[mpls] Paul Wouters' No Objection on draft-ietf-mpls-sr-epe-oam-18: (with COMMENT)

[Paul Wouters via Datatracker <[e-mail]>]

Paul Wouters has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-mpls-sr-epe-oam-18: No Objection

When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all
email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this
introductory paragraph, however.)


Please refer to https://www.ietf.org/about/groups/iesg/statements/handling-ballot-positions/ 
for more information about how to handle DISCUSS and COMMENT positions.


The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-mpls-sr-epe-oam/



----------------------------------------------------------------------
COMMENT:
----------------------------------------------------------------------

            If an initiator does not remove the FECs belonging to the previous
            AS that has traversed, it MAY expose the internal AS information to
            the following AS being traversed in traceroute.

I find the use of MAY here strange. I think what is meant that If the FECs are
not removed, it will expose ? Or if it is really "may expose" because it would
depend on the content of the FECs, then it would be a lowercase may, as an
uppercase MAY makes it sound like an instruction or action