IPng (IPv6) was designed when the original paradigm existed, not what we have now-a-days.
So, if we actually had been on track to do IPv6 in the decade it was defined, we could have gone a totally different way. Instead due to the rapid growth of the Internet in the mid 90's, IPv4 was morphed into something different and IPv6 had its own model until we started to need it again.
Ip routing is kind of like a tree (not a graph) in the ip regards, how would you get around it?
I admittedly don't know as much as I'd like about network, hence why I'm posing this question ;-)
If theres a way to efficiently model hierarchical domains for stuff like DNS/IP i'd love to know. Like, consistent hash rings maybe, but then we'd be reintroducing ring topologies...
Oh wait duh though. A cell tower is owned by a single company. Yeah that's prolly doable, the company can always buy beefier routers if they need the memory. And realistically speaking the virtual tree could be closely aligned to the physical one given how cell towers work.
However the correct ip way to do it would to have tcp(layer 4) decoupled from ip(layer 3) such that an ip address could change while maintaining the tcp stream. unfortunately this was not done, tcp has too many layer violations and is firmly interlocked with ip. I don't know much about the state of the art, does http over udp (quic) allow for ip address change?