[tsvwg] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC3390 (4583)

RFC Errata System <rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org> Wed, 06 January 2016 18:55 UTC

Return-Path: <wwwrun@rfc-editor.org>
X-Original-To: tsvwg@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: tsvwg@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D59A11A00F0 for <tsvwg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 6 Jan 2016 10:55:35 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -106.912
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-106.912 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] autolearn=ham
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Bn51GXXMXk4n for <tsvwg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 6 Jan 2016 10:55:34 -0800 (PST)
Received: from rfc-editor.org (rfc-editor.org [4.31.198.49]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6E48C1A00EA for <tsvwg@ietf.org>; Wed, 6 Jan 2016 10:55:34 -0800 (PST)
Received: by rfc-editor.org (Postfix, from userid 30) id 07BA7180011; Wed, 6 Jan 2016 10:54:38 -0800 (PST)
To: mallman@bbn.com, floyd@icir.org, craig@bbn.com, spencerdawkins.ietf@gmail.com, mls.ietf@gmail.com, gorry@erg.abdn.ac.uk, david.black@emc.com
X-PHP-Originating-Script: 30:errata_mail_lib.php
From: RFC Errata System <rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org>
Message-Id: <20160106185438.07BA7180011@rfc-editor.org>
Date: Wed, 06 Jan 2016 10:54:38 -0800
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tsvwg/r9UOUlktFuVbSAIU7JQtw0fVaD0>
Cc: rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org, tsvwg@ietf.org, touch@isi.edu
Subject: [tsvwg] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC3390 (4583)
X-BeenThere: tsvwg@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: Transport Area Working Group <tsvwg.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/tsvwg>, <mailto:tsvwg-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/tsvwg/>
List-Post: <mailto:tsvwg@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:tsvwg-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tsvwg>, <mailto:tsvwg-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 06 Jan 2016 18:55:36 -0000

The following errata report has been submitted for RFC3390,
"Increasing TCP's Initial Window".

--------------------------------------
You may review the report below and at:
http://www.rfc-editor.org/errata_search.php?rfc=3390&eid=4583

--------------------------------------
Type: Technical
Reported by: Joe Touch <touch@isi.edu>

Section: 1.

Original Text
-------------
   This increased initial window is optional: a TCP MAY start with a
   larger initial window.  However, we expect that most general-purpose
   TCP implementations would choose to use the larger initial congestion
   window given in equation (1) above.

Corrected Text
--------------
   This increased initial window is optional: a TCP MAY start with a
   smaller initial window.  However, we expect that most general-purpose
   TCP implementations would choose to use the larger initial congestion
   window given in equation (1) above.

Notes
-----
The MAY allows use of values smaller than this document allows, not larger.

Instructions:
-------------
This erratum is currently posted as "Reported". If necessary, please
use "Reply All" to discuss whether it should be verified or
rejected. When a decision is reached, the verifying party (IESG)
can log in to change the status and edit the report, if necessary. 

--------------------------------------
RFC3390 (draft-ietf-tsvwg-initwin-04)
--------------------------------------
Title               : Increasing TCP's Initial Window
Publication Date    : October 2002
Author(s)           : M. Allman, S. Floyd, C. Partridge
Category            : PROPOSED STANDARD
Source              : Transport Area Working Group
Area                : Transport
Stream              : IETF
Verifying Party     : IESG