Yes.
>and speed up IPv6
Fucking lol. It's still not enough of a financial hit for people to want to deal with IPv6.
Should have just come up with a better protocol in the first place. That's what really would have stimulated adoption.
there's nothing wrong with ND and it addresses several security vulnerabilities, namely ARP cache poisoning. But the real reason why ARP was removed is because it's a layering violation.
> NAT support (because it's everywhere these days)
nothing at all is stopping you from doing NAT on IPv6, except for the fact that everyone hates NAT, even people that pretend that they like it.
> Correct DHCP support (SLAAC wasn't a great idea after all)
SLAAC is a great thing. Also, DHCPv6 also exists, which allows you to do exactly what DHCP lets you do. Android doesn't support DHCPv6, but that's not IPv6s fault.
- IPv6->IPv4 interop (one way)
There's no such thing as one-way communication if we're talking TCP. Besides, it's still fundamentally impossible if the other end has no idea what to do with the source address.
Never heard about ND tables overflows? They fixed one thing, broken another. ARP poisoning is mostly fixed problem.
I like NAT myself. Im dualhomed (el-cheapo), using policy routing and NAT. Everything works like a charm. I cant imagine such setup w/o NAT actually.
SLAAC might be great thing for you, but not for others. This is why IPv6 is such a failure. Instead of creating simple protocol to meet middle ground, they slapped together annoying techs for specific cases like IoT. Great job.
If you had a /24 of v4, you easily could.
> SLAAC might be great thing for you, but not for others.
[citation needed]