On Mon, Feb 8, 2016 at 4:22 PM, Joe Touch <touch@xxxxxxx> wrote: > > > On 2/8/2016 12:44 PM, Phillip Hallam-Baker wrote: >> Seems to me that we might be misreading the original proposal. There >> are two ways to read it: >> >> 1) In future all Internet routing gear MUST NOT fragment IP packets. > > IPv6 is that future, FWIW. Hopefully yes. But is it written down anywhere that IPv6 routers MUST accept packets up to the full IP payload? The conversation in this thread suggests not. One of the tricks the WiFi folk use to keep people upgrading is to add a little suffix to the protocol. So folk started to look for 802.11a/c/n/an. As a marketing matter, an IPv6f profile (f for FAST) might help grease the skids a bit.