And I know what I am talking about: I am one of them :)
People who fails to adapt because "it is new" has no place in IT. The only skill required to work in IT is a great ability to adapt.
If IPv6 were a simple replacement for all things IPv4, and you simply had to learn IPv6 instead of IPv4, no one would complain.
But you need to learn IPv6 in addition to IPv4, in almost all areas of networking. The complexity adds up, it isn't replaced.
And I still manage ipsec tunnels and NAT and I still have to know things about OSPF, even tho I learned BGP more than 10 years ago
In the real world, you cannot simply replace things in the blink of a eye. This is not possible unless you are working in your own, fully-managed environment, never talking to other people (which is a good but scarse position)
This is only true if you use DNS for every network request. That has never been realistic for any home network.
> sigh At this point I need to conclude what the network guys are... just dumb. Like, come on, I needed to learn every year from the time I touched my first 286.
This attitude is part of why many people love IPv6 evangelism.
> If anything, IPSec with it's idiosyncrasies is way, way more convoluted both to learn and implement.
"Easier than IPSec" is not exactly a ringing endorsement.
And note that IPv6 doesn't replace any of this. You still need to know the IPv4 way, and the IPv6 way, and IPSec in both flavors etc.
Sure, it's not neuroscience, but it is needlessly more work, and most people like to not fuss with more work if they can avoid it. Especially when it's entirely duplicated, since, again, you can't drop IPv4 support, you still need to do CGNAT and all that, and then add IPv6 management on top.