I'm still of the personal view that the only real benefit of V6 is the larger address space, and all the other dragons we fight from day to day (routing scaling, security, traffic engineering, dns, content routing, overlays, and the QoS thing are just the same in V6 as V4).
with IPv6, we get the chance to allocate address ranges in a sane manner unlike what happened with IPv4. CIDR has not solved the routing table size problem. It was claimed by Ford et al in 1993 that routing tables in core routers could be reduced from 10,000 entries to 200 if addresses were re-allocated according to continental boundaries and service providers. P. Ford, Y. Rekhter, and H.-W. Braun. Improving the Routing and Addressing of the Internet protocol. IEEE Network, May 1993. Look at page 141 of TCP/IP Illustrated Volume 1 for more information. I don't think that anyone has claimed that IPv6 would solve all of the things you listed on your soap box. solve one problem at a time. routing and addressing is a big one. As for the "no one is using it" argument: someone give me a native IPv6 path out of NZ to the US and Asia. I can't use it if no one will deploy it and give me addresses to use.