Re: [tcpm] [Editorial Errata Reported] RFC7323 (6798)

Yaakov Stein <> Mon, 27 December 2021 05:17 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id D94A43A1794 for <>; Sun, 26 Dec 2021 21:17:12 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.097
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.097 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key)
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id YMB1-PZqTR5k for <>; Sun, 26 Dec 2021 21:17:08 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ( [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::1036]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id EDF8A3A1795 for <>; Sun, 26 Dec 2021 21:17:07 -0800 (PST)
Received: by with SMTP id b1-20020a17090a990100b001b14bd47532so13478426pjp.0 for <>; Sun, 26 Dec 2021 21:17:07 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=20210112; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=C9HT8ovCRPpZIP1+RlKaxVMH6EfWs4Ch/mqsa2Dr6Hg=; b=ApvVncUSpQVKEGaev4hITbCW9FEfNlZC77c7M0h94yCzEP7zTBOUWNq+gxy4M58rrr hcSG3BM/XhYmNNtBNsB/y4kOg1aiGeybKlD2cC+xhjcbFWdlfTFFSlnGsK5bBtM7Mta8 W/i/slwXn/k+ZRsEKYWJtFVQU+KABG3HZrGgzy4eWWqLHhlGj+ysJjiCXzZhqNtV+Omt WsosZ1XxYauPtmv0Xujsc1mDD2bWyO45qhGIoDaq6NfqKlX+sFqfLYGb9Klr/RngHurq 1hqO5Wnx/AIY7aHTibYLKee590xpt7KSOz4twsHR5CsYVtim/bFuDqdAhu3qTxBQhvGs 05Fg==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=C9HT8ovCRPpZIP1+RlKaxVMH6EfWs4Ch/mqsa2Dr6Hg=; b=aqAqsLehPD45zP/nNNzRpOp6fdeq6suZQfdKsdFFyWjDGE3IGlnACjTdV814gTkoVS qbnJ2ypMebEObQLu5A3zEaxNGVfx2b4dhFrv4rTFwwmYkRrDAyi3bSvm86IrKKJUYlm4 gygHhU6ACjCESV1ZYX+a5ce7rjBmXuq+/zbp+fa81PsKoiKcfx3hRK3DPGo9zRruE6OP cBsEbV+korUGuDjjoUaE8phYhtxNJaP0IW2uYUMSSoR3wbTJw88jFFUPP+aTxEGouI2y md7+doo3p2lv87FRpF07dWe39fyIqKMebnJ1B4s70N8y3Ooj6GCwuIpQ1aR04DqR+ecR /vSg==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM532ZWXRkfbumS7+nx+GtykWzw2GajTi8TwcGcZjl3dwP+rL0hlPB izfR99qEz7zTS8PpByY7p2aXS/W/LifHJWiPJ+Y=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJxtdrm7OCk3Shr41G17TNXiVYwEhmwFoC3C9sEzPlkMp1G4xC2MxhcG6IvAgpnKUQLEPWS6r9gO2ReoVqnl9Yk=
X-Received: by 2002:a17:902:dac9:b0:141:e931:3b49 with SMTP id q9-20020a170902dac900b00141e9313b49mr16294613plx.45.1640582224995; Sun, 26 Dec 2021 21:17:04 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <> <> <>
In-Reply-To: <>
From: Yaakov Stein <>
Date: Mon, 27 Dec 2021 07:16:55 +0200
Message-ID: <>
To: Carsten Bormann <>
Cc: t petch <>, RFC Errata System <>,,,,,
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000bee76105d419d05d"
Archived-At: <>
X-Mailman-Approved-At: Mon, 27 Dec 2021 08:47:07 -0800
Subject: Re: [tcpm] [Editorial Errata Reported] RFC7323 (6798)
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: TCP Maintenance and Minor Extensions Working Group <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 27 Dec 2021 05:17:13 -0000

In any case, the same RFC uses the normative "MAY" in several other places,
so these are probably mistakes.

For example,
  The three-byte Window Scale option MAY be sent in a <SYN> segment by a
  This option MAY be sent in an initial <SYN> segment.

So why
  A random offset may be added to the timestamp clock on a per-connection
Is this may to be considered weaker than the other two?

At first I wondered if there were some good reason for not capitalizing,
i.e., weakening the MAY even further,
but I couldn't come up with any reasonable explanation.


On Sun, Dec 26, 2021 at 4:39 PM Carsten Bormann <> wrote:

> On 26. Dec 2021, at 12:06, t petch <> wrote:
> >
> > One AD once said that a MAY is the same as a MAY NOT and therefore is
> pointless.  Makes sense to me.  I find it hard to come up with a situation
> where 'MAY' has any value.
> A MAY for one party means that the other party MUST be able to handle the
> allowed behavior.
> (I.e., not crash, not delete all your files, MAYbe even do something
> meaningful with the first party’s behavior.)
> Not at all pointless, if used correctly.
> Grüße, Carsten