Subject: [tcpm] rto-consider: may vs could wording nit

From: "Mark Allman" <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 22 Nov 2019 08:58:49 -0500

I-D>> Finally, we note that while allowing implementations to be
I-D>> more aggressive may in fact increase the number of needless
I-D>> retransmissions

Gorry> - I think it would be wiser to say /could/ to be sure no-one
Gorry>   seems readable as potentially permissive.

I really don’t grok this comment.  However, I see no harm in
changing “may” to "could" and so I've done it.

allman