I am concerned the congestion control text is too permissive. #3247
Labels
-recovery
design
An issue that affects the design of the protocol; resolution requires consensus.
has-consensus
An issue that the Chairs have determined has consensus, by canvassing the mailing list.
The docs call out that the design is based on (new)Reno. That is good and suitable for a PS. I have no problem here.
However, there are several places where the text is very permissive "MAY..." that suggests the PS can implement this or anything else. This combination seems awkward for a PS. I'd hoped that we could allow experimentation with new CC's but say SHOULD use an IETF-specified congestion control method, or something text close to that, and change the MAYs into something more helpful. I think this is an easy piece of text to get correct.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: