<?xml version="1.0" encoding="US-ASCII"?>
<!-- Convert to HTML and Text with xml2rfc: http://xml2rfc.ietf.org. -->
<!DOCTYPE rfc SYSTEM "rfc2629.dtd" [
  <!ENTITY RFC5533 SYSTEM "https://xml2rfc.ietf.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RFC.5533.xml">
  <!ENTITY RFC5062 SYSTEM "https://xml2rfc.ietf.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RFC.5062.xml">
  <!ENTITY RFC5061 SYSTEM "https://xml2rfc.ietf.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RFC.5061.xml">
  <!ENTITY RFC4960 SYSTEM "https://xml2rfc.ietf.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RFC.4960.xml">
  <!ENTITY RFC4987 SYSTEM "https://xml2rfc.ietf.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RFC.4987.xml">
  <!ENTITY RFC6234 SYSTEM "https://xml2rfc.ietf.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RFC.6234.xml">
  <!ENTITY RFC4086 SYSTEM "https://xml2rfc.ietf.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RFC.4086.xml">
  <!ENTITY RFC5681 SYSTEM "https://xml2rfc.ietf.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RFC.5681.xml">
  <!ENTITY RFC2119 SYSTEM "https://xml2rfc.ietf.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RFC.2119.xml">
  <!ENTITY RFC2992 SYSTEM "https://xml2rfc.ietf.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RFC.2992.xml">
  <!ENTITY RFC2979 SYSTEM "https://xml2rfc.ietf.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RFC.2979.xml">
  <!ENTITY RFC2104 SYSTEM "https://xml2rfc.ietf.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RFC.2104.xml">
  <!ENTITY RFC2018 SYSTEM "https://xml2rfc.ietf.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RFC.2018.xml">
  <!ENTITY RFC1918 SYSTEM "https://xml2rfc.ietf.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RFC.1918.xml">
  <!ENTITY RFC0793 SYSTEM "https://xml2rfc.ietf.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RFC.0793.xml">
  <!ENTITY RFC7323 SYSTEM "https://xml2rfc.ietf.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RFC.7323.xml">
  <!ENTITY RFC1122 SYSTEM "https://xml2rfc.ietf.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RFC.1122.xml">
  <!ENTITY RFC3135 SYSTEM "https://xml2rfc.ietf.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RFC.3135.xml">
  <!ENTITY RFC3022 SYSTEM "https://xml2rfc.ietf.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RFC.3022.xml">
  <!ENTITY RFC6181 SYSTEM "https://xml2rfc.ietf.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RFC.6181.xml">
  <!ENTITY RFC6182 SYSTEM "https://xml2rfc.ietf.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RFC.6182.xml">
  <!ENTITY RFC6356 SYSTEM "https://xml2rfc.ietf.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RFC.6356.xml">
  <!ENTITY RFC6555 SYSTEM "https://xml2rfc.ietf.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RFC.6555.xml">
  <!ENTITY RFC8126 SYSTEM "https://xml2rfc.ietf.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RFC.8126.xml">
  <!ENTITY RFC6897 SYSTEM "https://xml2rfc.ietf.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RFC.6897.xml">
  <!ENTITY RFC6528 SYSTEM "https://xml2rfc.ietf.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RFC.6528.xml">
  <!ENTITY RFC5961 SYSTEM "https://xml2rfc.ietf.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RFC.5961.xml">
  <!ENTITY RFC7413 SYSTEM "https://xml2rfc.ietf.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RFC.7413.xml">
  <!ENTITY RFC7430 SYSTEM "https://xml2rfc.ietf.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RFC.7430.xml">
  <!ENTITY RFC8174 SYSTEM "https://xml2rfc.ietf.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RFC.8174.xml">
  <!ENTITY RFC8041 SYSTEM "https://xml2rfc.ietf.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RFC.8041.xml">
]>
<?xml-stylesheet type='text/xsl' href='rfc2629.xslt' ?>
<?rfc strict="no" ?>
<?rfc toc="yes"?>
<?rfc tocdepth="4"?>
<?rfc symrefs="yes"?>
<?rfc sortrefs="yes" ?>
<?rfc compact="yes" ?>
<?rfc subcompact="no" ?>
<?rfc rfcedstyle="yes"?> version='1.0' encoding='utf-8'?>
<rfc xmlns:xi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XInclude" version="3" category="std" consensus="true" docName="draft-ietf-mptcp-rfc6824bis-18" indexInclude="true" ipr="trust200902" obsoletes="6824"> number="8684" obsoletes="6824" prepTime="2020-03-30T17:51:35" scripts="Common,Latin" sortRefs="true" submissionType="IETF" symRefs="true" tocDepth="3" tocInclude="true" xml:lang="en">
  <link href="https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-mptcp-rfc6824bis-18" rel="prev"/>
  <link href="https://dx.doi.org/10.17487/rfc8684" rel="alternate"/>
  <link href="urn:issn:2070-1721" rel="alternate"/>
  <front>
    <title abbrev="Multipath TCP">TCP Extensions for Multipath Operation with Multiple Addresses</title>
    <seriesInfo name="RFC" value="8684" stream="IETF"/>
    <author fullname="Alan Ford" initials="A." surname="Ford">
      <organization>Pexip</organization>
      <organization showOnFrontPage="true">Pexip</organization>
      <address>
      <!--  <postal>
          <street>Beech Court</street>
          <city>Hurst</city>
          <region>Berkshire</region>
          <code>RG10 0RQ</code>
          <country>UK</country>
        </postal> -->
        <email>alan.ford@gmail.com</email>
      </address>
    </author>
    <author fullname="Costin Raiciu" initials="C." surname="Raiciu">
      <organization abbrev="U. Politechnica Politehnica of Bucharest">University Bucharest" showOnFrontPage="true">University Politehnica of Bucharest</organization>
      <address>
        <postal>
          <street>Splaiul Independentei 313</street>
          <city>Bucharest</city>
          <country>Romania</country>
        </postal>
        <email>costin.raiciu@cs.pub.ro</email>
      </address>
    </author>
    <author fullname="Mark Handley" initials="M." surname="Handley">
      <organization abbrev="U. College London">University London" showOnFrontPage="true">University College London</organization>
      <address>
        <postal>
          <street>Gower Street</street>
          <city>London</city>
          <code>WC1E 6BT</code>
          <country>UK</country>
          <country>United Kingdom</country>
        </postal>
        <email>m.handley@cs.ucl.ac.uk</email>
      </address>
    </author>
    <author fullname="Olivier Bonaventure" initials="O." surname="Bonaventure">
      <organization abbrev="U. catholique de Louvain">Universit&eacute; Louvain" ascii="Universite catholique   de Louvain" showOnFrontPage="true">Université catholique de Louvain</organization>
      <address>
        <postal>
          <street>Pl. Ste Barbe, 2</street>
          <code>1348</code>
          <city>Louvain-la-Neuve</city>
          <country>Belgium</country>
        </postal>
        <email>olivier.bonaventure@uclouvain.be</email>
      </address>
    </author>
    <author fullname="Christoph Paasch" initials="C." surname="Paasch">
      <organization abbrev="Apple, Inc.">Apple, Inc." showOnFrontPage="true">Apple, Inc.</organization>
      <address>
        <postal>
          <street></street>
          <street/>
          <city>Cupertino</city>
          <country>US</country>
          <region>CA</region>
          <country>United States of America</country>
        </postal>
        <email>cpaasch@apple.com</email>
      </address>
    </author>
    <date year="2019" />

    <area>General</area>
    <workgroup>Internet Engineering Task Force</workgroup>
    <keyword>tcp extensions multipath multihomed subflow</keyword>

    <abstract>
      <t>TCP/IP month="03" year="2020"/>
    <keyword>tcp</keyword>
    <keyword>extensions</keyword>
    <keyword>multipath</keyword>
    <keyword>multihomed</keyword>
    <keyword>subflow</keyword>
    <abstract pn="section-abstract">
      <t pn="section-abstract-1">TCP/IP communication is currently restricted to a single path per connection, yet multiple paths often exist between peers. The simultaneous use of these multiple paths for a TCP/IP session would improve resource usage within the network and, thus, and thus improve user experience through higher throughput and improved resilience to network failure.</t>

      <t>Multipath
      <t pn="section-abstract-2">Multipath TCP provides the ability to simultaneously use multiple
      paths between peers. This document presents a set of extensions to
      traditional TCP to support multipath operation. The protocol offers the
      same type of service to applications as TCP (i.e., a reliable bytestream), and it provides the components necessary to establish and use multiple TCP flows across potentially disjoint paths.</t>

      <t>This
      <t pn="section-abstract-3">This document specifies v1 of Multipath TCP, obsoleting v0 as
      specified in RFC6824, RFC 6824, through clarifications and modifications primarily driven by deployment experience.</t>
    </abstract>
  </front>

  <middle>
    <boilerplate>
      <section title="Introduction" anchor="sec_intro">
      <t>Multipath TCP (MPTCP) is a set anchor="status-of-memo" numbered="false" removeInRFC="false" toc="exclude" pn="section-boilerplate.1">
        <name slugifiedName="name-status-of-this-memo">Status of extensions to regular TCP <xref target="RFC0793"/> to provide a Multipath TCP <xref target="RFC6182"/> service, which enables a transport connection to operate across multiple paths
simultaneously. This document presents the protocol changes required to add multipath capability to TCP; specifically, those for signaling and setting up multiple paths ("subflows"), managing these subflows, reassembly of data, and termination of sessions. Memo</name>
        <t pn="section-boilerplate.1-1">
            This is not the only information required to create a Multipath TCP implementation, however. an Internet Standards Track document.
        </t>
        <t pn="section-boilerplate.1-2">
            This document is complemented by three others:
        <list style="symbols">
          <t>Architecture <xref target="RFC6182"/>, which explains the motivations behind Multipath TCP, contains a discussion product of high-level design decisions on which this design is based, and an explanation the Internet Engineering Task Force
            (IETF).  It represents the consensus of a functional separation through which an extensible MPTCP implementation can be developed.</t>
          <t>Congestion control <xref target="RFC6356"/> presents a safe congestion control algorithm the IETF community.  It has
            received public review and has been approved for coupling publication by
            the behavior Internet Engineering Steering Group (IESG).  Further
            information on Internet Standards is available in Section 2 of
            RFC 7841.
        </t>
        <t pn="section-boilerplate.1-3">
            Information about the multiple paths in order to "do no harm" current status of this document, any
            errata, and how to other network users.</t>
          <t>Application considerations <xref target="RFC6897"/> discusses what impact MPTCP will have provide feedback on applications, what applications will want to do with MPTCP, it may be obtained at
            <eref target="https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8684" brackets="none"/>.
        </t>
      </section>
      <section anchor="copyright" numbered="false" removeInRFC="false" toc="exclude" pn="section-boilerplate.2">
        <name slugifiedName="name-copyright-notice">Copyright Notice</name>
        <t pn="section-boilerplate.2-1">
            Copyright (c) 2020 IETF Trust and the persons identified as a consequence of these factors, what API extensions an MPTCP implementation should present.</t>
        </list> the
            document authors. All rights reserved.
        </t>
        <t pn="section-boilerplate.2-2">
            This document is an update to, subject to BCP 78 and obsoletes, the v0 specification of Multipath TCP (RFC6824). This document specifies MPTCP v1, which is not backward compatible with MPTCP v0. This document additionally defines version negotiation procedures for implementations that support both versions.
      </t>

      <section title="Design Assumptions" anchor="sec_assum">
        <t>In order IETF Trust's Legal
            Provisions Relating to limit the potentially huge design space, the mptcp working group imposed two key constraints on the Multipath TCP design presented IETF Documents
            (<eref target="https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info" brackets="none"/>) in this document:
          <list style="symbols">
            <t>It must be backwards-compatible with current, regular TCP, to increase its chances of deployment.</t>
            <t>It can be assumed that one or both hosts are multihomed and multiaddressed.</t>
          </list>
        </t>
        <t>To simplify the design, we assume that effect on the presence date of multiple addresses at a host is sufficient to indicate the existence
            publication of multiple paths. These paths need not be entirely disjoint: this document. Please review these documents
            carefully, as they may share one or many routers between them. Even in such a situation, making use of multiple paths is beneficial, improving resource utilization describe your rights and resilience restrictions with
            respect to a subset of node failures. The congestion control algorithms defined in <xref target="RFC6356"/> ensure this does not act detrimentally. Furthermore, there may be some scenarios where different TCP ports on a single host can provide disjoint paths (such document. Code Components extracted from this
            document must include Simplified BSD License text as through certain Equal-Cost Multipath (ECMP) implementations <xref target="RFC2992"/>), and so the MPTCP design also supports the use of ports in path identifiers.</t>
        <t>There are three aspects to the backwards-compatibility listed above (discussed in more detail described in <xref target="RFC6182"/>):
          <list style="hanging">
            <t hangText="External Constraints:"> The protocol must function through the vast majority
            Section 4.e of existing
middleboxes such as NATs, firewalls, and proxies, the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without
            warranty as such must resemble existing described in the Simplified BSD License.
        </t>
      </section>
    </boilerplate>
    <toc>
      <section anchor="toc" numbered="false" removeInRFC="false" toc="exclude" pn="section-toc.1">
        <name slugifiedName="name-table-of-contents">Table of Contents</name>
        <ul bare="true" empty="true" indent="2" spacing="compact" pn="section-toc.1-1">
          <li pn="section-toc.1-1.1">
            <t keepWithNext="true" pn="section-toc.1-1.1.1"><xref derivedContent="1" format="counter" sectionFormat="of" target="section-1"/>.  <xref derivedContent="" format="title" sectionFormat="of" target="name-introduction">Introduction</xref></t>
            <ul bare="true" empty="true" indent="2" spacing="compact" pn="section-toc.1-1.1.2">
              <li pn="section-toc.1-1.1.2.1">
                <t keepWithNext="true" pn="section-toc.1-1.1.2.1.1"><xref derivedContent="1.1" format="counter" sectionFormat="of" target="section-1.1"/>.  <xref derivedContent="" format="title" sectionFormat="of" target="name-design-assumptions">Design Assumptions</xref></t>
              </li>
              <li pn="section-toc.1-1.1.2.2">
                <t keepWithNext="true" pn="section-toc.1-1.1.2.2.1"><xref derivedContent="1.2" format="counter" sectionFormat="of" target="section-1.2"/>.  <xref derivedContent="" format="title" sectionFormat="of" target="name-multipath-tcp-in-the-networ">Multipath TCP as far as possible on in the
wire. Furthermore, the protocol must not assume Networking Stack</xref></t>
              </li>
              <li pn="section-toc.1-1.1.2.3">
                <t keepWithNext="true" pn="section-toc.1-1.1.2.3.1"><xref derivedContent="1.3" format="counter" sectionFormat="of" target="section-1.3"/>.  <xref derivedContent="" format="title" sectionFormat="of" target="name-terminology">Terminology</xref></t>
              </li>
              <li pn="section-toc.1-1.1.2.4">
                <t keepWithNext="true" pn="section-toc.1-1.1.2.4.1"><xref derivedContent="1.4" format="counter" sectionFormat="of" target="section-1.4"/>.  <xref derivedContent="" format="title" sectionFormat="of" target="name-mptcp-concept">MPTCP Concept</xref></t>
              </li>
              <li pn="section-toc.1-1.1.2.5">
                <t keepWithNext="true" pn="section-toc.1-1.1.2.5.1"><xref derivedContent="1.5" format="counter" sectionFormat="of" target="section-1.5"/>.  <xref derivedContent="" format="title" sectionFormat="of" target="name-requirements-language">Requirements Language</xref></t>
              </li>
            </ul>
          </li>
          <li pn="section-toc.1-1.2">
            <t keepWithNext="true" pn="section-toc.1-1.2.1"><xref derivedContent="2" format="counter" sectionFormat="of" target="section-2"/>.  <xref derivedContent="" format="title" sectionFormat="of" target="name-operation-overview">Operation Overview</xref></t>
            <ul bare="true" empty="true" indent="2" spacing="compact" pn="section-toc.1-1.2.2">
              <li pn="section-toc.1-1.2.2.1">
                <t keepWithNext="true" pn="section-toc.1-1.2.2.1.1"><xref derivedContent="2.1" format="counter" sectionFormat="of" target="section-2.1"/>.  <xref derivedContent="" format="title" sectionFormat="of" target="name-initiating-an-mptcp-connect">Initiating an MPTCP Connection</xref></t>
              </li>
              <li pn="section-toc.1-1.2.2.2">
                <t keepWithNext="true" pn="section-toc.1-1.2.2.2.1"><xref derivedContent="2.2" format="counter" sectionFormat="of" target="section-2.2"/>.  <xref derivedContent="" format="title" sectionFormat="of" target="name-associating-a-new-subflow-w">Associating a New Subflow with an Existing MPTCP Connection</xref></t>
              </li>
              <li pn="section-toc.1-1.2.2.3">
                <t keepWithNext="true" pn="section-toc.1-1.2.2.3.1"><xref derivedContent="2.3" format="counter" sectionFormat="of" target="section-2.3"/>.  <xref derivedContent="" format="title" sectionFormat="of" target="name-informing-the-other-host-ab">Informing the segments it sends Other Host about Another Potential Address</xref></t>
              </li>
              <li pn="section-toc.1-1.2.2.4">
                <t keepWithNext="true" pn="section-toc.1-1.2.2.4.1"><xref derivedContent="2.4" format="counter" sectionFormat="of" target="section-2.4"/>.  <xref derivedContent="" format="title" sectionFormat="of" target="name-data-transfer-using-mptcp">Data Transfer Using MPTCP</xref></t>
              </li>
              <li pn="section-toc.1-1.2.2.5">
                <t keepWithNext="true" pn="section-toc.1-1.2.2.5.1"><xref derivedContent="2.5" format="counter" sectionFormat="of" target="section-2.5"/>.  <xref derivedContent="" format="title" sectionFormat="of" target="name-requesting-a-change-in-a-pa">Requesting a Change in a Path's Priority</xref></t>
              </li>
              <li pn="section-toc.1-1.2.2.6">
                <t keepWithNext="true" pn="section-toc.1-1.2.2.6.1"><xref derivedContent="2.6" format="counter" sectionFormat="of" target="section-2.6"/>.  <xref derivedContent="" format="title" sectionFormat="of" target="name-closing-an-mptcp-connection">Closing an MPTCP Connection</xref></t>
              </li>
              <li pn="section-toc.1-1.2.2.7">
                <t keepWithNext="true" pn="section-toc.1-1.2.2.7.1"><xref derivedContent="2.7" format="counter" sectionFormat="of" target="section-2.7"/>.  <xref derivedContent="" format="title" sectionFormat="of" target="name-notable-features">Notable Features</xref></t>
              </li>
            </ul>
          </li>
          <li pn="section-toc.1-1.3">
            <t keepWithNext="true" pn="section-toc.1-1.3.1"><xref derivedContent="3" format="counter" sectionFormat="of" target="section-3"/>.  <xref derivedContent="" format="title" sectionFormat="of" target="name-mptcp-operations-an-overvie">MPTCP Operations: An Overview</xref></t>
            <ul bare="true" empty="true" indent="2" spacing="compact" pn="section-toc.1-1.3.2">
              <li pn="section-toc.1-1.3.2.1">
                <t keepWithNext="true" pn="section-toc.1-1.3.2.1.1"><xref derivedContent="3.1" format="counter" sectionFormat="of" target="section-3.1"/>.  <xref derivedContent="" format="title" sectionFormat="of" target="name-connection-initiation">Connection Initiation</xref></t>
              </li>
              <li pn="section-toc.1-1.3.2.2">
                <t keepWithNext="true" pn="section-toc.1-1.3.2.2.1"><xref derivedContent="3.2" format="counter" sectionFormat="of" target="section-3.2"/>.  <xref derivedContent="" format="title" sectionFormat="of" target="name-starting-a-new-subflow">Starting a New Subflow</xref></t>
              </li>
              <li pn="section-toc.1-1.3.2.3">
                <t keepWithNext="true" pn="section-toc.1-1.3.2.3.1"><xref derivedContent="3.3" format="counter" sectionFormat="of" target="section-3.3"/>.  <xref derivedContent="" format="title" sectionFormat="of" target="name-mptcp-operation-and-data-tr">MPTCP Operation and Data Transfer</xref></t>
                <ul bare="true" empty="true" indent="2" spacing="compact" pn="section-toc.1-1.3.2.3.2">
                  <li pn="section-toc.1-1.3.2.3.2.1">
                    <t keepWithNext="true" pn="section-toc.1-1.3.2.3.2.1.1"><xref derivedContent="3.3.1" format="counter" sectionFormat="of" target="section-3.3.1"/>.  <xref derivedContent="" format="title" sectionFormat="of" target="name-data-sequence-mapping">Data Sequence Mapping</xref></t>
                  </li>
                  <li pn="section-toc.1-1.3.2.3.2.2">
                    <t keepWithNext="true" pn="section-toc.1-1.3.2.3.2.2.1"><xref derivedContent="3.3.2" format="counter" sectionFormat="of" target="section-3.3.2"/>.  <xref derivedContent="" format="title" sectionFormat="of" target="name-data-acknowledgments">Data Acknowledgments</xref></t>
                  </li>
                  <li pn="section-toc.1-1.3.2.3.2.3">
                    <t keepWithNext="true" pn="section-toc.1-1.3.2.3.2.3.1"><xref derivedContent="3.3.3" format="counter" sectionFormat="of" target="section-3.3.3"/>.  <xref derivedContent="" format="title" sectionFormat="of" target="name-closing-a-connection">Closing a Connection</xref></t>
                  </li>
                  <li pn="section-toc.1-1.3.2.3.2.4">
                    <t keepWithNext="true" pn="section-toc.1-1.3.2.3.2.4.1"><xref derivedContent="3.3.4" format="counter" sectionFormat="of" target="section-3.3.4"/>.  <xref derivedContent="" format="title" sectionFormat="of" target="name-receiver-considerations">Receiver Considerations</xref></t>
                  </li>
                  <li pn="section-toc.1-1.3.2.3.2.5">
                    <t keepWithNext="true" pn="section-toc.1-1.3.2.3.2.5.1"><xref derivedContent="3.3.5" format="counter" sectionFormat="of" target="section-3.3.5"/>.  <xref derivedContent="" format="title" sectionFormat="of" target="name-sender-considerations">Sender Considerations</xref></t>
                  </li>
                  <li pn="section-toc.1-1.3.2.3.2.6">
                    <t keepWithNext="true" pn="section-toc.1-1.3.2.3.2.6.1"><xref derivedContent="3.3.6" format="counter" sectionFormat="of" target="section-3.3.6"/>.  <xref derivedContent="" format="title" sectionFormat="of" target="name-reliability-and-retransmiss">Reliability and Retransmissions</xref></t>
                  </li>
                  <li pn="section-toc.1-1.3.2.3.2.7">
                    <t keepWithNext="true" pn="section-toc.1-1.3.2.3.2.7.1"><xref derivedContent="3.3.7" format="counter" sectionFormat="of" target="section-3.3.7"/>.  <xref derivedContent="" format="title" sectionFormat="of" target="name-congestion-control-consider">Congestion Control Considerations</xref></t>
                  </li>
                  <li pn="section-toc.1-1.3.2.3.2.8">
                    <t keepWithNext="true" pn="section-toc.1-1.3.2.3.2.8.1"><xref derivedContent="3.3.8" format="counter" sectionFormat="of" target="section-3.3.8"/>.  <xref derivedContent="" format="title" sectionFormat="of" target="name-subflow-policy">Subflow Policy</xref></t>
                  </li>
                </ul>
              </li>
              <li pn="section-toc.1-1.3.2.4">
                <t keepWithNext="true" pn="section-toc.1-1.3.2.4.1"><xref derivedContent="3.4" format="counter" sectionFormat="of" target="section-3.4"/>.  <xref derivedContent="" format="title" sectionFormat="of" target="name-address-knowledge-exchange-">Address Knowledge Exchange (Path Management)</xref></t>
                <ul bare="true" empty="true" indent="2" spacing="compact" pn="section-toc.1-1.3.2.4.2">
                  <li pn="section-toc.1-1.3.2.4.2.1">
                    <t keepWithNext="true" pn="section-toc.1-1.3.2.4.2.1.1"><xref derivedContent="3.4.1" format="counter" sectionFormat="of" target="section-3.4.1"/>.  <xref derivedContent="" format="title" sectionFormat="of" target="name-address-advertisement">Address Advertisement</xref></t>
                  </li>
                  <li pn="section-toc.1-1.3.2.4.2.2">
                    <t keepWithNext="true" pn="section-toc.1-1.3.2.4.2.2.1"><xref derivedContent="3.4.2" format="counter" sectionFormat="of" target="section-3.4.2"/>.  <xref derivedContent="" format="title" sectionFormat="of" target="name-remove-address">Remove Address</xref></t>
                  </li>
                </ul>
              </li>
              <li pn="section-toc.1-1.3.2.5">
                <t keepWithNext="true" pn="section-toc.1-1.3.2.5.1"><xref derivedContent="3.5" format="counter" sectionFormat="of" target="section-3.5"/>.  <xref derivedContent="" format="title" sectionFormat="of" target="name-fast-close">Fast Close</xref></t>
              </li>
              <li pn="section-toc.1-1.3.2.6">
                <t keepWithNext="true" pn="section-toc.1-1.3.2.6.1"><xref derivedContent="3.6" format="counter" sectionFormat="of" target="section-3.6"/>.  <xref derivedContent="" format="title" sectionFormat="of" target="name-subflow-reset">Subflow Reset</xref></t>
              </li>
              <li pn="section-toc.1-1.3.2.7">
                <t keepWithNext="true" pn="section-toc.1-1.3.2.7.1"><xref derivedContent="3.7" format="counter" sectionFormat="of" target="section-3.7"/>.  <xref derivedContent="" format="title" sectionFormat="of" target="name-fallback">Fallback</xref></t>
              </li>
              <li pn="section-toc.1-1.3.2.8">
                <t keepWithNext="true" pn="section-toc.1-1.3.2.8.1"><xref derivedContent="3.8" format="counter" sectionFormat="of" target="section-3.8"/>.  <xref derivedContent="" format="title" sectionFormat="of" target="name-error-handling">Error Handling</xref></t>
              </li>
              <li pn="section-toc.1-1.3.2.9">
                <t keepWithNext="true" pn="section-toc.1-1.3.2.9.1"><xref derivedContent="3.9" format="counter" sectionFormat="of" target="section-3.9"/>.  <xref derivedContent="" format="title" sectionFormat="of" target="name-heuristics">Heuristics</xref></t>
                <ul bare="true" empty="true" indent="2" spacing="compact" pn="section-toc.1-1.3.2.9.2">
                  <li pn="section-toc.1-1.3.2.9.2.1">
                    <t keepWithNext="true" pn="section-toc.1-1.3.2.9.2.1.1"><xref derivedContent="3.9.1" format="counter" sectionFormat="of" target="section-3.9.1"/>.  <xref derivedContent="" format="title" sectionFormat="of" target="name-port-usage">Port Usage</xref></t>
                  </li>
                  <li pn="section-toc.1-1.3.2.9.2.2">
                    <t keepWithNext="true" pn="section-toc.1-1.3.2.9.2.2.1"><xref derivedContent="3.9.2" format="counter" sectionFormat="of" target="section-3.9.2"/>.  <xref derivedContent="" format="title" sectionFormat="of" target="name-delayed-subflow-start-and-s">Delayed Subflow Start and Subflow Symmetry</xref></t>
                  </li>
                  <li pn="section-toc.1-1.3.2.9.2.3">
                    <t keepWithNext="true" pn="section-toc.1-1.3.2.9.2.3.1"><xref derivedContent="3.9.3" format="counter" sectionFormat="of" target="section-3.9.3"/>.  <xref derivedContent="" format="title" sectionFormat="of" target="name-failure-handling">Failure Handling</xref></t>
                  </li>
                </ul>
              </li>
            </ul>
          </li>
          <li pn="section-toc.1-1.4">
            <t keepWithNext="true" pn="section-toc.1-1.4.1"><xref derivedContent="4" format="counter" sectionFormat="of" target="section-4"/>.  <xref derivedContent="" format="title" sectionFormat="of" target="name-semantic-issues">Semantic Issues</xref></t>
          </li>
          <li pn="section-toc.1-1.5">
            <t keepWithNext="true" pn="section-toc.1-1.5.1"><xref derivedContent="5" format="counter" sectionFormat="of" target="section-5"/>.  <xref derivedContent="" format="title" sectionFormat="of" target="name-security-considerations">Security Considerations</xref></t>
          </li>
          <li pn="section-toc.1-1.6">
            <t keepWithNext="true" pn="section-toc.1-1.6.1"><xref derivedContent="6" format="counter" sectionFormat="of" target="section-6"/>.  <xref derivedContent="" format="title" sectionFormat="of" target="name-interactions-with-middlebox">Interactions with Middleboxes</xref></t>
          </li>
          <li pn="section-toc.1-1.7">
            <t keepWithNext="true" pn="section-toc.1-1.7.1"><xref derivedContent="7" format="counter" sectionFormat="of" target="section-7"/>.  <xref derivedContent="" format="title" sectionFormat="of" target="name-iana-considerations">IANA Considerations</xref></t>
            <ul bare="true" empty="true" indent="2" spacing="compact" pn="section-toc.1-1.7.2">
              <li pn="section-toc.1-1.7.2.1">
                <t keepWithNext="true" pn="section-toc.1-1.7.2.1.1"><xref derivedContent="7.1" format="counter" sectionFormat="of" target="section-7.1"/>.  <xref derivedContent="" format="title" sectionFormat="of" target="name-tcp-option-kind-numbers">TCP Option Kind Numbers</xref></t>
              </li>
              <li pn="section-toc.1-1.7.2.2">
                <t keepWithNext="true" pn="section-toc.1-1.7.2.2.1"><xref derivedContent="7.2" format="counter" sectionFormat="of" target="section-7.2"/>.  <xref derivedContent="" format="title" sectionFormat="of" target="name-mptcp-option-subtypes">MPTCP Option Subtypes</xref></t>
              </li>
              <li pn="section-toc.1-1.7.2.3">
                <t keepWithNext="true" pn="section-toc.1-1.7.2.3.1"><xref derivedContent="7.3" format="counter" sectionFormat="of" target="section-7.3"/>.  <xref derivedContent="" format="title" sectionFormat="of" target="name-mptcp-handshake-algorithms">MPTCP Handshake Algorithms</xref></t>
              </li>
              <li pn="section-toc.1-1.7.2.4">
                <t keepWithNext="true" pn="section-toc.1-1.7.2.4.1"><xref derivedContent="7.4" format="counter" sectionFormat="of" target="section-7.4"/>.  <xref derivedContent="" format="title" sectionFormat="of" target="name-mp_tcprst-reason-codes">MP_TCPRST Reason Codes</xref></t>
              </li>
            </ul>
          </li>
          <li pn="section-toc.1-1.8">
            <t keepWithNext="true" pn="section-toc.1-1.8.1"><xref derivedContent="8" format="counter" sectionFormat="of" target="section-8"/>.  <xref derivedContent="" format="title" sectionFormat="of" target="name-references">References</xref></t>
            <ul bare="true" empty="true" indent="2" spacing="compact" pn="section-toc.1-1.8.2">
              <li pn="section-toc.1-1.8.2.1">
                <t keepWithNext="true" pn="section-toc.1-1.8.2.1.1"><xref derivedContent="8.1" format="counter" sectionFormat="of" target="section-8.1"/>.  <xref derivedContent="" format="title" sectionFormat="of" target="name-normative-references">Normative References</xref></t>
              </li>
              <li pn="section-toc.1-1.8.2.2">
                <t keepWithNext="true" pn="section-toc.1-1.8.2.2.1"><xref derivedContent="8.2" format="counter" sectionFormat="of" target="section-8.2"/>.  <xref derivedContent="" format="title" sectionFormat="of" target="name-informative-references">Informative References</xref></t>
              </li>
            </ul>
          </li>
          <li pn="section-toc.1-1.9">
            <t keepWithNext="true" pn="section-toc.1-1.9.1"><xref derivedContent="Appendix A" format="default" sectionFormat="of" target="section-appendix.a"/>.  <xref derivedContent="" format="title" sectionFormat="of" target="name-notes-on-use-of-tcp-options">Notes on the wire arrive unmodified at the destination:
they may be split or coalesced; Use of TCP options may be removed or duplicated. </t> Options</xref></t>
          </li>
          <li pn="section-toc.1-1.10">
            <t hangText="Application Constraints:"> The protocol must be usable keepWithNext="true" pn="section-toc.1-1.10.1"><xref derivedContent="Appendix B" format="default" sectionFormat="of" target="section-appendix.b"/>.  <xref derivedContent="" format="title" sectionFormat="of" target="name-tcp-fast-open-and-mptcp">TCP Fast Open and MPTCP</xref></t>
            <ul bare="true" empty="true" indent="2" spacing="compact" pn="section-toc.1-1.10.2">
              <li pn="section-toc.1-1.10.2.1">
                <t keepWithNext="true" pn="section-toc.1-1.10.2.1.1"><xref derivedContent="B.1" format="counter" sectionFormat="of" target="section-b.1"/>.  <xref derivedContent="" format="title" sectionFormat="of" target="name-tfo-cookie-request-with-mpt">TFO Cookie Request with no change to existing applications that use the common MPTCP</xref></t>
              </li>
              <li pn="section-toc.1-1.10.2.2">
                <t keepWithNext="true" pn="section-toc.1-1.10.2.2.1"><xref derivedContent="B.2" format="counter" sectionFormat="of" target="section-b.2"/>.  <xref derivedContent="" format="title" sectionFormat="of" target="name-data-sequence-mapping-under">Data Sequence Mapping under TFO</xref></t>
              </li>
              <li pn="section-toc.1-1.10.2.3">
                <t keepWithNext="true" pn="section-toc.1-1.10.2.3.1"><xref derivedContent="B.3" format="counter" sectionFormat="of" target="section-b.3"/>.  <xref derivedContent="" format="title" sectionFormat="of" target="name-connection-establishment-ex">Connection Establishment Examples</xref></t>
              </li>
            </ul>
          </li>
          <li pn="section-toc.1-1.11">
            <t keepWithNext="true" pn="section-toc.1-1.11.1"><xref derivedContent="Appendix C" format="default" sectionFormat="of" target="section-appendix.c"/>.  <xref derivedContent="" format="title" sectionFormat="of" target="name-control-blocks">Control Blocks</xref></t>
            <ul bare="true" empty="true" indent="2" spacing="compact" pn="section-toc.1-1.11.2">
              <li pn="section-toc.1-1.11.2.1">
                <t keepWithNext="true" pn="section-toc.1-1.11.2.1.1"><xref derivedContent="C.1" format="counter" sectionFormat="of" target="section-c.1"/>.  <xref derivedContent="" format="title" sectionFormat="of" target="name-mptcp-control-block">MPTCP Control Block</xref></t>
                <ul bare="true" empty="true" indent="2" spacing="compact" pn="section-toc.1-1.11.2.1.2">
                  <li pn="section-toc.1-1.11.2.1.2.1">
                    <t keepWithNext="true" pn="section-toc.1-1.11.2.1.2.1.1"><xref derivedContent="C.1.1" format="counter" sectionFormat="of" target="section-c.1.1"/>.  <xref derivedContent="" format="title" sectionFormat="of" target="name-authentication-and-metadata">Authentication and Metadata</xref></t>
                  </li>
                  <li pn="section-toc.1-1.11.2.1.2.2">
                    <t keepWithNext="true" pn="section-toc.1-1.11.2.1.2.2.1"><xref derivedContent="C.1.2" format="counter" sectionFormat="of" target="section-c.1.2"/>.  <xref derivedContent="" format="title" sectionFormat="of" target="name-sending-side">Sending Side</xref></t>
                  </li>
                  <li pn="section-toc.1-1.11.2.1.2.3">
                    <t keepWithNext="true" pn="section-toc.1-1.11.2.1.2.3.1"><xref derivedContent="C.1.3" format="counter" sectionFormat="of" target="section-c.1.3"/>.  <xref derivedContent="" format="title" sectionFormat="of" target="name-receiving-side">Receiving Side</xref></t>
                  </li>
                </ul>
              </li>
              <li pn="section-toc.1-1.11.2.2">
                <t keepWithNext="true" pn="section-toc.1-1.11.2.2.1"><xref derivedContent="C.2" format="counter" sectionFormat="of" target="section-c.2"/>.  <xref derivedContent="" format="title" sectionFormat="of" target="name-tcp-control-blocks">TCP Control Blocks</xref></t>
                <ul bare="true" empty="true" indent="2" spacing="compact" pn="section-toc.1-1.11.2.2.2">
                  <li pn="section-toc.1-1.11.2.2.2.1">
                    <t keepWithNext="true" pn="section-toc.1-1.11.2.2.2.1.1"><xref derivedContent="C.2.1" format="counter" sectionFormat="of" target="section-c.2.1"/>.  <xref derivedContent="" format="title" sectionFormat="of" target="name-sending-side-2">Sending Side</xref></t>
                  </li>
                  <li pn="section-toc.1-1.11.2.2.2.2">
                    <t keepWithNext="true" pn="section-toc.1-1.11.2.2.2.2.1"><xref derivedContent="C.2.2" format="counter" sectionFormat="of" target="section-c.2.2"/>.  <xref derivedContent="" format="title" sectionFormat="of" target="name-receiving-side-2">Receiving Side</xref></t>
                  </li>
                </ul>
              </li>
            </ul>
          </li>
          <li pn="section-toc.1-1.12">
            <t keepWithNext="true" pn="section-toc.1-1.12.1"><xref derivedContent="Appendix D" format="default" sectionFormat="of" target="section-appendix.d"/>.  <xref derivedContent="" format="title" sectionFormat="of" target="name-finite-state-machine">Finite State Machine</xref></t>
          </li>
          <li pn="section-toc.1-1.13">
            <t keepWithNext="true" pn="section-toc.1-1.13.1"><xref derivedContent="Appendix E" format="default" sectionFormat="of" target="section-appendix.e"/>.  <xref derivedContent="" format="title" sectionFormat="of" target="name-changes-from-rfc-6824">Changes from RFC 6824</xref></t>
          </li>
          <li pn="section-toc.1-1.14">
            <t keepWithNext="true" pn="section-toc.1-1.14.1"><xref derivedContent="" format="none" sectionFormat="of" target="section-appendix.f"/><xref derivedContent="" format="title" sectionFormat="of" target="name-acknowledgments">Acknowledgments</xref></t>
          </li>
          <li pn="section-toc.1-1.15">
            <t keepWithNext="true" pn="section-toc.1-1.15.1"><xref derivedContent="" format="none" sectionFormat="of" target="section-appendix.g"/><xref derivedContent="" format="title" sectionFormat="of" target="name-authors-addresses">Authors' Addresses</xref></t>
          </li>
        </ul>
      </section>
    </toc>
  </front>
  <middle>
    <section anchor="sec_intro" numbered="true" toc="include" removeInRFC="false" pn="section-1">
      <name slugifiedName="name-introduction">Introduction</name>
      <t pn="section-1-1">Multipath TCP API (although it (MPTCP) is reasonable that not all features would be available a set of extensions to such legacy applications). Furthermore, the protocol must provide the same service model as regular TCP <xref target="RFC0793" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="RFC0793"/> to provide a Multipath TCP service <xref target="RFC6182" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="RFC6182"/>, which enables a transport connection to operate across multiple paths
simultaneously. This document presents the application.</t>
            <t hangText="Fallback:"> The protocol should be able changes required to fall back add
multipath capability to standard TCP with no interference from -- specifically, those for signaling and setting
up multiple paths ("subflows"), managing these subflows, reassembly of data,
and termination of sessions. This is not the user, to be able only information required to communicate with legacy hosts.</t>
          </list>
        </t>
        <t>The complementary application considerations create a Multipath TCP implementation, however. This document <xref target="RFC6897"/> discusses is complemented by three others:
      </t>
      <ul spacing="normal" bare="false" empty="false" pn="section-1-2">
        <li pn="section-1-2.1">
          <xref target="RFC6182" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="RFC6182"/> (MPTCP architecture), which
        explains the necessary features motivations behind Multipath TCP, contains a discussion
        of high-level design decisions on which this design is based, and provides an API to provide backwards-compatibility, as well as API extensions to convey the behavior explanation of a functional separation through which an extensible MPTCP at implementation can be developed.</li>
        <li pn="section-1-2.2">
          <xref target="RFC6356" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="RFC6356"/> (congestion control), which presents a level of safe congestion control and information equivalent to that available with regular, single-path TCP.</t>
        <t>Further discussion of algorithm for coupling the design constraints and associated design decisions are given in behavior of the MPTCP Architecture document <xref target="RFC6182"/> and in <xref target="howhard"/>.</t>
      </section>

      <section title="Multipath TCP multiple paths in the Networking Stack" anchor="sec_layers">
        <t>MPTCP operates at the transport layer and aims order to be transparent "do no harm" to both higher other network users.</li>
        <li pn="section-1-2.3">
          <xref target="RFC6897" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="RFC6897"/> (application considerations), which discusses what impact MPTCP will have on applications, what applications will want to do with MPTCP, and lower
layers. It is as a set consequence of additional features on top these factors, what API extensions an MPTCP implementation should present.</li>
      </ul>
      <t pn="section-1-3">
      This document obsoletes the v0 specification of standard TCP;
      Multipath TCP <xref target="fig_arch" /> illustrates
this layering. target="RFC6824" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="RFC6824"/>. This document specifies MPTCP v1, which is designed not backward compatible with MPTCP v0. This document additionally defines version negotiation procedures for implementations that support both versions.
      </t>
      <section anchor="sec_assum" numbered="true" toc="include" removeInRFC="false" pn="section-1.1">
        <name slugifiedName="name-design-assumptions">Design Assumptions</name>
        <t pn="section-1.1-1">In order to limit the potentially huge design space, the
        MPTCP Working Group imposed two key constraints on the Multipath TCP design presented in this document:
        </t>
        <ul spacing="normal" bare="false" empty="false" pn="section-1.1-2">
          <li pn="section-1.1-2.1">It must be usable by legacy applications with no changes; detailed discussion
of its interactions backward compatible with applications is given in <xref target="RFC6897"/>.</t>

        <figure align="center" anchor="fig_arch" title="Comparison of Standard TCP and MPTCP Protocol Stacks">
          <artwork align="left"><![CDATA[
                                +-------------------------------+
                                |           Application         |
   +---------------+            +-------------------------------+
   |  Application  |            |             MPTCP             |
   +---------------+            + - - - - - - - + - - - - - - - +
   |      TCP      |            | Subflow (TCP) | Subflow (TCP) |
   +---------------+            +-------------------------------+
   |      IP       |            |       IP      |      IP       |
   +---------------+            +-------------------------------+
            ]]></artwork>
        </figure>
      </section>

      <section title="Terminology">
        <t>This document makes use of a number current, regular TCP, to increase its chances of terms deployment.</li>
          <li pn="section-1.1-2.2">It can be assumed that are either MPTCP-specific one or have defined meaning in the context of MPTCP, as follows:
        <list style="hanging">
          <t hangText="Path:"> A sequence of links between a sender and a receiver, defined in this context by a 4-tuple of source both hosts are multihomed and destination address/port pairs.</t> multiaddressed.</li>
        </ul>
        <t hangText="Subflow:"> A flow of TCP segments operating over an individual path, which forms part pn="section-1.1-3">To simplify the design, we assume that the presence of multiple
        addresses at a larger MPTCP connection. A subflow host is started and terminated similar sufficient to a regular TCP connection.</t>
          <t hangText="(MPTCP) Connection:"> A set indicate the existence of
        multiple paths. These paths need not be entirely disjoint: they may
        share one or more subflows, over which an application can communicate between two hosts. There is a one-to-one mapping many routers between them. Even in such a connection and an application socket.</t>
          <t hangText="Data-level:"> The payload data situation,
        making use of multiple paths is nominally transferred over beneficial, improving resource
        utilization and resilience to a connection, which subset of node failures. The
        congestion control algorithm defined in turn is transported over subflows.  Thus, <xref target="RFC6356" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="RFC6356"/> ensures that the term "data-level" is synonymous with "connection level", in contrast to "subflow-level", which refers to properties use of an individual subflow.</t>
          <t hangText="Token:"> A locally unique identifier given to a multipath connection by a host. May also multiple paths does not act detrimentally.
 Furthermore, there may be referred to as some scenarios where different TCP ports on a "Connection ID".</t>
          <t hangText="Host:"> An end
single host operating an MPTCP implementation, and either initiating or accepting an MPTCP connection.</t>
        </list>
        In addition to these terms, note that MPTCP's interpretation of, and effect on, regular single-path TCP semantics are discussed in can provide disjoint paths (such as through certain
Equal-Cost Multipath (ECMP) implementations <xref target="sec_semantics"/>.</t>
      </section>

      <section title="MPTCP Concept" anchor="sec_operation">
        <t>This section provides a high-level summary of normal
operation of MPTCP, target="RFC2992" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="RFC2992"/>), and is illustrated by so the scenario shown in
<xref target="fig_scenario"/>. A detailed description of operation is given in <xref target="sec_protocol"/>.
          <list style="symbols">
            <t>To a non-MPTCP-aware application, MPTCP will behave design also supports the same as normal TCP. Extended APIs could provide
additional control to MPTCP-aware applications <xref target="RFC6897"/>.
An application begins by opening a TCP socket use of
ports in the normal way.
MPTCP signaling and operation path identifiers.</t>
        <t pn="section-1.1-4">There are handled by the MPTCP implementation.
</t>
            <t>An MPTCP connection begins similarly three aspects to a regular TCP connection. This is
illustrated the backward compatibility listed above (discussed in more detail in <xref target="fig_scenario"/> where an MPTCP connection is established between
addresses A1 target="RFC6182" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="RFC6182"/>):
        </t>
        <dl newline="false" spacing="normal" indent="3" pn="section-1.1-5">
          <dt pn="section-1.1-5.1">External Constraints:</dt>
          <dd pn="section-1.1-5.2"> The protocol must function through the vast majority of existing
middleboxes such as NATs, firewalls, and B1 on Hosts A proxies, and B, respectively.</t>
            <t>If extra paths are available, additional as such must resemble existing TCP sessions (termed MPTCP "subflows")
are created as far as possible on these paths, and are combined with the existing session, which continues
to appear as a single connection to
wire. Furthermore, the applications at both ends. The creation of protocol must not assume that the
additional TCP session is illustrated between Address A2 on Host A and Address B1 segments it sends on
Host B.</t>
            <t>MPTCP identifies multiple paths by the presence of multiple addresses wire arrive unmodified at hosts. Combinations of these multiple addresses equate to the additional paths.
In the example, other potential paths that could destination:
they may be set up are A1&lt;-&gt;B2 and A2&lt;-&gt;B2.
Although this additional session is shown as being initiated from A2, it could equally have
been initiated from B1 split or B2.</t>
            <t>The discovery and setup of additional subflows
will coalesced; TCP options may be achieved through a path management method; this document describes a mechanism
by which a host can initiate new subflows by using its own additional addresses, removed or by
signaling its available addresses duplicated. </dd>
          <dt pn="section-1.1-5.3">Application Constraints:</dt>
          <dd pn="section-1.1-5.4"> The protocol must be usable with no change to existing applications that use the other host.</t>
            <t>MPTCP adds connection-level sequence numbers common TCP API (although it is reasonable that not all features would be available to allow such legacy applications). Furthermore, the reassembly of
segments arriving on multiple subflows with differing network delays. </t>
            <t>Subflows are terminated protocol must provide the same service model as regular TCP connections, with a four-way FIN
handshake. to the application.</dd>
          <dt pn="section-1.1-5.5">Fallback:</dt>
          <dd pn="section-1.1-5.6"> The protocol should be able to fall back to standard TCP with no interference from the user, to be able to communicate with legacy hosts.</dd>
        </dl>
        <t pn="section-1.1-6">The complementary application considerations document <xref target="RFC6897" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="RFC6897"/> discusses the necessary features
        of an API to provide backward compatibility, as well as API extensions to convey the behavior of MPTCP connection is terminated by at a connection-level FIN.</t>
          </list>
        </t>
          <?rfc needLines='17'?> level of control and information equivalent to that available with regular, single-path TCP.</t>
        <t pn="section-1.1-7">Further discussion of the design constraints and associated design decisions is given in the MPTCP architecture document <xref target="RFC6182" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="RFC6182"/> and in <xref target="howhard" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="howhard"/>.</t>
      </section>
      <section anchor="sec_layers" numbered="true" toc="include" removeInRFC="false" pn="section-1.2">
        <name slugifiedName="name-multipath-tcp-in-the-networ">Multipath TCP in the Networking Stack</name>
        <t pn="section-1.2-1">MPTCP operates at the transport layer and aims to be transparent to both higher and lower
layers. It is a set of additional features on top of standard TCP; <xref target="fig_arch" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="Figure 1"/> illustrates
this layering. MPTCP is designed to be usable by legacy applications with no changes; detailed discussion
of its interactions with applications is given in <xref target="RFC6897" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="RFC6897"/>.</t>
        <figure align="center" anchor="fig_scenario" title="Example anchor="fig_arch" align="left" suppress-title="false" pn="figure-1">
          <name slugifiedName="name-comparison-of-standard-tcp-">Comparison of Standard TCP and MPTCP Usage Scenario"> Protocol Stacks</name>
          <artwork align="left"><![CDATA[
            Host A                               Host B
   ------------------------             ------------------------
   Address A1    Address A2             Address B1    Address B2
   ----------    ----------             ----------    ----------
       |             |                      |             |
       |     (initial connection setup)     |             |
       |----------------------------------->|             |
       |<-----------------------------------|             |
       |             | align="left" name="" type="" alt="" pn="section-1.2-2.1">
                                +-------------------------------+
                                |           Application         |
   +---------------+            +-------------------------------+
   |            (additional subflow setup)  Application  |            |             |--------------------->|             MPTCP             |
   +---------------+            + - - - - - - - + - - - - - - - +
   |             |<---------------------|      TCP      |            | Subflow (TCP) | Subflow (TCP) |
   +---------------+            +-------------------------------+
   |      IP       |            |       IP      |      IP       |
              ]]></artwork>
   +---------------+            +-------------------------------+ </artwork>
        </figure>
      </section>
      <section title="Requirements Language">
	<t>The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL
        NOT", "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "NOT RECOMMENDED",
        "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this numbered="true" toc="include" removeInRFC="false" pn="section-1.3">
        <name slugifiedName="name-terminology">Terminology</name>
        <t pn="section-1.3-1">This document makes use of a number of terms that are to be interpreted as
        described either MPTCP specific or have defined meaning in BCP&nbsp;14 <xref target="RFC2119"/> <xref target="RFC8174"/>
	when, the context of MPTCP, as follows:
        </t>
        <dl newline="false" spacing="normal" indent="3" pn="section-1.3-2">
          <dt pn="section-1.3-2.1">Path:</dt>
          <dd pn="section-1.3-2.2"> A sequence of links between a sender and only when, they appear a receiver, defined in all capitals, as shown here.</t>

      </section>
    </section>

    <section title="Operation Overview" anchor="sec_overview">
      <t>This section presents this context by a single description 4-tuple of common MPTCP operation, with reference to the protocol operation. This is a high-level overview of the key functions; the full specification follows in <xref target="sec_protocol"/>. Extensibility source and negotiated features are not discussed here. Considerable reference is made to symbolic names destination address⁠/port pairs.</dd>
          <dt pn="section-1.3-2.3">Subflow:</dt>
          <dd pn="section-1.3-2.4"> A flow of MPTCP options throughout this section -- these are subtypes TCP segments operating over an individual path, which forms part of the IANA-assigned a larger MPTCP option (see <xref target="IANA"/>), connection. A subflow is started and their formats are defined in the detailed protocol specification that follows in <xref target="sec_protocol"/>.</t>

<t>A Multipath TCP connection provides terminated similarly to a bidirectional bytestream regular TCP connection.</dd>
          <dt pn="section-1.3-2.5">(MPTCP) Connection:</dt>
          <dd pn="section-1.3-2.6"> A set of one or more subflows, over which an application can communicate between two hosts communicating like normal TCP and, thus, does not require any change to the applications. However, Multipath TCP enables hosts. There is a one‑to‑one mapping between a connection and an application socket.</dd>
          <dt pn="section-1.3-2.7">Data-level:</dt>
          <dd pn="section-1.3-2.8"> The payload data is nominally transferred over a connection, which in turn is transported over subflows.  Thus, the hosts to use different paths term "data-level" is synonymous with different IP addresses "connection-level", in contrast to exchange packets belonging "subflow-level", which refers to the MPTCP connection. properties of an individual subflow.</dd>
          <dt pn="section-1.3-2.9">Token:</dt>
          <dd pn="section-1.3-2.10"> A Multipath TCP connection appears like locally unique identifier given to a normal TCP multipath connection by a host. May also be referred to as a "Connection ID".</dd>
          <dt pn="section-1.3-2.11">Host:</dt>
          <dd pn="section-1.3-2.12"> An end host operating an application. However, to the network layer, each MPTCP subflow looks like a regular TCP flow whose segments carry a new TCP option type. Multipath TCP manages the creation, removal, implementation, and utilization of these subflows either initiating or accepting an MPTCP connection.</dd>
        </dl>
        <t pn="section-1.3-3">
        In addition to send data. The number of subflows these terms, note that are managed within a Multipath TCP connection is not fixed MPTCP's interpretation of, and it can fluctuate during the lifetime of the Multipath effect on, regular single-path TCP connection.</t>

<t>All MPTCP operations semantics are signaled with a TCP option -- a single numerical type for MPTCP, with "sub-types" for each MPTCP message. What follows is discussed in <xref target="sec_semantics" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="Section 4"/>.</t>
      </section>
      <section anchor="sec_operation" numbered="true" toc="include" removeInRFC="false" pn="section-1.4">
        <name slugifiedName="name-mptcp-concept">MPTCP Concept</name>
        <t pn="section-1.4-1">This section provides a high-level summary of the purpose and rationale normal
operation of these messages.</t>
<section title="Initiating an MPTCP; this type of scenario is illustrated in
<xref target="fig_scenario" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="Figure 2"/>. A detailed description of how
MPTCP Connection">
<t>This operates is given in <xref target="sec_protocol" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="Section 3"/>.
        </t>
        <figure anchor="fig_scenario" align="left" suppress-title="false" pn="figure-2">
          <name slugifiedName="name-example-mptcp-usage-scenari">Example MPTCP Usage Scenario</name>
          <artwork align="left" name="" type="" alt="" pn="section-1.4-2.1">
            Host A                               Host B
   ------------------------             ------------------------
   Address A1    Address A2             Address B1    Address B2
   ----------    ----------             ----------    ----------
       |             |                      |             |
       |     (initial connection setup)     |             |
       |-----------------------------------&gt;|             |
       |&lt;-----------------------------------|             |
       |             |                      |             |
       |            (additional subflow setup)            |
       |             |---------------------&gt;|             |
       |             |&lt;---------------------|             |
       |             |                      |             |
       |             |                      |             | </artwork>
        </figure>
        <ul spacing="normal" bare="false" empty="false" pn="section-1.4-3">
          <li pn="section-1.4-3.1">To a non-MPTCP-aware application, MPTCP will behave the same signaling as for initiating a normal TCP. Extended APIs could provide
additional control to MPTCP-aware applications <xref target="RFC6897" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="RFC6897"/>.
An application begins by opening a TCP connection, but the SYN, SYN/ACK, and initial ACK (and data) packets also carry socket in the MP_CAPABLE option. This option has a variable length normal way.
MPTCP signaling and serves multiple purposes. Firstly, it verifies whether the remote host supports Multipath TCP; secondly, this option allows operation are handled by the hosts to exchange some information MPTCP implementation.
</li>
          <li pn="section-1.4-3.2">An MPTCP connection begins similarly to authenticate the establishment of additional subflows. Further details are given a regular TCP connection. This is
illustrated in <xref target="sec_init"/>.</t>

<figure><artwork align="left"><![CDATA[
   Host A                                  Host B
   ------                                  ------
   MP_CAPABLE                ->
   [flags]
                             <-            MP_CAPABLE
                                           [B's key, flags]
   ACK + MP_CAPABLE (+ data) ->
   [A's key, B's key, flags, (data-level details)]
]]></artwork></figure>

<t>Retransmission of the ACK + MP_CAPABLE can occur if it target="fig_scenario" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="Figure 2"/>, where an MPTCP connection is not known if it has been received. The following diagrams show all possible exchanges for the initial subflow setup to ensure this reliability.</t>

<figure><artwork align="left"><![CDATA[
   Host established between
addresses A1 and B1 on Hosts A (with data and B, respectively.</li>
          <li pn="section-1.4-3.3">If extra paths are available, additional TCP sessions (termed MPTCP "subflows")
are created on these paths and are combined with the existing session, which continues
to send immediately)  Host B
   ------                                  ------
   MP_CAPABLE                ->
   [flags]
                             <-            MP_CAPABLE
                                           [B's key, flags]
   ACK + MP_CAPABLE + data   ->
   [A's key, B's key, flags, data-level details]

   Host A (with data appear as a single connection to send later)        Host B
   ------                                  ------
   MP_CAPABLE                ->
   [flags]
                             <-            MP_CAPABLE
                                           [B's key, flags]
   ACK + MP_CAPABLE          ->
   [A's key, B's key, flags]

   ACK + MP_CAPABLE + data   ->
   [A's key, B's key, flags, data-level details] the applications at both ends. The creation of the
additional TCP session is illustrated between Address A2 on Host A and Address B1 on
Host B (sending first)
   ------                                  ------
   MP_CAPABLE                ->
   [flags]
                             <-            MP_CAPABLE
                                           [B's key, flags]
   ACK + MP_CAPABLE          ->
   [A's key, B's key, flags]

                             <-            ACK + DSS + data
                                           [data-level details]
]]></artwork></figure>
</section>

<section title="Associating a New Subflow with an Existing MPTCP Connection">
<t>The exchange of keys in B.</li>
          <li pn="section-1.4-3.4">MPTCP identifies multiple paths by the MP_CAPABLE handshake provides material that can be used presence of multiple addresses
at hosts. Combinations of these multiple addresses equate to authenticate the endpoints when new subflows will additional paths.
In the example, other potential paths that could be set up.
Additional subflows begin in the same way up are A1&lt;-&gt;B2 and A2&lt;-&gt;B2.
Although this additional session is shown as initiating a normal TCP connection, but the SYN, SYN/ACK, being initiated from A2, it could equally have
been initiated from B1 or B2.</li>
          <li pn="section-1.4-3.5">The discovery and ACK packets also carry the MP_JOIN option. </t>

<t>Host A initiates setup of additional subflows
will be achieved through a path management method; this document describes a mechanism
by which a host can initiate new subflow between one of subflows by using its own additional addresses and one of Host B's addresses. The token -- generated from or by
signaling its available addresses to the key -- is used other host.</li>
          <li pn="section-1.4-3.6">MPTCP adds connection-level sequence numbers to identify which allow the reassembly of
segments arriving on multiple subflows with differing network delays. </li>
          <li pn="section-1.4-3.7">Subflows are terminated as regular TCP connections, with a four‑way FIN
handshake. The MPTCP connection it is joining, and the HMAC is used for authentication. terminated by a connection-level FIN.</li>
        </ul>
      </section>
      <section numbered="true" toc="include" removeInRFC="false" pn="section-1.5">
        <name slugifiedName="name-requirements-language">Requirements Language</name>
        <t pn="section-1.5-1">
    The Hash-based Message Authentication Code (HMAC) uses the keys exchanged in the MP_CAPABLE handshake, key words "<bcp14>MUST</bcp14>", "<bcp14>MUST NOT</bcp14>",
    "<bcp14>REQUIRED</bcp14>", "<bcp14>SHALL</bcp14>", "<bcp14>SHALL NOT</bcp14>",
    "<bcp14>SHOULD</bcp14>", "<bcp14>SHOULD NOT</bcp14>",
    "<bcp14>RECOMMENDED</bcp14>", "<bcp14>NOT RECOMMENDED</bcp14>",
    "<bcp14>MAY</bcp14>", and the random numbers (nonces) exchanged "<bcp14>OPTIONAL</bcp14>" in these MP_JOIN options. MP_JOIN also contains flags and an Address ID that can be used this document are to refer be
    interpreted as described in BCP 14 <xref target="RFC2119" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="RFC2119"/> <xref target="RFC8174" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="RFC8174"/> when, and only when, they appear in all capitals, as
    shown here.
        </t>
      </section>
    </section>
    <section anchor="sec_overview" numbered="true" toc="include" removeInRFC="false" pn="section-2">
      <name slugifiedName="name-operation-overview">Operation Overview</name>
      <t pn="section-2-1">This section presents a single description of common MPTCP operation, with reference to the source address without the sender needing to know if it has been changed by protocol operation. This is a NAT. Further details are high-level overview of the key functions; the full specification follows in <xref target="sec_join"/>.</t>

<figure><artwork align="left"><![CDATA[
   Host A                                  Host B
   ------                                  ------
   MP_JOIN               ->
   [B's token, A's nonce,
    A's Address ID, flags]
                         <-                MP_JOIN
                                           [B's HMAC, B's nonce,
                                            B's Address ID, flags]
   ACK + MP_JOIN         ->
   [A's HMAC]

                         <-                ACK
]]></artwork></figure>
</section>

<section title="Informing the Other Host about Another Potential Address">
<t>The set of IP addresses associated target="sec_protocol" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="Section 3"/>. Extensibility and negotiated features are not discussed here. Considerable reference is made to a multihomed host may change during the lifetime symbolic names of an MPTCP connection. MPTCP supports the addition and removal options throughout this section -- these are subtypes of addresses on a host both implicitly the IANA‑assigned MPTCP option (see <xref target="IANA" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="Section 7"/>), and explicitly. If Host A has established their formats are defined in the detailed protocol specification provided in <xref target="sec_protocol" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="Section 3"/>.</t>
      <t pn="section-2-2">A Multipath TCP connection provides a subflow starting at address/port pair IP#-A1 bidirectional bytestream between two hosts communicating like normal TCP and wants thus does not require any change to open a second subflow starting at address/port pair IP#-A2, it simply initiates the establishment of applications. However, Multipath TCP enables the subflow as explained above. The remote host will then be implicitly informed about hosts to use different paths with different IP addresses to exchange packets belonging to the new address.</t>

<t>In some circumstances, MPTCP connection. A Multipath TCP connection appears like a host may want normal TCP connection to advertise an application. However, to the remote host the availability of an address without establishing network layer, each MPTCP subflow looks like a new subflow, for example, when regular TCP flow whose segments carry a NAT prevents setup in one direction.  In new TCP option type. Multipath TCP manages the example below, Host A informs Host B about its alternative IP address/port pair (IP#-A2). Host B may later send an MP_JOIN creation, removal, and utilization of these subflows to this new address. send data. The ADD_ADDR option contains number of subflows that are managed within a HMAC to authenticate Multipath TCP connection is not fixed, and it can fluctuate during the address as having been sent from lifetime of the originator Multipath TCP connection.</t>
      <t pn="section-2-3">All MPTCP operations are signaled with a TCP option -- a single numerical type for MPTCP, with "subtypes" for each MPTCP message. What follows is a summary of the connection. The receiver purpose and rationale of this these messages.</t>
      <section numbered="true" toc="include" removeInRFC="false" pn="section-2.1">
        <name slugifiedName="name-initiating-an-mptcp-connect">Initiating an MPTCP Connection</name>
        <t pn="section-2.1-1">This is the same signaling as for initiating a normal TCP connection, but the SYN, SYN/ACK, and initial ACK (and data) packets also carry the MP_CAPABLE option. This option echoes has a variable length and serves multiple purposes. Firstly, it back to verifies whether the client remote host supports Multipath TCP; secondly, this option allows the hosts to indicate successful receipt. exchange some information to authenticate the establishment of additional subflows. Further details are given in <xref target="sec_add_address"/>.</t>

<figure><artwork align="left"><![CDATA[ target="sec_init" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="Section 3.1"/>.</t>
        <artwork align="left" name="" type="" alt="" pn="section-2.1-2">
   Host A                                  Host B
   ------                                  ------
   ADD_ADDR                  ->
   [Echo-flag=0,
    IP#-A2,
    IP#-A2's Address ID,
    HMAC of IP#-A2]

                             <-          ADD_ADDR
                                         [Echo-flag=1,
                                          IP#-A2,
                                          IP#-A2's Address ID,
                                          HMAC of IP#-A2]
]]></artwork></figure>

<t>There is a corresponding signal for address removal, making use
   MP_CAPABLE                -&gt;
   [flags]
                             &lt;-            MP_CAPABLE
                                           [B's key, flags]
   ACK + MP_CAPABLE (+ data) -&gt;
   [A's key, B's key, flags, (data-level details)]  </artwork>
        <t pn="section-2.1-3">Retransmission of the Address ID that ACK + MP_CAPABLE can occur if it is signaled in not known if it has been received. The following diagrams show all possible exchanges for the add address handshake. Further details in <xref target="sec_remove_addr"/>.</t>

<figure><artwork align="left"><![CDATA[ initial subflow setup to ensure this reliability.</t>
        <artwork align="left" name="" type="" alt="" pn="section-2.1-4">
   Host A (with data to send immediately)  Host B
   ------                                  ------
   REMOVE_ADDR               ->
   [IP#-A2's Address ID]
]]></artwork></figure>
</section>

<section title="Data Transfer Using MPTCP">
<t>To ensure reliable, in-order delivery of
   MP_CAPABLE                -&gt;
   [flags]
                             &lt;-            MP_CAPABLE
                                           [B's key, flags]
   ACK + MP_CAPABLE + data over subflows that may appear and disappear at any time, MPTCP uses a 64-bit   -&gt;
   [A's key, B's key, flags, data-level details]

   Host A (with data sequence number (DSN) to number all send later)        Host B
   ------                                  ------
   MP_CAPABLE                -&gt;
   [flags]
                             &lt;-            MP_CAPABLE
                                           [B's key, flags]
   ACK + MP_CAPABLE          -&gt;
   [A's key, B's key, flags]

   ACK + MP_CAPABLE + data sent over the MPTCP connection. Each subflow has its own 32-bit sequence number space, utilising the regular TCP sequence number header, and   -&gt;
   [A's key, B's key, flags, data-level details]

   Host A                                  Host B (sending first)
   ------                                  ------
   MP_CAPABLE                -&gt;
   [flags]
                             &lt;-            MP_CAPABLE
                                           [B's key, flags]
   ACK + MP_CAPABLE          -&gt;
   [A's key, B's key, flags]

                             &lt;-            ACK + DSS + data
                                           [data-level details] </artwork>
      </section>
      <section numbered="true" toc="include" removeInRFC="false" pn="section-2.2">
        <name slugifiedName="name-associating-a-new-subflow-w">Associating a New Subflow with an Existing MPTCP option maps the subflow sequence space to Connection</name>
        <t pn="section-2.2-1">The exchange of keys in the data sequence space. In this way, data MP_CAPABLE handshake provides material that can be retransmitted on different subflows (mapped used to authenticate the same DSN) endpoints when new subflows will be set up.
Additional subflows begin in the event of failure.</t>

<t>The Data Sequence Signal (DSS) carries the Data Sequence Mapping. The Data Sequence Mapping consists of same way as initiating a normal TCP connection, but the subflow sequence number, data sequence number, SYN, SYN/ACK, and length for which this mapping is valid. This option can ACK packets also carry a connection-level acknowledgment (the "Data ACK") for the received DSN.</t>

<t>With MPTCP, all subflows share the same receive buffer and advertise the same receive window. There are two levels of acknowledgment in MPTCP. Regular TCP acknowledgments are used on each MP_JOIN option. </t>
        <t pn="section-2.2-2">Host A initiates a new subflow to acknowledge the reception between one of its addresses and one
        of Host B's addresses. The token -- generated from the segments sent over key -- is used
        to identify which MPTCP connection it is joining, and the subflow independently of their DSN. In addition, there are connection-level acknowledgments Hash‑based
        Message Authentication Code (HMAC) is used for authentication. The HMAC uses the data sequence space. These acknowledgments track the advancement of keys exchanged in the bytestream MP_CAPABLE handshake and slide the receiving window.</t>

<t>Further details are in <xref target="sec_generalop"/>.</t>

<figure><artwork align="left"><![CDATA[
   Host A                                 Host B
   ------                                 ------
   DSS                       ->
   [Data Sequence Mapping]
   [Data ACK]
   [Checksum]
]]></artwork></figure>
</section>

<section title="Requesting a Change random numbers (nonces) exchanged in a Path's Priority">
<t>Hosts these MP_JOIN options. MP_JOIN also contains flags and an Address ID that can indicate at initial subflow setup whether they wish the subflow to be used as a regular or backup path -- a backup path only being used if there are no regular paths available. During a connection, Host A can request a change in to refer to the priority of a subflow through source address without the MP_PRIO signal sender needing to Host B. know if it has been changed by a NAT. Further details are given in <xref target="sec_policy"/>.</t>

<figure><artwork align="left"><![CDATA[ target="sec_join" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="Section 3.2"/>.</t>
        <artwork align="left" name="" type="" alt="" pn="section-2.2-3">
   Host A                                  Host B
   ------                                  ------
   MP_PRIO                   ->
]]></artwork></figure>
   MP_JOIN               -&gt;
   [B's token, A's nonce,
    A's Address ID, flags]
                         &lt;-                MP_JOIN
                                           [B's HMAC, B's nonce,
                                            B's Address ID, flags]
   ACK + MP_JOIN         -&gt;
   [A's HMAC]

                         &lt;-                ACK </artwork>
      </section>
      <section title="Closing an MPTCP Connection">
<t>When a host wants to close an existing subflow, but not numbered="true" toc="include" removeInRFC="false" pn="section-2.3">
        <name slugifiedName="name-informing-the-other-host-ab">Informing the whole connection, it can initiate a regular TCP FIN/ACK exchange.</t>

<t>When Other Host A wants about Another Potential Address</name>
        <t pn="section-2.3-1">The set of IP addresses associated to inform a multihomed host may change during the lifetime of an MPTCP connection. MPTCP supports the addition and removal of addresses on a host both implicitly and explicitly. If Host B that it A has no more data established a subflow starting at address⁠/port pair IP#-A1 and wants to send, open a second subflow starting at address⁠/port pair IP#-A2, it signals this "Data FIN" as part of simply initiates the Data Sequence Signal (see above). It has establishment of the same semantics and behavior subflow as explained above. The remote host will then be implicitly informed about the new address.</t>
        <t pn="section-2.3-2">In some circumstances, a regular TCP FIN, but at host may want to advertise to the connection level. Once all remote
        host the data on availability of an address without establishing a new subflow
 -- for example, when a NAT prevents setup in one direction.  In the example below, Host A informs Host B about its alternative IP address⁠/port pair (IP#-A2). Host B may later send an MP_JOIN to this new address. The ADD_ADDR option contains an HMAC to authenticate the MPTCP connection has address as having been successfully received, then sent from the originator of the connection. The receiver of this message is acknowledged at option echoes it back to the connection level with a Data ACK. client to indicate successful receipt. Further details are given in <xref target="sec_close"/>.</t>

<figure><artwork align="left"><![CDATA[ target="sec_add_address" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="Section 3.4.1"/>.</t>
        <artwork align="left" name="" type="" alt="" pn="section-2.3-3">
   Host A                                 Host B
   ------                                 ------
   DSS                       ->
   [Data FIN]
                             <-           DSS
                                          [Data ACK]
]]></artwork></figure>

<t>There is an additional method
   ADD_ADDR                  -&gt;
   [Echo-flag=0,
    IP#-A2,
    IP#-A2's Address ID,
    HMAC of connection closure, referred to as "Fast Close", which IP#-A2]

                             &lt;-          ADD_ADDR
                                         [Echo-flag=1,
                                          IP#-A2,
                                          IP#-A2's Address ID,
                                          HMAC of IP#-A2] </artwork>
        <t pn="section-2.3-4">There is analogous to closing a single-path TCP connection with a RST signal. The MP_FASTCLOSE corresponding signal is used to indicate to the peer that the connection will be abruptly closed and no data will be accepted anymore. This can be used on an ACK (ensuring reliability for address removal, making use of
        the signal), or a RST (which Address ID that is not). Both examples are shown signaled in the following diagrams. ADD_ADDR handshake.

 Further details are given in <xref target="sec_fastclose"/>.</t>

<figure><artwork align="left"><![CDATA[
   Host A                                 Host B
   ------                                 ------
   ACK + MP_FASTCLOSE          ->
   [B's key]

   [RST on all other subflows] ->

                               <-         [RST on all subflows] target="sec_remove_addr" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="Section 3.4.2"/>.</t>
        <artwork align="left" name="" type="" alt="" pn="section-2.3-5">
   Host A                                 Host B
   ------                                 ------
   RST + MP_FASTCLOSE          ->
   [B's key] [on all subflows]

                               <-         [RST on all subflows]
]]></artwork></figure>
   REMOVE_ADDR               -&gt;
   [IP#-A2's Address ID] </artwork>
      </section>
      <section title="Notable Features">
<t>It is worth highlighting numbered="true" toc="include" removeInRFC="false" pn="section-2.4">
        <name slugifiedName="name-data-transfer-using-mptcp">Data Transfer Using MPTCP</name>
        <t pn="section-2.4-1">To ensure reliable, in-order delivery of data over subflows that MPTCP's signaling may appear and disappear at any time, MPTCP uses a 64-bit Data Sequence Number (DSN) to number all data sent over the MPTCP connection. Each subflow has been designed with several key requirements in mind:

<list style="symbols">
<t>To cope with NATs on its own 32-bit sequence number space, utilizing the path, addresses are referred regular TCP sequence number header, and an MPTCP option maps the subflow sequence space to by Address IDs, the data sequence space. In this way, data can be retransmitted on different subflows (mapped to the same DSN) in case the IP packet's source
address gets changed by a NAT. Setting up a new TCP flow is not possible if event of failure.</t>
        <t pn="section-2.4-2">The Data Sequence Signal (DSS) carries the receiver Data Sequence Mapping. The Data Sequence Mapping consists of the SYN subflow sequence number, data sequence number, and length for which this mapping is behind a NAT;
to allow subflows to be created when either end is behind valid. This option can also carry a NAT, MPTCP uses the ADD_ADDR message. </t>

<t>MPTCP falls back to ordinary TCP if MPTCP operation is not possible, connection-level acknowledgment (the "Data ACK") for example, if one host is not MPTCP capable or if a middlebox alters the payload. This is discussed in <xref target="sec_fallback"/>.</t>

<t>To address received DSN.</t>
        <t pn="section-2.4-3">With MPTCP, all subflows share the threats identified in <xref target="RFC6181"/>, same receive buffer and advertise the following steps are taken: keys same receive window. There are sent in the clear two levels of acknowledgment in the MP_CAPABLE messages; MP_JOIN messages are secured with HMAC-SHA256 (<xref target="RFC2104"/>, <xref target="RFC6234"/>) using those keys; and standard MPTCP. Regular TCP validity checks acknowledgments are made used on the other messages (ensuring sequence numbers are in-window <xref target="RFC5961"/>). Residual threats each subflow to MPTCP v0 were identified in <xref target="RFC7430"/>, and those affecting acknowledge the protocol (i.e. modification to ADD_ADDR) have been incorporated in this document. Further discussion reception of security can be found in <xref target="sec_security"/>.</t>
</list></t>
</section>
    </section>

    <section title="MPTCP Protocol" anchor="sec_protocol">
      <t>This section describes the operation of segments sent over the MPTCP protocol, and is subdivided into sections for each key part subflow independently of the protocol operation.</t>
      <t>All MPTCP operations their DSN. In addition, there are signaled using optional TCP header fields. A single TCP option number ("Kind") has been assigned by IANA connection-level acknowledgments for MPTCP (see <xref target="IANA"/>), and then individual messages will be determined by a "subtype", the values data sequence space. These acknowledgments track the advancement of which are also stored in an IANA registry (and the bytestream and slide the receive window.</t>
        <t pn="section-2.4-4">Further details are also listed given in <xref target="IANA"/>). As with all TCP options, the Length field is specified target="sec_generalop" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="Section 3.3"/>.</t>
        <artwork align="left" name="" type="" alt="" pn="section-2.4-5">
   Host A                                 Host B
   ------                                 ------
   DSS                       -&gt;
   [Data Sequence Mapping]
   [Data ACK]
   [Checksum] </artwork>
      </section>
      <section numbered="true" toc="include" removeInRFC="false" pn="section-2.5">
        <name slugifiedName="name-requesting-a-change-in-a-pa">Requesting a Change in bytes, and includes a Path's Priority</name>
        <t pn="section-2.5-1">Hosts can indicate at initial subflow setup whether they wish the 2 bytes of Kind and Length.</t>
      <t>Throughout this document, when reference is made subflow to an MPTCP option by symbolic name, such be used as "MP_CAPABLE", this refers to a TCP option with the single MPTCP option type, and with regular or backup path -- a backup path only being used if there are no regular paths available. During a connection, Host A can request a change in the subtype value priority of a subflow through the symbolic name as defined MP_PRIO signal to Host B. Further details are given in <xref target="IANA"/>. This subtype is target="sec_policy" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="Section 3.3.8"/>.</t>
        <artwork align="left" name="" type="" alt="" pn="section-2.5-2">
   Host A                                 Host B
   ------                                 ------
   MP_PRIO                   -&gt;                 </artwork>
      </section>
      <section numbered="true" toc="include" removeInRFC="false" pn="section-2.6">
        <name slugifiedName="name-closing-an-mptcp-connection">Closing an MPTCP Connection</name>
        <t pn="section-2.6-1">When a 4-bit field -- host wants to close an existing subflow but not the first 4 bits whole connection, it can initiate a regular TCP FIN/ACK exchange.</t>
        <t pn="section-2.6-2">When Host A wants to inform Host B that it has no more data to send, it signals this "Data FIN" as part of the option payload, DSS (see above). It has the same semantics and behavior as shown in <xref target="fig_option"/>. The a regular TCP FIN, but at the connection level. Once all the data on the MPTCP messages connection has been successfully received, this message is acknowledged at the connection level with a Data ACK. Further details are defined given in the following sections.</t>

      <?rfc needLines='8'?>
      <figure align="center" anchor="fig_option" title="MPTCP Option Format"> <xref target="sec_close" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="Section 3.3.3"/>.</t>
        <artwork align="left"><![CDATA[
                        1                   2                   3
    0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1
   +---------------+---------------+-------+-----------------------+
   |     Kind      |    Length     |Subtype|                       |
   +---------------+---------------+-------+                       |
   |                     Subtype-specific data                     |
   |                       (variable length)                       |
   +---------------------------------------------------------------+
          ]]></artwork>
      </figure>

      <t>Those MPTCP options associated with subflow initiation are used on packets align="left" name="" type="" alt="" pn="section-2.6-3">
   Host A                                 Host B
   ------                                 ------
   DSS                       -&gt;
   [Data FIN]
                             &lt;-           DSS
                                          [Data ACK] </artwork>
        <t pn="section-2.6-4">There is an additional method of connection closure, referred to as
        "Fast Close", which is analogous to closing a single-path TCP
        connection with the SYN flag set. Additionally, there a RST signal. The MP_FASTCLOSE signal is one MPTCP option for signaling metadata used to ensure segmented data can be recombined for delivery
        indicate to the application.</t>
      <t>The remaining options, however, are signals peer that do not need to be on a specific packet, such as those for signaling additional addresses. Whilst an implementation may desire to send MPTCP options as soon as possible, it may not the connection will be possible to combine all desired options (both those for MPTCP abruptly closed and for regular TCP, such as SACK (selective acknowledgment) <xref target="RFC2018"/>)
        no data will be accepted anymore. This can be used on a single packet. Therefore, an implementation may choose to send duplicate ACKs containing the additional signaling information. This changes the semantics ACK (which
        ensures reliability of the signal) or a duplicate ACK; these RST (which does not).
 Both examples are usually only sent as a signal of a lost segment <xref target="RFC5681"/> shown in regular TCP. Therefore, an MPTCP implementation receiving a duplicate ACK that contains an MPTCP option MUST NOT treat it as a signal of congestion. Additionally, an MPTCP implementation SHOULD NOT send more than two duplicate ACKs the following diagrams. Further details are given in <xref target="sec_fastclose" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="Section 3.5"/>.</t>
        <artwork align="left" name="" type="" alt="" pn="section-2.6-5">
   Host A                                 Host B
   ------                                 ------
   ACK + MP_FASTCLOSE          -&gt;
   [B's key]

   [RST on all other subflows] -&gt;

                               &lt;-         [RST on all subflows]

   Host A                                 Host B
   ------                                 ------
   RST + MP_FASTCLOSE          -&gt;
   [B's key] [on all subflows]

                               &lt;-         [RST on all subflows] </artwork>
      </section>
      <section numbered="true" toc="include" removeInRFC="false" pn="section-2.7">
        <name slugifiedName="name-notable-features">Notable Features</name>
        <t pn="section-2.7-1">It is worth highlighting that MPTCP's signaling has been designed with several key requirements in mind:

</t>
        <ul spacing="normal" bare="false" empty="false" pn="section-2.7-2">
          <li pn="section-2.7-2.1">To cope with NATs on the path, addresses are referred to by Address IDs, in case the IP packet's source
address gets changed by a row for NAT. Setting up a new TCP flow is not possible if the purposes receiver of sending the SYN is behind a NAT;
to allow subflows to be created when either end is behind a NAT, MPTCP options alone, in order uses the ADD_ADDR message. </li>
          <li pn="section-2.7-2.2">MPTCP falls back to ensure no middleboxes misinterpret this as ordinary TCP if MPTCP operation is not
 possible -- for example, if one host is not MPTCP capable or if a sign of congestion.</t>
      <t>Furthermore, middlebox alters the payload. This is discussed in <xref target="sec_fallback" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="Section 3.7"/>.</li>
          <li pn="section-2.7-2.3">To address the threats identified in <xref target="RFC6181" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="RFC6181"/>, the following steps are taken: keys are sent in
          the clear in the MP_CAPABLE messages; MP_JOIN messages are secured
          with HMAC-SHA256 (<xref target="RFC2104" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="RFC2104"/> using
          the algorithm in <xref target="RFC6234" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="RFC6234"/>) using those keys; and standard
          TCP validity checks (such as ensuring are made on the other messages (ensuring that
          sequence number and acknowledgment number numbers are within window) MUST be undertaken before processing any in‑window <xref target="RFC5961" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="RFC5961"/>).
 Residual threats to MPTCP signals, as described v0 were identified in <xref target="RFC5961"/>, target="RFC7430" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="RFC7430"/>, and initial subflow sequence numbers SHOULD be generated according to the recommendations in <xref target="RFC6528"/>.</t>

      <section title="Connection Initiation" anchor="sec_init">
        <t>Connection initiation begins with a SYN, SYN/ACK, ACK exchange
        on a single path. Each packet
        contains those affecting the Multipath Capable (MP_CAPABLE) MPTCP option
        (<xref target="tcpm_capable"/>). This option declares its
        sender is capable of performing Multipath TCP and wishes protocol (i.e., modifications to do
        so on this particular connection.</t>

        <t>The MP_CAPABLE exchange
 ADD_ADDR) have been incorporated in this specification (v1) is different to
        that specified in v0.  If a host supports multiple versions document.
 Further discussion of MPTCP, security can be found in <xref target="sec_security" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="Section 5"/>.</li>
        </ul>
      </section>
    </section>
    <section anchor="sec_protocol" numbered="true" toc="include" removeInRFC="false" pn="section-3">
      <name slugifiedName="name-mptcp-operations-an-overvie">MPTCP Operations: An Overview</name>
      <t pn="section-3-1">This section describes the sender operation of MPTCP. The
      subsections below discuss each key part of the MP_CAPABLE protocol operation.</t>
      <t pn="section-3-2">All MPTCP operations are signaled using optional TCP header fields. A single TCP option SHOULD signal the
        highest version number it supports.  In return, in its MP_CAPABLE option,
        the receiver ("Kind") has been assigned by IANA for MPTCP (see <xref target="IANA" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="Section 7"/>), and then individual messages will signal be determined by a "subtype", the version number it wishes to use, values of which MUST
        be equal to or lower than are also stored in an IANA registry (and are also listed in <xref target="IANA" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="Section 7"/>). As with all TCP options, the version number indicated Length field is specified in bytes and includes the initial
        MP_CAPABLE.
        There 2 bytes of Kind and Length.</t>
      <t pn="section-3-3">Throughout this document, when reference is a caveat though with respect made to an MPTCP option by symbolic name, such as "MP_CAPABLE", this version negotiation refers to a TCP option with
        old listeners that only support v0. A listener that supports v0 expects that the MP_CAPABLE single MPTCP option in type, and with the SYN-segment includes subtype value of the initiator's key. If
        the initiator however already upgraded to v1, it won't include the key in the
        SYN-segment. Thus, the listener will ignore the MP_CAPABLE of this SYN-segment
        and reply with a SYN/ACK that does not include an MP_CAPABLE. The initiator MAY
        choose to immediately fall back to TCP or MAY choose to attempt a connection
        using MPTCP v0 (if the initiator supports v0), symbolic name as defined in order to discover whether the
        listener supports the earlier version of MPTCP. In general a MPTCP v0 connection <xref target="IANA" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="Section 7"/>. This subtype is likely to be preferred to a TCP one, however in a particular deployment scenario
        it may be known that the listener is unlikely to support MPTCPv0 and so 4-bit field -- the
        initiator may prefer not to attempt a v0 connection. An initiator MAY cache
        information for a peer about what version first 4 bits of MPTCP it supports if any, and use
        this information for future connection attempts.</t>

        <t>The MP_CAPABLE option is variable-length, with different fields
        included depending on which packet the option is used on. The full
        MP_CAPABLE option is payload, as shown in <xref target="tcpm_capable"/>.</t>

        <?rfc needLines='10'?> target="fig_option" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="Figure 3"/>. The MPTCP messages are defined in the following sections.</t>
      <figure align="center" anchor="tcpm_capable" title="Multipath Capable (MP_CAPABLE) Option"> anchor="fig_option" align="left" suppress-title="false" pn="figure-3">
        <name slugifiedName="name-mptcp-option-format">MPTCP Option Format</name>
        <artwork align="left"><![CDATA[ align="left" name="" type="" alt="" pn="section-3-4.1">
                       1                   2                   3
   0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1
   +---------------+---------------+-------+-------+---------------+
  +---------------+---------------+-------+-----------------------+
  |     Kind      |    Length     |Subtype|Version|A|B|C|D|E|F|G|H|
   +---------------+---------------+-------+-------+---------------+     |Subtype|                       |                   Option Sender's Key (64 bits)
  +---------------+---------------+-------+                       |
  |                      (if option Length > 4)                     Subtype-specific data                     |
  |                       (variable length)                       |
  +---------------------------------------------------------------+
   |                  Option Receiver's Key (64 bits)              |
   |                      (if option Length > 12)                  |
   |                                                               |
   +-------------------------------+-------------------------------+
   |  Data-Level Length (16 bits)  |  Checksum (16 bits, optional) |
   +-------------------------------+-------------------------------+
            ]]></artwork> </artwork>
      </figure>

        <t>The MP_CAPABLE option is carried
      <t pn="section-3-5">Those MPTCP options associated with subflow initiation are used on the SYN, SYN/ACK, and ACK
      packets that start with the first subflow of an MPTCP connection, as well as the first packet that carries data, if the initiator wishes to send first. The data carried by each option SYN flag set. Additionally, there is as follows, where A = initiator and B = listener.
          <list style="symbols">
            <t>SYN (A-&gt;B): only the first four octets (Length = 4).</t>
            <t>SYN/ACK (B-&gt;A): B's Key for this connection (Length = 12).</t>
            <t>ACK (no data) (A-&gt;B): A's Key followed by B's Key (Length = 20).</t>
            <t>ACK (with first data) (A-&gt;B): A's Key followed by B's Key followed by Data-Level Length, and optional Checksum (Length = 22 or 24).</t>
          </list>
        The contents of the one MPTCP option is determined by the SYN and ACK flags of the packet, along with the option's length field. For the diagram shown in <xref target="tcpm_capable"/>, "sender" and "receiver" refer
      for signaling metadata to the sender or receiver of the TCP packet (which ensure that segmented data can be either host).</t>

        <t>The initial SYN, containing just the MP_CAPABLE header, is used recombined for delivery to define the version of application.</t>
      <t pn="section-3-6">The remaining options, however, are signals that do not need to be on
      a specific packet, such as those for signaling additional
      addresses. While an implementation may desire to send MPTCP being requested, options as well
      soon as exchanging
        flags to negotiate connection features, described later.</t>

        <t>This option is used possible, it may not be possible to declare the 64-bit keys that the end hosts have generated combine all desired options
      (both those for this MPTCP connection. These keys are used and for regular TCP, such as SACK (selective
      acknowledgment) <xref target="RFC2018" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="RFC2018"/>) on a single
      packet. Therefore, an implementation may choose to authenticate send duplicate ACKs
      containing the addition additional signaling information. This changes the
      semantics of future subflows to this connection. This is the a duplicate ACK; these are usually only time the key will be sent in clear on the wire (unless "fast close", as a signal of
      a lost segment <xref target="sec_fastclose"/>, is used); all future subflows will identify the connection using target="RFC5681" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="RFC5681"/> in regular
      TCP. Therefore, an MPTCP implementation receiving a 32-bit "token". This token is duplicate ACK that
      contains an MPTCP option <bcp14>MUST NOT</bcp14> treat it as a cryptographic hash signal of this key. The algorithm
      congestion. Additionally, an MPTCP implementation <bcp14>SHOULD NOT</bcp14> send more than two duplicate ACKs in a row for this process is dependent on the authentication algorithm selected; the method purposes
      of selection is defined later sending MPTCP options alone, in order to ensure that no middleboxes misinterpret this section.</t>

        <t>Upon reception of the initial SYN-segment, a stateful server generates a random key and replies with as a SYN/ACK. The key's method sign of generation is implementation specific. The key MUST be hard to guess, congestion.</t>
      <t pn="section-3-7">Furthermore, standard TCP validity checks (such as ensuring that the
      sequence number and it MUST be unique for acknowledgment number are within the sending host across all its current window) <bcp14>MUST</bcp14> be undertaken before processing any MPTCP connections. Recommendations for generating random numbers for use in keys are given signals, as described in <xref target="RFC4086"/>. Connections will target="RFC5961" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="RFC5961"/>, and initial subflow sequence numbers <bcp14>SHOULD</bcp14> be indexed at each host by the token (a one-way hash of the key). Therefore, an implementation will require a mapping from each token generated according to the corresponding connection, and recommendations in turn to the keys for the connection.</t>

        <t>There is <xref target="RFC6528" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="RFC6528"/>.</t>
      <section anchor="sec_init" numbered="true" toc="include" removeInRFC="false" pn="section-3.1">
        <name slugifiedName="name-connection-initiation">Connection Initiation</name>
        <t pn="section-3.1-1">Connection initiation begins with a risk that two different keys will hash to the same token. The risk of hash collisions is usually small, unless SYN, SYN/ACK, ACK exchange
        on a single path. Each packet
        contains the host is handling many tens of thousands of connections. Therefore, an implementation SHOULD check Multipath Capable (MP_CAPABLE) MPTCP option
        (<xref target="tcpm_capable" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="Figure 4"/>). This option declares its list
        sender capable of connection tokens performing Multipath TCP and wishes to ensure there do
        so on this particular connection.</t>
        <figure anchor="tcpm_capable" align="left" suppress-title="false" pn="figure-4">
          <name slugifiedName="name-multipath-capable-mp_capabl">Multipath Capable (MP_CAPABLE) Option</name>
          <artwork align="left" name="" type="" alt="" pn="section-3.1-2.1">
                       1                   2                   3
   0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1
  +---------------+---------------+-------+-------+---------------+
  |     Kind      |    Length     |Subtype|Version|A|B|C|D|E|F|G|H|
  +---------------+---------------+-------+-------+---------------+
  |                   Option Sender's Key (64 bits)               |
  |                      (if option Length &gt; 4)                   |
  |                                                               |
  +---------------------------------------------------------------+
  |                  Option Receiver's Key (64 bits)              |
  |                      (if option Length &gt; 12)                  |
  |                                                               |
  +-------------------------------+-------------------------------+
  |  Data-Level Length (16 bits)  |  Checksum (16 bits, optional) |
  +-------------------------------+-------------------------------+ </artwork>
        </figure>
        <t pn="section-3.1-3">The MP_CAPABLE exchange in this specification (v1) is no collision before sending its key, and if there is, then it should generate a new key. This would, however, be costly for different than
        that specified in v0.  If a server with thousands host supports multiple versions
        of connections. The subflow handshake mechanism (<xref target="sec_join"/>) will ensure that new subflows only join MPTCP, the correct connection, however, through sender of the cryptographic handshake, as well as checking MP_CAPABLE option <bcp14>SHOULD</bcp14> signal the connection tokens in both directions, and ensuring sequence numbers are in-window. So
        highest version number it supports.  In return, in its MP_CAPABLE option,
        the worst case if there was a token collision, receiver will signal the new subflow would not succeed, but the MPTCP connection would continue to provide a regular TCP service.</t>

        <t>Since key generation is implementation-specific, there is no	requirement that they be simply random numbers. An implementation is free to exchange cryptographic material out-of-band and generate these keys from this, in order version number it wishes to provide additional mechanisms by use, which <bcp14>MUST</bcp14>
        be equal to verify the identity of the communicating entities. For example, an implementation could choose to link its MPTCP keys to those used in higher-layer TLS or SSH connections.</t>

        <t>If lower than the server behaves version number indicated in the initial
        MP_CAPABLE.
        There is a
        stateless manner, it has caveat, though, with respect to generate its own key this version negotiation with
        old listeners that only support v0. A listener that supports v0 expects that
        the MP_CAPABLE option in a verifiable
        fashion.  This verifiable way of generating the key can be done by
        using a hash of SYN segment will include the 4-tuple, sequence number and a local secret
        (similar to what is done for initiator's
        key. If, however,
        the TCP-sequence number <xref target="RFC4987"/>).
        It will thus be able initiator already upgraded to verify whether v1, it is indeed the originator of won't include the key echoed back in the later
        SYN segment. Thus, the listener will ignore the MP_CAPABLE option.
        As for of this SYN segment
        and reply with a stateful server, the tokens SHOULD be checked for uniqueness, however
        if uniqueness is SYN/ACK that does not met, and there is no way to generate include an alternative verifiable
        key, then the connection MUST MP_CAPABLE. The initiator <bcp14>MAY</bcp14>
        choose to immediately fall back to using regular TCP by not sending or <bcp14>MAY</bcp14> choose to attempt a
        MP_CAPABLE in connection
        using MPTCP v0 (if the SYN/ACK.</t>

        <t>The ACK carries both A's key and B's key. This is the first time that A's key is seen on the wire, although it is expected that A will have generated a key locally before the initial SYN. The echoing of B's key allows B to operate statelessly, as described above. Therefore, A's key must be delivered reliably to B, and initiator supports v0), in order to do this, discover whether the transmission of this packet must be made reliable.</t>

        <t>If B has data to send first, then
        listener supports the reliable delivery earlier version of the ACK+MP_CAPABLE can MPTCP. In general, an MPTCP v0 connection
        will likely be inferred by the receipt of this data with preferred over a MPTCP Data Sequence Signal (DSS) option (<xref target="sec_generalop"/>). If, TCP connection; however, A wishes to send data first, in a particular deployment scenario,
        it has two options may be known that the listener is unlikely to ensure support MPTCP v0 and so the reliable delivery
        initiator may prefer not to attempt a v0 connection. An initiator <bcp14>MAY</bcp14> cache
        information for a peer about what version of the ACK+MP_CAPABLE. If MPTCP it immediately has data to send, then the third ACK (with data) would also contain an supports, if any, and use
        this information for future connection attempts.</t>
        <t pn="section-3.1-4">The MP_CAPABLE option is of variable length, with additional data parameters (the Data-Level Length and optional Checksum as different fields
        included, depending on which packet the option is used on. The full
        MP_CAPABLE option is shown in <xref target="tcpm_capable"/>). If A does not immediately have data to send, it MUST include the target="tcpm_capable" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="Figure 4"/>.</t>
        <t pn="section-3.1-5">The MP_CAPABLE option is carried on the third ACK, but without SYN, SYN/ACK, and ACK packets that start the additional data parameters. When A does have data to send, it must repeat the sending first subflow of an MPTCP connection, as well as the MP_CAPABLE option from first packet that carries data, if the third ACK, with additional initiator wishes to send first. The data parameters. This MP_CAPABLE carried by each option is in place of the DSS, as follows, where A = initiator and simply specifies the data-level length of B = listener.
        </t>
        <ul spacing="normal" bare="false" empty="false" pn="section-3.1-6">
          <li pn="section-3.1-6.1">SYN (A-&gt;B): only the payload, first 4 octets (Length = 4).</li>
          <li pn="section-3.1-6.2">SYN/ACK (B-&gt;A): B's key for this connection (Length = 12).</li>
          <li pn="section-3.1-6.3">ACK (no data) (A-&gt;B): A's key followed by B's key (Length = 20).</li>
          <li pn="section-3.1-6.4">ACK (with first data) (A-&gt;B): A's key followed by B's key followed by Data-Level Length, and optional Checksum (Length = 22 or 24).</li>
        </ul>
        <t pn="section-3.1-7">
        The contents of the checksum (if option are determined by the use SYN and ACK flags of checksums is negotiated). This is the minimal data required to establish a MPTCP connection - it allows validation of packet, along with the payload, option's Length field. In <xref target="tcpm_capable" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="Figure 4"/>, "Sender" and given it is "Receiver" refer to the first data, sender or receiver of the Initial Data Sequence Number (IDSN) is also known (as it TCP packet (which can be either host).</t>
        <t pn="section-3.1-8">The initial SYN, containing just the MP_CAPABLE header, is generated from used
        to define the key, version of MPTCP being requested and also to exchange
        flags to negotiate connection features, as described below). Conveying later.</t>
        <t pn="section-3.1-9">This option is used to declare the 64-bit keys on the first data packet allows that the TCP reliability mechanisms end hosts
        have generated for this MPTCP connection. These keys are used to ensure
        authenticate the packet is successfully delivered. The receiver will acknowledge addition of future subflows to this data at connection. This
        is the only time the key will be sent in the clear on the wire (unless "Fast Close" (<xref target="sec_fastclose" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="Section 3.5"/>) is used); all future subflows will identify the connection level with using a Data ACK, as if 32-bit "token". This token is a DSS option has been received.</t>

        <t>There could be situations where both A and B attempt to transmit initial data at cryptographic hash of this key. The algorithm for this process is dependent on the same time. For example, if A did not initially have data to send, but then needed to transmit data before it had received anything from B, it would use a MP_CAPABLE option with data parameters (since it would not know if authentication algorithm selected; the MP_CAPABLE on method of selection is defined later in this section.</t>
        <t pn="section-3.1-10">Upon reception of the ACK was received). In such a situation, B may also have transmitted data with initial SYN segment, a DSS option, but it had not yet been received at A. Therefore, B has received data with stateful server generates a MP_CAPABLE mapping after it has sent data random key and replies with a DSS option. To ensure these situations can SYN/ACK. The key's method of generation is implementation specific. The key <bcp14>MUST</bcp14> be handled, hard to guess, and it follows that <bcp14>MUST</bcp14> be unique for the data parameters sending host across all its current MPTCP connections. Recommendations for generating random numbers for use in a MP_CAPABLE keys are semantically equivalent to those given in a DSS option and can <xref target="RFC4086" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="RFC4086"/>. Connections will be used interchangeably. Similar situations could occur when indexed at each host by the MP_CAPABLE with data is lost token (a one-way hash of the key). Therefore, an implementation will require a mapping from each token to the corresponding connection, and retransmitted. Furthermore, in turn to the case of TCP Segmentation Offloading, keys for the MP_CAPABLE with data parameters may be duplicated across multiple packets, and implementations must also be able connection.</t>
        <t pn="section-3.1-11">There is a risk that two different keys will hash to cope with duplicate MP_CAPABLE mappings as well as duplicate DSS mappings.</t>

        <t>Additionally, the MP_CAPABLE exchange allows same
        token. The risk of hash collisions is usually small, unless the safe passage host
        is handling many tens of MPTCP options on SYN packets thousands of connections. Therefore, an
        implementation <bcp14>SHOULD</bcp14> check its list of connection
        tokens to ensure that there is no collision before sending its key,
        and if there is, then it should generate a new key. This would,
        however, be determined. If any costly for a server with thousands of these options are dropped, MPTCP connections. The
        subflow handshake mechanism (<xref target="sec_join" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="Section 3.2"/>) will gracefully fall back to regular single-path TCP, ensure that new subflows only join the
        correct connection, however, through the cryptographic handshake, as documented
        well as checking the connection tokens in <xref target="sec_fallback"/>.  If at any point both directions, and
        ensuring that sequence numbers are in-window. So, in the handshake either party thinks the MPTCP negotiation is compromised, for example by worst case, if there was a middlebox corrupting token collision, the TCP options, or unexpected ACK numbers being present, new subflow would not succeed, but the host MUST stop using MPTCP and no longer include MPTCP options in future TCP packets. The other host will then also fall back connection would continue to provide a regular TCP using the fall back mechanism.  Note service.</t>
        <t pn="section-3.1-12">Since key generation is implementation specific, there is no
        requirement that new subflows MUST NOT they simply be established (using random numbers. An implementation is
        free to exchange cryptographic material out of band and generate these
        keys from this material, in order to provide additional mechanisms by which to verify the process documented identity of the communicating entities. For example, an implementation could choose to link its MPTCP keys to those used in higher-layer TLS or SSH connections.</t>
        <t pn="section-3.1-13">If the server behaves in <xref target="sec_join"/>) until a Data Sequence Signal (DSS) option
        stateless manner, it has been successfully received across the path (as documented to generate its own key in <xref target="sec_generalop"/>).</t>

        <t>Like all MPTCP options, a verifiable
        fashion.  This verifiable way of generating the MP_CAPABLE option starts with key can be done by
        using a hash of the Kind 4-tuple, sequence number, and Length a local secret
        (similar to specify what is done for the TCP-option kind and its length. Followed by that TCP sequence number <xref target="RFC4987" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="RFC4987"/>).
        It will thus be able to verify whether it is indeed the MP_CAPABLE option. The first 4 bits originator of
        the first octet key echoed back in the subsequent MP_CAPABLE option (<xref target="tcpm_capable"/>) define option.
        As for a stateful server, the MPTCP option subtype (see <xref target="IANA"/>; tokens <bcp14>SHOULD</bcp14> be checked for MP_CAPABLE, this uniqueness; however,
        if uniqueness is 0x0), not met and the remaining 4 bits of this octet specify the MPTCP version in use (for this specification, this is 1).</t>

        <t>The second octet there is reserved for flags, allocated as follows:

        <list style="hanging">
          <t hangText="A:"> The leftmost bit, labeled "A", SHOULD be set to 1 no way to indicate "Checksum Required", unless generate an alternative verifiable
        key, then the system administrator has decided that checksums are connection <bcp14>MUST</bcp14> fall back to using regular TCP by not required (for example, if sending an
        MP_CAPABLE in the environment is controlled SYN⁠/ACK.</t>
        <t pn="section-3.1-14">The ACK carries both A's key and no middleboxes exist B's key. This is the first time that might adjust A's key is seen on the payload).</t>
          <t hangText="B:"> The second bit, labeled "B", wire, although it is an extensibility flag, and MUST be set to 0 for current implementations. This expected that A will be used for an extensibility mechanism in have generated a future specification, and key locally before the impact initial SYN. The echoing of this flag will B's key allows B to operate statelessly, as described above. Therefore, A's key must be defined at a later date. It is expected, but not mandated, that delivered reliably to B, and in order to do this, the transmission of this flag would packet must be used as part of an alternative security mechanism that does not require a full version upgrade of made reliable.</t>
        <t pn="section-3.1-15">If B has data to send first, then the protocol, but does require redefining some elements reliable delivery of the handshake. If receiving a message with the 'B' flag set to 1, and this
        ACK + MP_CAPABLE is not understood, then ensured by the MP_CAPABLE in receipt of this SYN MUST be silently ignored, which triggers data with an
        MPTCP Data Sequence Signal (DSS) option (<xref target="sec_generalop" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="Section 3.3"/>) containing a fallback to regular TCP; DATA_ACK for the sender MP_CAPABLE (which is expected to retry with a format compatible with this legacy specification. Note that
	the length first octet of the MP_CAPABLE option, and data sequence space). If, however, A wishes to send data first, it has
        two options to ensure the meanings reliable delivery of bits "D" through "H", may be altered by setting B=1.</t>
          <t hangText="C:"> The third bit, labeled "C", is set to "1" the ACK + MP_CAPABLE. If
        it immediately has data to indicate that send, then the sender of this first ACK (with data) would
        also contain an MP_CAPABLE option will not accept with additional MPTCP subflows data parameters (the
        Data-Level Length and optional Checksum as shown in <xref target="tcpm_capable" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="Figure 4"/>). If A does not immediately
        have data to send, it <bcp14>MUST</bcp14> include the source address and port, and therefore MP_CAPABLE on
        the receiver MUST NOT try first ACK, but without the additional data parameters. When A does
        have data to open any send, it must repeat the sending of the MP_CAPABLE option
        from the first ACK, with additional subflows towards this address and port. data parameters. This MP_CAPABLE
        option is an efficiency improvement for situations where the sender knows a restriction is used in place, for example if place of the sender is behind a strict NAT, or operating behind a legacy Layer 4 load balancer.</t>
          <t hangText="D through H:"> The remaining bits, labeled "D" through "H", are used for crypto algorithm negotiation.  In this specification only DSS and simply specifies (1) the Data-Level
        Length of the rightmost bit, labeled "H", is assigned.  Bit "H" indicates payload and (2) the checksum (if the use of HMAC-SHA256 (as defined in <xref target="sec_join"/>).  An implementation that only supports this method MUST set bit "H" to 1, and bits "D" through "G" checksums is
        negotiated). This is the minimal data required to 0.</t>
        </list>

        A crypto algorithm MUST be specified.  If flag bits D through H are all 0, establish an MPTCP
        connection -- it allows validation of the MP_CAPABLE option MUST be treated as invalid payload, and ignored (that is, given that it must be treated as a regular TCP handshake).</t>

        <t>The selection of the authentication algorithm also impacts the algorithm used to generate is the token and
        first data, the Initial Data Sequence Number (IDSN). In this specification, with only the SHA-256 algorithm (bit "H") specified and selected, the token MUST be a truncated (most significant 32 bits) SHA-256 hash (<xref target="RFC6234"/>) of the key. A different, 64-bit truncation (the least significant 64 bits) of the SHA-256 hash of (IDSN) is also known (as
        it is generated from the key MUST be used key, as described below). Conveying the IDSN. Note that the key MUST be hashed in network byte order. Also note that the "least significant" bits MUST be the rightmost bits of the SHA-256 digest, as per <xref target="RFC6234"/>. Future specifications of keys
        on the use of first data packet allows the crypto bits may choose TCP reliability mechanisms to specify different algorithms for token and IDSN generation.</t>

        <t>Both
        ensure that the crypto and checksum bits negotiate capabilities in similar ways. For packet is successfully delivered. The receiver will acknowledge this data at the Checksum Required bit (labeled "A"), connection level with a Data ACK, as if either host requires the use of checksums, checksums MUST be used. In other words, the only way for checksums not to a DSS option has been received.</t>
        <t pn="section-3.1-16">There could be used is if situations where both hosts in their SYNs set A=0. This decision is confirmed by the setting of the "A" bit in the third packet (the ACK) of A and B attempt to transmit
        initial data at the handshake. same time. For example, if the initiator sets A=0 in the SYN, A did not initially
        have data to send but the responder sets A=1 in the SYN/ACK, checksums MUST be used in both directions, and the initiator will set A=1 in the ACK. The decision whether then needed to use checksums will be stored by an implementation in a per-connection binary state variable. If A=1 is transmit data before it had
        received by a host that does not want to use checksums, anything from B, it MUST fall back to regular TCP by ignoring the would use an MP_CAPABLE option as if with data
        parameters (since it was invalid.</t>

        <t>For crypto negotiation, would not know if the responder has MP_CAPABLE on the choice. The initiator creates ACK was
        received). In such a proposal setting situation, B may also have transmitted data with
        a bit for each algorithm DSS option, but it supports to 1 (in this version of the specification, there is only one proposal, so bit "H" will had not yet been received at A. Therefore, B has
        received data with an MP_CAPABLE mapping after it has sent data with a
        DSS option. To ensure that these situations can be always set handled, it follows that the data parameters in an MP_CAPABLE are semantically equivalent to 1). The responder responds those in a DSS option and can be used interchangeably. Similar situations could occur when the MP_CAPABLE with only 1 bit set -- this data is lost and retransmitted. Furthermore, in the chosen algorithm. The rationale for this behavior is that case of TCP segmentation offloading, the responder will typically be a server MP_CAPABLE with potentially many thousands of connections, so it data parameters may wish to choose an algorithm be duplicated across multiple packets, and implementations must also be able to cope with minimal computational complexity, depending on duplicate MP_CAPABLE mappings as well as duplicate DSS mappings.</t>
        <t pn="section-3.1-17">Additionally, the load. If a responder does not support (or does not want MP_CAPABLE exchange allows the safe passage of
        MPTCP options on SYN packets to support) be determined. If any of the initiator's proposals, it MUST respond without an MP_CAPABLE option, thus forcing a fallback these options
        are dropped, MPTCP will gracefully fall back to regular TCP.</t>

        <t>The MP_CAPABLE option is only used single-path
        TCP, as documented in <xref target="sec_fallback" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="Section 3.7"/>.
        If at any point in the first subflow of handshake either party thinks the MPTCP
        negotiation is compromised -- for example, by a connection, middlebox corrupting
        the TCP options or by unexpected ACK numbers being present -- the host <bcp14>MUST</bcp14> stop using MPTCP and no longer include MPTCP options in order future TCP packets. The other host will then also fall back to identify regular TCP using the connection; all following fallback mechanism.  Note that new subflows will use <bcp14>MUST NOT</bcp14> be established (using the "Join" process documented in <xref target="sec_join" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="Section 3.2"/>) until a DSS option (see has been successfully received across the path (as documented in <xref target="sec_join"/>) to join target="sec_generalop" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="Section 3.3"/>).</t>
        <t pn="section-3.1-18">Like all MPTCP options, the existing connection.</t>
        <t>If a SYN contains an MP_CAPABLE option but starts with the
        SYN/ACK does not, it is assumed that sender of Kind
        and Length to specify the SYN/ACK TCP option's kind and length. This
        information is not
        multipath capable; thus, followed by the MPTCP session MUST operate as
        a regular, single-path TCP. If a SYN does not contain a MP_CAPABLE option, option. The first 4 bits of
        the SYN/ACK MUST NOT contain one first octet in response. If the third packet (the ACK) does not contain the MP_CAPABLE option, then the session MUST fall back to
        operating as a regular, single-path TCP. This is to maintain
        compatibility with middleboxes on option (<xref target="tcpm_capable" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="Figure 4"/>) define the path that drop some
        or all TCP options. Note that an implementation MAY choose
        to attempt sending MPTCP options more than one time before
        making this decision to operate as regular TCP Option Subtype (see <xref target="heuristics"/>).</t>

        <t>If the SYN packets are unacknowledged, it is up to local
        policy to decide how to respond. It target="IANA" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="Section 7"/>; for MP_CAPABLE, this value is expected that a sender
        will eventually fall back to single-path TCP (i.e., without
        0x0), and the
        MP_CAPABLE option) remaining 4 bits of this octet specify the MPTCP
        version in order use (for this specification, this value is 1).</t>
        <t pn="section-3.1-19">The second octet is reserved for flags, allocated as follows:

        </t>
        <dl newline="false" spacing="normal" indent="14" pn="section-3.1-20">
          <dt pn="section-3.1-20.1">A:</dt>
          <dd pn="section-3.1-20.2"> The leftmost bit, labeled "A", <bcp14>SHOULD</bcp14> be set to work around middleboxes that
        may drop packets with unknown options; however, 1 to indicate "Checksum required", unless the number of
        multipath-capable attempts system administrator has decided that checksums are made first will be up to
        local policy.
        It not required (for example, if the environment is possible that MPTCP controlled and non-MPTCP SYNs could get reordered
        in the network. Therefore, no middleboxes exist that might adjust the final state payload).</dd>
          <dt pn="section-3.1-20.3">B:</dt>
          <dd pn="section-3.1-20.4"> The second bit, labeled "B", is inferred from the
        presence or absence of the MP_CAPABLE option an extensibility flag. It
          <bcp14>MUST</bcp14> be set to 0 for current implementations. This
          flag will be used for an extensibility mechanism in a future specification, and the third packet impact of the TCP handshake.  If this option flag will be defined at a later date. It is expected, but not present, the
        connection SHOULD fall back to regular TCP, mandated, that this flag would be used as documented in
        <xref target="sec_fallback"/>.</t>

        <t>The initial data sequence number on part of an MPTCP connection
        is generated from alternative security mechanism that does not require a full version upgrade of the key. The algorithm for IDSN generation is
        also determined from protocol but does require redefining some elements of the negotiated authentication algorithm.
        In this specification, handshake. If receiving a message with only the SHA-256 algorithm specified "B" flag set to 1 and
        selected, this is not understood, then the IDSN of a host MUST MP_CAPABLE in this SYN <bcp14>MUST</bcp14> be the least significant 64 bits of the
        SHA-256 hash of its key, i.e., IDSN-A = Hash(Key-A) and IDSN-B = Hash(Key-B).
        This deterministic generation of the IDSN allows silently ignored, which triggers a receiver fallback to ensure regular TCP; the sender is expected to retry with a format compatible with this legacy specification. Note that there are no gaps in sequence space at the start length of the connection.
        The SYN with MP_CAPABLE occupies option, and the first octet meanings of data sequence space,
        although this does not need to bits "D" through "H", may be acknowledged at the connection level
        until the first data altered by setting B=1.</dd>
          <dt pn="section-3.1-20.5">C:</dt>
          <dd pn="section-3.1-20.6"> The third bit, labeled "C", is sent (see <xref target="sec_generalop"/>).</t>
      </section>

      <section title="Starting a New Subflow" anchor="sec_join">
        <t>Once an MPTCP connection has begun with set to 1 to indicate that the MP_CAPABLE
        exchange, further
          sender of this option will not accept additional MPTCP subflows can be added to
          the connection.
        Hosts have knowledge of their own address(es), source address and can
        become aware of port, and therefore the other host's addresses through
        signaling exchanges as described in
        <xref target="sec_pm"/>. Using receiver <bcp14>MUST NOT</bcp14> try to open any additional subflows toward this knowledge, a host
        can initiate a new subflow over a currently unused pair of
        addresses. It is permitted for either host address
          and port. This improves efficiency in a connection
        to initiate situations where the creation of
          sender knows a new subflow, but it restriction is expected
        that this will normally be the original connection initiator
        (see <xref target="heuristics"/> in place -- for heuristics).</t>

        <t>A new subflow example, if the sender is started as behind a normal TCP SYN/ACK
        exchange. strict NAT or operating behind a legacy Layer 4 load balancer.</dd>
          <dt pn="section-3.1-20.7">D through H:</dt>
          <dd pn="section-3.1-20.8"> The Join Connection (MP_JOIN) MPTCP option
        is remaining bits, labeled "D" through "H", are used to identify for
          crypto algorithm negotiation.  In this specification, only the connection to be joined by
          rightmost bit, labeled "H", is assigned.  Bit "H" indicates the new subflow.
        It uses keying material that was exchanged use
          of HMAC-SHA256 (as defined in the initial MP_CAPABLE
        handshake (<xref target="sec_init"/>), and <xref target="sec_join" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="Section 3.2"/>).  An implementation that handshake also
        negotiates the only supports this
          method <bcp14>MUST</bcp14> set bit "H" to 1 and bits "D"
          through "G" to 0.</dd>
        </dl>
        <t pn="section-3.1-21">A crypto algorithm in use for the MP_JOIN handshake.</t>

        <t>This section specifies <bcp14>MUST</bcp14> be specified.  If flag bits "D" through "H" are all 0, the behavior MP_CAPABLE option <bcp14>MUST</bcp14> be treated as invalid and ignored (that is, it must be treated as a regular TCP handshake).</t>
        <t pn="section-3.1-22">The selection of MP_JOIN using the HMAC-SHA256
        algorithm. An MP_JOIN option is present in authentication algorithm also impacts the SYN, SYN/ACK, algorithm used to generate the token and ACK of the three-way handshake, although in each case IDSN. In this specification, with a
        different format.</t>

        <t>In only the first MP_JOIN on SHA-256 algorithm (bit "H") specified and selected, the SYN packet, illustrated in token <bcp14>MUST</bcp14> be a truncated (most significant 32 bits) SHA-256 hash <xref target="tcpm_join"/>, target="RFC6234" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="RFC6234"/> of the initiator sends a token, random
        number, and address ID.</t>

        <t>The token is used to identify key. A different, 64-bit truncation (the least significant 64 bits) of the MPTCP connection and is a
        cryptographic SHA-256 hash of the receiver's key, key <bcp14>MUST</bcp14> be used as exchanged
        in the initial MP_CAPABLE handshake (<xref target="sec_init"/>).
        In this specification, IDSN. Note that the tokens presented key <bcp14>MUST</bcp14> be hashed in this
        option are generated by network byte order. Also note that the "least significant" bits <bcp14>MUST</bcp14> be the rightmost bits of the SHA-256 digest, as per <xref target="RFC6234"/>
        algorithm, truncated to target="RFC6234" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="RFC6234"/>. Future specifications of the most significant 32 bits.  The use of the crypto bits may choose to specify different algorithms for token
        included in and IDSN generation.</t>
        <t pn="section-3.1-23">Both the MP_JOIN option is crypto and checksum bits negotiate capabilities in similar
        ways. For the token that "Checksum required" bit (labeled "A"), if either host
        requires the receiver use of checksums, checksums <bcp14>MUST</bcp14> be
        used. In other words, the packet uses only way for checksums not to identify this connection; i.e., Host A
        will send Token-B (which is generated from Key-B). Note that the
        hash generation algorithm can be overridden used is if
        both hosts in their SYNs set A=0. This decision is confirmed by the choice
        setting of
        cryptographic handshake algorithm, as defined the "A" bit in <xref target="sec_init"/>.</t>

        <t>The MP_JOIN SYN sends not only the token (which is static for a
        connection) but also random numbers (nonces) that are used to prevent
        replay attacks on third packet (the ACK) of the authentication method. Recommendations for
        handshake. For example, if the
        generation of random numbers for this purpose are given initiator sets A=0 in <xref target="RFC4086"/>.</t>

        <t>The MP_JOIN option includes an "Address ID".  This is an identifier
        generated by the sender of SYN but the option, used to identify
        responder sets A=1 in the source address
        of this packet, even if SYN/ACK, checksums <bcp14>MUST</bcp14> be
        used in both directions, and the IP header has been changed initiator will set A=1 in transit the
        ACK. The decision regarding whether to use checksums will be stored by an implementation in a middlebox.
        The numeric value of this field per-connection binary state variable. If A=1 is generated received by the sender and must map uniquely
        to a source IP address for the sending host.
        The Address ID allows address removal (<xref target="sec_remove_addr"/>)
        without needing host that does not want to know what the source address at the
        receiver is, thus allowing address removal through NATs.
        The Address ID also allows correlation between new subflow setup attempts
        and address signaling (<xref target="sec_add_address"/>), use checksums, it <bcp14>MUST</bcp14> fall back to prevent setting up duplicate subflows on regular TCP by ignoring the same path, MP_CAPABLE option as if an MP_JOIN
        and ADD_ADDR are sent at the same time.</t>

        <t>The Address IDs of it was invalid.</t>
        <t pn="section-3.1-24">For crypto negotiation, the subflow used in responder has the initial SYN
        exchange choice. The initiator
        creates a proposal setting a bit for each algorithm it supports to 1
        (in this version of the first subflow in specification, there is only one proposal, so
        bit "H" will always be set to 1). The responder responds with only 1 bit set -- this is the connection are implicit,
        and have chosen algorithm. The rationale for this behavior is that the value zero. A host MUST store the mappings between
        Address IDs and addresses both for itself and the remote host.
        An implementation responder will also need typically be a server with potentially many thousands of connections, so it may wish to know which local and remote
        Address IDs are associated choose an algorithm with which established subflows, for
        when addresses are removed from a local or remote host.</t>

        <t>The MP_JOIN option minimal computational complexity, depending on packets with the SYN flag set also includes 4 bits load. If a responder does not support (or does not want to support) any of flags, 3 the initiator's proposals, it <bcp14>MUST</bcp14> respond without an MP_CAPABLE option, thus forcing a fallback to regular TCP.</t>
        <t pn="section-3.1-25">The MP_CAPABLE option is only used in the first subflow of which are currently reserved and MUST be set a
        connection, in order to zero by identify the sender. The final bit, labeled "B", indicates whether connection; all subsequent
        subflows will use the sender of this MP_JOIN option wishes this subflow (see <xref target="sec_join" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="Section 3.2"/>) to be used as join the existing connection.</t>
        <t pn="section-3.1-26">If a backup path (B=1) in SYN contains an MP_CAPABLE option but the event of failure of other paths, or whether it wants
        SYN/ACK does not, it to be used as part of the connection immediately. By setting B=1, is assumed that the sender of the option SYN/ACK is requesting not
        multipath capable; thus, the other host to only send data on this subflow if there are no available subflows where B=0. Subflow policy is discussed MPTCP session <bcp14>MUST</bcp14> operate as
        a regular, single-path TCP session. If a SYN does not contain an
        MP_CAPABLE option, the SYN/ACK <bcp14>MUST NOT</bcp14> contain one
        in more detail in <xref target="sec_policy"/>.</t>

        <?rfc needLines='10'?>
        <figure align="center" anchor="tcpm_join" title="Join Connection (MP_JOIN) Option (for Initial SYN)">
          <artwork align="left"><![CDATA[
                        1                   2                   3
    0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1
   +---------------+---------------+-------+-----+-+---------------+
   |     Kind      |  Length = 12  |Subtype|(rsv)|B|   Address ID  |
   +---------------+---------------+-------+-----+-+---------------+
   |                   Receiver's Token (32 bits)                  |
   +---------------------------------------------------------------+
   |                Sender's Random Number (32 bits)               |
   +---------------------------------------------------------------+
            ]]></artwork>
        </figure>

        <t>When receiving response. If the third packet (the ACK) does not contain
        the MP_CAPABLE option, then the session <bcp14>MUST</bcp14> fall back to
        operating as a SYN regular, single-path TCP session. This is done to maintain
        compatibility with an MP_JOIN option middleboxes on the path that drop some
        or all TCP options. Note that contains
        a valid token for an existing implementation <bcp14>MAY</bcp14> choose
        to attempt sending MPTCP connection, the recipient
        SHOULD respond with a SYN/ACK also containing an MP_JOIN
        option containing a random number and a truncated (leftmost 64
        bits) Hash-based Message Authentication Code (HMAC). This
        version of the option is shown in options more than one time before
        making this decision to operate as regular TCP (see
        <xref target="tcpm_join2"/>.
        If target="heuristics" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="Section 3.9"/>).</t>
        <t pn="section-3.1-27">If the token SYN packets are unacknowledged, it is unknown, or the host wants up to refuse subflow
        establishment (for example, due local
        policy to decide how to respond. It is expected that a limit on the number of
        subflows it will permit), the receiver sender
        will send eventually fall back a reset
        (RST) signal, analogous to an unknown port single-path TCP (i.e., without the
        MP_CAPABLE option) in TCP, containing a
        MP_TCPRST option (<xref target="sec_reset"/>) with a "MPTCP
        specific error" reason code. Although calculating an HMAC
        requires cryptographic operations, it is believed order to work around middleboxes that
        may drop packets with unknown options; however, the
        32-bit token number of
        multipath-capable attempts that are made first will be up to
        local policy.
        It is possible that MPTCP and non-MPTCP SYNs could get reordered
        in the MP_JOIN SYN gives sufficient protection against blind network. Therefore, the final state
        exhaustion attacks; therefore, there is no need to provide
        mechanisms to allow a responder to operate statelessly at inferred from the
        MP_JOIN stage.</t>

        <t>An HMAC is sent by both hosts -- by
        presence or absence of the initiator (Host A) MP_CAPABLE option in the third packet (the ACK) and by the responder (Host B) in
        the second packet (the SYN/ACK). Doing
        of the HMAC exchange at TCP handshake.  If this
        stage allows both hosts to have first exchanged random data (in the
        first two SYN packets) that option is used as not present, the "message". This
        specification defines that HMAC
        connection <bcp14>SHOULD</bcp14> fall back to regular TCP, as defined documented in
        <xref target="RFC2104"/> target="sec_fallback" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="Section 3.7"/>.</t>
        <t pn="section-3.1-28">The IDSN on an MPTCP connection
        is used, along generated from the key. The algorithm for IDSN generation is
        also determined from the negotiated authentication algorithm.
        In this specification, with only the SHA-256 hash algorithm <xref target="RFC6234"/>, specified and that
        selected, the output is truncated to IDSN of a host <bcp14>MUST</bcp14> be the leftmost 160 bits (20 octets).
        Due to option space limitations, least significant 64 bits of the HMAC included in
        SHA-256 hash of its key, i.e., IDSN-A = Hash(Key-A) and IDSN-B = Hash(Key-B).
        This deterministic generation of the SYN/ACK is truncated IDSN allows a receiver to the leftmost 64 bits, but this is
        acceptable since random numbers ensure
        that there are used; thus, an attacker
        only has one chance to correctly guess the HMAC that matches no gaps in sequence space at the random
        number previously sent by start of the peer (if connection.
        The SYN with MP_CAPABLE occupies the HMAC is
        incorrect, first octet of data sequence space,
        although this does not need to be acknowledged at the TCP connection level
        until the first data is closed, so sent (see <xref target="sec_generalop" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="Section 3.3"/>).</t>
      </section>
      <section anchor="sec_join" numbered="true" toc="include" removeInRFC="false" pn="section-3.2">
        <name slugifiedName="name-starting-a-new-subflow">Starting a new MP_JOIN negotiation New Subflow</name>
        <t pn="section-3.2-1">Once an MPTCP connection has begun with a new random number is required).</t>

        <t>The initiator's authentication information is sent in its
        first ACK (the third packet the MP_CAPABLE
        exchange, further subflows can be added to the connection.
        Hosts have knowledge of their own address(es) and can
        become aware of the handshake), other host's addresses through
        signaling exchanges as shown described in
        <xref target="tcpm_join3"/>. This data needs target="sec_pm" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="Section 3.4"/>. Using this knowledge, a host
        can initiate a new subflow over a currently unused pair of
        addresses. It is permissible for either host in a connection
        to be sent reliably,
        since initiate the creation of a new subflow, but it is the only time expected
        that this HMAC will normally be the original connection initiator
        (see <xref target="heuristics" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="Section 3.9"/> for heuristics).</t>
        <t pn="section-3.2-2">A new subflow is sent;
        therefore, receipt of this packet MUST trigger started as a regular normal TCP ACK
        in response, and the packet MUST be retransmitted if this
        ACK SYN/ACK
        exchange. The Join Connection (MP_JOIN) MPTCP option
        is not received. In other words, sending used to identify the ACK/MP_JOIN
        packet places connection to be joined by the subflow new subflow.
        It uses keying material that was exchanged in the PRE_ESTABLISHED state, initial MP_CAPABLE
        handshake (<xref target="sec_init" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="Section 3.1"/>), and it
        moves to that handshake also
        negotiates the ESTABLISHED state only on receipt of an ACK from
        the receiver. It is not permitted to send data while in the
        PRE_ESTABLISHED state. The reserved bits crypto algorithm in this option MUST be set
        to zero by the sender.</t>

        <t>The key use for the HMAC algorithm, in MP_JOIN handshake.</t>
        <t pn="section-3.2-3">This section specifies the case behavior of MP_JOIN using the message transmitted by Host A, will be Key-A followed by Key-B, and HMAC-SHA256
        algorithm. An MP_JOIN option is present in the case SYN, SYN/ACK,
        and ACK of Host B, Key-B followed by Key-A. These are the keys that were exchanged three-way handshake, although in each case with a
        different format.</t>
        <t pn="section-3.2-4">In the original MP_CAPABLE handshake. The "message" for first MP_JOIN on the HMAC algorithm SYN packet, illustrated in each case is
        <xref target="tcpm_join" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="Figure 5"/>, the concatenations of initiator sends a token, random number for each host (denoted by R): for Host A, R-A followed by R-B;
        number, and for Host B, R-B followed by R-A.</t>

        <?rfc needLines='10'?> Address ID.</t>
        <figure align="center" anchor="tcpm_join2" title="Join anchor="tcpm_join" align="left" suppress-title="false" pn="figure-5">
          <name slugifiedName="name-join-connection-mp_join-opt">Join Connection (MP_JOIN) Option (for Responding SYN/ACK)"> Initial SYN)</name>
          <artwork align="left"><![CDATA[ align="left" name="" type="" alt="" pn="section-3.2-5.1">
                       1                   2                   3
   0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1
  +---------------+---------------+-------+-----+-+---------------+
  |     Kind      |  Length = 16 12  |Subtype|(rsv)|B|   Address ID  |
  +---------------+---------------+-------+-----+-+---------------+
  |                                                               |
   |                Sender's Truncated HMAC (64                   Receiver's Token (32 bits)                  |
   |                                                               |
  +---------------------------------------------------------------+
  |                Sender's Random Number (32 bits)               |
  +---------------------------------------------------------------+
            ]]></artwork>
        </figure>

        <?rfc needLines='12'?>
        <figure align="center" anchor="tcpm_join3" title="Join Connection (MP_JOIN) Option (for Third ACK)">
          <artwork align="left"><![CDATA[
                        1                   2                   3
    0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1
   +---------------+---------------+-------+-----------------------+
   |     Kind      |  Length = 24  |Subtype|      (reserved)       |
   +---------------+---------------+-------+-----------------------+
   |                                                               |
   |                                                               |
   |              Sender's Truncated HMAC (160 bits)               |
   |                                                               |
   |                                                               |
   +---------------------------------------------------------------+
            ]]></artwork> </artwork>
        </figure>

        <t>These various MPTCP options fit together
        <t pn="section-3.2-6">The token is used to enable authenticated subflow setup as illustrated in <xref target="fig_tokens"/>.</t>

        <?rfc needLines='24'?>
        <figure align="center" anchor="fig_tokens" title="Example Use of MPTCP Authentication">
          <artwork align="left"><![CDATA[
           Host A                                  Host B
  ------------------------                       ----------
  Address A1    Address A2                       Address B1
  ----------    ----------                       ----------
      |             |                                |
      |             |  SYN + MP_CAPABLE              |
      |--------------------------------------------->|
      |<---------------------------------------------|
      |          SYN/ACK + MP_CAPABLE(Key-B)         |
      |             |                                |
      |        ACK + MP_CAPABLE(Key-A, Key-B)        |
      |--------------------------------------------->|
      |             |                                |
      |             |   SYN + MP_JOIN(Token-B, R-A)  |
      |             |------------------------------->|
      |             |<-------------------------------|
      |             | SYN/ACK + MP_JOIN(HMAC-B, R-B) |
      |             |                                |
      |             |     ACK + MP_JOIN(HMAC-A)      |
      |             |------------------------------->|
      |             |<-------------------------------|
      |             |             ACK                |

HMAC-A = HMAC(Key=(Key-A+Key-B), Msg=(R-A+R-B))
HMAC-B = HMAC(Key=(Key-B+Key-A), Msg=(R-B+R-A))
            ]]></artwork>
        </figure>

        <t>If identify the token received at Host B MPTCP connection and is unknown or local policy
        prohibits the acceptance a
        cryptographic hash of the new subflow, receiver's key, as exchanged
        in the recipient MUST
        respond with a TCP RST for initial MP_CAPABLE handshake (<xref target="sec_init" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="Section 3.1"/>).
        In this specification, the subflow. If appropriate, a MP_TCPRST tokens presented in this
        option with a "Administratively prohibited" reason code
        (<xref target="sec_reset"/>) should be included.</t>

        <t>If are generated by the SHA-256 algorithm <xref target="RFC6234" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="RFC6234"/>, truncated to the most significant 32 bits.  The token
        included in the MP_JOIN option is accepted at Host B, but the HMAC returned token that the receiver
        of the packet uses to identify this connection; i.e., Host A does not match
        will send Token-B (which is generated from Key-B). Note that the one expected, Host A MUST close
        hash generation algorithm can be overridden by the
        subflow with a TCP RST. In this, and all following cases choice of sending
        a RST
        cryptographic handshake algorithm, as defined in this section, the sender SHOULD send a MP_TCPRST option
        (<xref target="sec_reset"/>) on this RST packet with <xref target="sec_init" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="Section 3.1"/>.</t>
        <t pn="section-3.2-7">The MP_JOIN SYN sends not only the reason
        code token (which is static for a "MPTCP specific error".</t>

        <t>If Host B does not receive
        connection) but also random numbers (nonces) that are used to prevent
        replay attacks on the expected HMAC, or authentication method. Recommendations for the
        generation of random numbers for this purpose are given in <xref target="RFC4086" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="RFC4086"/>.</t>
        <t pn="section-3.2-8">The MP_JOIN option includes an "Address ID".  This is missing from the ACK, it MUST close the subflow with a
        TCP RST.</t>

        <t>If an identifier
        generated by the HMACs are verified as correct, then both hosts have
        verified each other as being sender of the same peers as existed at option, used to identify the start source address
        of this packet, even if the connection, and they have agreed IP header has been changed in transit by a middlebox.
        The numeric value of which
        connection this subflow will become field is generated by the sender and must map uniquely
        to a part.</t>

        <t>If source IP address for the SYN/ACK as received sending host.
        The Address ID allows address removal (<xref target="sec_remove_addr" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="Section 3.4.2"/>)
        without needing to know what the source address at Host A does not have an MP_JOIN
        option, Host A MUST close the
        receiver is, thus allowing address removal through NATs.
        The Address ID also allows correlation between new subflow with a TCP RST.</t>

        <t>This covers all cases of setup attempts
        and address signaling (<xref target="sec_add_address" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="Section 3.4.1"/>),
        to prevent setting up duplicate subflows on the loss of an MP_JOIN. In more detail, same path, if an MP_JOIN is stripped from
        and ADD_ADDR are sent at the same time.</t>
        <t pn="section-3.2-9">The Address IDs of the subflow used in the initial SYN on
        exchange of the path from A to
        B, first subflow in the connection are implicit
        and Host B does not have a listener on the relevant
        port, it will respond with a RST in value zero. A host <bcp14>MUST</bcp14> store the normal way.  If in
        response mappings between
        Address IDs and addresses both for itself and the remote host.
        An implementation will also need to a SYN know which local and remote
        Address IDs are associated with an MP_JOIN option, which established subflows, for
        when addresses are removed from a SYN/ACK is
        received without the local or remote host.</t>
        <t pn="section-3.2-10">The MP_JOIN option (either since it was
        stripped on the return path, or it was stripped on the
        outgoing path but Host B responded as if
        it were a new regular TCP session), then the subflow is
        unusable and Host A MUST close it packets with a RST.</t>

        <t>Note that additional subflows can be created
        between any pair the SYN flag set also includes
        4 bits of ports (but see <xref target="heuristics"/> for
        heuristics); no explicit application-level accept calls or
        bind calls flags, 3 of which are required currently reserved and
        <bcp14>MUST</bcp14> be set to open additional subflows. To
        associate a new subflow with an existing connection, 0 by the token
        supplied in sender. The final bit, labeled
        "B", indicates whether the subflow's SYN exchange is sender of this option (1) wishes this
        subflow to be used for
        demultiplexing.  This then binds as a backup path (B=1) in the 5-tuple event of failure of
        other paths or (2) wants the TCP subflow to be used as part of the local token
        connection immediately. By setting B=1, the sender of the connection. A consequence option is
        requesting that it is possible to allow any port pairs to be used for a
        connection. </t>

        <t>Demultiplexing subflow SYNs MUST be done using the token; other host only send data on this is unlike traditional TCP, where the destination port is
        used for demultiplexing SYN packets.  Once a subflow if there
 are no available subflows where B=0. Subflow policy is set up,
        demultiplexing packets is done using the 5-tuple, as discussed in
        traditional TCP. The 5-tuples will be mapped to the local
        connection identifier (token). Note more
 detail in <xref target="sec_policy" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="Section 3.3.8"/>.</t>
        <t pn="section-3.2-11">When receiving a SYN with an MP_JOIN option that Host A will know its
        local token for the subflow even though it is not sent on the
        wire -- only the responder's contains
        a valid token is sent.</t>
      </section>

      <section title="General MPTCP Operation" anchor="sec_generalop">
        <t>This section discusses operation of MPTCP for data transfer. At a high level, an existing MPTCP implementation will take one input data stream from an application, and split it into one or more subflows, with sufficient control information to allow it to be reassembled and delivered reliably and in order to connection, the recipient application. The following subsections define this behavior in detail.</t>

        <t>The data sequence mapping
        <bcp14>SHOULD</bcp14> respond with a SYN/ACK also containing an MP_JOIN
        option containing a random number and a truncated (leftmost 64 bits) HMAC. This
        version of the Data ACK are signaled in the Data Sequence Signal (DSS) option (<xref target="tcpm_dsn"/>). Either or both can be signaled is shown in one DSS, depending on the flags set. The data sequence mapping defines how <xref target="tcpm_join2" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="Figure 6"/>. If the sequence space on token is unknown or the host wants to refuse subflow maps
        establishment (for example, due to a limit on the connection level, and the Data ACK acknowledges receipt number of data at the connection level. These functions are described in more detail in
        subflows it will permit), the following two subsections.</t>

        <?rfc needLines='18'?>
        <figure align="center" anchor="tcpm_dsn" title="Data Sequence Signal (DSS) Option"> receiver will send back a reset
        (RST) signal, analogous to an unknown port in TCP, containing an
        MP_TCPRST option (<xref target="sec_reset" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="Section 3.6"/>) with an "MPTCP
        specific error" reason code. Although calculating an HMAC
        requires cryptographic operations, it is believed that the
        32-bit token in the MP_JOIN SYN gives sufficient protection against blind state
        exhaustion attacks; therefore, there is no need to provide
        mechanisms to allow a responder to operate statelessly at the
        MP_JOIN stage.</t>
        <figure anchor="tcpm_join2" align="left" suppress-title="false" pn="figure-6">
          <name slugifiedName="name-join-connection-mp_join-opti">Join Connection (MP_JOIN) Option (for Responding SYN/ACK)</name>
          <artwork align="left"><![CDATA[ align="left" name="" type="" alt="" pn="section-3.2-12.1">
                       1                   2                   3
   0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1
  +---------------+---------------+-------+----------------------+
  +---------------+---------------+-------+-----+-+---------------+
  |     Kind      |  Length     |Subtype| (reserved) |F|m|M|a|A|
  +---------------+---------------+-------+----------------------+ = 16  |Subtype|(rsv)|B|   Address ID  |           Data ACK (4 or 8 octets, depending on flags)
  +---------------+---------------+-------+-----+-+---------------+
  |
  +--------------------------------------------------------------+                                                               |   Data sequence number (4 or 8 octets, depending on flags)
  |
  +--------------------------------------------------------------+                Sender's Truncated HMAC (64 bits)              |              Subflow Sequence Number (4 octets)
  |
  +-------------------------------+------------------------------+                                                               |  Data-Level Length (2 octets)
  +---------------------------------------------------------------+
  |      Checksum (2 octets)                Sender's Random Number (32 bits)               |
  +-------------------------------+------------------------------+
          ]]></artwork>
  +---------------------------------------------------------------+ </artwork>
        </figure>

        <t>The flags, when set, define
        <t pn="section-3.2-13">An HMAC is sent by both hosts -- by the contents of initiator (Host A)
        in the third packet (the ACK) and by the responder (Host B) in
        the second packet (the SYN/ACK). Doing the HMAC exchange at this option, as follows:

          <list style="symbols">
            <t>A = Data ACK present</t>
            <t>a = Data ACK
        stage allows both hosts to have first exchanged random data (in the
        first two SYN packets) that is 8 octets (if not set, Data ACK used as the "message". This
        specification defines that HMAC as defined in <xref target="RFC2104" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="RFC2104"/>
        is 4 octets)</t>
            <t>M = Data Sequence Number (DSN), Subflow Sequence Number (SSN), Data-Level Length, used, along with the SHA-256 hash algorithm <xref target="RFC6234" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="RFC6234"/>,
        and Checksum (if negotiated) present</t>
            <t>m = Data sequence number is 8 octets (if not set, DSN is 4 octets)</t>
          </list>

        The flags 'a' and 'm' only have meaning if the corresponding 'A' or 'M' flags are set; otherwise, they will be ignored. The maximum length of this option, with all flags set, is 28 octets.</t>

        <t>The 'F' flag indicates "Data FIN". If present, this means that this mapping covers the final data from the sender. This output is truncated to the connection-level equivalent leftmost 160 bits (20 octets).
        Due to option space limitations, the FIN flag HMAC included in single-path TCP. A connection is not closed unless there has been a Data FIN exchange, a MP_FASTCLOSE (<xref target="sec_fastclose"/>) message, or an implementation-specific, connection-level send timeout. The purpose of
        the Data FIN and SYN/ACK is truncated to the interactions between leftmost 64 bits, but this flag, the subflow-level FIN flag, and the data sequence mapping is
        acceptable, since random numbers are described in <xref target="sec_close"/>.
        The remaining reserved bits MUST be set to zero by used; thus, an implementation of this specification.</t>

        <t>Note that the checksum is attacker
        only present in this option if the use of MPTCP checksumming has been negotiated at one chance to correctly guess the MP_CAPABLE handshake (see <xref target="sec_init"/>). The presence of HMAC that matches the checksum can be inferred from random
        number previously sent by the length of peer (if the option. If a checksum HMAC is present, but its use had not been negotiated in the MP_CAPABLE handshake, the receiver MUST close
        incorrect, the subflow with TCP connection is closed, so a RST as it not behaving as negotiated. If new MP_JOIN negotiation
        with a checksum new random number is not present when required).</t>
        <t pn="section-3.2-14">The initiator's authentication information is sent in its use has been negotiated, the receiver MUST close
        first ACK (the third packet of the subflow with a RST handshake), as shown in
        <xref target="tcpm_join3" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="Figure 7"/>. This data needs to be sent reliably,
        since it is considered broken. In both cases, the only time this RST SHOULD be accompanied with HMAC is sent;
        therefore, receipt of this packet <bcp14>MUST</bcp14> trigger a MP_TCPRST option (<xref target="sec_reset"/>) with regular TCP ACK
        in response, and the reason code for a "MPTCP specific error".</t>

        <section title="Data Sequence Mapping" anchor="sec_dsn">

          <t>The data stream as a whole can packet <bcp14>MUST</bcp14> be reassembled through the use of the data sequence mapping components of the DSS option (<xref target="tcpm_dsn"/>), which define retransmitted if this
        ACK is not received. In other words, sending the
mapping from ACK/MP_JOIN
        packet places the subflow sequence number to the data sequence number. This is used by in the receiver to ensure in-order delivery PRE_ESTABLISHED state, and it
        moves to the application layer. Meanwhile, the subflow-level sequence numbers (i.e., the regular sequence numbers in ESTABLISHED state only on receipt of an ACK from
        the TCP header) have subflow-only relevance. receiver. It is expected (but not mandated) that SACK <xref target='RFC2018'/> is used at the subflow level to improve efficiency.</t>

        <t>The data sequence mapping specifies a mapping from subflow sequence space permissible to send data sequence space. This is expressed while in terms of starting sequence numbers for the subflow and the data level, and a length of bytes for which
        PRE_ESTABLISHED state. The reserved bits in this mapping is valid.
This explicit mapping for a range of data was chosen rather than per-packet signaling option <bcp14>MUST</bcp14> be set
        to assist with compatibility with situations where TCP/IP segmentation or coalescing is undertaken separately from the stack that is generating 0 by the data flow (e.g., through sender.</t>
        <figure anchor="tcpm_join3" align="left" suppress-title="false" pn="figure-7">
          <name slugifiedName="name-join-connection-mp_join-optio">Join Connection (MP_JOIN) Option (for Initiator's First ACK)</name>
          <artwork align="left" name="" type="" alt="" pn="section-3.2-15.1">
                       1                   2                   3
   0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1
  +---------------+---------------+-------+-----------------------+
  |     Kind      |  Length = 24  |Subtype|      (reserved)       |
  +---------------+---------------+-------+-----------------------+
  |                                                               |
  |                                                               |
  |              Sender's Truncated HMAC (160 bits)               |
  |                                                               |
  |                                                               |
  +---------------------------------------------------------------+ </artwork>
        </figure>
        <t pn="section-3.2-16">The key for the use of TCP segmentation offloading on network interface cards, or by middleboxes such as performance enhancing proxies). It also allows a single mapping to cover many packets, which may be useful in bulk transfer situations.</t>

        <t>A mapping is fixed, HMAC algorithm, in that the subflow sequence number is bound to the data sequence number after the mapping has been processed. A sender MUST NOT change this mapping
after it has been declared; however, case of the same data sequence number can be mapped to message
        transmitted by different subflows for retransmission purposes (see <xref target="sec_retransmit"/>). This would also permit the same data to Host A, will be sent simultaneously on multiple subflows for resilience or efficiency purposes, especially Key-A followed by Key-B; and in the
        case of lossy links. Although the detailed specification of such operation is outside the scope of this document, an implementation SHOULD treat Host B, Key-B followed by Key-A. These are the first data keys that is received at a subflow were
        exchanged in the original MP_CAPABLE handshake. The "message" for the data sequence space as that which should be delivered to
        HMAC algorithm in each case is the application, and any later data concatenations of random numbers for that sequence space SHOULD be ignored.</t>

        <t>The data sequence number is specified as an absolute value, whereas the
        each host (denoted by R): for Host A, R-A followed by R-B; and for
        Host B, R-B followed by R-A.</t>
        <t pn="section-3.2-17">These various MPTCP options fit together to enable authenticated subflow sequence numbering is relative (the SYN at the start setup as illustrated in <xref target="fig_tokens" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="Figure 8"/>.</t>
        <figure anchor="fig_tokens" align="left" suppress-title="false" pn="figure-8">
          <name slugifiedName="name-example-use-of-mptcp-authen">Example Use of MPTCP Authentication</name>
          <artwork align="left" name="" type="" alt="" pn="section-3.2-18.1">
                Host A                                  Host B
       ------------------------                       ----------
       Address A1    Address A2                       Address B1
       ----------    ----------                       ----------
           |             |                                |
           |             |  SYN + MP_CAPABLE              |
           |---------------------------------------------&gt;|
           |&lt;---------------------------------------------|
           |          SYN/ACK + MP_CAPABLE(Key-B)         |
           |             |                                |
           |        ACK + MP_CAPABLE(Key-A, Key-B)        |
           |---------------------------------------------&gt;|
           |             |                                |
           |             |   SYN + MP_JOIN(Token-B, R-A)  |
           |             |-------------------------------&gt;|
           |             |&lt;-------------------------------|
           |             | SYN/ACK + MP_JOIN(HMAC-B, R-B) |
           |             |                                |
           |             |     ACK + MP_JOIN(HMAC-A)      |
           |             |-------------------------------&gt;|
           |             |&lt;-------------------------------|
           |             |             ACK                |

       HMAC-A = HMAC(Key=(Key-A + Key-B), Msg=(R-A + R-B))
       HMAC-B = HMAC(Key=(Key-B + Key-A), Msg=(R-B + R-A)) </artwork>
        </figure>
        <t pn="section-3.2-19">If the subflow has relative subflow sequence number 0). This token received at Host B is to allow middleboxes to change unknown or local policy
        prohibits the initial sequence number acceptance of a the new subflow, such as firewalls that undertake Initial Sequence Number (ISN) randomization.</t>

        <t>The data sequence mapping also contains the recipient <bcp14>MUST</bcp14>
        respond with a checksum of TCP RST for the data that this mapping covers, if use of checksums has been negotiated subflow. If appropriate, an MP_TCPRST
        option with an "Administratively prohibited" reason code
        (<xref target="sec_reset" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="Section 3.6"/>) should be included.</t>
        <t pn="section-3.2-20">If the token is accepted at Host B but the MP_CAPABLE exchange. Checksums are used HMAC returned to detect if
        Host A does not match the payload has been adjusted in any way by one expected, Host A <bcp14>MUST</bcp14> close the
        subflow with a non-MPTCP-aware middlebox. If TCP RST. In this checksum fails, it will trigger a failure and all subsequent cases of the subflow, or sending
        a fallback to regular TCP, RST as documented described in <xref target="sec_fallback"/>, since MPTCP can no longer reliably know this section, the sender <bcp14>SHOULD</bcp14> send an MP_TCPRST option
        (<xref target="sec_reset" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="Section 3.6"/>) on this RST packet with the reason
        code for an "MPTCP-specific error".</t>
        <t pn="section-3.2-21">If Host B does not receive the expected HMAC or the MP_JOIN
        option is missing from the ACK, it <bcp14>MUST</bcp14> close the subflow sequence space with a
        TCP RST.</t>
        <t pn="section-3.2-22">If the HMACs are verified as correct, then both hosts have
        verified each other as being the same peers as those that existed at
        the receiver to build data sequence mappings. Without checksumming enabled, corrupt data may be delivered to start of the application if connection, and they have agreed of which
        connection this subflow will become a middlebox alters segment boundaries, alters content, or part.</t>
        <t pn="section-3.2-23">If the SYN/ACK as received at Host A does not deliver all segments covered by have an MP_JOIN
        option, Host A <bcp14>MUST</bcp14> close the subflow with a data sequence mapping. It is therefore RECOMMENDED to use checksumming unless it is known TCP RST.</t>
        <t pn="section-3.2-24">This covers all cases of the network path contains no such devices.</t>

        <t>The checksum algorithm used loss of an MP_JOIN. In more detail,
        if an MP_JOIN is stripped from the standard TCP checksum <xref target="RFC0793"/>, operating over SYN on the data covered by this mapping, along path from A to
        B and Host B does not have a listener on the relevant
        port, it will respond with a pseudo-header as shown RST in <xref target="fig_pseudo"/>.</t>

        <?rfc needLines='18'?>
        <figure align="center" anchor="fig_pseudo" title="Pseudo-Header for DSS Checksum">
          <artwork align="left"><![CDATA[
                       1                   2                   3
   0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1
  +--------------------------------------------------------------+
  |                                                              |
  |                Data Sequence Number (8 octets)               |
  |                                                              |
  +--------------------------------------------------------------+
  |              Subflow Sequence Number (4 octets)              |
  +-------------------------------+------------------------------+
  |  Data-Level Length (2 octets) |        Zeros (2 octets)      |
  +-------------------------------+------------------------------+
          ]]></artwork>
        </figure>

        <t>Note that the data sequence number used normal way.  If in the pseudo-header is always the 64-bit value, irrespective of what length
        response to a SYN with an MP_JOIN option a SYN/ACK is used in
        received without the DSS MP_JOIN option itself. The standard TCP checksum algorithm has been chosen since (because it will be calculated anyway for the TCP subflow, and if calculated first over was either
        stripped on the data before adding return path, or stripped on the pseudo-headers, it only needs
        outgoing path leading to be calculated once. Furthermore, since the Host B responding as if
        it was a new regular TCP checksum is additive, session), then the checksum for subflow is
        unusable and Host A <bcp14>MUST</bcp14> close it with a DSN_MAP RST.</t>
        <t pn="section-3.2-25">Note that additional subflows can be constructed by simply adding together the checksums created
        between any pair of ports (but see <xref target="heuristics" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="Section 3.9"/> for
        heuristics); no explicit application-level accept calls or
        bind calls are required to open additional subflows. To
        associate a new subflow with an existing connection, the data of each constituent TCP segment, and adding token
        supplied in the checksum subflow's SYN exchange is used for
        demultiplexing.  This then binds the DSS pseudo-header.</t>

        <t>Note that checksumming relies on 5-tuple of the TCP
        subflow containing contiguous data; therefore, a TCP subflow MUST NOT use the Urgent Pointer to interrupt an existing mapping. Further note, however, that if Urgent data the local token of the connection. One consequence is received on a subflow,
        that it SHOULD be mapped to the data sequence space and delivered is possible to the application analogous allow any port pairs to Urgent data in regular TCP.</t>

        <t>To avoid possible deadlock scenarios, subflow-level
        processing should be undertaken separately from that at
        connection level. Therefore, even if used for a mapping does not exist
        from the
        connection. </t>
        <t pn="section-3.2-26">Demultiplexing subflow space to the data-level space, the data
        SHOULD still SYNs <bcp14>MUST</bcp14> be ACKed at done using the subflow (if it token;
        this is in-window).
        This data cannot, however, be acknowledged at unlike traditional TCP, where the data level
        (<xref target="sec_dataack"/>) because its data sequence
        numbers are unknown. Implementations MAY hold onto such
        unmapped data destination port is
        used for demultiplexing SYN packets.  Once a short while in subflow is set up,
        demultiplexing packets is done using the expectation that a
        mapping 5-tuple, as in
        traditional TCP. The 5-tuples will arrive shortly.  Such unmapped data cannot be
        counted as being within mapped to the local
        connection level receive window because this identifier (token). Note that Host A will know its
        local token for the subflow even though it is
        relative to not sent on the data sequence numbers, so if
        wire -- only the receiver runs
        out responder's token is sent.</t>
      </section>
      <section anchor="sec_generalop" numbered="true" toc="include" removeInRFC="false" pn="section-3.3">
        <name slugifiedName="name-mptcp-operation-and-data-tr">MPTCP Operation and Data Transfer</name>
        <t pn="section-3.3-1">This section discusses the operation of memory to hold this data, it will have to be discarded.
        If a mapping MPTCP for that subflow-level sequence space does not
        arrive within data transfer. At a receive window of data, that subflow SHOULD be
        treated as broken, closed with a RST, and any unmapped high level, an MPTCP implementation will take one input data
        silently discarded.</t>

        <t>Data sequence numbers are always 64-bit quantities, stream from an application and
        MUST split it into one or more subflows, with sufficient control information to allow it to be maintained as such reassembled and delivered reliably and in implementations.  If a
        connection is progressing at a slow rate, so protection
        against wrapped sequence numbers is not required,
        then an implementation MAY include just the lower 32
        bits of order to the data sequence number recipient application. The following subsections define this behavior in detail.</t>
        <t pn="section-3.3-2">The Data Sequence Mapping and the data sequence mapping and/or Data ACK as an optimization, and an implementation are signaled in the DSS option (<xref target="tcpm_dsn" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="Figure 9"/>). Either or both can make this choice
        independently for each packet. An implementation MUST be able to receive
        and process both 64-bit or 32-bit sequence number values, but it is not
        required that an implementation is able to send both.</t>

        <t>An implementation MUST send signaled in one DSS, depending on the flags set. The Data Sequence Mapping defines how the full 64-bit data sequence number
        if it is transmitting at a sufficiently high rate that space on the 32-bit value
        could wrap within subflow maps to the Maximum Segment Lifetime
        (MSL) <xref target="RFC7323"/>. The lengths connection level, and the Data ACK acknowledges receipt of data at the DSNs used in these
        values (which may be different) connection level. These functions are declared with flags described in more detail in the
        DSS option.  Implementations MUST accept a 32-bit DSN and implicitly
        promote it to a 64-bit quantity by incrementing following two subsections.</t>
        <figure anchor="tcpm_dsn" align="left" suppress-title="false" pn="figure-9">
          <name slugifiedName="name-data-sequence-signal-dss-op">Data Sequence Signal (DSS) Option</name>
          <artwork align="left" name="" type="" alt="" pn="section-3.3-3.1">
                       1                   2                   3
   0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1
  +---------------+---------------+-------+----------------------+
  |     Kind      |    Length     |Subtype| (reserved) |F|m|M|a|A|
  +---------------+---------------+-------+----------------------+
  |           Data ACK (4 or 8 octets, depending on flags)       |
  +--------------------------------------------------------------+
  |   Data Sequence Number (4 or 8 octets, depending on flags)   |
  +--------------------------------------------------------------+
  |              Subflow Sequence Number (4 octets)              |
  +-------------------------------+------------------------------+
  |  Data-Level Length (2 octets) |      Checksum (2 octets)     |
  +-------------------------------+------------------------------+ </artwork>
        </figure>
        <t pn="section-3.3-4">The flags, when set, define the upper 32
        bits contents of sequence number each time this option, as follows:

        </t>
        <ul spacing="normal" bare="false" empty="false" pn="section-3.3-5">
          <li pn="section-3.3-5.1">A = Data ACK present</li>
          <li pn="section-3.3-5.2">a = Data ACK is 8 octets (if not set, Data ACK is 4 octets)</li>
          <li pn="section-3.3-5.3">M = Data Sequence Number (DSN), Subflow Sequence Number (SSN), Data-Level Length, and Checksum (if negotiated) present</li>
          <li pn="section-3.3-5.4">m = Data Sequence Number is 8 octets (if not set, DSN is 4 octets)</li>
        </ul>
        <t pn="section-3.3-6">

        The flags "a" and "m" only have meaning if the lower 32
        bits wrap. A sanity check MUST corresponding "A" or "M" flags are set; otherwise, they will be implemented to ensure ignored. The maximum length of this option, with all flags set, is 28 octets.</t>
        <t pn="section-3.3-7">The "F" flag indicates "Data FIN". If present, this means that
        a wrap occurs at an expected time (e.g., this
        mapping covers the sequence number jumps final data from a very high number to a very low number) and is not triggered
        by out-of-order packets.</t>

        <t>As with the standard TCP sequence number, sender. This is the data sequence
        number should
        connection-level equivalent of the FIN flag in single-path TCP. A connection is not start at zero, but at closed unless there has been a random value to make
        blind session hijacking harder. This specification requires
        setting the initial data sequence number (IDSN) Data FIN exchange, an MP_FASTCLOSE (<xref target="sec_fastclose" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="Section 3.5"/>) message, or an implementation-specific connection-level send timeout. The purpose of each host to the
        least significant 64 bits of Data FIN and the SHA-256 hash of interactions between this flag, the host's key, as subflow-level FIN flag, and the Data Sequence Mapping are described in <xref target="sec_init"/>. This is required also in
        order for the receiver target="sec_close" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="Section 3.3.3"/>.
        The remaining reserved bits <bcp14>MUST</bcp14> be set to know what the expected IDSN is, and thus
        determine if any initial connection-level packets are missing; 0 by an implementation of this specification.</t>
        <t pn="section-3.3-8">Note that the checksum is particularly relevant if two subflows start transmitting simultaneously.</t>

        <t>A data sequence mapping does not need to be included only present in
        every MPTCP packet, as long as this option if the subflow sequence space in
        that packet is covered by a mapping known use of
        MPTCP checksumming has been negotiated at the receiver. This MP_CAPABLE handshake
        (see <xref target="sec_init" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="Section 3.1"/>). The presence of the
        checksum can be used to reduce overhead in cases where inferred from the mapping length of the option. If a checksum
        is
        known present but its use had not been negotiated in advance; one such case is when there the MP_CAPABLE
        handshake, the receiver <bcp14>MUST</bcp14> close the subflow with a
        RST, as it is not behaving as negotiated. If a single
        subflow between the hosts, another checksum is not present when segments of
        data are scheduled in larger than packet-sized chunks.</t>

        <t>An "infinite" mapping can be used to fall back to regular TCP by
        mapping the subflow-level data to the connection-level data
        for its use has been negotiated, the remainder of receiver <bcp14>MUST</bcp14> close the connection (see
        <xref target="sec_fallback"/>). This subflow with a RST, as it is achieved considered broken. In both cases, this RST <bcp14>SHOULD</bcp14> be accompanied by setting
        the Data-Level Length field of the DSS an MP_TCPRST option to (<xref target="sec_reset" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="Section 3.6"/>) with the reserved value of 0. The
        checksum, in such a case, will also be set to zero.</t>
      </section> reason code for an "MPTCP-specific error".</t>
        <section title="Data Acknowledgments" anchor="sec_dataack">
        <t>To provide full end-to-end resilience, MPTCP provides a
        connection-level acknowledgment, to act anchor="sec_dsn" numbered="true" toc="include" removeInRFC="false" pn="section-3.3.1">
          <name slugifiedName="name-data-sequence-mapping">Data Sequence Mapping</name>
          <t pn="section-3.3.1-1">The data stream as a cumulative ACK for whole can be reassembled through the connection as a whole. This is use of the "Data ACK" field Data Sequence Mapping components of the DSS option (<xref target="tcpm_dsn"/>). The Data ACK
        is analogous to target="tcpm_dsn" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="Figure 9"/>), which define the behavior
        of
mapping from the subflow sequence number to the standard TCP cumulative ACK -- indicating
        how much data has been successfully received (with no
        holes). sequence number. This is in comparison
          used by the receiver to ensure in-order delivery to the application
          layer. Meanwhile, the subflow-level ACK, which
        acts analogous to sequence numbers (i.e., the
          regular sequence numbers in the TCP SACK, given header) are only relevant to the subflow. It is expected (but not mandated) that there may still SACK <xref target="RFC2018" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="RFC2018"/> will be
        holes in the data stream used at the connection level.
        The subflow level to improve efficiency.</t>
          <t pn="section-3.3.1-2">The Data ACK Sequence Mapping specifies a mapping from the next data subflow
          sequence number
        it expects space to receive.</t>

        <t>The Data ACK, as for the DSN, can be sent as the full 64-bit
        value, or as the lower 32 bits.  If data is received with a 64-bit DSN,
        it MUST be acknowledged with a 64-bit Data ACK.  If sequence space. This is expressed in terms of starting sequence numbers for the DSN received subflow and the data level, and a length of bytes for which this mapping is 32 bits, an implementation can choose whether to send valid.
This explicit mapping for a 32-bit range of data, rather than per‑packet signaling, was chosen to assist with compatibility with
          situations where TCP/IP segmentation or
        64-bit Data ACK, and an implementation MUST accept either in this situation.</t>

        <t>The Data ACK proves coalescing is undertaken
          separately from the stack that is generating the data, and all required MPTCP
        signaling, has been received and accepted by data flow (e.g.,
          through the remote end.
        One key use of the Data ACK signal TCP segmentation offloading on network interface
          cards, or by middleboxes such as Performance Enhancing Proxies
          (PEPs) <xref target="RFC3135" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="RFC3135"/>). It
          also allows a single mapping to cover many packets; this may be useful in bulk‑transfer situations.</t>
          <t pn="section-3.3.1-3">A mapping is fixed, in that it the subflow sequence number is used bound to indicate the left edge of data sequence number after the advertised receive window. As explained in
        <xref target="sec_rwin"/>, mapping has been processed. A sender <bcp14>MUST NOT</bcp14> change this mapping
after it has been declared; however, the receive window is shared same data sequence number can be
          mapped to by all different subflows and is relative for retransmission purposes (see
          <xref target="sec_retransmit" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="Section 3.3.6"/>). This would also
          permit the same data to be sent simultaneously on multiple subflows
          for resilience or efficiency purposes, especially in the Data ACK. Because case of this, an
        implementation MUST NOT use
          lossy links. Although the RCV.WND field detailed specification of a TCP segment
        at such operation
          is outside the connection level if it does not also carry a DSS option with scope of this document, an implementation
          <bcp14>SHOULD</bcp14> treat the first data that is received at a Data ACK field. Furthermore,
        separating
          subflow for the connection-level acknowledgments from data sequence space as the
        subflow level allows processing to data that should be done separately, and
        a receiver has the freedom delivered to drop segments after acknowledgment
        at the subflow level, application, and any subsequent data for example, due to memory constraints
        when many segments arrive out of order.</t>

        <t>An MPTCP sender MUST NOT free that sequence space <bcp14>SHOULD</bcp14> be ignored.</t>
          <t pn="section-3.3.1-4">The data from sequence number is specified as an absolute value,
          whereas the send buffer until
        it has been acknowledged by both a Data ACK received on any subflow
        and sequence numbering is relative (the SYN at the subflow level by all subflows on which the data was sent.
        The former condition ensures liveness
          start of the
        connection and the latter condition ensures liveness and
        self-consistence of subflow has a relative subflow when data needs sequence number of
          0). This is done to be
        retransmitted.
        Note, however, that if some data needs allow middleboxes to be retransmitted multiple
        times over change the Initial Sequence
          Number (ISN) of a subflow, there is such as firewalls that undertake ISN randomization.</t>
          <t pn="section-3.3.1-5">The Data Sequence Mapping also contains a risk checksum of blocking the sending
        window. In data
          that this case, mapping covers, if the MPTCP sender can decide use of checksums has been negotiated at
          the MP_CAPABLE exchange. Checksums are used to terminate detect if the
        subflow that is behaving badly payload
          has been adjusted in any way by sending a RST, using an appropriate
        MP_TCPRST (<xref target="sec_reset"/>) error code.</t>

        <t>The Data ACK MAY be included in all segments; however, optimizations
        SHOULD be considered in more advanced implementations, where the
        Data ACK is present in segments
        only when the Data ACK value advances, and non-MPTCP-aware middlebox. If this behavior MUST
        be treated as valid. This behavior ensures the sender buffer
        is freed, while reducing overhead when
          checksum fails, it will trigger a failure of the data transfer is
        unidirectional.</t>
      </section>

      <section title="Closing subflow, or a Connection" anchor="sec_close">
        <t>In
          fallback to regular TCP, a FIN announces as documented in <xref target="sec_fallback" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="Section 3.7"/>, since MPTCP can no longer
          reliably know the receiver that subflow sequence space at the sender has no more data to send.
In order to allow subflows receiver to operate independently and build
          Data Sequence Mappings. Without checksumming enabled, corrupt data
          may be delivered to keep the appearance of TCP over the wire, application if a FIN in MPTCP only affects the subflow on which it is sent. This
allows nodes to exercise considerable freedom over which paths are in use at any one time.
The semantics of middlebox alters segment
          boundaries, alters content, or does not deliver all segments covered
          by a FIN remain as for regular TCP; i.e., it Data Sequence Mapping. It is not until both sides have ACKed
each other's FINs therefore
          <bcp14>RECOMMENDED</bcp14> that the subflow checksumming be used, unless it is fully closed.</t>
        <t>When an application calls close() on a socket, this indicates known
          that it has the network path contains no more such devices.</t>
          <t pn="section-3.3.1-6">The checksum algorithm used is the standard TCP checksum <xref target="RFC0793" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="RFC0793"/>, operating over the data to send; for regular TCP, covered by this would result in mapping, along with a FIN on the connection. For MPTCP, an
equivalent mechanism is needed, and this is referred to pseudo‑header as shown in <xref target="fig_pseudo" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="Figure 10"/>.</t>
          <figure anchor="fig_pseudo" align="left" suppress-title="false" pn="figure-10">
            <name slugifiedName="name-pseudo-header-for-dss-check">Pseudo-Header for DSS Checksum</name>
            <artwork align="left" name="" type="" alt="" pn="section-3.3.1-7.1">
                       1                   2                   3
   0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1
  +--------------------------------------------------------------+
  |                                                              |
  |                Data Sequence Number (8 octets)               |
  |                                                              |
  +--------------------------------------------------------------+
  |              Subflow Sequence Number (4 octets)              |
  +-------------------------------+------------------------------+
  |  Data-Level Length (2 octets) |        Zeros (2 octets)      |
  +-------------------------------+------------------------------+ </artwork>
          </figure>
          <t pn="section-3.3.1-8">Note that the DATA_FIN.</t>

        <t>A DATA_FIN data sequence number used in the pseudo-header is an indication that always the sender 64-bit value, irrespective of what length is used in the DSS option itself. The standard TCP checksum algorithm has no more been chosen, since it will be calculated anyway for the TCP subflow, and if calculated first over the data before adding the pseudo-headers, it only needs to send, and
        as such can be used to verify that all data has been successfully received. A DATA_FIN,
        as with calculated once. Furthermore, since the FIN on a regular TCP connection, checksum is additive, the checksum for a unidirectional signal.</t>

        <t>The DATA_FIN is signaled DSN_MAP can be constructed by setting simply adding together the 'F' flag in checksums for the Data Sequence Signal option (<xref target="tcpm_dsn"/>) to 1. A DATA_FIN occupies 1 octet (the final octet) data of each constituent TCP segment and adding the connection-level sequence space. Note that the DATA_FIN is included in checksum for the Data-Level Length, but not at DSS pseudo‑header.</t>
          <t pn="section-3.3.1-9">Note that checksumming relies on the TCP subflow level: for example, containing contiguous data; therefore, a segment with DSN 80, and Data-Level Length 11, with DATA_FIN set, would map 10 octets from the TCP subflow into data sequence space 80-89, <bcp14>MUST NOT</bcp14> use the DATA_FIN is DSN 90; therefore, this segment including DATA_FIN would be acknowledged with a DATA_ACK of 91.</t>

        <t>Note Urgent Pointer to interrupt an existing mapping. Further note, however, that when the DATA_FIN if Urgent data is not attached to received on a TCP segment containing data, subflow, it <bcp14>SHOULD</bcp14> be mapped to the Data Sequence Signal MUST have a subflow data sequence number of 0, a Data-Level Length of 1, space and delivered to the application, analogous to Urgent data sequence number that corresponds with the DATA_FIN itself. The checksum in this case will only cover the pseudo-header.</t>

        <t>A DATA_FIN has the semantics and behavior as a regular TCP FIN, but at the connection level. Notably, it is only DATA_ACKed once all data has been successfully received TCP.</t>
          <t pn="section-3.3.1-10">To avoid possible deadlock scenarios, subflow-level
        processing should be undertaken separately from processing at the
        connection level. Note, therefore, that Therefore, even if a DATA_FIN is decoupled mapping does not exist
        from a the subflow FIN. It is only permissible space to combine these signals on one subflow if there is no the data‑level space, the data outstanding on other subflows. Otherwise, it may
        <bcp14>SHOULD</bcp14> still be necessary to retransmit data on different subflows. Essentially, a host MUST NOT close all functioning subflows unless ACKed at the subflow (if it is safe to do so, i.e., until all outstanding in-window).
        This data has been DATA_ACKed, or until the segment with the DATA_FIN flag set is cannot, however, be acknowledged at the only outstanding segment.</t>

        <t>Once data level
        (<xref target="sec_dataack" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="Section 3.3.2"/>) because its data sequence
        numbers are unknown. Implementations <bcp14>MAY</bcp14> hold onto such
        unmapped data for a DATA_FIN has been acknowledged, all remaining subflows MUST short while, in the expectation that a
        mapping will arrive shortly.  Such unmapped data cannot be closed with standard FIN exchanges. Both hosts SHOULD send FINs on all subflows,
        counted as a courtesy to allow middleboxes to clean up state even if an individual subflow has failed. It being within the connection-level receive window because this is also encouraged
        relative to reduce the timeouts (Maximum Segment Lifetime) on subflows at end hosts after receiving a DATA_FIN. In particular, any subflows where there is still outstanding data queued (which has been retransmitted on other subflows in order to get sequence numbers, so if the DATA_FIN acknowledged) MAY receiver runs
        out of memory to hold this data, it will have to be closed with discarded.
        If a RST with MP_TCPRST (<xref target="sec_reset"/>) error code mapping for "too much outstanding data".</t>

        <t>A connection is considered closed once both hosts' DATA_FINs have been acknowledged by DATA_ACKs.</t>

        <t>As specified above, that subflow-level sequence space does not
        arrive within a standard TCP FIN on an individual subflow only shuts down the receive window of data, that subflow on which it was sent. If all subflows have been <bcp14>SHOULD</bcp14> be
        treated as broken, closed with a FIN exchange, but no DATA_FIN has been received RST, and acknowledged, the MPTCP any unmapped data
        silently discarded.</t>
          <t pn="section-3.3.1-11">Data sequence numbers are always 64-bit quantities and
        <bcp14>MUST</bcp14> be maintained as such in implementations.  If a
        connection is treated as closed only after progressing at a timeout. This implies that slow rate, so protection
        against wrapped sequence numbers is not required,
        then an implementation will have TIME_WAIT states at both <bcp14>MAY</bcp14> include just the subflow and connection levels (see <xref target="app_fsm"/>). This permits "break-before-make" scenarios where connectivity is lost on all subflows before a new one can be re-established.</t>
      </section>

        <section title="Receiver Considerations" anchor="sec_rwin">
          <t>Regular TCP advertises a receive window in each packet, telling lower 32
        bits of the sender how much data sequence number in the receiver
is willing to accept past the cumulative ack. The receive window is used Data Sequence Mapping and⁠/or
        Data ACK as an optimization, and an implementation can make this choice
        independently for each packet. An implementation <bcp14>MUST</bcp14> be able to implement flow control, throttling
down fast senders when receivers cannot keep up. </t>

          <t>MPTCP also uses a unique receive window, shared between the subflows. The idea
        and process both 64-bit and 32-bit sequence number values, but it is to allow any
subflow not
        required that an implementation be able to send data as long as both.</t>
          <t pn="section-3.3.1-12">An implementation <bcp14>MUST</bcp14> send the receiver full 64-bit data sequence number
        if it is willing to accept it. The alternative, maintaining per subflow
receive windows, transmitting at a sufficiently high rate that the 32-bit value
        could end up stalling some subflows while others would not use up their window.</t>

          <t>The receive window is relative to wrap within the DATA_ACK. As Maximum Segment Lifetime
        (MSL) <xref target="RFC7323" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="RFC7323"/>. The lengths of the DSNs used in TCP, these
        values (which may be different) are declared with flags in the
        DSS option.  Implementations <bcp14>MUST</bcp14> accept a receiver MUST NOT shrink 32-bit DSN and implicitly
        promote it to a 64-bit quantity by incrementing the right edge upper 32
        bits of the receive window (i.e., DATA_ACK + receive window). The receiver will
use the data sequence number each time the lower 32
        bits wrap. A sanity check <bcp14>MUST</bcp14> be implemented to tell if ensure that
        a packet should be accepted wrap occurs at the connection level.</t>

          <t>When deciding to accept packets at subflow level, regular TCP checks an expected time (e.g., the sequence number in the packet against the allowed receive window.
With multipath, such jumps
        from a check very high number to a very low number) and is done using only not triggered
        by out‑of-order packets.</t>
          <t pn="section-3.3.1-13">As with the connection-level window. A sanity
check SHOULD be performed standard TCP sequence number, the data sequence
        number should not start at subflow level zero, but at a random value to ensure that make
        blind session hijacking harder. This specification requires
        setting the subflow and mapped sequence
numbers meet IDSN of each host to the following test: SSN - SUBFLOW_ACK &lt;= DSN - DATA_ACK, where SSN is
        least significant 64 bits of the subflow sequence number SHA-256 hash of the received packet and SUBFLOW_ACK host's key, as
        described in <xref target="sec_init" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="Section 3.1"/>. This is also required in
        order for the receiver to know what the RCV.NXT (next expected sequence number) IDSN is and thus
        determine if any initial connection-level packets are missing; this
        is particularly relevant if two subflows start transmitting simultaneously.</t>
          <t pn="section-3.3.1-14">The mapping provided by a Data Sequence Mapping MUST apply to
	  some or all of the subflow (with sequence space in the equivalent connection-level definitions for DSN and DATA_ACK).</t>

<t>In regular TCP, once a TCP segment is deemed in-window, it is put either
in that
	  carries the in-order receive queue or option. It does not need to be included in
        every MPTCP packet, as long as the out-of-order queue.
In Multipath TCP, the same happens but subflow sequence space in
        that packet is covered by a mapping known at the connection level: a segment
is placed receiver. This
        can be used to reduce overhead in cases where the connection level in-order or out-of-order queue if
it mapping is in-window at both connection and
        known in advance. One such case is when there is a single
        subflow levels.
The stack still has to remember, for each subflow, which between the hosts, and another is when segments were
received successfully so that it of
        data are scheduled in larger-than-packet-sized chunks.</t>
          <t pn="section-3.3.1-15">An "infinite" mapping can ACK them at subflow level appropriately.
Typically, this will be implemented used to fall back to regular TCP by keeping per subflow out-of-order
queues (containing only message headers, not the payloads) and remembering
the value of
        mapping the cumulative ACK.
</t>

          <t>It is important for implementers subflow-level data to understand how large
          a receiver buffer is appropriate. The lower bound the connection-level data
        for full
          network utilization is the maximum bandwidth-delay product
          of any one remainder of the paths.  However, this might be insufficient
          when a packet is lost on a slower subflow and needs to be
          retransmitted connection (see
        <xref target="sec_retransmit"/>). A tight
          upper bound would be target="sec_fallback" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="Section 3.7"/>). This is achieved by setting
        the maximum round-trip time (RTT) Data-Level Length field of any path multiplied
          by the total bandwidth available across all paths. This
          permits all subflows DSS option to continue at full speed while a
          packet is fast-retransmitted on the maximum RTT path. Even
          this might reserved value of 0. The
        checksum, in such a case, will also be insufficient set to maintain 0.</t>
        </section>
        <section anchor="sec_dataack" numbered="true" toc="include" removeInRFC="false" pn="section-3.3.2">
          <name slugifiedName="name-data-acknowledgments">Data Acknowledgments</name>
          <t pn="section-3.3.2-1">To provide full performance in
          the event of end-to-end resilience, MPTCP provides a retransmit timeout on
        connection-level acknowledgment, to act as a cumulative ACK for
        the maximum RTT path.
          It connection as a whole. This is for future study to determine done via the relationship between
          retransmission strategies and receive buffer sizing.</t>
        </section>

        <section title="Sender Considerations" anchor="sec_sender">
          <t>The sender remembers receiver window advertisements from the receiver. It should only update its local receive window values when the largest sequence number allowed (i.e., DATA_ACK + receive window) increases, on the receipt "Data ACK" field of a DATA_ACK. This is important to allow using paths with different RTTs, and thus different feedback loops. </t>

          <t>MPTCP uses a single receive window across all subflows, and if
        the receive window was guaranteed DSS option (<xref target="tcpm_dsn" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="Figure 9"/>). The Data ACK
        is analogous to be unchanged end-to-end, a host could always read the most recent receive window value. However, some classes behavior
        of middleboxes may alter the TCP-level receive window. Typically, these will
shrink the offered window, although for short periods of time it may standard TCP cumulative ACK -- indicating
        how much data has been successfully received (with no
        holes). This can be possible for compared to the window subflow-level ACK, which
        acts in a fashion analogous to be larger (however,
note TCP SACK, given that this would not continue for long periods since ultimately there may still be
        holes in the middlebox must keep up with
delivering data to stream at the receiver). Therefore, if receive window sizes differ on multiple subflows,
when sending connection level.
        The Data ACK specifies the next data MPTCP SHOULD take sequence number
        it expects to receive.</t>
          <t pn="section-3.3.2-2">The Data ACK, as for the largest of DSN, can be sent as the most recent window sizes full 64-bit
        value or as the one to use in calculations.
This rule lower 32 bits.  If data is implicit in received with a 64-bit DSN,
        it <bcp14>MUST</bcp14> be acknowledged with a 64-bit Data ACK.  If the requirement not to reduce the right edge of the window.</t>

          <t>The sender MUST also remember the receive windows advertised by each subflow.
The allowed window for subflow i is (ack_i, ack_i + rcv_wnd_i), where ack_i DSN received
        is the
subflow-level cumulative ACK of subflow i. This ensures data will not be sent 32 bits, an implementation can choose whether to send a middlebox
unless there is enough buffering for 32-bit or
        64-bit Data ACK, and an implementation <bcp14>MUST</bcp14> accept either in this situation.</t>
          <t pn="section-3.3.2-3">The Data ACK proves that the data. </t>

          <t>Putting data, and all required MPTCP
        signaling, have been received and accepted by the two rules together, we get remote end.
        One key use of the following: a sender Data ACK signal is allowed that it is used to send
data segments with data-level sequence numbers between (DATA_ACK, DATA_ACK + receive_window).
Each indicate
        the left edge of these segments will be mapped onto subflows, as long as subflow sequence numbers
are in the allowed windows for those subflows. Note that subflow sequence numbers do not
generally affect flow control if advertised receive window. As explained in
        <xref target="sec_rwin" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="Section 3.3.4"/>, the same receive window is advertised across shared by all subflows.
They will perform flow control for those
        subflows with and is relative to the Data ACK. Because of this, an
        implementation <bcp14>MUST NOT</bcp14> use the RCV.WND field of a smaller advertised receive window.
          </t>

          <t>The send buffer MUST, TCP segment
        at the connection level if it does not also carry a minimum, be as big as DSS option with
        a Data ACK field. Furthermore,
        separating the receive buffer, to enable connection-level acknowledgments from the sender
        subflow level allows processing to reach maximum throughput.</t>

        </section>

        <section title="Reliability be done separately, and Retransmissions" anchor="sec_retransmit">

          <t>The data sequence mapping allows senders to resend data with the same data sequence number on a different subflow. When doing this,
        a host MUST still retransmit the original data on receiver has the original subflow, in order freedom to preserve drop segments after acknowledgment
        at the subflow integrity (middleboxes could replay old data, and/or could reject holes in subflows), and a receiver will ignore these retransmissions. While this is clearly suboptimal, level -- for compatibility reasons this is sensible behavior. Optimizations could be negotiated in future versions example, due to memory constraints
        when many segments arrive out of this protocol. Note also that this property would also permit a order.</t>
          <t pn="section-3.3.2-4">An MPTCP sender to always send the same data, with the same <bcp14>MUST NOT</bcp14> free data sequence number, from the send buffer until
        it has been acknowledged by both a Data ACK received on multiple subflows, if desired for reliability reasons.</t>

          <t>This protocol specification does not mandate any mechanisms for handling retransmissions, subflow
        and much will be dependent upon local policy
(as discussed in <xref target="sec_policy"/>). One can imagine aggressive connection-level retransmissions policies where every packet lost at the subflow level is retransmitted by all subflows on which the data was sent.
        The former condition ensures liveness of the
        connection, and the latter condition ensures liveness and
        self-consistence of a different subflow (hence, wasting bandwidth but possibly reducing application-to-application delays), or conservative retransmission policies where connection-level retransmits
are only used after a few subflow-level retransmission timeouts occur.</t>

          <t>It is envisaged when data needs to be
        retransmitted.
        Note, however, that a standard connection-level retransmission mechanism
would if some data needs to be implemented around retransmitted multiple
        times over a connection-level data queue: all segments that haven't
been DATA_ACKed are stored. A timer subflow, there is set when
the head a risk of blocking the send
        window. In this case, the MPTCP sender can decide to terminate the connection-level is ACKed at
        subflow level but its corresponding data that is not ACKed at data level. This timer will guard against failures in retransmission behaving badly by middleboxes that proactively sending a RST, using an appropriate
        MP_TCPRST (<xref target="sec_reset" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="Section 3.6"/>) error code.</t>
          <t pn="section-3.3.2-5">The Data ACK data.</t>

          <t>The sender MUST keep data <bcp14>MAY</bcp14> be included in its send buffer as long as all segments; however, optimizations
        <bcp14>SHOULD</bcp14> be considered in more advanced implementations, where the data has not been acknowledged at both connection level
        Data ACK is present in segments
        only when the Data ACK value advances, and on all subflows on which it
has been sent. In this way, behavior <bcp14>MUST</bcp14>
        be treated as valid. This behavior ensures that the sender can always retransmit send buffer
        is freed, while reducing overhead when the data if needed, on the same subflow or on a different one. A special case transfer is when
        unidirectional.</t>
        </section>
        <section anchor="sec_close" numbered="true" toc="include" removeInRFC="false" pn="section-3.3.3">
          <name slugifiedName="name-closing-a-connection">Closing a subflow fails: Connection</name>
          <t pn="section-3.3.3-1">In regular TCP, a FIN announces to the sender
will typically resend receiver that the sender has no more data on other working to send.
In order to allow subflows after a timeout, to operate independently and will keep trying to retransmit keep the data
on appearance of TCP over the failed subflow too. The sender will declare wire,
a FIN in MPTCP only affects the subflow failed after a predefined upper bound on retransmissions which it is reached (which MAY be lower than the usual TCP limits of the Maximum Segment Life), or on the receipt of an ICMP error, and only then delete the outstanding data segments. </t>

          <t>If multiple retransmissions are triggered that indicate that a subflow performs badly, this MAY lead to a host resetting the subflow with a RST. However, additional research is required sent. This
allows nodes to understand the heuristics exercise considerable freedom over which paths are in use at any one time.
The semantics of how and when to reset underperforming subflows. For example, a highly asymmetric path may be misdiagnosed FIN remain as underperforming. A RST for this purpose SHOULD be accompanied with an "Unacceptable performance" MP_TCPRST option (<xref target="sec_reset"/>).</t>

        </section>

        <section title="Congestion Control Considerations" anchor="sec_cc">
          <t>Different subflows in an MPTCP connection have different congestion windows.
To achieve fairness at bottlenecks and resource pooling, regular TCP; i.e., it is necessary to couple not until both sides have ACKed
each other's FINs that the
congestion windows in use subflow is fully closed.</t>
          <t pn="section-3.3.3-2">When an application calls close() on each subflow, in order to push most traffic a socket, this indicates that it has no more
data to uncongested links.
One algorithm send; for achieving regular TCP, this is presented would result in <xref target="RFC6356"/>; a FIN on the algorithm does not achieve perfect resource pooling but connection. For MPTCP, an
equivalent mechanism is "safe" in that it needed; this is readily
deployable in referred to as the current Internet. By this, we mean DATA_FIN.</t>
          <t pn="section-3.3.3-3">A DATA_FIN is an indication that it does not take up the sender has no more capacity
on any one path than if data to send, and
        as such it was a single path flow using only can be used to verify that route, so this ensures
fair coexistence with single-path TCP at shared bottlenecks.</t>

          <t>It is foreseeable that different congestion controllers will be implemented for MPTCP, each aiming to achieve different properties in the resource pooling/fairness/stability design space, as well all data has been successfully received. A DATA_FIN,
        as those for achieving different properties in quality of service, reliability, and resilience.</t>

          <t>Regardless of with the algorithm used, FIN on a regular TCP connection, is a unidirectional signal.</t>
          <t pn="section-3.3.3-4">The DATA_FIN is signaled by setting the design of "F" flag in the MPTCP protocol aims DSS
          option (<xref target="tcpm_dsn" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="Figure 9"/>)
          to provide 1. A DATA_FIN occupies 1 octet (the final octet) of the congestion control implementations sufficient information
to take
          connection-level sequence space. Note that the right decisions; this information includes,
 DATA_FIN is included in the Data-Level Length but not at the subflow
 level: for each subflow, which packets were lost and when. </t>
        </section>

        <section title="Subflow Policy" anchor="sec_policy">
          <t>Within example, a local MPTCP implementation, segment with a host may use any local policy it wishes to decide how to share the traffic to be sent over DSN value of 80 and a
 Data-Level Length of 11, with DATA_FIN set, would map 10 octets from
 the available paths.</t>
          <t>In subflow into data sequence space 80-89, and the typical use case, where DATA_FIN would
 be DSN 90; therefore, this segment, including DATA_FIN, would be
 acknowledged with a DATA_ACK of 91.</t>
          <t pn="section-3.3.3-5">Note that when the goal DATA_FIN is not attached to maximize throughput, all available paths will be used simultaneously for data transfer, using coupled congestion control as described in <xref target="RFC6356"/>. It is expected, however, that other use cases will appear.</t>
          <t>For instance, a possibility is an 'all-or-nothing' approach, i.e., TCP segment containing data, the DSS <bcp14>MUST</bcp14> have a second path ready for use in the event of
failure subflow sequence number of 0, a Data-Level Length of 1, and the first path, data sequence number that corresponds with the DATA_FIN itself. The checksum in this case will only cover the pseudo-header.</t>
          <t pn="section-3.3.3-6">A DATA_FIN has the same semantics and behavior as a regular TCP FIN, but alternatives could include entirely saturating at the connection level. Notably, it is only DATA_ACKed once all data has been successfully received at the connection level. Note, therefore, that a DATA_FIN is decoupled from a subflow FIN. It is only permissible to combine these signals on one path before using an additional
path (the 'overflow' case). Such choices would be most likely based subflow if there is no data outstanding on the monetary cost of links, but other subflows. Otherwise, it may also be
based necessary to retransmit data on properties such as the delay or jitter of links, where stability (of delay or bandwidth) different subflows. Essentially, a host <bcp14>MUST NOT</bcp14> close all functioning subflows unless it is more important than throughput. Application
requirements such as these are discussed in detail in <xref target="RFC6897"/>.</t>
          <t>The ability safe to make effective choices at do so, i.e., until all outstanding data has been DATA_ACKed or until the sender requires full knowledge of segment with the path "cost", which DATA_FIN flag set is unlikely to be the case. It would be desirable for only outstanding segment.</t>
          <t pn="section-3.3.3-7">Once a receiver to DATA_FIN has been acknowledged, all remaining subflows
          <bcp14>MUST</bcp14> be able closed with standard FIN exchanges. Both
          hosts <bcp14>SHOULD</bcp14> send FINs on all subflows, as a courtesy,
          to signal their own preferences for paths,
since they will often be the multihomed party, and may have allow middleboxes to pay for metered incoming bandwidth.</t>
          <t>To enable this, the MP_JOIN option (see <xref target="sec_join"/>) contains the 'B' bit, which allows a host to indicate to its peer that this path should be treated as a backup path to use only in clean up state even if an individual subflow
          has failed. Reducing the event of failure of other working timeouts (MSL) on subflows (i.e., at end hosts after receiving a subflow
          DATA_FIN is also encouraged. In particular, any subflows where the receiver has indicated B=1 SHOULD NOT be used to send data unless there are no usable is still
          outstanding data queued (which has been retransmitted on other
          subflows where B=0).</t>
          <t>In the event that the available set of paths changes, a host may wish to signal a change in priority of subflows order to get the peer (e.g., DATA_FIN acknowledged)
          <bcp14>MAY</bcp14> be closed with a RST with an MP_TCPRST (<xref target="sec_reset" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="Section 3.6"/>) error code for "too much outstanding data".</t>
          <t pn="section-3.3.3-8">A connection is considered closed once both hosts' DATA_FINs have been acknowledged by DATA_ACKs.</t>
          <t pn="section-3.3.3-9">As specified above, a standard TCP FIN on an individual subflow that was previously set as backup should now take priority over all remaining subflows). Therefore, the MP_PRIO option, shown in <xref target="tcpm_prio"/>, can be used to change the 'B' flag of
          only shuts down the subflow on which it is sent.</t>
          <t>Another use of was sent. If all subflows
          have been closed with a FIN exchange but no DATA_FIN has been
          received and acknowledged, the MP_PRIO option MPTCP connection is to set the 'B' flag on treated as closed
          only after a timeout. This implies that an implementation will have
          TIME_WAIT states at both the subflow to cleanly retire its use before closing it level and removing it with REMOVE_ADDR the connection level (see <xref target="sec_remove_addr"/>, for example to support make-before-break session continuity, target="app_fsm" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="Appendix D"/>). This permits "break-before-make" scenarios where new connectivity is lost on all subflows are added before the previously used ones are closed.</t>
          <?rfc needLines='8'?>
          <figure align="center" anchor="tcpm_prio" title="Change Subflow Priority (MP_PRIO) Option">
            <artwork align="left"><![CDATA[
                        1                   2                   3
    0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1
   +---------------+---------------+-------+-----+-+
   |     Kind      |     Length    |Subtype|(rsv)|B|
   +---------------+---------------+-------+-----+-+
              ]]></artwork>
          </figure>

<t>It should be noted that the backup flag is a request from new one can be re‑established.</t>
        </section>
        <section anchor="sec_rwin" numbered="true" toc="include" removeInRFC="false" pn="section-3.3.4">
          <name slugifiedName="name-receiver-considerations">Receiver Considerations</name>
          <t pn="section-3.3.4-1">Regular TCP advertises a receive window in each packet, telling the sender how much data the receiver
is willing to a data sender only, and accept past the data sender SHOULD adhere cumulative ACK. The receive window is used to these requests. A host implement flow control, throttling
down fast senders when receivers cannot assume that the data sender will do so, however, since local policies -- or technical difficulties -- may override MP_PRIO requests. Note keep up. </t>
          <t pn="section-3.3.4-2">MPTCP also that this signal applies to uses a single direction, and so unique receive window, shared between the sender of this option could choose subflows. The idea is to continue using the allow any
subflow to send data even if it has signaled B=1 to the other host.</t>

        </section>
      </section>

      <section title="Address Knowledge Exchange (Path Management)" anchor="sec_pm">
        <t>We use as long as the term "path management" receiver is willing to refer accept it. The
alternative -- maintaining per-subflow
receive windows -- could end up stalling some subflows while others would not use up their window.</t>
          <t pn="section-3.3.4-3">The receive window is relative to the exchange of information about additional paths between hosts, which DATA_ACK. As in this design is managed by multiple addresses at hosts. For more detail of the architectural thinking behind this design, see the MPTCP Architecture document <xref target="RFC6182"/>.</t>
        <t>This design makes use of two methods of sharing such
        information, and both can be used on TCP, a connection.
        The first is receiver <bcp14>MUST NOT</bcp14> shrink the direct
        setup right edge of new subflows, already described in
        <xref target="sec_join"/>, where the initiator has an
        additional address. receive window (i.e., DATA_ACK + receive window). The second method, described in receiver will
use the
        following subsections, signals addresses explicitly data sequence number to tell if a packet should be accepted at the
        other host to allow it connection level.</t>
          <t pn="section-3.3.4-4">When deciding to initiate new subflows. The
        two mechanisms are complementary: the first is implicit and
        simple, while accept packets at the explicit is more complex but is more
        robust. Together, subflow level, regular TCP checks
the mechanisms allow addresses to change sequence number in
        flight (and thus support operation through NATs, since the
        source address need not packet against the allowed receive window.
With MPTCP, such a check is done using only the connection-level window. A sanity
check <bcp14>SHOULD</bcp14> be known), and also allow performed at the
        signaling of previously unknown addresses, and of addresses
        belonging subflow level to other address families (e.g., both IPv4 ensure that the subflow and IPv6).</t>

        <t>Here is an example of typical operation of mapped sequence
numbers meet the protocol:
          <list style="symbols">
            <t>An MPTCP connection following test: SSN - SUBFLOW_ACK &lt;= DSN - DATA_ACK, where SSN is initially set up between address/port A1 the subflow sequence number of Host A the received packet and address/port B1 of Host B.&nbsp;  If Host A SUBFLOW_ACK is multihomed and
              multiaddressed, it can start an additional the RCV.NXT (next expected sequence number) of the subflow from
              its address A2 to B1, by sending a SYN with a Join
              option from A2 to B1, using B's previously declared
              token (with the equivalent connection-level definitions for this connection.  Alternatively, if B DSN and DATA_ACK).</t>
          <t pn="section-3.3.4-5">In regular TCP, once a segment is
              multihomed, deemed in-window, it can try to set up a new subflow from B2 to
              A1, using A's previously declared token.  In is put in either
              case,
the SYN will be sent to in-order receive queue or the port already in use
              for out-of-order queue.
In Multipath TCP, the original subflow on same thing happens, but at the receiving host.</t>

            <t>Simultaneously (or after connection level: a timeout), an ADD_ADDR option
(<xref target="sec_add_address"/>) segment
is sent on an existing subflow, informing placed in the receiver of connection-level in-order or out-of-order queue if
it is in-window at both the connection level and the sender's alternative address(es). The recipient can use
this information to open a new subflow level.
The stack still has to remember, for each subflow, which segments were
received successfully so that it can ACK them at the sender's additional address.
In our example, A subflow level appropriately.
Typically, this will send ADD_ADDR option informing B of address/port A2.
The mix of using be implemented by keeping per-subflow out-of-order
queues (containing only message headers -- not the SYN-based option payloads) and remembering
the ADD_ADDR option, including
timeouts, value of the cumulative ACK.
</t>
          <t pn="section-3.3.4-6">It is implementation specific and can be tailored important for implementers to agree with local policy.</t>

            <t>If subflow A2-B1 understand how large
          a receive buffer is appropriate. The lower bound for full
          network utilization is successfully set up, Host B can use the Address ID in the Join option to correlate this with maximum bandwidth-delay product
          of any one of the ADD_ADDR option that will also arrive paths.  However, this might be insufficient
          when a packet is lost on
an existing subflow; now B knows not to open A2-B1, ignoring the ADD_ADDR.
Otherwise, if B has not received the A2-B1 MP_JOIN SYN but received the ADD_ADDR,
it can try to initiate a new slower subflow from one or more of its addresses and needs to address
A2. be
          retransmitted (see <xref target="sec_retransmit" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="Section 3.3.6"/>). A tight
          upper bound would be the maximum round-trip time (RTT) of any path multiplied
          by the total bandwidth available across all paths. This
          permits new sessions all subflows to be opened if one host is behind continue at full speed while a NAT.</t>
          </list>
       Other ways of using
          packet is fast-retransmitted on the two signaling mechanisms are possible; for instance,
signaling addresses in other address families can only maximum RTT path. Even
          this might be done explicitly using insufficient to maintain full performance in
          the Add Address option.
        </t>

      <section title="Address Advertisement" anchor="sec_add_address">
        <t>The Add Address (ADD_ADDR) MPTCP option announces additional addresses (and optionally, ports) on which a
host can be reached (<xref target="tcpm_address"/>).
This option can be used at any time during event of a connection, depending retransmit timeout on when the maximum RTT path.
          Determining the relationship between
          retransmission strategies and receive buffer sizing is left for future study.</t>
        </section>
        <section anchor="sec_sender" numbered="true" toc="include" removeInRFC="false" pn="section-3.3.5">
          <name slugifiedName="name-sender-considerations">Sender Considerations</name>
          <t pn="section-3.3.5-1">The sender wishes to enable multiple paths and/or when paths become available. As with all MPTCP
signals, remembers receive window advertisements from the receiver MUST undertake standard TCP validity checks, e.g. <xref target="RFC5961"/>, before acting upon it.</t>

        <t>Every address has an Address ID that can be used for uniquely identifying
          receiver. It should only update its local receive window values when
          the address within largest sequence number allowed (i.e., DATA_ACK + receive
          window) increases on the receipt of a connection for address removal. The Address ID DATA_ACK. This is also
used important
          for allowing the use of paths with different RTTs and thus different feedback loops. </t>
          <t pn="section-3.3.5-2">MPTCP uses a single receive window across all subflows, and if
          the receive window was guaranteed to identify MP_JOIN options (see <xref target="sec_join"/>) relating be unchanged end to end, a host could always read the same address, even when address translators are in use. The Address ID MUST uniquely
identify most recent receive window value. However, some classes of middleboxes may alter the address for TCP-level receive window. Typically, these will
shrink the sender offered window, although for short periods of time it may be possible for the option (within window to be larger (however,
note that this would not continue for long periods, since ultimately the scope middlebox must keep up with
delivering data to the receiver). Therefore, if receive window sizes differ on multiple subflows,
when sending data MPTCP <bcp14>SHOULD</bcp14> take the largest of the connection), but most recent window sizes as the mechanism for
allocating such IDs one to use in calculations.
This rule is implementation specific.</t>

        <t>All address IDs learned via either MP_JOIN or ADD_ADDR
        SHOULD be stored by the receiver implicit in a data structure that gathers all the Address ID requirement not to address mappings for a connection (identified reduce the right edge of the window.</t>
          <t pn="section-3.3.5-3">The sender <bcp14>MUST</bcp14> also remember the receive windows advertised by a token pair). In this way, there is
        a stored mapping between Address ID, observed source address, and token pair for
        future processing of control information for a connection. Note that an implementation
        MAY discard incoming address advertisements at will, for example, each subflow.
The allowed window for avoiding updating
        mapping state, or because advertised addresses are of no use to it (for
        example, IPv6 addresses when it has IPv4 only). Therefore, a host MUST treat address
        advertisements as soft state, and it MAY choose to refresh advertisements periodically.
        Note also that an implementation MAY choose to cache these address advertisements even
        if they are not currently relevant but may be relevant in the future, such as IPv4
        addresses when IPv6 connectivity is available but IPv4 is awaiting DHCP.</t>

        <t>This option subflow i is shown in <xref target="tcpm_address"/>. The illustration (ack_i, ack_i + rcv_wnd_i), where ack_i is sized for
        IPv4 addresses. For IPv6, the length
subflow-level cumulative ACK of the address subflow i. This ensures that data will not be 16 octets (instead of 4).</t>

        <t>The 2 octets that specify the TCP port number sent to use are optional and their presence
        can be inferred from a middlebox
unless there is enough buffering for the length of data. </t>
          <t pn="section-3.3.5-4">Putting the option. Although it is expected that two rules together, we get the majority following: a sender is allowed to send
data segments with data-level sequence numbers between (DATA_ACK, DATA_ACK + receive_window).
Each of
        use cases these segments will use the same port pairs be mapped onto subflows, as used for long as subflow sequence numbers
are in the initial allowed windows for those subflows. Note that subflow (e.g., port
        80 remains port 80 on all subflows, as does sequence numbers do not
generally affect flow control if the ephemeral port same receive window is advertised across all subflows.
They will perform flow control for those subflows with a smaller advertised receive window.
          </t>
          <t pn="section-3.3.5-5">The send buffer <bcp14>MUST</bcp14>, at the client), there
        may a minimum, be cases (such as port-based load balancing) where big as the explicit specification of
        a different port is required. If no port is specified, MPTCP SHOULD attempt to
        connect receive buffer, to enable the specified address on sender to reach maximum throughput.</t>
        </section>
        <section anchor="sec_retransmit" numbered="true" toc="include" removeInRFC="false" pn="section-3.3.6">
          <name slugifiedName="name-reliability-and-retransmiss">Reliability and Retransmissions</name>
          <t pn="section-3.3.6-1">The Data Sequence Mapping allows senders to resend data with the
          same port as is already in use by data sequence number on a different subflow. When doing this, a
          host <bcp14>MUST</bcp14> still retransmit the subflow original data on which the ADD_ADDR signal was sent; this is discussed in more detail
          original subflow, in <xref target="heuristics"/>.</t>

        <t>The Truncated HMAC present order to preserve the subflow's integrity
          (middleboxes could replay old data and⁠/or could reject holes in
          subflows), and a receiver will ignore these retransmissions. While
          this Option is the rightmost 64 bits of an HMAC, negotiated and
        calculated in the same way as clearly suboptimal, for MP_JOIN as described in <xref target="sec_join"/>. For compatibility reasons this
        specification of MPTCP, as there is only one hash algorithm option specified, this will
          sensible behavior. Optimizations could be HMAC as
        defined negotiated in <xref target="RFC2104"/>, using future
          versions of this protocol. Note also that this property would also permit a sender to always send the SHA-256 hash algorithm <xref target="RFC6234"/>.
        In same data, with the same way as data sequence number, on multiple subflows, if desired for MP_JOIN, the key reliability reasons.</t>
          <t pn="section-3.3.6-2">This protocol specification does not mandate any mechanisms for the HMAC
        algorithm, in the case of the message transmitted by Host A, handling retransmissions, and much will be Key-A followed by Key-B, and dependent upon local policy
(as discussed in <xref target="sec_policy" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="Section 3.3.8"/>). One can imagine aggressive connection-level retransmission policies where every packet lost at the case of Host B, Key-B followed by Key-A.  These subflow level is retransmitted on
a different subflow (hence wasting bandwidth but possibly reducing application-to-application delays) or conservative retransmission policies where connection-level retransmissions
are the keys only used after a few subflow-level retransmission timeouts occur.</t>
          <t pn="section-3.3.6-3">It is envisaged that were exchanged in the original
        MP_CAPABLE handshake. The message for the HMAC a standard connection-level retransmission mechanism
would be implemented around a connection-level data queue: all segments that haven't
been DATA_ACKed are stored. A timer is set when
the Address ID, IP Address, and Port which precede
        the HMAC in head of the ADD_ADDR option. If connection level is ACKed at the port subflow level but is not present in the ADD_ADDR option, DATA_ACKed at the HMAC message data level. This timer will nevertheless include two octets of value zero. The rationale for the HMAC is to
        prevent unauthorized entities from injecting ADD_ADDR signals in an attempt to hijack a connection.
        Note guard against retransmission failures
by middleboxes that additionally proactively ACK data.</t>
          <t pn="section-3.3.6-4">The sender <bcp14>MUST</bcp14> keep data in its send buffer as
          long as the presence of data has not been acknowledged both (1) at the
          connection level and (2) on all subflows on which it
has been sent. In this HMAC prevents way, the address being changed in flight unless sender can always retransmit the key is known by an intermediary. If data if needed, on the same subflow or on a host receives an ADD_ADDR option for which it cannot
        validate different one. A special case is when a subflow fails: the HMAC, it SHOULD silently ignore sender
will typically resend the option.</t>

        <t>A set of four flags are present data on other working subflows after the subtype a timeout and before will keep trying to retransmit the Address ID. Only data
on the rightmost
        bit - labelled 'E' - is assigned in this specification. failed subflow too. The other bits are currently unassigned and MUST
        be set to zero by a sender and MUST be ignored by the receiver.</t>

        <t>The 'E' flag exists to provide reliability for this option. Because this option will often be sent declare the subflow failed after a predefined upper bound on pure ACKs, there retransmissions is no guarantee reached (which <bcp14>MAY</bcp14> be lower than the usual TCP limits of reliability. Therefore, the MSL) or on the receipt of an ICMP error, and only then delete the outstanding data segments. </t>
          <t pn="section-3.3.6-5">If multiple retransmissions that indicate that a receiver receiving
          subflow is performing badly are triggered, this <bcp14>MAY</bcp14> lead to a fresh ADD_ADDR
        option (where E=0), will send host resetting the same option back subflow with a RST. However, additional research is required to understand the sender, but not including the HMAC, heuristics of how and
        with E=1, when to indicate receipt. The lack of reset underperforming subflows. For example, a highly asymmetric path may be misdiagnosed as underperforming. A RST for this echo can purpose <bcp14>SHOULD</bcp14> be used accompanied by the initial ADD_ADDR sender to
        retransmit the ADD_ADDR according to local policy.</t>

        <?rfc needLines='11'?>
        <figure align="center" anchor="tcpm_address" title="Add Address (ADD_ADDR) Option">
          <artwork align="left"><![CDATA[
                        1                   2                   3
    0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1
   +---------------+---------------+-------+-------+---------------+
   |     Kind      |     Length    |Subtype|(rsv)|E|  Address ID   |
   +---------------+---------------+-------+-------+---------------+
   |          Address (IPv4 - 4 octets / IPv6 - 16 octets)         |
   +-------------------------------+-------------------------------+
   |   Port (2 octets, optional)   |                               |
   +-------------------------------+                               |
   |                Truncated HMAC (8 octets, if E=0)              |
   |                               +-------------------------------+
   |                               |
   +-------------------------------+
            ]]></artwork>
        </figure>

        <t>Due to the proliferation of NATs, an "Unacceptable performance" MP_TCPRST option (<xref target="sec_reset" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="Section 3.6"/>).</t>
        </section>
        <section anchor="sec_cc" numbered="true" toc="include" removeInRFC="false" pn="section-3.3.7">
          <name slugifiedName="name-congestion-control-consider">Congestion Control Considerations</name>
          <t pn="section-3.3.7-1">Different subflows in an MPTCP connection have different congestion windows.
To achieve fairness at bottlenecks and resource pooling, it is reasonably likely that one host may attempt to advertise private addresses <xref target="RFC1918"/>. It is not desirable necessary to prohibit this, since there may be cases where both hosts have additional interfaces on couple the same private network, and a host MAY advertise such addresses. The MP_JOIN handshake to create a new subflow (<xref target="sec_join"/>) provides mechanisms
congestion windows in use on each subflow, in order to minimize security risks. The MP_JOIN message contains a 32-bit token that uniquely identifies the connection push most traffic to the receiving host. If the token uncongested links.
One algorithm for achieving this is unknown, the host will return with a RST. In presented in <xref target="RFC6356" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="RFC6356"/>;
the unlikely event algorithm does not achieve perfect resource pooling but is "safe" in that the token it is valid at the receiving host, subflow setup will continue, but readily
deployable in the HMAC exchange must occur for authentication. This will fail, and will provide sufficient protection against two unconnected hosts accidentally setting current Internet. By this we mean that it does not take up more capacity
on any one path than if it was a new subflow upon single path flow using only that route, so this ensures
fair coexistence with single-path TCP at shared bottlenecks.</t>
          <t pn="section-3.3.7-2">It is foreseeable that different congestion controllers will be
          implemented for MPTCP, each aiming to achieve different properties
          in the signal resource pooling / fairness / stability design space, as well as those for achieving different properties in quality of service, reliability, and resilience.</t>
          <t pn="section-3.3.7-3">Regardless of a private address. Further security considerations around the issue algorithm used,
the design of ADD_ADDR messages that accidentally misdirect, or maliciously direct, new MP_JOIN attempts are discussed in <xref target="sec_security"/>.</t>

        <t>A host that receives an ADD_ADDR but finds a connection set up MPTCP aims to that IP address and port number is unsuccessful SHOULD NOT perform further connection attempts provide the congestion control
implementations with sufficient information
to make the right decisions; this address/port combination information includes, for this connection. A sender that wants to trigger each subflow, which packets were lost and when. </t>
        </section>
        <section anchor="sec_policy" numbered="true" toc="include" removeInRFC="false" pn="section-3.3.8">
          <name slugifiedName="name-subflow-policy">Subflow Policy</name>
          <t pn="section-3.3.8-1">Within a new incoming connection attempt on local MPTCP implementation, a previously advertised address/port combination can therefore refresh ADD_ADDR information by sending the option again.</t>

        <t>A host can therefore send an ADD_ADDR message with an already assigned Address ID, but may use any local policy it wishes to decide how to share the Address MUST traffic to be sent over the same as previously assigned to this Address ID. A new ADD_ADDR may have available paths.</t>
          <t pn="section-3.3.8-2">In the same, or different, port number. If typical use case, where the port number goal is different, the receiving host SHOULD try to set up a new subflow to this new address/port combination.</t>

        <t>A host wishing to replace an existing Address ID MUST first remove the existing one (<xref target="sec_remove_addr"/>).</t>

        <t>During normal MPTCP operation, it is unlikely that there maximize throughput, all available paths will be sufficient TCP option space for ADD_ADDR to be included along with those used simultaneously for data sequence numbering (<xref target="sec_dsn"/>). Therefore, it transfer, using coupled congestion control as described in <xref target="RFC6356" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="RFC6356"/>. It is expected expected, however, that an MPTCP implementation other use cases will send the ADD_ADDR option on separate ACKs. As discussed earlier, however, appear.</t>
          <t pn="section-3.3.8-3">For instance, one possibility is an MPTCP implementation MUST NOT treat duplicate ACKs with any MPTCP option, with "all-or-nothing" approach, i.e., have a second path ready for use in the exception event of
failure of the DSS option, first path, but alternatives could include entirely saturating one path before using an additional
path (the "overflow" case). Such choices would be most likely based on the monetary cost of links but may also be
based on properties such as indications the delay or jitter of congestion <xref target="RFC5681"/>, and an MPTCP implementation SHOULD NOT send links, where stability (of delay or bandwidth) is more important than two duplicate ACKs throughput. Application
requirements such as these are discussed in a row for signaling purposes.</t>

      </section>
      <section title="Remove Address" anchor="sec_remove_addr">
        <t>If, during detail in <xref target="RFC6897" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="RFC6897"/>.</t>
          <t pn="section-3.3.8-4">The ability to make effective choices at the lifetime sender requires full knowledge of an MPTCP connection, a previously announced address becomes invalid (e.g., if the interface disappears, or an IPv6 address path "cost", which
is no longer preferred), the affected host SHOULD announce this so that the peer can remove subflows related unlikely to this address. Even if an address is not in use by be the case. It would be desirable for a MPTCP connection, if it has been previously announced, an implementation SHOULD announce its removal. A host MAY also choose receiver to announce that a valid IP address should not be used any longer, able to signal their own preferences for example paths,
since they will often be the multihomed party and may have to pay for make-before-break session continuity.</t>
        <t>This is achieved through metered incoming bandwidth.</t>
          <t pn="section-3.3.8-5">To enable this behavior, the Remove Address (REMOVE_ADDR) MP_JOIN option (<xref target="tcpm_remove"/>), (see <xref target="sec_join" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="Section 3.2"/>) contains the "B" bit,
          which will remove a previously added address (or list of addresses) from a connection and terminate any subflows currently using that address.</t>
        <t>For security purposes, if allows a host receives to indicate to its peer that this path should be
          treated as a REMOVE_ADDR option, it must ensure the affected path(s) are no longer in backup path to use before it instigates closure. The receipt of REMOVE_ADDR SHOULD first trigger only in the sending event of failure of
          other working subflows (i.e., a TCP keepalive <xref target="RFC1122"/> on the path, and if a response is received subflow where the path SHOULD NOT receiver has
          indicated that B=1 <bcp14>SHOULD NOT</bcp14> be removed. If the path is found used to still be alive, the receiving host SHOULD send data unless there are no longer use usable subflows where B=0).</t>
          <t pn="section-3.3.8-6">In the specified address for future connections, but it is event that the responsibility available set of the paths changes, a host which sent the REMOVE_ADDR may
          wish to shut down the subflow. The requesting host MAY also use MP_PRIO (<xref target="sec_policy"/>) signal a change in priority of subflows to request the peer (e.g., a path is no longer used, before removal. Typical TCP validity tests on the
          subflow (e.g., ensuring sequence and ACK numbers are correct) MUST also be undertaken. An implementation can use indications of these test failures as part of intrusion detection or error logging.</t>
        <t>The sending and receipt (if no keepalive response that was received) of this message SHOULD trigger the sending of RSTs by both hosts on the affected subflow(s) (if possible), previously set as a courtesy to cleaning up middlebox state, before cleaning up any local state.</t>
        <t>Address removal is undertaken by ID, so as backup should now take priority
          over all remaining subflows). Therefore, the MP_PRIO option, shown
          in <xref target="tcpm_prio" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="Figure 11"/>, can be used to permit
          change the use "B" flag of NATs and other middleboxes that rewrite source addresses. If there is no address at the requested ID, the receiver will silently ignore the request.</t>
        <t>A subflow that on which it is still functioning MUST be closed with a FIN exchange as in regular TCP, rather than using this option. For more information, see <xref target="sec_close"/>.</t>
        <?rfc needLines='8'?> sent.</t>
          <figure align="center" anchor="tcpm_remove" title="Remove Address (REMOVE_ADDR) Option"> anchor="tcpm_prio" align="left" suppress-title="false" pn="figure-11">
            <name slugifiedName="name-change-subflow-priority-mp_">Change Subflow Priority (MP_PRIO) Option</name>
            <artwork align="left"><![CDATA[ align="left" name="" type="" alt="" pn="section-3.3.8-7.1">
                       1                   2                   3
   0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1
   +---------------+---------------+-------+-------+---------------+
  +---------------+---------------+-------+-----+-+
  |     Kind      |     Length = 3+n |Subtype|(resvd)|   Address ID  | ...
   +---------------+---------------+-------+-------+---------------+
                              (followed by n-1 Address IDs, if required)
            ]]></artwork>    |Subtype|(rsv)|B|
  +---------------+---------------+-------+-----+-+ </artwork>
          </figure>
      </section>

      </section>

      <section title="Fast Close" anchor="sec_fastclose">
        <t>Regular TCP has the means
          <t pn="section-3.3.8-8">Another use of sending a reset (RST) signal to abruptly
        close a connection. With MPTCP, a regular RST only has the scope of MP_PRIO option is to set the "B" flag on a
          subflow to cleanly "retire" its use before closing it and will only close the concerned subflow but not affect removing it
          with REMOVE_ADDR (<xref target="sec_remove_addr" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="Section 3.4.2"/>) -- for example, to support make-before-break session continuity, where new subflows are added before the remaining
        subflows. MPTCP's connection will stay alive at previously used subflows are closed.</t>
          <t pn="section-3.3.8-9">It should be noted that the backup flag is a request from a data level, in order receiver to permit break-before-make handover between subflows. It is therefore
        necessary a data sender only, and the data sender <bcp14>SHOULD</bcp14> adhere to provide an MPTCP-level "reset" these requests. A host cannot assume that the data sender will do so, however, since local policies -- or technical difficulties -- may override MP_PRIO requests. Note also that this signal applies to allow a single direction, and so the abrupt closure sender of the whole MPTCP connection, and this is option could choose to continue using the MP_FASTCLOSE option.</t>

        <t>MP_FASTCLOSE is used subflow to indicate send data even if it has signaled B=1 to the peer that the connection will be
        abruptly closed and no data will be accepted anymore. The reasons for
        triggering an MP_FASTCLOSE are implementation specific. Regular TCP does
        not allow sending a RST while other host.</t>
        </section>
      </section>
      <section anchor="sec_pm" numbered="true" toc="include" removeInRFC="false" pn="section-3.4">
        <name slugifiedName="name-address-knowledge-exchange-">Address Knowledge Exchange (Path Management)</name>
        <t pn="section-3.4-1">We use the connection is in a synchronized
        state <xref target="RFC0793"/>. Nevertheless, implementations allow term "path management" to refer to the sending exchange of a RST information about additional paths between hosts, which in this state, if, for example, the operating
        system design is running out of resources. In these cases, MPTCP should send managed by multiple addresses at hosts. For more details regarding the MP_FASTCLOSE. This option architectural thinking behind this design, see the MPTCP architecture document <xref target="RFC6182" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="RFC6182"/>.</t>
        <t pn="section-3.4-2">This design makes use of two methods of sharing such
        information, and both can be used on a connection.
        The first is illustrated the direct
        setup of new subflows (described in
        <xref target="tcpm_fastclose"/>.</t>

        <?rfc needLines='12'?>
        <figure align="center" anchor="tcpm_fastclose" title="Fast Close (MP_FASTCLOSE) Option">
          <artwork align="left"><![CDATA[
                          1                   2                   3
      0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1
     +---------------+---------------+-------+-----------------------+
     |     Kind      |    Length     |Subtype|      (reserved)       |
     +---------------+---------------+-------+-----------------------+
     |                      Option Receiver's Key                    |
     |                            (64 bits)                          |
     |                                                               |
     +---------------------------------------------------------------+
            ]]></artwork>
        </figure>

        <t>If Host A wants to force target="sec_join" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="Section 3.2"/>), where the closure of an MPTCP connection, it initiator has two
	different options:
	  <list style="symbols">
	    <t>Option A (ACK) : Host A sends an ACK containing the MP_FASTCLOSE
	    option on one subflow, containing the key of Host B as declared
        additional address. The second method (described in the initial connection handshake.  On all
        following subsections) signals addresses explicitly to the
        other subflows, Host A
	    sends a regular TCP RST host to close these subflows, and tears them down.
	    Host A now enters FASTCLOSE_WAIT state.</t>

            <t>Option R (RST) : Host A sends a RST containing allow it to initiate new subflows. The
        two mechanisms are complementary: the MP_FASTCLOSE
	    option on all subflows, containing first is implicit and
        simple, while the key of Host B as declared second (explicit) is more complex but is more
        robust. Together, these mechanisms allow addresses to change in
        flight (and thus support operation through NATs, since the initial connection handshake.  Host A can tear
        source address need not be known); they also allow the subflows
        signaling of previously unknown addresses and
	    the connection down immediately.</t>
	  </list>
	</t>

	<t>If host A decides of addresses
        belonging to force the closure by using Option A other address families (e.g., both IPv4 and sending IPv6).</t>
        <t pn="section-3.4-3">Here is an ACK with the MP_FASTCLOSE option, example of typical operation of the protocol:
        </t>
        <ul spacing="normal" bare="false" empty="false" pn="section-3.4-4">
          <li pn="section-3.4-4.1">An MPTCP connection shall proceed as follows:
          <list style="symbols">
            <t>Upon receipt is initially set up between address⁠/port A1 of an ACK with MP_FASTCLOSE by Host B, containing the valid key, Host B answers
            on the same subflow with a TCP RST A
              and tears down all subflows also through sending TCP RST signals. address⁠/port B1 of Host B can
            now close the whole MPTCP connection (it transitions directly to CLOSED state).</t>

            <t>As soon as B.  If Host A has received the TCP RST on the remaining subflow, is multihomed and
              multiaddressed, it can close this start an additional subflow and tear down the whole connection (transition from
            FASTCLOSE_WAIT
              its address A2 to CLOSED states). If Host A receives an MP_FASTCLOSE instead
            of B1, by sending a TCP RST, both hosts attempted fast closure simultaneously. Host A should
            reply SYN with an MP_JOIN
              option from A2 to B1, using B's previously declared
              token for this connection.  Alternatively, if B is
              multihomed, it can try to set up a TCP RST and tear down new subflow from B2 to
              A1, using A's previously declared token.  In either
              case, the connection.</t>

            <t>If Host A does not receive a TCP RST in reply SYN will be sent to its MP_FASTCLOSE the port already in use
              for the original subflow on the receiving host.</li>
          <li pn="section-3.4-4.2">Simultaneously (or after one
            retransmission timeout (RTO) (the RTO a timeout), an ADD_ADDR option
(<xref target="sec_add_address" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="Section 3.4.1"/>) is sent on an existing subflow, informing
the receiver of the sender's alternative address(es). The recipient can use
this information to open a new subflow where to the MP_FASTCLOSE has been sent), it SHOULD
            retransmit sender's additional address(es).
In our example, A will send the MP_FASTCLOSE. ADD_ADDR option informing B of address⁠/port A2.
The number mix of retransmissions SHOULD be
            limited to avoid this connection from being retained for a long time, but
            this limit is implementation specific. A RECOMMENDED number is 3. If no TCP RST
            is received in response, Host A SHOULD send a TCP RST with using the MP_FASTCLOSE SYN‑based option
	    itself when it releases state in order to clear any remaining state at middleboxes.</t>
          </list>
        </t>

	<t>If however host A decides to force the closure by using Option R and
	sending a RST with the MP_FASTCLOSE ADD_ADDR option, Host B will act as follows:
	Upon receipt of a RST including
timeouts, is implementation specific and can be tailored to agree with MP_FASTCLOSE, containing the valid key,
	Host B tears down all subflows by sending a TCP RST. local policy.</li>
          <li pn="section-3.4-4.3">If subflow A2-B1 is successfully set up, Host B can now close use the whole MPTCP
	connection (it transitions directly Address ID in
the MP_JOIN option to CLOSED state).</t>
      </section>

      <section title="Subflow Reset" anchor="sec_reset">
	<t>An implementation of MPTCP may correlate this source address with the ADD_ADDR option that will also need to send a regular TCP RST arrive on
an existing subflow; now B knows not to force open A2-B1, ignoring the closure of a subflow. A host sends a TCP RST in order ADD_ADDR.
Otherwise, if B has not received the A2-B1 MP_JOIN SYN but received the ADD_ADDR,
it can try to close initiate a new subflow from one or reject an attempt more of its addresses to open a subflow (MP_JOIN). In order address
A2. This permits new sessions to inform the
	receiving be opened if one host why a subflow is being closed or rejected, the TCP RST packet
	MAY include behind a NAT.</li>
        </ul>
        <t pn="section-3.4-5">
       Other ways of using the MP_TCPRST Option. The host MAY use this information to
	decide, for example, whether it tries two signaling mechanisms are possible; for instance,
signaling addresses in other address families can only be done explicitly
using the Add Address (ADD_ADDR) option.
        </t>
        <section anchor="sec_add_address" numbered="true" toc="include" removeInRFC="false" pn="section-3.4.1">
          <name slugifiedName="name-address-advertisement">Address Advertisement</name>
          <t pn="section-3.4.1-1">The ADD_ADDR MPTCP option announces additional addresses (and, optionally, ports) on which a
host can be reached (<xref target="tcpm_address" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="Figure 12"/>).
This option can be used at any time during a connection, depending on when the
sender wishes to re-establish enable multiple paths and⁠/or when paths become available. As with all MPTCP
signals, the subflow
	immediately, later, or never.</t>

        <?rfc needLines='8'?> receiver <bcp14>MUST</bcp14> undertake standard TCP validity
          checks, e.g., per <xref target="RFC5961" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="RFC5961"/>, before
          acting upon it.</t>
          <figure align="center" anchor="tcpm_reset" title="TCP RST Reason (MP_TCPRST) Option"> anchor="tcpm_address" align="left" suppress-title="false" pn="figure-12">
            <name slugifiedName="name-add-address-add_addr-option">Add Address (ADD_ADDR) Option</name>
            <artwork align="left"><![CDATA[ align="left" name="" type="" alt="" pn="section-3.4.1-2.1">
                       1                   2                   3
   0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1
    +---------------+---------------+-------+-----------------------+
  +---------------+---------------+-------+-------+---------------+
  |     Kind      |     Length     |Subtype|U|V|W|T|    Reason    |Subtype|(rsv)|E|  Address ID   |
    +---------------+---------------+-------+-----------------------+
            ]]></artwork>
  +---------------+---------------+-------+-------+---------------+
  |           Address (IPv4: 4 octets / IPv6: 16 octets)          |
  +-------------------------------+-------------------------------+
  |   Port (2 octets, optional)   |                               |
  +-------------------------------+                               |
  |                Truncated HMAC (8 octets, if E=0)              |
  |                               +-------------------------------+
  |                               |
  +-------------------------------+ </artwork>
          </figure>

        <t>The MP_TCPRST option contains a reason code
          <t pn="section-3.4.1-3">Every address has an Address ID that allows the
        sender of can be used for uniquely identifying the option address within a connection for address removal. The Address ID is also
used to identify MP_JOIN options (see <xref target="sec_join" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="Section 3.2"/>) relating to provide more information about
the reason same address, even when address translators are in use. The Address ID <bcp14>MUST</bcp14> uniquely
identify the address for the termination sender of the subflow.  Using 12 bits of option space, (within the
        first four bits are reserved for flags (only one scope of which is currently
        defined), and the remaining octet is used to express a reason code for
        this subflow termination, from which a receiver MAY infer information
        about connection); the usability of this path.</t>

        <t>The "T" flag is used by the sender to indicate whether the error
        condition that is reported mechanism for
allocating such IDs is Transient (T bit set to 1) implementation specific.</t>
          <t pn="section-3.4.1-4">All Address IDs learned via either MP_JOIN or Permanent
        (T bit set to 0).  If the error condition is considered to ADD_ADDR
        <bcp14>SHOULD</bcp14> be
        Transient stored by the sender of the RST segment, the recipient of this
        segment MAY try to reestablish receiver in a subflow data structure
        that gathers all the Address-ID-to-address mappings for this a connection over the
        failed path.  The time at which
        (identified by a receiver may try to re-establish token pair). In this way, there is implementation-specific, but SHOULD take into account the properties
        of the failure defined by the following reason code.  If the error condition
        is considered to be permanent, the receiver of the RST segment SHOULD NOT try
        to reestablish
        a subflow for this connection over this path.  The "U", "V"
        and "W" flags are not defined by this specification stored mapping between the Address ID, observed source address, and are reserved token pair for
        future use. An implementation processing of this specification MUST set these flags
        to 0, and control information for a receiver MUST ignore them.</t>

        <t>The "Reason" code is an 8-bit field connection. Note that indicates the reason an implementation
        <bcp14>MAY</bcp14> discard incoming address advertisements at will -- for
        the termination of the subflow.  The following codes example, to avoid updating
        mapping state or because advertised addresses are defined in
        this document:

          <list style="symbols">
            <t>Unspecified error (code 0x0).  This is the default error implying the
            subflow is no longer available.  The presence of this option shows
	    that the RST was generated by no use to it (for
        example, IPv6 addresses when it has IPv4 only). Therefore, a MPTCP-aware device.</t>

            <t>MPTCP specific error (code 0x01).  An error has been detected host <bcp14>MUST</bcp14> treat address
        advertisements as soft state, and it <bcp14>MAY</bcp14> choose to refresh advertisements periodically.
        Note also that an implementation <bcp14>MAY</bcp14> choose to cache these address advertisements even
        if they are not currently relevant but may be relevant in the
            processing of MPTCP options.  This future, such as IPv4
        addresses when IPv6 connectivity is the usual reason code to return available but IPv4 is awaiting DHCP.</t>
          <t pn="section-3.4.1-5">This option is shown in the cases where a RST <xref target="tcpm_address" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="Figure 12"/>. The illustration is being sent to close a subflow sized for reasons
        IPv4 addresses. For IPv6, the length of an invalid response.</t>

            <t>Lack the address will be 16 octets (instead of resources (code 0x02).  This code indicates 4).</t>
          <t pn="section-3.4.1-6">The 2 octets that specify the
            sending host does not have enough resources TCP port number to support use are optional, and their presence
        can be inferred from the
            terminated subflow.</t>

            <t>Administratively prohibited (code 0x03).  This code indicates that length of the requested subflow option. Although it is prohibited by expected that the policies majority of
        use cases will use the sending
            host.</t>

            <t>Too much outstanding data (code 0x04).  This code indicates that
            there is an excessive amount of data that need to be transmitted
            over same port pairs as those used for the terminated initial subflow while having already been acknowledged
            over one or more other subflows. This (e.g., port
        80 remains port 80 on all subflows, as does the ephemeral port at the client), there
        may occur if a path has been
            unavailable for be cases (such as port-based load balancing) where the explicit specification of
        a short period and it different port is more efficient to reset and
            start again than it required. If no port is specified, MPTCP <bcp14>SHOULD</bcp14> attempt to
        connect to retransmit the queued data.</t>

            <t>Unacceptable performance (code 0x05).  This code indicates specified address on the same port as the port that is already in use by the performance of this subflow was too low compared to
        on which the other
            subflows of ADD_ADDR signal was sent; this Multipath TCP connection.</t>

            <t>Middlebox interference (code 0x06).  Middlebox interference has
            been detected over is discussed in more detail in <xref target="heuristics" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="Section 3.9"/>.</t>
          <t pn="section-3.4.1-7">The Truncated HMAC parameter present in this subflow making MPTCP signaling invalid. option is the rightmost 64 bits of an HMAC, negotiated and
        calculated in the same way as for MP_JOIN as described in <xref target="sec_join" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="Section 3.2"/>. For
            example, this may
        specification of MPTCP, as there is only one hash algorithm option specified, this will be sent if HMAC as
        defined in <xref target="RFC2104" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="RFC2104"/>, using the checksum does not validate.</t>
          </list>
        </t>
      </section>

      <section title="Fallback" anchor="sec_fallback">
        <t>Sometimes, middleboxes will exist on a path that could prevent SHA-256 hash algorithm <xref target="RFC6234" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="RFC6234"/>.
        In the operation same way as for MP_JOIN, the key for the HMAC
        algorithm, in the case of MPTCP. MPTCP has been designed the message transmitted by Host A, will be Key-A followed by Key-B, and in order to cope with many middlebox modifications (see <xref target="sec_middleboxes"/>), but there are still some cases where a subflow could fail to operate within
        the MPTCP requirements. case of Host B, Key-B followed by Key-A.  These cases are notably the following: keys that were exchanged in the loss of MPTCP options on a path, and original
        MP_CAPABLE handshake. The message for the modification of payload data. If such an event occurs, it HMAC is necessary to "fall back" to the previous, safe operation. This may be either falling back to regular TCP or removing a problematic subflow.</t>

        <t>At Address ID, IP address, and port that precede
        the start of an MPTCP connection (i.e., HMAC in the first subflow), it is important to ensure that ADD_ADDR option. If the path port is fully MPTCP capable and not present in the necessary MPTCP options can reach each host. ADD_ADDR option, the HMAC message
        will nevertheless include 2 octets of value zero. The handshake as described rationale for the HMAC is to
        prevent unauthorized entities from injecting ADD_ADDR signals in <xref target="sec_init"/> SHOULD fall back an attempt to regular TCP if either of the SYN messages do not have hijack a connection.
        Note that, additionally, the MPTCP options: presence of this is HMAC prevents the same, and desired, behavior
        address from being changed in flight unless
        the case where key is known by an intermediary. If a host is not MPTCP capable, or receives an ADD_ADDR option for which it cannot
        validate the path does not support HMAC, it <bcp14>SHOULD</bcp14> silently ignore the MPTCP options. When attempting to join an existing MPTCP connection (<xref target="sec_join"/>), if a path option.</t>
          <t pn="section-3.4.1-8">A set of four flags is not MPTCP capable and present after the MPTCP options do not get through on subtype and before the SYNs, Address ID. Only the subflow will rightmost
        bit -- labeled "E" -- is assigned in this specification. The other
        bits are currently unassigned; they <bcp14>MUST</bcp14>
        be closed according set to 0 by a sender and <bcp14>MUST</bcp14> be ignored by the MP_JOIN logic.</t>

        <t>There is, however, another corner case that should receiver.</t>
          <t pn="section-3.4.1-9">The "E" flag exists to provide reliability for this option. Because this option will often be addressed. That sent
        on pure ACKs, there is one no guarantee of MPTCP options getting through on reliability. Therefore, a receiver receiving a fresh ADD_ADDR
        option (where E=0) will send the SYN, same option back to the sender, but not on regular packets. This can be resolved if the subflow is including the first subflow, HMAC and thus all data in flight is contiguous, using the following rules.</t>

        <t>A sender MUST include a DSS option
        with data sequence mapping in every segment until one of E=1, to indicate receipt. According to local policy, the sent segments has been acknowledged with a DSS option containing a Data ACK. Upon reception lack of
        this type of "echo" can indicate to the acknowledgment, the initial ADD_ADDR sender has the confirmation that the DSS option passes in both directions and
        ADD_ADDR needs to be retransmitted.</t>
          <t pn="section-3.4.1-10">Due to the proliferation of NATs, it is reasonably likely that
          one host may choose attempt to send fewer DSS options than once per segment.</t>

        <t>If, however, an ACK advertise private addresses <xref target="RFC1918" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="RFC1918"/>. It is received for data (not just for not desirable to prohibit
 this behavior, since there may be cases where both hosts have additional
          interfaces on the SYN) without same private network, and a DSS option containing host
          <bcp14>MAY</bcp14> advertise such addresses. The MP_JOIN handshake
          to create a Data ACK, new subflow (<xref target="sec_join" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="Section 3.2"/>)
          provides mechanisms to minimize security risks. The MP_JOIN message
          contains a 32-bit token that uniquely identifies the sender determines connection to
          the path is not MPTCP capable. In receiving host. If the case of this occurring on an additional subflow (i.e., one started with MP_JOIN), token is unknown, the host MUST close the subflow with a RST, which SHOULD contain a MP_TCPRST option (<xref target="sec_reset"/>) will respond
          with a "Middlebox interference" reason code.</t>

        <t>In RST. In the case of such an ACK being received on unlikely event that the first token is valid at the
          receiving host, subflow (i.e., that started with MP_CAPABLE), before any additional subflows are added, setup will continue, but the implementation MUST drop out of an MPTCP mode, back to regular TCP. HMAC exchange
          must occur for authentication. The sender HMAC exchange
 will send one final data sequence mapping, with fail and will provide
          sufficient protection against two unconnected hosts accidentally
          setting up a new subflow upon the Data-Level Length value signal of 0 indicating an infinite mapping (to inform the other end in case a private address.
 Further security considerations around the path drops options issue of ADD_ADDR messages that accidentally misdirect, or maliciously direct, new MP_JOIN attempts are discussed in one direction only), and then revert to sending data on the single subflow without any MPTCP options.</t>

        <t>If <xref target="sec_security" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="Section 5"/>.</t>
          <t pn="section-3.4.1-11">A host that receives an ADD_ADDR but finds that a subflow breaks during operation, e.g. if it is re-routed connection set up to that IP address and MPTCP options are no longer permitted, then once this is detected (by the subflow-level receive buffer filling up, since there port number is no mapping available in order unsuccessful <bcp14>SHOULD NOT</bcp14> perform further connection attempts to DATA_ACK this data), the subflow SHOULD be treated as broken and closed with address⁠/port combination for this connection. A sender that wants to trigger a RST, since no data new incoming connection attempt on a previously advertised address⁠/port combination can be delivered to therefore refresh ADD_ADDR information by sending the application layer, and no fallback signal option again.</t>
          <t pn="section-3.4.1-12">A host can therefore send an ADD_ADDR message with an
          already-assigned Address ID, but the address <bcp14>MUST</bcp14> be reliably sent. This RST SHOULD include the MP_TCPRST option (<xref target="sec_reset"/>) with a "Middlebox interference" reason code.</t>

        <t>These rules should cover all cases where such a failure could happen: whether it's on the forward or reverse path and whether
          the server or same as the client first sends data.</t>

        <t>So far address previously assigned to this section has discussed Address ID. A
          new ADD_ADDR may have the loss of MPTCP options, either initially, same port number or during the course of the connection. As described in <xref target="sec_generalop"/>, each portion of data for which there is a mapping different port number. If the port number is protected by different, the receiving host <bcp14>SHOULD</bcp14> try to set up a checksum, if checksums have been negotiated. This mechanism is used new subflow to detect if middleboxes have made any adjustments this new address⁠/port combination.</t>
          <t pn="section-3.4.1-13">A host wishing to replace an existing Address ID <bcp14>MUST</bcp14> first remove the payload (added, removed, or changed data). A checksum existing one (<xref target="sec_remove_addr" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="Section 3.4.2"/>).</t>
          <t pn="section-3.4.1-14">During normal MPTCP operation, it is unlikely that there will fail if the be sufficient TCP option space for ADD_ADDR to be included along with those for data has been changed in any way. This sequence numbering (<xref target="sec_dsn" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="Section 3.3.1"/>). Therefore, it is expected that an MPTCP implementation will also detect if send the length of data ADD_ADDR option on separate ACKs. As discussed earlier, however, an MPTCP implementation <bcp14>MUST NOT</bcp14> treat duplicate ACKs with any MPTCP option, with the subflow is increased or decreased, exception of the DSS option, as indications of congestion <xref target="RFC5681" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="RFC5681"/>, and this means an MPTCP implementation <bcp14>SHOULD NOT</bcp14> send more than two duplicate ACKs in a row for signaling purposes.</t>
        </section>
        <section anchor="sec_remove_addr" numbered="true" toc="include" removeInRFC="false" pn="section-3.4.2">
          <name slugifiedName="name-remove-address">Remove Address</name>
          <t pn="section-3.4.2-1">If, during the data sequence mapping is no longer valid. The sender no longer knows what subflow-level sequence number the receiver is genuinely operating at (the middlebox will be faking ACKs in return), and it cannot signal any further mappings. Furthermore, in addition to the possibility lifetime of payload modifications that are valid at the application layer, there is the possibility that such modifications could be triggered across an MPTCP segment boundaries, corrupting the data. Therefore, all data from connection, a previously
          announced address becomes invalid (e.g., if the start of interface
          disappears or an IPv6 address is no longer preferred), the segment affected
          host <bcp14>SHOULD</bcp14> announce this situation so that failed the checksum onwards peer can remove
          subflows related to this address. Even if an address is not trustworthy.</t>

        <t>Note that in use
          by an MPTCP connection, if checksum usage it has not been negotiated, this fallback mechanism cannot be used unless there is some higher or lower layer signal to inform the MPTCP previously announced, an
          implementation <bcp14>SHOULD</bcp14> announce its removal. A host
          <bcp14>MAY</bcp14> also choose to announce that the payload has been tampered with.</t>

        <t>When multiple subflows are in use, the data in flight on a subflow will likely involve data that is valid IP address
          should not contiguously part of the connection-level stream, since segments will be spread across the multiple subflows. Due to the problems identified above, it is not possible to determine what adjustment has done to the data (notably, used any changes to the subflow sequence numbering). Therefore, it longer -- for example, for make‑before-break session continuity.</t>
          <t pn="section-3.4.2-2">This is not possible to recover the subflow, and achieved through the affected subflow must be immediately closed with a RST, featuring an MP_FAIL Remove Address (REMOVE_ADDR) option
          (<xref target="tcpm_fallback"/>), target="tcpm_remove" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="Figure 13"/>), which defines the data sequence number at the start will remove a
          previously added address (or list of the segment (defined by the data sequence mapping) that had the checksum failure. Note addresses) from a connection
          and terminate any subflows currently using that the MP_FAIL option requires the use of the full 64-bit sequence number, even if 32-bit sequence numbers are normally in use in the DSS signals on the path.</t>

        <?rfc needLines='8'?> address.</t>
          <figure align="center" anchor="tcpm_fallback" title="Fallback (MP_FAIL) Option"> anchor="tcpm_remove" align="left" suppress-title="false" pn="figure-13">
            <name slugifiedName="name-remove-address-remove_addr-">Remove Address (REMOVE_ADDR) Option</name>
            <artwork align="left"><![CDATA[ align="left" name="" type="" alt="" pn="section-3.4.2-3.1">
                     1                   2                   3
 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1
   +---------------+---------------+-------+----------------------+
+---------------+---------------+-------+-------+---------------+
|     Kind      |Length = 3 + n |Subtype|(resvd)|   Address ID  |   Length=12   |Subtype|      (reserved)      |
   +---------------+---------------+-------+----------------------+
   |                                                              |
   |                 Data Sequence Number (8 octets)              |
   |                                                              |
   +--------------------------------------------------------------+

            ]]></artwork> ...
+---------------+---------------+-------+-------+---------------+
                           (followed by n-1 Address IDs, if required) </artwork>
          </figure>

        <t>The receiver of this option MUST discard all data following the data sequence number specified.
        Failed data MUST NOT be DATA_ACKed and so will be retransmitted on other subflows (<xref target="sec_retransmit"/>). </t>

        <t>A special case is when there is
          <t pn="section-3.4.2-4">For security purposes, if a single subflow and it fails with host receives a checksum error.
        If REMOVE_ADDR option,
          it is known must ensure that all unacknowledged data the affected path or paths are no longer in flight is
contiguous (which will usually be use
          before it instigates closure. The receipt of REMOVE_ADDR
          <bcp14>SHOULD</bcp14> first trigger the case with sending of a single subflow), an infinite mapping can be applied to the subflow without TCP keepalive
          <xref target="RFC1122" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="RFC1122"/> on the need to close it first, path, and
essentially turn off all further MPTCP signaling. In this case, if a receiver identifies a checksum failure
when there
          response is only one path, it will send back an MP_FAIL option on received, the subflow-level ACK, referring to path <bcp14>SHOULD NOT</bcp14> be
          removed. If the data-level sequence number of the start of the
segment on which the checksum error was detected. The sender will receive
this, and if all unacknowledged data in flight path is contiguous, will signal an infinite mapping.
This infinite mapping will found to still be a DSS option (<xref target="sec_generalop"/>)
on alive, the first new packet, containing a data sequence mapping that acts retroactively, referring to receiving host
          <bcp14>SHOULD</bcp14> no longer use the start of specified address for future
          connections, but it is the subflow sequence
number responsibility of the most recent segment host that was known sent the
          REMOVE_ADDR to be delivered intact (i.e. was successfully DATA_ACKed). From that point onwards, data can be altered
by a middlebox without affecting MPTCP, as shut down the data stream subflow. Before the address is equivalent removed,
          the requesting host
          <bcp14>MAY</bcp14> also use MP_PRIO (<xref target="sec_policy" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="Section 3.3.8"/>) to request that a regular, legacy path no longer be used. Typical TCP session.
Whilst in theory paths may only validity tests on the subflow (e.g., ensuring
          that sequence and ACK numbers are correct) <bcp14>MUST</bcp14> also be damaged in one direction, undertaken. An implementation can use indications of these test failures as part of intrusion detection or error logging.</t>
          <t pn="section-3.4.2-5">The sending and the MP_FAIL signal affects only one direction receipt (if no keepalive response was received)
          of traffic,
for implementation simplicity, this message <bcp14>SHOULD</bcp14> trigger the receiver sending of an MP_FAIL MUST also respond with an MP_FAIL in RSTs by
          both hosts on the reverse direction and entirely revert to affected subflow(s) (if possible), as a regular TCP session.</t>

        <t>In the rare case that courtesy,
          to allow the data cleanup of middlebox state before cleaning up any local state.</t>
          <t pn="section-3.4.2-6">Address removal is not contiguous (which could happen when there is only one subflow but it is retransmitting data from a subflow undertaken according to the Address ID, so as to
 permit the use of NATs and other middleboxes that has recently been uncleanly closed), rewrite source
 addresses.  If an Address ID is not known, the receiver MUST close will
 silently ignore the request.</t>
          <t pn="section-3.4.2-7">A subflow that is still functioning <bcp14>MUST</bcp14> be closed with a RST with MP_FAIL. The receiver MUST discard all data that follows FIN exchange as in regular TCP, rather than using this option. For more information, see <xref target="sec_close" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="Section 3.3.3"/>.</t>
        </section>
      </section>
      <section anchor="sec_fastclose" numbered="true" toc="include" removeInRFC="false" pn="section-3.5">
        <name slugifiedName="name-fast-close">Fast Close</name>
        <t pn="section-3.5-1">Regular TCP has the
data sequence number specified. The sender MAY attempt to create means of sending a new subflow belonging RST signal to abruptly
        close a connection. With MPTCP, a regular RST only has the same connection, and, if scope of
        the subflow; it chooses to do so, SHOULD place
        will only close the single applicable subflow immediately in single-path mode by setting an infinite data sequence mapping. This mapping and will begin from not affect the data-level sequence number
that was declared in remaining
        subflows. MPTCP's connection will stay alive at the MP_FAIL.</t>

        <t>After a sender signals an infinite mapping, it MUST only use subflow ACKs data level, in order
        to clear its send buffer.
This permit break-before-make handover between subflows. It is because Data ACKs may become misaligned with the subflow ACKs when middleboxes insert or delete data.
The receive SHOULD stop generating Data ACKs after it receives an infinite mapping. </t>

        <t>When a connection has fallen back with therefore
        necessary to provide an infinite mapping, only one subflow can send data; otherwise, the receiver would not know how MPTCP-level "reset" to reorder allow the data. In practice, this means that all MPTCP subflows will have to be terminated except one. Once MPTCP falls back to regular TCP, it MUST NOT revert to MPTCP later in abrupt closure
        of the connection.</t>

        <t>It should be emphasized that whole MPTCP connection; this is not attempting to prevent done via the use of middleboxes that want MP_FASTCLOSE option.</t>
        <t pn="section-3.5-2">MP_FASTCLOSE is used to adjust the payload. An MPTCP-aware middlebox could provide such functionality by also rewriting checksums.</t>
      </section>

      <section title="Error Handling" anchor="sec_errors">
        <t>In addition indicate to the fallback mechanism as described above, peer that the standard classes of TCP errors may need to connection will be handled in
        abruptly closed and no data will be accepted anymore. The reasons for
        triggering an MPTCP-specific way. Note that changing semantics -- such as MP_FASTCLOSE are implementation specific. Regular TCP does
        not allow the relevance sending of a RST -- are covered while the connection is in a synchronized
        state <xref target="sec_semantics"/>. Where possible, we do not want to deviate from regular TCP behavior.</t>
        <t>The following list covers possible errors and target="RFC0793" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="RFC0793"/>. Nevertheless, implementations allow
        the appropriate MPTCP behavior:
          <list style="symbols">
            <t>Unknown token in MP_JOIN (or HMAC failure in MP_JOIN ACK, or missing MP_JOIN in SYN/ACK response): send RST (analogous to TCP's behavior on an unknown port)</t>
            <t>DSN out sending of window (during normal operation): drop the data, do not send Data ACKs</t>
            <t>Remove request for unknown address ID: silently ignore</t>
          </list>
        </t>
      </section>

      <section title="Heuristics" anchor="heuristics">

        <t>There are a number of heuristics that are needed for
        performance or deployment but that are not required for
        protocol correctness.  In RST in this section, we detail such
        heuristics. Note that discussion state if, for example, the operating
        system is running out of buffering and certain
        sender and receiver window behaviors are presented in Sections
        <xref target="sec_rwin" format="counter"/> and <xref target="sec_sender" format="counter"/>,
        as well as retransmission resources. In these cases, MPTCP should send
        the MP_FASTCLOSE. This option is illustrated in <xref target="sec_retransmit"/>.</t>

        <section title="Port Usage">
          <t>Under typical operation, target="tcpm_fastclose" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="Figure 14"/>.</t>
        <figure anchor="tcpm_fastclose" align="left" suppress-title="false" pn="figure-14">
          <name slugifiedName="name-fast-close-mp_fastclose-opt">Fast Close (MP_FASTCLOSE) Option</name>
          <artwork align="left" name="" type="" alt="" pn="section-3.5-3.1">
                       1                   2                   3
   0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1
  +---------------+---------------+-------+-----------------------+
  |     Kind      |    Length     |Subtype|      (reserved)       |
  +---------------+---------------+-------+-----------------------+
  |                      Option Receiver's Key                    |
  |                            (64 bits)                          |
  |                                                               |
  +---------------------------------------------------------------+ </artwork>
        </figure>
        <t pn="section-3.5-4">If Host A wants to force the closure of an MPTCP implementation SHOULD use connection, it can
        do so via two
        options:
        </t>
        <ul spacing="normal" bare="false" empty="false" pn="section-3.5-5">
          <li pn="section-3.5-5.1">Option A (ACK): Host A sends an ACK containing the same ports MP_FASTCLOSE
            option on one subflow, containing the key of Host B as already declared in use. In other words,
            the
          destination port of initial connection handshake.  On all the other subflows, Host A
            sends a SYN regular TCP RST to close these subflows and tears them down.
            Host A now enters FASTCLOSE_WAIT state.</li>
          <li pn="section-3.5-5.2">Option R (RST): Host A sends a RST containing an MP_JOIN option SHOULD
          be the same as MP_FASTCLOSE
            option on all subflows, containing the remote port key of the first subflow Host B as declared in
            the
          connection.  The local port for such SYNs SHOULD also be initial connection handshake.  Host A can tear down the
          same as for subflows and
            the first subflow (and as such, an
          implementation SHOULD reserve ephemeral ports across all
          local IP addresses), although there may be cases where this
          is infeasible.  This strategy is intended connection immediately.</li>
        </ul>
        <t pn="section-3.5-6">If Host A decides to maximize the
          probability of force the SYN being permitted closure by a firewall or NAT
          at the recipient and to avoid confusing any network
          monitoring software.</t>

          <t>There may also be cases, however, where a host wishes to
          signal that a specific port should be used, using Option A and this facility
          is provided in sending
        an ACK with the ADD_ADDR option MP_FASTCLOSE option, the connection shall proceed as documented in
          <xref target="sec_add_address"/>.  It is therefore feasible
          to allow multiple subflows between follows:
        </t>
        <ul spacing="normal" bare="false" empty="false" pn="section-3.5-7">
          <li pn="section-3.5-7.1">Upon receipt of an ACK with MP_FASTCLOSE by Host B, containing the valid key, Host B answers
            on the same two addresses
          but using different port pairs, and
          such subflow with a facility could be used TCP RST and tears down all subflows
            also through sending TCP RST signals. Host B can
            now close the whole MPTCP connection (it transitions directly to allow load balancing within CLOSED state).</li>
          <li pn="section-3.5-7.2">As soon as Host A has received the network based on 5-tuples (e.g., some ECMP implementations <xref target="RFC2992"/>).</t>
        </section>

        <section title="Delayed Subflow Start and Subflow Symmetry">
          <t>Many TCP connections are short-lived RST on the remaining subflow, it
            can close this subflow and consist only tear down the whole connection (transition from
            FASTCLOSE_WAIT state to CLOSED state). If Host A receives an MP_FASTCLOSE instead
            of a few
          segments, TCP RST, both hosts attempted fast closure simultaneously. Host A should
            reply with a TCP RST and so tear down the overheads
          of using MPTCP outweigh any benefits. connection.</li>
          <li pn="section-3.5-7.3">If Host A heuristic is required,
          therefore, to decide when to start using additional subflows in
          an MPTCP connection. Experimental deployments have shown that
          MPTCP can be applied in does not receive a range of scenarios so an implementation
          is likely to need TCP RST in reply to take into account factors including the type its MP_FASTCLOSE after one
            retransmission timeout (RTO) (the RTO of
          traffic the subflow where the MP_FASTCLOSE has been sent), it <bcp14>SHOULD</bcp14>
            retransmit the MP_FASTCLOSE. To keep this connection from being sent and duration
            retained for a long time, the number of session, and this information
          MAY retransmissions <bcp14>SHOULD</bcp14> be signalled by the application layer.</t>

          <t>However, for standard
            limited;
            this limit is implementation specific. A <bcp14>RECOMMENDED</bcp14> number is 3. If no TCP traffic, RST
            is received in response, Host A <bcp14>SHOULD</bcp14> send a suggested general-purpose
          heuristic that an implementation MAY choose TCP RST with the MP_FASTCLOSE option
            itself when it releases state in order to employ is clear any remaining state at middleboxes.</li>
        </ul>
        <t pn="section-3.5-8">If, however, Host A decides to force the closure by using Option R and
        sending a RST with the MP_FASTCLOSE option, Host B will act as follows.</t>

          <t>If follows:
        upon receipt of a host has data buffered for its peer (which implies that RST with MP_FASTCLOSE, containing the
          application has received valid key,
        Host B tears down all subflows by sending a request for data), TCP RST. Host B can now close the host opens one
          subflow for each initial window's worth whole MPTCP
        connection (it transitions directly to CLOSED state).</t>
      </section>
      <section anchor="sec_reset" numbered="true" toc="include" removeInRFC="false" pn="section-3.6">
        <name slugifiedName="name-subflow-reset">Subflow Reset</name>
        <t pn="section-3.6-1">An implementation of data that is buffered.</t>

          <t>Consideration should MPTCP may also be given need to limiting the rate of adding
          new subflows, as well as limiting send a regular TCP RST to force
        the total number closure of subflows open
          for a particular connection. subflow. A host may choose sends a TCP RST in order to vary these values
          based on its load close a subflow
        or knowledge of traffic and path characteristics.</t>

          <t>Note that this heuristic alone is probably insufficient. Traffic
          for many common applications, such as downloads, is highly asymmetric and reject an attempt to open a subflow (MP_JOIN). In order to let the
        receiving host that know why a subflow is multihomed may well be being closed or rejected, the client that will never fill
          its buffers, and thus never TCP RST packet
        <bcp14>MAY</bcp14> include the MP_TCPRST option (<xref target="tcpm_reset" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="Figure 15"/>). The host <bcp14>MAY</bcp14> use MPTCP according to this heuristic. Advanced APIs that allow an
          application information to signal its traffic requirements would aid in these decisions.</t>

          <t>An additional time-based heuristic could be applied, opening additional
          subflows after
        decide, for example, whether it tries to re-establish the subflow
        immediately, later, or never.</t>
        <figure anchor="tcpm_reset" align="left" suppress-title="false" pn="figure-15">
          <name slugifiedName="name-tcp-rst-reason-mp_tcprst-op">TCP RST Reason (MP_TCPRST) Option</name>
          <artwork align="left" name="" type="" alt="" pn="section-3.6-2.1">
                       1                   2                   3
   0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1
  +---------------+---------------+-------+-----------------------+
  |     Kind      |    Length     |Subtype|U|V|W|T|    Reason     |
  +---------------+---------------+-------+-----------------------+ </artwork>
        </figure>
        <t pn="section-3.6-3">The MP_TCPRST option contains a given period reason code that allows the
        sender of time has passed. This would alleviate the
          above issue, and also option to provide resilience more information about the reason for low-bandwidth but long-lived
          applications.</t>

          <t>Another issue is that both communicating hosts may simultaneously try to
	  set up a subflow between
        the same pair termination of addresses. This leads to an
	  inefficient use the subflow.  Using 12 bits of resources.</t>

          <t>If option space, the same ports
        first 4 bits are used on all subflows, as recommended above,
          then standard TCP simultaneous open logic should take care reserved for flags (only one of this situation which is currently
        defined), and only one subflow will be established between the address pairs. However,
          this relies on the same ports being remaining octet is used at both end hosts. If to express a host does
          not support TCP simultaneous open, it reason code for
        this subflow termination, from which a receiver <bcp14>MAY</bcp14> infer information
        about the usability of this path.</t>
        <t pn="section-3.6-4">The "T" flag is RECOMMENDED used by the sender to indicate whether the error
        condition that some element
          of randomization is applied reported is Transient ("T" bit set to 1) or Permanent
        ("T" bit set to 0).  If the time error condition is considered to wait before opening new subflows,
          so that only one be
        Transient by the sender of the RST segment, the recipient of this
        segment <bcp14>MAY</bcp14> try to re-establish a subflow is created between for this connection over the
        failed path.  The time at which a given address pair. If, however,
          hosts signal additional ports receiver may try to use (for example, for leveraging ECMP on-path),
 re‑establish this heuristic subflow
        is not appropriate.</t>

          <t>This section has shown some implementation specific but <bcp14>SHOULD</bcp14> take into account the properties
        of the considerations that an implementer
          should give when developing MPTCP heuristics, but failure as defined by the provided reason code.  If the error condition
        is not intended considered to be
          prescriptive.</t>
        </section>

        <section title="Failure Handling">
          <t>Requirements for MPTCP's handling Permanent, the receiver of unexpected signals have been
          given in <xref target="sec_errors"/>. There are other failure cases,
          however, where a hosts can choose appropriate behavior.</t>

          <t>For example, <xref target="sec_init"/> suggests that a host SHOULD
          fall back the RST segment <bcp14>SHOULD NOT</bcp14> try
        to trying regular TCP SYNs after one or more failures of MPTCP
          SYNs for a connection. A host may keep re‑establish a system-wide cache of such
          information, so that it can back off from using MPTCP, firstly subflow for that
          particular destination host, and eventually on a whole interface, if
          MPTCP connections continue failing. this connection over this path.  The duration "U", "V",
        and "W" flags are not defined by this specification and are reserved for
        future use. An implementation of such a cache would
          be implementation-specific.</t>

          <t>Another failure could occur when the MP_JOIN handshake fails.
          <xref target="sec_errors"/> specifies that an incorrect handshake MUST
          lead this specification <bcp14>MUST</bcp14> set these flags
        to the subflow being closed with 0, and a RST. A host operating receiver <bcp14>MUST</bcp14> ignore them.</t>
        <t pn="section-3.6-5">"Reason" is an active
          intrusion detection system may choose to start blocking MP_JOIN packets
          from 8-bit field that indicates the source host if multiple failed MP_JOIN attempts are seen. From reason code for
        the connection initiator's point termination of view, if an MP_JOIN fails, it SHOULD
          NOT attempt to connect to the same IP address and port during subflow.  The following codes are defined in
        this document:

        </t>
        <ul spacing="normal" bare="false" empty="false" pn="section-3.6-6">
          <li pn="section-3.6-6.1">Unspecified error (code 0x00).  This is the lifetime default error;
 it implies that the
            subflow is no longer available.  The presence of this option shows
            that the connection, unless RST was generated by an MPTCP-aware device.</li>
          <li pn="section-3.6-6.2">MPTCP-specific error (code 0x01).  An error has been detected in the other host refreshes
            processing of MPTCP options.  This is the information with
          another ADD_ADDR option. Note that usual reason code to return
            in the ADD_ADDR option cases where a RST is informational
          only, and does not guarantee the other host will attempt being sent to close a connection.</t>

          <t>In addition, subflow because
            of an implementation may learn, over a number invalid response.</li>
          <li pn="section-3.6-6.3">Lack of connections, resources (code 0x02).  This code indicates that certain interfaces or destination addresses consistently fail and
          may default to the
            sending host does not trying to use MPTCP for these.  Behavior could also
          be learned for particularly badly performing subflows or subflows that
          regularly fail during use, in order to temporarily choose not to use
          these paths.</t>
        </section>
      </section>
    </section>

    <section title="Semantic Issues" anchor="sec_semantics">
      <t>In order to support multipath operation, the semantics of some TCP components have changed. To aid clarity, this section collects these semantic changes as a reference.
        <list style="hanging">
          <t hangText="Sequence number:"> The (in-header) TCP sequence
            number is specific enough resources to support the subflow. To allow
            terminated subflow.</li>
          <li pn="section-3.6-6.4">Administratively prohibited (code 0x03).  This code indicates that
            the receiver to
            reorder application data, an additional data-level
            sequence space requested subflow is used. In this data-level sequence space, the initial SYN and prohibited by the final DATA_FIN occupy 1 octet policies of sequence space. This is to ensure these
            signals are acknowledged at the connection level. There sending
            host.</li>
          <li pn="section-3.6-6.5">Too much outstanding data (code 0x04).  This code indicates that
            there is an explicit
            mapping excessive amount of data sequence space that needs to subflow sequence space,
            which is signaled through TCP options in data
            packets.</t>

          <t hangText="ACK:"> The ACK field in the TCP header
            acknowledges only be transmitted
            over the terminated subflow sequence number, not the
            data-level sequence space. Implementations SHOULD NOT
            attempt to infer while having already been acknowledged
            over one or more other subflows. This may occur if a data-level acknowledgment from path has been
            unavailable for a short period and it is more efficient to reset and
            start again than it is to retransmit the
            subflow ACKs. queued data.</li>
          <li pn="section-3.6-6.6">Unacceptable performance (code 0x05).  This separates subflow- and connection-level processing
            at an end host.</t>

          <t hangText="Duplicate ACK:"> A duplicate ACK code indicates that includes any MPTCP signaling
            (with
            the exception performance of this subflow was too low compared to the DSS option) MUST NOT other
            subflows of this Multipath TCP connection.</li>
          <li pn="section-3.6-6.7">Middlebox interference (code 0x06).  Middlebox interference has
            been detected over this subflow, making MPTCP signaling invalid.  For
            example, this may be treated as sent if the checksum does not validate.</li>
        </ul>
      </section>
      <section anchor="sec_fallback" numbered="true" toc="include" removeInRFC="false" pn="section-3.7">
        <name slugifiedName="name-fallback">Fallback</name>
        <t pn="section-3.7-1">Sometimes, middleboxes will exist on a signal of congestion.
            To limit path that could prevent the chances
        operation of non-MPTCP-aware entities mistakenly interpreting duplicate
            ACKs as MPTCP. MPTCP has been designed to cope with many
        middlebox modifications (see <xref target="sec_middleboxes" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="Section 6"/>), but there are still some cases where a signal of congestion, subflow
        could fail to operate within the MPTCP SHOULD NOT send more than two duplicate ACKs
            containing (non-DSS) requirements. Notably, these cases are the following: the loss of MPTCP signals in options on a row.</t>

          <t hangText="Receive Window:">The receive window in path and the modification of payload data. If such an event occurs, it is necessary to "fall back" to the previous, safe operation. This may be either falling back to regular TCP
            header indicates or removing a problematic subflow.</t>
        <t pn="section-3.7-2">At the amount start of free buffer space for the
            whole data-level an MPTCP connection (as opposed (i.e., the first subflow), it is important to for this
            subflow) ensure that is available at the receiver.  This path is fully MPTCP capable and the
            same semantics necessary MPTCP options can reach each host. The handshake as regular TCP, but described in <xref target="sec_init" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="Section 3.1"/> <bcp14>SHOULD</bcp14> fall back to maintain these
            semantics regular TCP if either of the receive window must be interpreted at SYN messages does not have the
            sender as relative to MPTCP options: this is the sequence number given same, and desired, behavior in the
            DATA_ACK rather than case where a host is not MPTCP capable or the subflow ACK in the TCP header.
            In this way, path does not support the original flow control role MPTCP options. When attempting to join an existing MPTCP connection (<xref target="sec_join" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="Section 3.2"/>), if a path is preserved.
            Note that some middleboxes may change the receive window, not MPTCP capable and so a host SHOULD use the maximum value of those recently
            seen MPTCP options do not get through on the constituent subflows for SYNs, the connection-level
            receive window, and also needs subflow will be closed according to maintain a subflow-level
            window for subflow-level processing.</t> the MP_JOIN logic.</t>
        <t hangText="FIN:"> The FIN flag in pn="section-3.7-3">There is, however, another corner case that should be addressed:
        the TCP header applies
            only to case where MPTCP options get through on the subflow it is sent on, SYN but not to the whole
            connection. For connection-level FIN semantics, on regular
        packets. If the
            DATA_FIN option subflow is used.</t>

          <t hangText="RST:"> The RST flag in the TCP header applies
            only to the first subflow it and thus all data in
        flight is sent on, not to contiguous, this situation can be resolved by using the whole
            connection. The MP_FASTCLOSE following rules:</t>
        <ul spacing="normal" bare="false" empty="false" pn="section-3.7-4">
          <li pn="section-3.7-4.1">A sender <bcp14>MUST</bcp14> include a DSS option provides the fast close
            functionality with Data Sequence Mapping in every segment until one of a RST at the MPTCP connection level.</t>

          <t hangText="Address List:"> Address list management (i.e.,
            knowledge sent segments has been acknowledged with a DSS option containing a Data ACK. Upon reception of the local acknowledgment, the sender has the confirmation that the DSS option passes in both directions and remote hosts' lists of
            available IP addresses) is handled
            on a per-connection basis (as opposed may choose to send fewer DSS options than once per subflow, per
            host, or per pair of communicating hosts).  This permits
            the application of per-connection local policy.  Adding an
            address to one connection (either explicitly through segment.</li>
          <li pn="section-3.7-4.2">If, however, an Add
            Address message, or implicitly through a Join) has no implication ACK is received for data (not just for other connections between the same pair of hosts.</t>

          <t hangText="5-tuple:"> The 5-tuple (protocol, local
            address, local port, remote address, remote port)
            presented by kernel APIs to the application layer in SYN)
        without a
            non-multipath-aware application is DSS option containing a Data ACK, the sender determines that of the first
            subflow, even if path is not MPTCP capable. In the case of this occurring on an additional subflow has since been closed and
            removed from (i.e., one started with MP_JOIN), the connection. This decision, and other
            related API issues, are discussed in more detail in
            <xref target="RFC6897"/>.</t>
        </list>
      </t>
    </section>

    <section title="Security Considerations" anchor="sec_security">
      <t>As identified in <xref target="RFC6181"/>, host <bcp14>MUST</bcp14> close the addition of multipath capability to TCP will bring subflow with it a number of new classes of threat. In order to prevent these, <xref target="RFC6182"/> presents RST, which <bcp14>SHOULD</bcp14> contain an MP_TCPRST option (<xref target="sec_reset" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="Section 3.6"/>) with a set "Middlebox interference" reason code.</li>
          <li pn="section-3.7-4.3">In the case of requirements for a security solution for MPTCP. The fundamental goal is for such an ACK being received on the security first subflow
        (i.e., that started with MP_CAPABLE), before any additional subflows
        are added, the implementation <bcp14>MUST</bcp14> drop out of MPTCP
        mode and fall back to be "no worse" than regular TCP today, and TCP. The sender will send one final Data Sequence Mapping, with the key security requirements are:
       <list style="symbols">
          <t>Provide a mechanism to confirm that Data-Level Length value of 0 indicating an infinite mapping (to inform the parties other end in a subflow handshake are case the same as path drops options in the original connection setup.</t>
          <t>Provide verification that the peer can receive traffic at a new address before using it as part of a connection.</t>
          <t>Provide replay protection, i.e., ensure that a request one direction only), and then revert to add/remove a sending data on the single subflow is 'fresh'.</t>
        </list>

        In order to achieve these goals, without any MPTCP includes options.</li>
          <li pn="section-3.7-4.4">If a hash-based handshake algorithm documented in Sections <xref target="sec_init" format="counter"/> subflow breaks during operation, e.g., if it is rerouted and <xref target="sec_join" format="counter"/>.</t>

      <t>The security of the
        MPTCP connection hangs on the use of keys that options are shared no longer permitted, then once at the start of the first subflow, and are never sent again over the network (unless used in the fast close mechanism, <xref target="sec_fastclose"/>).  To ease demultiplexing while not giving away any cryptographic material, future subflows use a truncated cryptographic hash of this key as is detected (by
        the connection identification "token".  The keys are concatenated and used as keys for creating Hash-based Message Authentication Codes (HMACs) used on subflow setup, subflow-level receive buffer filling up, since there is no mapping
        available in order to verify that the parties in the handshake are DATA_ACK this data), the same subflow
        <bcp14>SHOULD</bcp14> be treated as in the original connection setup.  It also provides verification that the peer broken and closed with a RST,
        since no data can receive traffic at this new address.  Replay attacks would still be possible when only keys are used; therefore, the handshakes use single-use random numbers (nonces) at both ends -- this ensures delivered to the HMAC will never application layer and no
        fallback signal can be reliably sent. This RST <bcp14>SHOULD</bcp14>
        include the same on two handshakes. Guidance on generating random numbers suitable for use as keys is given in <xref target="RFC4086"/> MP_TCPRST option (<xref target="sec_reset" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="Section 3.6"/>) with a "Middlebox interference" reason code.</li>
        </ul>
        <t pn="section-3.7-5">These rules should cover all cases where such a failure could
        happen -- whether it's on the forward or reverse path and whether the server or the client first sends data.</t>
        <t pn="section-3.7-6">So far, this section has discussed in <xref target="sec_init"/>. The nonces are valid for the lifetime loss of MPTCP options,
        either initially or during the TCP connection attempt. HMAC course of the connection. As described
        in <xref target="sec_generalop" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="Section 3.3"/>, each portion of
        data for which there is a mapping is protected by a checksum, if
        checksums have been negotiated. This mechanism is also used to secure the ADD_ADDR option, due detect if
        middleboxes have made any adjustments to the threats identified in <xref target="RFC7430"/>.</t>
      <t>The use of crypto capability bits in payload (added, removed,
        or changed data). A checksum will fail if the initial connection handshake to negotiate data has been changed in
        any way. The use of a particular algorithm allows checksum will also detect whether the deployment length of additional crypto mechanisms in the future.  This negotiation would nevertheless be susceptible to a bid-down attack by an on-path active attacker who could modify data on the crypto capability bits in subflow is
        increased or decreased, and this means the response from Data Sequence Mapping is no
        longer valid. The sender no longer knows what subflow-level sequence
        number the receiver to use a less secure crypto mechanism. The security mechanism presented is genuinely operating at (the middlebox will be
        faking ACKs in this document should therefore protect against all forms of flooding return), and hijacking attacks discussed it cannot signal any further
        mappings. Furthermore, in <xref target="RFC6181"/>.</t>

      <t>The version negotiation specified in <xref target="sec_init"/>, if differing MPTCP versions shared a common negotiation format, would allow an on-path attacker addition to apply a theoretical bid-down attack. Since the v1 and v0 protocols have a different handshake, possibility of payload
        modifications that are valid at the application layer, it is possible that such an attack would require modifications could be triggered across MPTCP segment boundaries, corrupting the client to re-establish data. Therefore, all data from the connection using v0, and start of the segment that failed the checksum onward is not trustworthy.</t>
        <t pn="section-3.7-7">Note that if checksum usage has not been negotiated, this being supported by fallback mechanism cannot be used unless there is some higher-layer or lower‑layer signal to inform the server. Note MPTCP implementation that an on-path attacker would the payload has been tampered with.</t>
        <t pn="section-3.7-8">When multiple subflows are in use, the data in flight on a subflow
        will likely involve data that is not contiguously part of the
        connection-level stream, since segments will be spread across the
        multiple subflows. Due to the problems identified above, it is not
        possible to determine what adjustments have access been done to the raw data, negating data (notably,
        any other TCP-level security mechanisms.
      Also a change from RFC6824 has removed changes to the subflow identifier from the MP_PRIO option (<xref target="sec_policy"/>), sequence numbering). Therefore, it is not
        possible to remove recover the theoretical attack where a subflow, and the affected subflow could must be placed in "backup" mode by
        immediately closed with a RST that includes an attacker.</t>

      <t>During normal operation, regular TCP protection mechanisms (such as ensuring MP_FAIL option (<xref target="tcpm_fallback" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="Figure 16"/>), which defines the data sequence numbers are in-window) will provide number at the same level start of protection against attacks on individual TCP subflows as exists for regular TCP today. Implementations will introduce additional buffers compared to regular TCP, to reassemble data at the connection level. The application of window sizing will minimize segment (defined by the risk of denial-of-service attacks consuming resources.</t>

      <t>As discussed in <xref target="sec_add_address"/>, a host may advertise its private addresses, but these might point to different hosts in Data Sequence Mapping) that had the receiver's network. The MP_JOIN handshake (<xref target="sec_join"/>) will ensure checksum failure. Note that this does not succeed in setting up a subflow to the incorrect host. However, it could still create unwanted TCP handshake traffic. This feature MP_FAIL option requires the use of MPTCP could be a target for denial-of-service exploits, with malicious participants in MPTCP connections encouraging the recipient to target other hosts full 64-bit sequence number, even if 32-bit sequence numbers are normally in use in the network. Therefore, implementations should consider heuristics (<xref target="heuristics"/>) at both DSS signals on the sender and path.</t>
        <figure anchor="tcpm_fallback" align="left" suppress-title="false" pn="figure-16">
          <name slugifiedName="name-fallback-mp_fail-option">Fallback (MP_FAIL) Option</name>
          <artwork align="left" name="" type="" alt="" pn="section-3.7-9.1">
                       1                   2                   3
   0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1
  +---------------+---------------+-------+----------------------+
  |     Kind      |   Length=12   |Subtype|      (reserved)      |
  +---------------+---------------+-------+----------------------+
  |                                                              |
  |                 Data Sequence Number (8 octets)              |
  |                                                              |
  +--------------------------------------------------------------+ </artwork>
        </figure>
        <t pn="section-3.7-10">The receiver to reduce the impact of this.</t>

      <t>To further protect against malicious ADD_ADDR messages sent by an off-path attacker, the ADD_ADDR includes an HMAC using the keys negotiated during this option <bcp14>MUST</bcp14> discard all data following the handshake. This effectively prevents an attacker from diverting an MPTCP connection through an off-path ADD_ADDR injection into the stream.</t>

      <t>A small security risk could theoretically exist data sequence number specified.
        Failed data <bcp14>MUST NOT</bcp14> be DATA_ACKed and so will be retransmitted on other subflows (<xref target="sec_retransmit" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="Section 3.3.6"/>). </t>
        <t pn="section-3.7-11">A special case is when there is a single subflow and it fails with key reuse, but in order to accomplish a replay attack, both checksum error. If it is known that all unacknowledged data in
 flight is contiguous (which will usually be the sender and receiver keys, and case with a single
 subflow), an infinite mapping can be applied to the sender and receiver random numbers, in subflow without
 the MP_JOIN handshake (<xref target="sec_join"/>) would have need to match.</t>

      <t>Whilst close it first, essentially turning off all further
 MPTCP signaling.

 In this specification defines case, if a "medium" security solution, meeting receiver identifies a checksum failure
when there is only one path, it will send back an MP_FAIL option on the criteria specified at subflow-level ACK, referring to the data-level sequence number of the start of this section and the threat analysis (<xref target="RFC6181"/>), since attacks only ever get worse, it
segment on which the checksum error was detected. The sender will receive
this information and, if all unacknowledged data in flight is likely that a future version of MPTCP would need to contiguous, will signal an infinite mapping.
This infinite mapping will be able a DSS option (<xref target="sec_generalop" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="Section 3.3"/>)
on the first new packet, containing a Data Sequence Mapping that acts retroactively, referring to support stronger security. There are several ways the security start of MPTCP could potentially be improved; some the subflow sequence
number of these would be compatible with MPTCP as defined in this document, whilst others may not be. For now, the best approach is most recent segment that was known to get experience with the current approach, establish what might work, and check be delivered intact (i.e., was successfully DATA_ACKed). From that point onward, data can be altered
by a middlebox without affecting MPTCP, as the threat analysis data stream is still accurate.</t>

<t>Possible ways of improving MPTCP security could include:<list style="symbols">
<t>defining equivalent to a new MPCTP cryptographic algorithm, as negotiated regular, legacy TCP session.
While in MP_CAPABLE. A sub-case could theory paths may only be to include an additional deployment assumption, such as stateful servers, damaged in order to allow a more powerful algorithm to be used.</t>
<t>defining how to secure data transfer with MPTCP, whilst not changing one direction -- and the signaling part MP_FAIL
signal affects only one direction of the protocol.</t>
<t>defining security that requires more option space, perhaps in conjunction with a "long options" proposal traffic --
for extending the TCP options space (such as those surveyed in <xref target="TCPLO"/>), or perhaps building on simplicity of implementation, the current approach with a second stage receiver of MPTCP-option-based security.</t>
<t>revisiting an MP_FAIL <bcp14>MUST</bcp14> also respond with an MP_FAIL in the working group's decision reverse direction and entirely revert to exclusively use a regular TCP options for MPTCP signaling, and instead look at also making use of session.</t>
        <t pn="section-3.7-12">In the TCP payloads.</t>
</list></t>

<t>MPTCP rare case that the data is not contiguous (which could happen when there is only one subflow but it is retransmitting data from a subflow
that has recently been designed uncleanly closed), the receiver <bcp14>MUST</bcp14> close the subflow with several methods available a RST with MP_FAIL. The receiver <bcp14>MUST</bcp14> discard all data that follows the
data sequence number specified. The sender <bcp14>MAY</bcp14> attempt to indicate
create a new security mechanism, including:
<list style="symbols">
<t>available flags in MP_CAPABLE (<xref target="tcpm_capable"/>);</t>
<t>available subtypes in subflow belonging to the MPTCP option (<xref target="fig_option"/>);</t>
<t>the version field same connection and, if it chooses to do
so, <bcp14>SHOULD</bcp14> immediately place
the single subflow in MP_CAPABLE (<xref target="tcpm_capable"/>);</t>
</list></t>

    </section>

    <section title="Interactions with Middleboxes" anchor="sec_middleboxes">

        <t>Multipath TCP single-path mode by setting an infinite Data Sequence Mapping. This mapping will begin from the data-level sequence number
that was designed to be deployable declared in the present world. Its design takes into account "reasonable"
existing middlebox behavior. In this section, we outline MP_FAIL.</t>
        <t pn="section-3.7-13">After a few representative middlebox-related failure scenarios and
show how Multipath TCP handles them. Next, we list sender signals an infinite mapping, it <bcp14>MUST</bcp14> only use subflow ACKs to clear its send buffer.
This is because Data ACKs may become misaligned with the design decisions multipath subflow ACKs when middleboxes insert or delete data.
The receiver <bcp14>SHOULD</bcp14> stop generating Data ACKs after it receives
an infinite mapping.</t>
        <t pn="section-3.7-14">When a connection has made fallen back with an infinite mapping, only one subflow can send data; otherwise, the receiver would not know how to accommodate reorder the different
middleboxes.</t>

        <t>A primary concern data. In practice, this means that all MPTCP subflows will have to be terminated except one. Once MPTCP falls back to regular TCP, it <bcp14>MUST NOT</bcp14> revert to MPTCP later in the connection.</t>
        <t pn="section-3.7-15">It should be emphasized that MPTCP is our not attempting to prevent the use of a new TCP option. Middleboxes should forward packets
with unknown options unchanged, yet there are some middleboxes that don't. These we expect will either strip options want to adjust the payload. An MPTCP-aware middlebox could provide such functionality by also rewriting checksums.</t>
      </section>
      <section anchor="sec_errors" numbered="true" toc="include" removeInRFC="false" pn="section-3.8">
        <name slugifiedName="name-error-handling">Error Handling</name>
        <t pn="section-3.8-1">In addition to the fallback mechanism described above, the standard classes of TCP errors may need to be handled in an MPTCP‑specific way. Note that changing semantics -- such as the relevance of a RST -- are covered in <xref target="sec_semantics" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="Section 4"/>. Where possible, we do not want to deviate from regular TCP behavior.</t>
        <t pn="section-3.8-2">The following list covers possible errors and the appropriate MPTCP behavior:
        </t>
        <ul spacing="normal" bare="false" empty="false" pn="section-3.8-3">
          <li pn="section-3.8-3.1">Unknown token in MP_JOIN (or HMAC failure in MP_JOIN ACK, or missing MP_JOIN in SYN/ACK response): send RST (analogous to TCP's behavior on an unknown port)</li>
          <li pn="section-3.8-3.2">DSN out of window (during normal operation): drop the data; do not send Data ACKs</li>
          <li pn="section-3.8-3.3">Remove request for unknown Address ID: silently ignore</li>
        </ul>
      </section>
      <section anchor="heuristics" numbered="true" toc="include" removeInRFC="false" pn="section-3.9">
        <name slugifiedName="name-heuristics">Heuristics</name>
        <t pn="section-3.9-1">There are a number of heuristics that are needed for
        performance or deployment but that are not required for
        protocol correctness.  In this section, we detail such
        heuristics. Note that discussions of buffering and certain
        sender and receiver window behaviors are presented in Sections
        <xref target="sec_rwin" format="counter" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="3.3.4"/> and <xref target="sec_sender" format="counter" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="3.3.5"/>,
        and retransmission is discussed in <xref target="sec_retransmit" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="Section 3.3.6"/>.</t>
        <section numbered="true" toc="include" removeInRFC="false" pn="section-3.9.1">
          <name slugifiedName="name-port-usage">Port Usage</name>
          <t pn="section-3.9.1-1">Under typical operation, an MPTCP implementation <bcp14>SHOULD</bcp14> use
          the same ports as the ports that are already in use. In other words, the
          destination port of a SYN containing an MP_JOIN option <bcp14>SHOULD</bcp14>
          be the same as the remote port of the first subflow in the
          connection.  The local port for such SYNs <bcp14>SHOULD</bcp14> also be the
          same as the port for the first subflow (and as such, an
          implementation <bcp14>SHOULD</bcp14> reserve ephemeral ports across all
          local IP addresses), although there may be cases where this
          is infeasible.  This strategy is intended to maximize the
          probability of the SYN being permitted by a firewall or NAT
          at the recipient and to avoid confusing any network-monitoring software.</t>
          <t pn="section-3.9.1-2">There may also be cases, however, where a host wishes to
          signal that a specific port should be used; this facility
          is provided in the ADD_ADDR option as documented in
          <xref target="sec_add_address" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="Section 3.4.1"/>.  It is therefore feasible
          to allow multiple subflows between the same two addresses
          but using different port pairs, and
          such a facility could be used to allow load balancing within
          the network based on 5-tuples (e.g., some ECMP implementations <xref target="RFC2992" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="RFC2992"/>).</t>
        </section>
        <section numbered="true" toc="include" removeInRFC="false" pn="section-3.9.2">
          <name slugifiedName="name-delayed-subflow-start-and-s">Delayed Subflow Start and Subflow Symmetry</name>
          <t pn="section-3.9.2-1">Many TCP connections are short-lived and consist only of a few
          segments, and so the overhead
          of using MPTCP outweighs any benefits. A heuristic is required,
          therefore, to decide when to start using additional subflows in
          an MPTCP connection. Experimental deployments have shown that
          MPTCP can be applied in a range of scenarios, so an implementation
          will likely need to take into account such factors as the type of
          traffic being sent and the duration of the session; this information
          <bcp14>MAY</bcp14> be signaled by the application layer.</t>
          <t pn="section-3.9.2-2">However, for standard TCP traffic, a suggested general-purpose
          heuristic that an implementation <bcp14>MAY</bcp14> choose to employ is as follows.</t>
          <t pn="section-3.9.2-3">If a host has data buffered for its peer (which implies that the
          application has received a request for data), the host opens one
          subflow for each initial window's worth of data that is buffered.</t>
          <t pn="section-3.9.2-4">Consideration should also be given to limiting the rate of adding
          new subflows, as well as limiting the total number of subflows open
          for a particular connection.  A host may choose to vary these values
          based on its load or knowledge of traffic and path characteristics.</t>
          <t pn="section-3.9.2-5">Note that this heuristic alone is probably insufficient. Traffic
          for many common applications, such as downloads, is highly asymmetric, and
          the host that is multihomed may well be the client that will never fill
          its buffers and thus never use MPTCP according to this heuristic. Advanced APIs that allow an
          application to signal its traffic requirements would aid in these decisions.</t>
          <t pn="section-3.9.2-6">An additional time-based heuristic could be applied, opening additional
          subflows after a given period of time has passed. This would alleviate the
          above issue and also provide resilience for low‑bandwidth but long-lived
          applications.</t>
          <t pn="section-3.9.2-7">Another issue is that both communicating hosts may simultaneously try to
          set up a subflow between the same pair of addresses. This leads to an
          inefficient use of resources.</t>
          <t pn="section-3.9.2-8">If the same ports are used on all subflows, as recommended above,
          then standard TCP simultaneous-open logic should take care of this situation
          and only one subflow will be established between the address pairs. However,
          this relies on the same ports being used at both end hosts. If a host does
          not support TCP simultaneous open, it is <bcp14>RECOMMENDED</bcp14> that some element
          of randomization be applied to the time to wait before opening new subflows,
          so that only one subflow is created between a given address pair. If, however,
          hosts signal additional ports to use (for example, for leveraging ECMP on-path),
          this heuristic is not appropriate.</t>
          <t pn="section-3.9.2-9">This section has shown some of the factors that an implementer
          should consider when developing MPTCP heuristics, but it is not intended to be
          prescriptive.</t>
        </section>
        <section numbered="true" toc="include" removeInRFC="false" pn="section-3.9.3">
          <name slugifiedName="name-failure-handling">Failure Handling</name>
          <t pn="section-3.9.3-1">Requirements for MPTCP's handling of unexpected signals are
          given in <xref target="sec_errors" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="Section 3.8"/>. There are other failure cases,
          however, where hosts can choose appropriate behavior.</t>
          <t pn="section-3.9.3-2">For example, <xref target="sec_init" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="Section 3.1"/> suggests that a host <bcp14>SHOULD</bcp14>
          fall back to trying regular TCP SYNs after one or more failures of MPTCP
          SYNs for a connection. A host may keep a system-wide cache of such
          information, so that it can back off from using MPTCP, firstly for that
          particular destination host and, eventually, on a whole interface, if
          MPTCP connections continue to fail. The duration of such a cache would
          be implementation specific.</t>
          <t pn="section-3.9.3-3">Another failure could occur when the MP_JOIN handshake fails.
          <xref target="sec_errors" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="Section 3.8"/> specifies that an incorrect handshake <bcp14>MUST</bcp14>
          lead to the subflow being closed with a RST. A host operating an active
          intrusion-detection system may choose to start blocking MP_JOIN packets
          from the source host if multiple failed MP_JOIN attempts are seen. From
          the connection initiator's point of view, if an MP_JOIN fails, it
          <bcp14>SHOULD NOT</bcp14>
          attempt to connect to the same IP address and port during the lifetime
          of the connection, unless the other host refreshes the information with
          another ADD_ADDR option. Note that the ADD_ADDR option is informational
          only and does not guarantee that the other host will attempt a connection.</t>
          <t pn="section-3.9.3-4">In addition, an implementation may learn, over a number of connections,
          that certain interfaces or destination addresses consistently fail and
          may default to not trying to use MPTCP for such interfaces or
          addresses.  The behavior of subflows that perform particularly badly
          or subflows that regularly fail during use could also
          be learned, so that an implementation can temporarily choose not to use
          these paths.</t>
        </section>
      </section>
    </section>
    <section anchor="sec_semantics" numbered="true" toc="include" removeInRFC="false" pn="section-4">
      <name slugifiedName="name-semantic-issues">Semantic Issues</name>
      <t pn="section-4-1">In order to support multipath operation, the semantics of some TCP
      components have changed. To help clarify, this section lists these
      semantic changes as a point of reference.
      </t>
      <dl newline="false" spacing="normal" indent="3" pn="section-4-2">
        <dt pn="section-4-2.1">Sequence number:</dt>
        <dd pn="section-4-2.2"> The (in-header) TCP sequence
            number is specific to the subflow. To allow the receiver to
            reorder application data, an additional data-level
            sequence space is used. In this data‑level sequence space, the initial SYN and
            the final DATA_FIN occupy 1 octet of sequence space. This is done to
            ensure that these
            signals are acknowledged at the connection level. There is an explicit
            mapping of data sequence space to subflow sequence space,
            which is signaled through TCP options in data
            packets.</dd>
        <dt pn="section-4-2.3">ACK:</dt>
        <dd pn="section-4-2.4"> The ACK field in the TCP header
            acknowledges only the subflow sequence number -- not the
            data-level sequence space. Implementations <bcp14>SHOULD NOT</bcp14>
            attempt to infer a data-level acknowledgment from the
            subflow ACKs.
            This separates subflow-level and connection-level processing
            at an end host.</dd>
        <dt pn="section-4-2.5">Duplicate ACK:</dt>
        <dd pn="section-4-2.6"> A duplicate ACK that includes any MPTCP signaling
            (with the exception of the DSS option) <bcp14>MUST NOT</bcp14> be treated as a signal of congestion.
            To limit the chances of non-MPTCP-aware entities mistakenly interpreting duplicate
            ACKs as a signal of congestion, MPTCP <bcp14>SHOULD NOT</bcp14> send more than two duplicate ACKs
            containing (non-DSS) MPTCP signals in a row.</dd>
        <dt pn="section-4-2.7">Receive Window:</dt>
        <dd pn="section-4-2.8">The receive window in the TCP
            header indicates the amount of free buffer space for the
            whole data-level connection (as opposed to the amount of space for this
            subflow) that is available at the receiver.  The
            semantics are the same as for regular TCP, but to maintain these
            semantics the receive window must be interpreted at the
            sender as relative to the sequence number given in the
            DATA_ACK rather than the subflow ACK in the TCP header.
            In this way, the original role of flow control is preserved.
            Note that some middleboxes may change the receive window,
            and so a host <bcp14>SHOULD</bcp14> use the maximum value of those recently
            seen on the constituent subflows for the connection-level
            receive window and also needs to maintain a subflow-level
            window for subflow-level processing.</dd>
        <dt pn="section-4-2.9">FIN:</dt>
        <dd pn="section-4-2.10"> The FIN flag in the TCP header applies
            only to the subflow it is sent on -- not to the whole
            connection. For connection-level FIN semantics, the
            DATA_FIN option is used.</dd>
        <dt pn="section-4-2.11">RST:</dt>
        <dd pn="section-4-2.12"> The RST flag in the TCP header applies
            only to the subflow it is sent on -- not to the whole
            connection. The MP_FASTCLOSE option provides the Fast Close
            functionality of a RST at the MPTCP connection level.</dd>
        <dt pn="section-4-2.13">Address List:</dt>
        <dd pn="section-4-2.14"> Address list management (i.e.,
            knowledge of the local and remote hosts' lists of
            available IP addresses) is handled
            on a per-connection basis (as opposed to per subflow, per
            host, or per pair of communicating hosts).  This permits
            the application of per-connection local policy.  Adding an
            address to one connection (either explicitly through an
            ADD_ADDR message or implicitly through an MP_JOIN) has no implications
            for other connections between the same pair of hosts.</dd>
        <dt pn="section-4-2.15">5-tuple:</dt>
        <dd pn="section-4-2.16"> The 5-tuple (protocol, local
            address, local port, remote address, remote port)
            presented by kernel APIs to the application layer in a
            non-multipath-aware application is that of the first
            subflow, even if the subflow has since been closed and
            removed from the connection. This decision, and other
            related API issues, are discussed in more detail in
            <xref target="RFC6897" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="RFC6897"/>.</dd>
      </dl>
    </section>
    <section anchor="sec_security" numbered="true" toc="include" removeInRFC="false" pn="section-5">
      <name slugifiedName="name-security-considerations">Security Considerations</name>
      <t pn="section-5-1">As identified in <xref target="RFC6181" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="RFC6181"/>, the
      addition of multipath capability to TCP will bring with it a number of
      new classes of threats. In order to prevent these threats, <xref target="RFC6182" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="RFC6182"/> presents a set of requirements for a security
      solution for MPTCP. The fundamental goal is for the security of MPTCP to
      be "no worse" than regular TCP today. The key security requirements
      are as follows:
      </t>
      <ul spacing="normal" bare="false" empty="false" pn="section-5-2">
        <li pn="section-5-2.1">Provide a mechanism to confirm that the parties in a subflow
        handshake are the same as the parties in the original connection setup.</li>
        <li pn="section-5-2.2">Provide verification that the peer can receive traffic at a new address before using it as part of a connection.</li>
        <li pn="section-5-2.3">Provide replay protection, i.e., ensure that a request to add⁠/remove a subflow is "fresh".</li>
      </ul>
      <t pn="section-5-3">
        In order to achieve these goals, MPTCP includes a hash-based handshake
      algorithm, as documented in Sections <xref target="sec_init" format="counter" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="3.1"/> and <xref target="sec_join" format="counter" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="3.2"/>.</t>
      <t pn="section-5-4">The security of the MPTCP connection hangs on the use of keys that
      are shared once at the start of the first subflow and are never sent
      again over the network (unless used in the Fast Close mechanism (<xref target="sec_fastclose" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="Section 3.5"/>)).  To ease demultiplexing
      while not giving away any cryptographic material, future subflows use a
      truncated cryptographic hash of this key as the connection
      identification "token".  The keys are concatenated and used as keys for
      creating Hash-based Message Authentication Codes (HMACs) used on subflow
      setup, in order to verify that the parties in the handshake are the same
      as the parties in the original connection setup.  It also provides verification that
      the peer can receive traffic at this new address.  Replay attacks would
      still be possible when only keys are used; therefore, the handshakes use
      single-use random numbers (nonces) at both ends -- this ensures that the HMAC will never be the same on two handshakes. Guidance on generating random numbers suitable for use as keys is given in <xref target="RFC4086" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="RFC4086"/> and discussed in <xref target="sec_init" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="Section 3.1"/>. The nonces are valid for the lifetime of the TCP connection attempt. HMAC is also used to secure the ADD_ADDR option, due to the threats identified in <xref target="RFC7430" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="RFC7430"/>.</t>
      <t pn="section-5-5">The use of crypto capability bits in the initial connection handshake
      to negotiate the use of a particular algorithm allows the deployment of additional crypto mechanisms in the future.  This negotiation would nevertheless be susceptible to a bid-down attack by an on-path active attacker who could modify the crypto capability bits in the response from the receiver to use a less secure crypto mechanism. The security mechanism presented in this document should therefore protect against all forms of flooding and hijacking attacks discussed in <xref target="RFC6181" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="RFC6181"/>.</t>
      <t pn="section-5-6">The version negotiation specified in <xref target="sec_init" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="Section 3.1"/>, if differing MPTCP versions shared a common
      negotiation format, would allow an on-path attacker to apply a
      theoretical bid-down attack. Since the v1 and v0 protocols have a
      different handshake, such an attack would require that the client
      re-establish the connection using v0 and that the server support v0.
 Note that an on-path attacker would have access to the raw data, negating any other TCP-level security mechanisms. As also noted in <xref target="app_changelog" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="Appendix E"/>, this document specifies the removal of the AddrID field <xref target="RFC6824" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="RFC6824"/> in the MP_PRIO option (<xref target="sec_policy" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="Section 3.3.8"/>).
 This change eliminates the possibility of a theoretical attack where
 a subflow could be placed in "backup" mode by an attacker.</t>
      <t pn="section-5-7">During normal operation, regular TCP protection mechanisms (such as
      ensuring that sequence numbers are in-window) will provide the same
      level of protection against attacks on individual TCP subflows as the
      level of protection that exists for regular TCP today. Implementations will introduce additional buffers compared to regular TCP, to reassemble data at the connection level. The application of window sizing will minimize the risk of denial-of-service attacks consuming resources.</t>
      <t pn="section-5-8">As discussed in <xref target="sec_add_address" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="Section 3.4.1"/>, a host may advertise its private addresses, but these might point to different hosts in the receiver's network. The MP_JOIN handshake (<xref target="sec_join" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="Section 3.2"/>) will ensure that this does not succeed in setting up a subflow to the incorrect host. However, it could still create unwanted TCP handshake traffic. This feature of MPTCP could be a target for denial-of-service exploits, with malicious participants in MPTCP connections encouraging the recipient to target other hosts in the network. Therefore, implementations should consider heuristics (<xref target="heuristics" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="Section 3.9"/>) at both the sender and receiver to reduce the impact of this.</t>
      <t pn="section-5-9">To further protect against malicious ADD_ADDR messages sent by an off-path attacker, the ADD_ADDR includes an HMAC using the keys negotiated during the handshake. This effectively prevents an attacker from diverting an MPTCP connection through an off-path ADD_ADDR injection into the stream.</t>
      <t pn="section-5-10">A small security risk could theoretically exist with key reuse, but in order to accomplish a replay attack, both the sender and receiver keys, and the sender and receiver random numbers, in the MP_JOIN handshake (<xref target="sec_join" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="Section 3.2"/>) would have to match.</t>
      <t pn="section-5-11">While this specification defines a "medium" security solution,
      meeting the criteria specified at the start of this section and in the
      threat analysis document <xref target="RFC6181" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="RFC6181"/>, since attacks
      only ever get worse, it is likely that a future version of MPTCP would
      need to be able to support stronger security.
 There are several ways the security of MPTCP could potentially be improved; some of these would be compatible with MPTCP as defined in this document, while others may not be. For now, the best approach is to gain experience with the current approach, establish what might work, and check that the threat analysis is still accurate.</t>
      <t pn="section-5-12">Possible ways of improving MPTCP security could include:</t>
      <ul spacing="normal" bare="false" empty="false" pn="section-5-13">
        <li pn="section-5-13.1">defining a new MPTCP cryptographic algorithm, as negotiated in
        MP_CAPABLE. If an implementation was being deployed in a controlled
        environment where additional assumptions could be made, such as the
        ability for the servers to store state during the TCP handshake, then
        it may be possible to use a stronger cryptographic algorithm than
        would otherwise be possible.</li>
        <li pn="section-5-13.2">defining how to secure data transfer with MPTCP, while not changing the signaling part of the protocol.</li>
        <li pn="section-5-13.3">defining security that requires more option space, perhaps in
        conjunction with a "long options" proposal for extending the TCP
        option space (such as those surveyed in <xref target="I-D.ananth-tcpm-tcpoptext" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="TCPLO"/>), or perhaps
        building on the current approach with a second stage of
security based on MPTCP options.</li>
        <li pn="section-5-13.4">revisiting the working group's decision to exclusively use TCP
    options for MPTCP signaling and instead looking at the
    possibility of using TCP payloads as well.</li>
      </ul>
      <t pn="section-5-14">MPTCP has been designed with several methods available to indicate a new security mechanism, including:
</t>
      <ul spacing="normal" bare="false" empty="false" pn="section-5-15">
        <li pn="section-5-15.1">available flags in MP_CAPABLE (<xref target="tcpm_capable" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="Figure 4"/>).</li>
        <li pn="section-5-15.2">available subtypes in the MPTCP option (<xref target="fig_option" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="Figure 3"/>).</li>
        <li pn="section-5-15.3">the Version field in MP_CAPABLE (<xref target="tcpm_capable" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="Figure 4"/>).</li>
      </ul>
    </section>
    <section anchor="sec_middleboxes" numbered="true" toc="include" removeInRFC="false" pn="section-6">
      <name slugifiedName="name-interactions-with-middlebox">Interactions with Middleboxes</name>
      <t pn="section-6-1">Multipath TCP was designed to be deployable in the present world. Its design takes into account "reasonable"
existing middlebox behavior. In this section, we outline a few representative middlebox-related failure scenarios and
show how Multipath TCP handles them. Next, we list the design decisions
Multipath TCP has made to accommodate the different
middleboxes.</t>
      <t pn="section-6-2">A primary concern is our use of a new TCP option. Middleboxes should forward packets
with unknown options unchanged, yet there are some that don't. We expect these
middleboxes to strip options and pass the data,
drop packets with new options, copy the same option into multiple segments (e.g., when doing segmentation), or drop
options during segment coalescing.</t>
      <t pn="section-6-3">MPTCP uses a single new TCP option called "Kind", and all message types are defined by "subtype" values (see <xref target="IANA" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="Section 7"/>). This should reduce the chances of only some types of MPTCP options being passed; instead, the key differing characteristics are different paths and the presence of the SYN flag.</t>
      <t pn="section-6-4">MPTCP SYN packets on the first subflow of a connection contain the MP_CAPABLE option (<xref target="sec_init" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="Section 3.1"/>). If this is dropped, MPTCP <bcp14>SHOULD</bcp14> fall back to regular TCP. If packets with the MP_JOIN option (<xref target="sec_join" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="Section 3.2"/>) are dropped, the paths will simply not be used.</t>
      <t pn="section-6-5">If a middlebox strips options but otherwise passes the packets
      unchanged, MPTCP will behave safely. If an MP_CAPABLE option is dropped
      on either the outgoing path or the return path, the initiating host can
      fall back to regular TCP, as illustrated in <xref target="fig_syn" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="Figure 17"/> and discussed in <xref target="sec_init" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="Section 3.1"/>.</t>
      <figure anchor="fig_syn" align="left" suppress-title="false" pn="figure-17">
        <name slugifiedName="name-connection-setup-with-middl">Connection Setup with Middleboxes That Strip Options from Packets</name>
        <artwork align="left" name="" type="" alt="" pn="section-6-6.1">
             Host A                              Host B
               |              Middlebox M            |
               |                   |                 |
               | SYN (MP_CAPABLE)  |        SYN      |
               |-------------------|----------------&gt;|
               |                SYN/ACK              |
               |&lt;------------------------------------|
           a) MP_CAPABLE option stripped on outgoing path

             Host A                                Host B
               |           SYN (MP_CAPABLE)            |
               |--------------------------------------&gt;|
               |             Middlebox M               |
               |                  |                    |
               |    SYN/ACK       |SYN/ACK (MP_CAPABLE)|
               |&lt;-----------------|--------------------|
           b) MP_CAPABLE option stripped on return path </artwork>
      </figure>
      <t pn="section-6-7">Subflow SYNs contain the MP_JOIN option. If this option is stripped on the outgoing path,
the SYN will appear to be a regular SYN to Host B.  Depending on whether there is a listening socket on
the target port, Host B will reply with either a SYN/ACK or a RST (subflow connection fails). When Host A
receives the SYN/ACK, it sends a RST because the SYN/ACK does not contain the MP_JOIN option and its token.
Either way, the subflow setup fails but otherwise does not affect the MPTCP connection as a whole.</t>
      <t pn="section-6-8">We now examine data flow with MPTCP, assuming that the flow is
      correctly set up, which implies that the options in the SYN
packets were allowed through by the relevant middleboxes. If options are allowed through and there is no resegmentation or
coalescing to TCP segments, Multipath TCP flows can proceed without problems.</t>
      <t pn="section-6-9">The case when options get stripped on data packets is discussed
      in <xref target="sec_fallback" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="Section 3.7"/>.
        If only some MPTCP options are stripped, behavior is not deterministic. If some Data Sequence Mappings are lost, the connection can continue so long as mappings exist for the subflow-level data (e.g., if multiple maps have been sent that reinforce each other). If some subflow-level space is left unmapped, however, the subflow is treated as broken and is closed, using the process described in <xref target="sec_fallback" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="Section 3.7"/>. MPTCP should survive with a loss of some Data ACKs, but performance will degrade as the fraction of stripped options increases.
We do not expect such cases to appear in practice, though: most
middleboxes will either strip all options or let them all through.</t>
      <t pn="section-6-10">We end this section with a list of middlebox classes, their behavior, and the elements in the MPTCP design
that allow operation through such middleboxes. Issues surrounding dropping packets with options
or stripping options were discussed above and are not included here:

      </t>
      <ul spacing="normal" bare="false" empty="false" pn="section-6-11">
        <li pn="section-6-11.1">NATs (Network Address (and port) Translators) <xref target="RFC3022" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="RFC3022"/> change the source address (and
        often the source port) of packets. This means that a host will not know its
    public-facing address for signaling in MPTCP. Therefore, MPTCP permits implicit address addition via the MP_JOIN option,
    and the handshake mechanism ensures that connection attempts to private addresses <xref target="RFC1918" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="RFC1918"/>, since they are authenticated, will only set up subflows to the correct hosts.
    Explicit address removal is undertaken by an Address ID to allow no knowledge of the source address.</li>
        <li pn="section-6-11.2">Performance Enhancing Proxies (PEPs) <xref target="RFC3135" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="RFC3135"/> might proactively ACK data to increase performance. MPTCP, however, relies on accurate congestion control signals from the end host, and non‑MPTCP-aware PEPs will not be able to provide such signals. MPTCP will, therefore, fall back to single-path TCP or close the problematic subflow (see <xref target="sec_fallback" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="Section 3.7"/>).</li>
        <li pn="section-6-11.3">Traffic normalizers <xref target="norm" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="norm"/> may not
        allow holes in sequence numbers, and they may cache packets and retransmit the same data.
MPTCP looks like standard TCP on the wire and will not retransmit different data on the same subflow sequence number. In the event of a retransmission, the same data will be retransmitted on the original TCP subflow even if it is additionally retransmitted at the connection level on a different subflow.</li>
        <li pn="section-6-11.4">Firewalls <xref target="RFC2979" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="RFC2979"/> might perform
        Initial Sequence Number (ISN) randomization on TCP connections. MPTCP uses relative
sequence numbers in Data Sequence Mappings to cope with this. Like NATs, firewalls will not permit many incoming connections, so
MPTCP supports address signaling (ADD_ADDR) so that a multiaddressed host can invite its peer behind the firewall/NAT to connect
out to its additional interface.</li>
        <li pn="section-6-11.5">Intrusion Detection Systems / Intrusion Prevention Systems (IDSs⁠/IPSs) observe packet streams for patterns and content that could threaten a network. MPTCP may require the
instrumentation of additional paths, and an MPTCP-aware IDS or IPS would need to read MPTCP tokens to correlate data from multiple subflows to maintain comparable visibility into all of the traffic between devices. Without such changes, an IDS would get an incomplete view of the traffic, increasing the risk of missing traffic of interest (false negatives) and increasing the chances of erroneously identifying a subflow as a risk due to only seeing partial data (false positives).</li>
        <li pn="section-6-11.6">Application-level middleboxes such as content-aware firewalls may
        alter the payload within a subflow -- for example, rewriting URIs in
        HTTP traffic. MPTCP will detect such changes using the checksum
and close the affected subflow(s), if there are other subflows that can be used. If all subflows are affected, MPTCP
will fall back to TCP, allowing such middleboxes to change the payload. MPTCP-aware middleboxes should be able to adjust the payload and MPTCP metadata in order not to break the connection.</li>
      </ul>
      <t pn="section-6-12">

        In addition, all classes of middleboxes may affect TCP traffic in the following ways:
      </t>
      <ul spacing="normal" bare="false" empty="false" pn="section-6-13">
        <li pn="section-6-13.1">TCP options may be removed, or packets with unknown options dropped, by many classes of middleboxes. It is intended
that the initial SYN exchange, with a TCP option, will be sufficient to identify the path's capabilities. If such a packet does
not get through, MPTCP will end up falling back to regular TCP.</li>
        <li pn="section-6-13.2">Segmentation/coalescing (e.g., TCP segmentation offloading) might copy options between packets and might
strip some options. MPTCP's Data Sequence Mapping includes the relative subflow sequence number instead of using the sequence
number in the segment. In this way, the mapping is independent of the packets that carry it.</li>
        <li pn="section-6-13.3">The receive window may be shrunk by some middleboxes at the
        subflow level. MPTCP will use the maximum window at the data level but will also obey
subflow-specific windows.</li>
      </ul>
    </section>
    <section anchor="IANA" numbered="true" toc="include" removeInRFC="false" pn="section-7">
      <name slugifiedName="name-iana-considerations">IANA Considerations</name>
      <t pn="section-7-1">This document obsoletes <xref target="RFC6824" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="RFC6824"/>. As such, IANA has updated
      several registries to point to this document. In addition, this document
      creates one new registry.  These topics are described in the following subsections.</t>
      <section anchor="IANA-TCP-Option-Kind" numbered="true" toc="include" removeInRFC="false" pn="section-7.1">
        <name slugifiedName="name-tcp-option-kind-numbers">TCP Option Kind Numbers</name>
        <t pn="section-7.1-1">IANA has
      updated the "TCP Option Kind Numbers" registry to point to this document
      for Multipath TCP, as shown in <xref target="table_tcpo" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="Table 1"/>:</t>
        <table anchor="table_tcpo" align="center" pn="table-1">
          <name slugifiedName="name-tcp-option-kind-numbers-2">TCP Option Kind Numbers</name>
          <thead>
            <tr>
              <th align="center" colspan="1" rowspan="1">Kind</th>
              <th align="center" colspan="1" rowspan="1">Length</th>
              <th align="center" colspan="1" rowspan="1">Meaning</th>
              <th align="center" colspan="1" rowspan="1">Reference</th>
            </tr>
          </thead>
          <tbody>
            <tr>
              <td align="center" colspan="1" rowspan="1">30</td>
              <td align="center" colspan="1" rowspan="1">N</td>
              <td align="center" colspan="1" rowspan="1">Multipath TCP (MPTCP)</td>
              <td align="center" colspan="1" rowspan="1">RFC 8684</td>
            </tr>
          </tbody>
        </table>
      </section>
      <section anchor="IANA_subtypes" numbered="true" toc="include" removeInRFC="false" pn="section-7.2">
        <name slugifiedName="name-mptcp-option-subtypes">MPTCP Option Subtypes</name>
        <t pn="section-7.2-1">The 4-bit MPTCP subtype in the "MPTCP Option Subtypes"
        subregistry under the "Transmission Control Protocol (TCP) Parameters"
        registry was defined in <xref target="RFC6824" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="RFC6824"/>. Since <xref target="RFC6824" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="RFC6824"/> is an
        Experimental RFC and not a Standards Track RFC, and since no further
        entries have occurred beyond those pointing to <xref target="RFC6824" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="RFC6824"/>, IANA has
        replaced the existing registry with the contents of
        <xref target="table_iana" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="Table 2"/> and with the following
        explanatory note.</t>
        <t pn="section-7.2-2">Note: This registry specifies the MPTCP Option Subtypes for MPTCP v1, which obsoletes the Experimental MPTCP v0. For the MPTCP v0 subtypes, please refer to <xref target="RFC6824" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="RFC6824"/>.</t>
        <table anchor="table_iana" align="center" pn="table-2">
          <name slugifiedName="name-mptcp-option-subtypes-2">MPTCP Option Subtypes</name>
          <thead>
            <tr>
              <th align="center" colspan="1" rowspan="1">Value</th>
              <th align="center" colspan="1" rowspan="1">Symbol</th>
              <th align="center" colspan="1" rowspan="1">Name</th>
              <th align="center" colspan="1" rowspan="1">Reference</th>
            </tr>
          </thead>
          <tbody>
            <tr>
              <td align="center" colspan="1" rowspan="1">0x0</td>
              <td align="center" colspan="1" rowspan="1">MP_CAPABLE</td>
              <td align="center" colspan="1" rowspan="1">Multipath Capable</td>
              <td align="center" colspan="1" rowspan="1">RFC 8684, <xref target="sec_init" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="Section 3.1"/></td>
            </tr>
            <tr>
              <td align="center" colspan="1" rowspan="1">0x1</td>
              <td align="center" colspan="1" rowspan="1">MP_JOIN</td>
              <td align="center" colspan="1" rowspan="1">Join Connection</td>
              <td align="center" colspan="1" rowspan="1">RFC 8684, <xref target="sec_join" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="Section 3.2"/></td>
            </tr>
            <tr>
              <td align="center" colspan="1" rowspan="1">0x2</td>
              <td align="center" colspan="1" rowspan="1">DSS</td>
              <td align="center" colspan="1" rowspan="1">Data Sequence Signal (Data ACK and Data Sequence Mapping)</td>
              <td align="center" colspan="1" rowspan="1">RFC 8684, <xref target="sec_generalop" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="Section 3.3"/></td>
            </tr>
            <tr>
              <td align="center" colspan="1" rowspan="1">0x3</td>
              <td align="center" colspan="1" rowspan="1">ADD_ADDR</td>
              <td align="center" colspan="1" rowspan="1">Add Address</td>
              <td align="center" colspan="1" rowspan="1">RFC 8684, <xref target="sec_add_address" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="Section 3.4.1"/></td>
            </tr>
            <tr>
              <td align="center" colspan="1" rowspan="1">0x4</td>
              <td align="center" colspan="1" rowspan="1">REMOVE_ADDR</td>
              <td align="center" colspan="1" rowspan="1">Remove Address</td>
              <td align="center" colspan="1" rowspan="1">RFC 8684, <xref target="sec_remove_addr" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="Section 3.4.2"/></td>
            </tr>
            <tr>
              <td align="center" colspan="1" rowspan="1">0x5</td>
              <td align="center" colspan="1" rowspan="1">MP_PRIO</td>
              <td align="center" colspan="1" rowspan="1">Change Subflow Priority</td>
              <td align="center" colspan="1" rowspan="1">RFC 8684, <xref target="sec_policy" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="Section 3.3.8"/></td>
            </tr>
            <tr>
              <td align="center" colspan="1" rowspan="1">0x6</td>
              <td align="center" colspan="1" rowspan="1">MP_FAIL</td>
              <td align="center" colspan="1" rowspan="1">Fallback</td>
              <td align="center" colspan="1" rowspan="1">RFC 8684, <xref target="sec_fallback" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="Section 3.7"/></td>
            </tr>
            <tr>
              <td align="center" colspan="1" rowspan="1">0x7</td>
              <td align="center" colspan="1" rowspan="1">MP_FASTCLOSE</td>
              <td align="center" colspan="1" rowspan="1">Fast Close</td>
              <td align="center" colspan="1" rowspan="1">RFC 8684, <xref target="sec_fastclose" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="Section 3.5"/></td>
            </tr>
            <tr>
              <td align="center" colspan="1" rowspan="1">0x8</td>
              <td align="center" colspan="1" rowspan="1">MP_TCPRST</td>
              <td align="center" colspan="1" rowspan="1">Subflow Reset</td>
              <td align="center" colspan="1" rowspan="1">RFC 8684, <xref target="sec_reset" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="Section 3.6"/></td>
            </tr>
            <tr>
              <td align="center" colspan="1" rowspan="1">0xf</td>
              <td align="center" colspan="1" rowspan="1">MP_EXPERIMENTAL</td>
              <td align="center" colspan="1" rowspan="1">Reserved for Private Use</td>
              <td align="center" colspan="1" rowspan="1"/>
            </tr>
          </tbody>
        </table>
        <t pn="section-7.2-4">Values 0x9 through 0xe are currently unassigned. Option 0xf is reserved for use by private experiments. Its use may be formalized in a future specification. Future assignments in this registry are to be defined by Standards Action as defined by <xref target="RFC8126" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="RFC8126"/>.  Assignments consist of the MPTCP subtype's symbolic name, its associated value, and a reference to its specification.</t>
      </section>
      <section anchor="IANA_handshake" numbered="true" toc="include" removeInRFC="false" pn="section-7.3">
        <name slugifiedName="name-mptcp-handshake-algorithms">MPTCP Handshake Algorithms</name>
        <t pn="section-7.3-1">The "MPTCP Handshake Algorithms" subregistry under the
        "Transmission Control Protocol (TCP) Parameters" registry was defined
        in <xref target="RFC6824" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="RFC6824"/>. Since <xref target="RFC6824" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="RFC6824"/> is an Experimental RFC and not
        a Standards Track RFC, and since no further entries have occurred
        beyond those pointing to <xref target="RFC6824" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="RFC6824"/>, IANA has replaced
        the existing registry with the contents of
 <xref target="table_crypto" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="Table 3"/> and with the following explanatory note.</t>
        <t pn="section-7.3-2">Note: This registry specifies the MPTCP Handshake Algorithms for MPTCP v1, which obsoletes the Experimental MPTCP v0. For the MPTCP v0 subtypes, please refer to <xref target="RFC6824" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="RFC6824"/>.</t>
        <table anchor="table_crypto" align="center" pn="table-3">
          <name slugifiedName="name-mptcp-handshake-algorithms-2">MPTCP Handshake Algorithms</name>
          <thead>
            <tr>
              <th align="center" colspan="1" rowspan="1">Flag Bit</th>
              <th align="center" colspan="1" rowspan="1">Meaning</th>
              <th align="center" colspan="1" rowspan="1">Reference</th>
            </tr>
          </thead>
          <tbody>
            <tr>
              <td align="center" colspan="1" rowspan="1">A</td>
              <td align="center" colspan="1" rowspan="1">Checksum required</td>
              <td align="center" colspan="1" rowspan="1">RFC 8684, <xref target="sec_init" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="Section 3.1"/></td>
            </tr>
            <tr>
              <td align="center" colspan="1" rowspan="1">B</td>
              <td align="center" colspan="1" rowspan="1">Extensibility</td>
              <td align="center" colspan="1" rowspan="1">RFC 8684, <xref target="sec_init" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="Section 3.1"/></td>
            </tr>
            <tr>
              <td align="center" colspan="1" rowspan="1">C</td>
              <td align="center" colspan="1" rowspan="1">Do not attempt to establish new subflows to the source address.</td>
              <td align="center" colspan="1" rowspan="1">RFC 8684, <xref target="sec_init" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="Section 3.1"/></td>
            </tr>
            <tr>
              <td align="center" colspan="1" rowspan="1">D-G</td>
              <td align="center" colspan="1" rowspan="1">Unassigned</td>
              <td align="center" colspan="1" rowspan="1"/>
            </tr>
            <tr>
              <td align="center" colspan="1" rowspan="1">H</td>
              <td align="center" colspan="1" rowspan="1">HMAC-SHA256</td>
              <td align="center" colspan="1" rowspan="1">RFC 8684, <xref target="sec_join" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="Section 3.2"/></td>
            </tr>
          </tbody>
        </table>
        <t pn="section-7.3-4">Note that the meanings of bits "D" through "H" can be dependent upon bit "B",
      depending on how the Extensibility parameter is defined in future specifications; see
      <xref target="sec_init" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="Section 3.1"/> for more information.</t>
        <t pn="section-7.3-5">Future assignments in this registry are also
      to be defined by Standards Action as defined by <xref target="RFC8126" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="RFC8126"/>.
      Assignments consist of the value of the flags, a symbolic name for the algorithm,
      and a reference to its specification.</t>
      </section>
      <section anchor="IANA_rst" numbered="true" toc="include" removeInRFC="false" pn="section-7.4">
        <name slugifiedName="name-mp_tcprst-reason-codes">MP_TCPRST Reason Codes</name>
        <t pn="section-7.4-1">IANA has created a further subregistry, "MPTCP MP_TCPRST
        Reason Codes" under the "Transmission Control Protocol (TCP)
        Parameters" registry, based on the reason code in the MP_TCPRST (<xref target="sec_reset" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="Section 3.6"/>) message. Initial values for this registry are given in <xref target="table_rstcodes" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="Table 4"/>; future assignments are to be defined by Specification Required as defined by <xref target="RFC8126" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="RFC8126"/>. Assignments consist of the value of the code, a short description of its meaning, and a reference to its specification. The maximum value is 0xff.</t>
        <table anchor="table_rstcodes" align="center" pn="table-4">
          <name slugifiedName="name-mptcp-mp_tcprst-reason-code">MPTCP MP_TCPRST Reason Codes</name>
          <thead>
            <tr>
              <th align="center" colspan="1" rowspan="1">Code</th>
              <th align="center" colspan="1" rowspan="1">Meaning</th>
              <th align="center" colspan="1" rowspan="1">Reference</th>
            </tr>
          </thead>
          <tbody>
            <tr>
              <td align="center" colspan="1" rowspan="1">0x00</td>
              <td align="center" colspan="1" rowspan="1">Unspecified error</td>
              <td align="center" colspan="1" rowspan="1">RFC 8684, <xref target="sec_reset" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="Section 3.6"/></td>
            </tr>
            <tr>
              <td align="center" colspan="1" rowspan="1">0x01</td>
              <td align="center" colspan="1" rowspan="1">MPTCP-specific error</td>
              <td align="center" colspan="1" rowspan="1">RFC 8684, <xref target="sec_reset" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="Section 3.6"/></td>
            </tr>
            <tr>
              <td align="center" colspan="1" rowspan="1">0x02</td>
              <td align="center" colspan="1" rowspan="1">Lack of resources</td>
              <td align="center" colspan="1" rowspan="1">RFC 8684, <xref target="sec_reset" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="Section 3.6"/></td>
            </tr>
            <tr>
              <td align="center" colspan="1" rowspan="1">0x03</td>
              <td align="center" colspan="1" rowspan="1">Administratively prohibited</td>
              <td align="center" colspan="1" rowspan="1">RFC 8684, <xref target="sec_reset" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="Section 3.6"/></td>
            </tr>
            <tr>
              <td align="center" colspan="1" rowspan="1">0x04</td>
              <td align="center" colspan="1" rowspan="1">Too much outstanding data</td>
              <td align="center" colspan="1" rowspan="1">RFC 8684, <xref target="sec_reset" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="Section 3.6"/></td>
            </tr>
            <tr>
              <td align="center" colspan="1" rowspan="1">0x05</td>
              <td align="center" colspan="1" rowspan="1">Unacceptable performance</td>
              <td align="center" colspan="1" rowspan="1">RFC 8684, <xref target="sec_reset" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="Section 3.6"/></td>
            </tr>
            <tr>
              <td align="center" colspan="1" rowspan="1">0x06</td>
              <td align="center" colspan="1" rowspan="1">Middlebox interference</td>
              <td align="center" colspan="1" rowspan="1">RFC 8684, <xref target="sec_reset" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="Section 3.6"/></td>
            </tr>
          </tbody>
        </table>
        <t pn="section-7.4-3">As guidance to the designated expert <xref target="RFC8126" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="RFC8126"/>, assignments should not normally be refused unless
        codepoint space is becoming scarce, provided that there is a clear
        distinction from other, already-existing codes and also provided that there is sufficient guidance for implementers both sending and receiving these codes.</t>
      </section>
    </section>
  </middle>
  <back>
    <displayreference target="I-D.ananth-tcpm-tcpoptext" to="TCPLO"/>
    <references pn="section-8">
      <name slugifiedName="name-references">References</name>
      <references pn="section-8.1">
        <name slugifiedName="name-normative-references">Normative References</name>
        <reference anchor="RFC0793" target="https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc793" quoteTitle="true" derivedAnchor="RFC0793">
          <front>
            <title>Transmission Control Protocol</title>
            <author initials="J." surname="Postel" fullname="J. Postel">
              <organization showOnFrontPage="true"/>
            </author>
            <date year="1981" month="September"/>
          </front>
          <seriesInfo name="STD" value="7"/>
          <seriesInfo name="RFC" value="793"/>
          <seriesInfo name="DOI" value="10.17487/RFC0793"/>
        </reference>
        <reference anchor="RFC2104" target="https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2104" quoteTitle="true" derivedAnchor="RFC2104">
          <front>
            <title>HMAC: Keyed-Hashing for Message Authentication</title>
            <author initials="H." surname="Krawczyk" fullname="H. Krawczyk">
              <organization showOnFrontPage="true"/>
            </author>
            <author initials="M." surname="Bellare" fullname="M. Bellare">
              <organization showOnFrontPage="true"/>
            </author>
            <author initials="R." surname="Canetti" fullname="R. Canetti">
              <organization showOnFrontPage="true"/>
            </author>
            <date year="1997" month="February"/>
            <abstract>
              <t>This document describes HMAC, a mechanism for message authentication using cryptographic hash functions. HMAC can be used with any iterative cryptographic hash function, e.g., MD5, SHA-1, in combination with a secret shared key.  The cryptographic strength of HMAC depends on the properties of the underlying hash function.  This memo provides information for the Internet community.  This memo does not specify an Internet standard of any kind</t>
            </abstract>
          </front>
          <seriesInfo name="RFC" value="2104"/>
          <seriesInfo name="DOI" value="10.17487/RFC2104"/>
        </reference>
        <reference anchor="RFC2119" target="https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2119" quoteTitle="true" derivedAnchor="RFC2119">
          <front>
            <title>Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate Requirement Levels</title>
            <author initials="S." surname="Bradner" fullname="S. Bradner">
              <organization showOnFrontPage="true"/>
            </author>
            <date year="1997" month="March"/>
            <abstract>
              <t>In many standards track documents several words are used to signify the requirements in the specification.  These words are often capitalized. This document defines these words as they should be interpreted in IETF documents.  This document specifies an Internet Best Current Practices for the Internet Community, and requests discussion and suggestions for improvements.</t>
            </abstract>
          </front>
          <seriesInfo name="BCP" value="14"/>
          <seriesInfo name="RFC" value="2119"/>
          <seriesInfo name="DOI" value="10.17487/RFC2119"/>
        </reference>
        <reference anchor="RFC5961" target="https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5961" quoteTitle="true" derivedAnchor="RFC5961">
          <front>
            <title>Improving TCP's Robustness to Blind In-Window Attacks</title>
            <author initials="A." surname="Ramaiah" fullname="A. Ramaiah">
              <organization showOnFrontPage="true"/>
            </author>
            <author initials="R." surname="Stewart" fullname="R. Stewart">
              <organization showOnFrontPage="true"/>
            </author>
            <author initials="M." surname="Dalal" fullname="M. Dalal">
              <organization showOnFrontPage="true"/>
            </author>
            <date year="2010" month="August"/>
            <abstract>
              <t>TCP has historically been considered to be protected against spoofed off-path packet injection attacks by relying on the fact that it is difficult to guess the 4-tuple (the source and destination IP addresses and the source and destination ports) in combination with the 32-bit sequence number(s).  A combination of increasing window sizes and applications using longer-term connections (e.g., H-323 or Border Gateway Protocol (BGP) [STANDARDS-TRACK]</t>
            </abstract>
          </front>
          <seriesInfo name="RFC" value="5961"/>
          <seriesInfo name="DOI" value="10.17487/RFC5961"/>
        </reference>
        <reference anchor="RFC6234" target="https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6234" quoteTitle="true" derivedAnchor="RFC6234">
          <front>
            <title>US Secure Hash Algorithms (SHA and SHA-based HMAC and HKDF)</title>
            <author initials="D." surname="Eastlake 3rd" fullname="D. Eastlake 3rd">
              <organization showOnFrontPage="true"/>
            </author>
            <author initials="T." surname="Hansen" fullname="T. Hansen">
              <organization showOnFrontPage="true"/>
            </author>
            <date year="2011" month="May"/>
            <abstract>
              <t>Federal Information Processing Standard, FIPS</t>
            </abstract>
          </front>
          <seriesInfo name="RFC" value="6234"/>
          <seriesInfo name="DOI" value="10.17487/RFC6234"/>
        </reference>
        <reference anchor="RFC8174" target="https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8174" quoteTitle="true" derivedAnchor="RFC8174">
          <front>
            <title>Ambiguity of Uppercase vs Lowercase in RFC 2119 Key Words</title>
            <author initials="B." surname="Leiba" fullname="B. Leiba">
              <organization showOnFrontPage="true"/>
            </author>
            <date year="2017" month="May"/>
            <abstract>
              <t>RFC 2119 specifies common key words that may be used in protocol  specifications.  This document aims to reduce the ambiguity by clarifying that only UPPERCASE usage of the key words have the  defined special meanings.</t>
            </abstract>
          </front>
          <seriesInfo name="BCP" value="14"/>
          <seriesInfo name="RFC" value="8174"/>
          <seriesInfo name="DOI" value="10.17487/RFC8174"/>
        </reference>
      </references>
      <references pn="section-8.2">
        <name slugifiedName="name-informative-references">Informative References</name>
        <reference anchor="deployments" target="https://www.ietfjournal.org/multipath-tcp-deployments/" quoteTitle="true" derivedAnchor="deployments">
          <front>
            <title abbrev="MPTCP Deployments">Multipath TCP Deployments</title>
            <seriesInfo name="IETF Journal" value="2016"/>
            <author initials="O." surname="Bonaventure" fullname="Olivier Bonaventure">
              <organization showOnFrontPage="true">Universite Catholique de Louvain</organization>
            </author>
            <author initials="S." surname="Seo" fullname="SungHoon Seo"/>
            <date month="November" year="2016"/>
          </front>
        </reference>
        <reference anchor="howhard" target="https://www.usenix.org/conference/nsdi12/technical-sessions/presentation/raiciu" quoteTitle="true" derivedAnchor="howhard">
          <front>
            <title abbrev="How Hard Can It Be? Designing and Implementing a Deployable Multipath TCP">How Hard Can It Be? Designing and Implementing a Deployable Multipath TCP</title>
            <seriesInfo name="Usenix Symposium on Networked Systems Design and Implementation" value="2012"/>
            <author initials="C." surname="Raiciu" fullname="Costin Raiciu">
              <organization showOnFrontPage="true">Universitatea Politehnica Bucuresti</organization>
            </author>
            <author initials="C." surname="Paasch" fullname="Christoph Paasch">
              <organization showOnFrontPage="true">Universite Catholique de Louvain</organization>
            </author>
            <author initials="S." surname="Barre" fullname="Sebastien Barre">
              <organization showOnFrontPage="true">Universite Catholique de Louvain</organization>
            </author>
            <author initials="A." surname="Ford" fullname="Alan Ford">
              <organization showOnFrontPage="true"/>
            </author>
            <author initials="M." surname="Honda" fullname="Michio Honda">
              <organization showOnFrontPage="true">Keio University</organization>
            </author>
            <author initials="F." surname="Duchene" fullname="Fabien Duchene">
              <organization showOnFrontPage="true">Universite Catholique de Louvain</organization>
            </author>
            <author initials="O." surname="Bonaventure" fullname="Olivier Bonaventure">
              <organization showOnFrontPage="true">Universite Catholique de Louvain</organization>
            </author>
            <author initials="M." surname="Handley" fullname="Mark Handley">
              <organization showOnFrontPage="true">University College London</organization>
            </author>
            <date month="April" year="2012"/>
          </front>
        </reference>
        <reference anchor="norm" target="https://www.usenix.org/legacy/events/sec01/full_papers/handley/handley.pdf" quoteTitle="true" derivedAnchor="norm">
          <front>
            <title abbrev="Network Intrusion Detection: Evasion, Traffic Normalization, and End-to-End Protocol Semantics">Network Intrusion Detection: Evasion, Traffic Normalization, and pass the data,
drop packets with new options, copy End-to-End Protocol Semantics</title>
            <seriesInfo name="Usenix Security Symposium" value="2001"/>
            <author initials="M." surname="Handley" fullname="Mark Handley">
              <organization showOnFrontPage="true">ACIRI</organization>
            </author>
            <author initials="V." surname="Paxson" fullname="Vern Paxson">
              <organization showOnFrontPage="true">ACIRI</organization>
            </author>
            <author initials="C." surname="Kreibich" fullname="Christian Kreibich">
              <organization showOnFrontPage="true">Technische Universitat Munchen</organization>
            </author>
            <date month="August" year="2001"/>
          </front>
        </reference>
        <reference anchor="RFC1122" target="https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc1122" quoteTitle="true" derivedAnchor="RFC1122">
          <front>
            <title>Requirements for Internet Hosts - Communication Layers</title>
            <author initials="R." surname="Braden" fullname="R. Braden" role="editor">
              <organization showOnFrontPage="true"/>
            </author>
            <date year="1989" month="October"/>
            <abstract>
              <t>This RFC is an official specification for the same option into multiple segments (e.g., when doing segmentation), or drop
options during segment coalescing.</t>

        <t>MPTCP uses a single new TCP option "Kind", and all message types are defined Internet community.  It incorporates by "subtype" values (see <xref target="IANA"/>). reference, amends, corrects, and supplements the primary protocol standards documents relating to hosts.  [STANDARDS-TRACK]</t>
            </abstract>
          </front>
          <seriesInfo name="STD" value="3"/>
          <seriesInfo name="RFC" value="1122"/>
          <seriesInfo name="DOI" value="10.17487/RFC1122"/>
        </reference>
        <reference anchor="RFC1918" target="https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc1918" quoteTitle="true" derivedAnchor="RFC1918">
          <front>
            <title>Address Allocation for Private Internets</title>
            <author initials="Y." surname="Rekhter" fullname="Y. Rekhter">
              <organization showOnFrontPage="true"/>
            </author>
            <author initials="B." surname="Moskowitz" fullname="B. Moskowitz">
              <organization showOnFrontPage="true"/>
            </author>
            <author initials="D." surname="Karrenberg" fullname="D. Karrenberg">
              <organization showOnFrontPage="true"/>
            </author>
            <author initials="G. J." surname="de Groot" fullname="G. J. de Groot">
              <organization showOnFrontPage="true"/>
            </author>
            <author initials="E." surname="Lear" fullname="E. Lear">
              <organization showOnFrontPage="true"/>
            </author>
            <date year="1996" month="February"/>
            <abstract>
              <t>This document describes address allocation for private internets.  This should reduce document specifies an Internet Best Current Practices for the chances Internet Community, and requests discussion and suggestions for improvements.</t>
            </abstract>
          </front>
          <seriesInfo name="BCP" value="5"/>
          <seriesInfo name="RFC" value="1918"/>
          <seriesInfo name="DOI" value="10.17487/RFC1918"/>
        </reference>
        <reference anchor="RFC2018" target="https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2018" quoteTitle="true" derivedAnchor="RFC2018">
          <front>
            <title>TCP Selective Acknowledgment Options</title>
            <author initials="M." surname="Mathis" fullname="M. Mathis">
              <organization showOnFrontPage="true"/>
            </author>
            <author initials="J." surname="Mahdavi" fullname="J. Mahdavi">
              <organization showOnFrontPage="true"/>
            </author>
            <author initials="S." surname="Floyd" fullname="S. Floyd">
              <organization showOnFrontPage="true"/>
            </author>
            <author initials="A." surname="Romanow" fullname="A. Romanow">
              <organization showOnFrontPage="true"/>
            </author>
            <date year="1996" month="October"/>
            <abstract>
              <t>This memo proposes an implementation of only some types SACK and discusses its performance and related issues.  [STANDARDS-TRACK]</t>
            </abstract>
          </front>
          <seriesInfo name="RFC" value="2018"/>
          <seriesInfo name="DOI" value="10.17487/RFC2018"/>
        </reference>
        <reference anchor="RFC2979" target="https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2979" quoteTitle="true" derivedAnchor="RFC2979">
          <front>
            <title>Behavior of MPTCP options being passed, and instead the key differing Requirements for Internet Firewalls</title>
            <author initials="N." surname="Freed" fullname="N. Freed">
              <organization showOnFrontPage="true"/>
            </author>
            <date year="2000" month="October"/>
            <abstract>
              <t>This memo defines behavioral characteristics are different paths, and the presence of and interoperability requirements for Internet firewalls.  This memo provides information for the SYN flag.</t>

        <t>MPTCP SYN packets on the first subflow Internet community.</t>
            </abstract>
          </front>
          <seriesInfo name="RFC" value="2979"/>
          <seriesInfo name="DOI" value="10.17487/RFC2979"/>
        </reference>
        <reference anchor="RFC2992" target="https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2992" quoteTitle="true" derivedAnchor="RFC2992">
          <front>
            <title>Analysis of a connection contain the MP_CAPABLE option (<xref target="sec_init"/>). If this an Equal-Cost Multi-Path Algorithm</title>
            <author initials="C." surname="Hopps" fullname="C. Hopps">
              <organization showOnFrontPage="true"/>
            </author>
            <date year="2000" month="November"/>
            <abstract>
              <t>Equal-cost multi-path (ECMP) is dropped, MPTCP SHOULD fall back to regular TCP. If packets with the MP_JOIN option (<xref target="sec_join"/>) are dropped, the a routing technique for routing packets along multiple paths will simply not be used.</t>

        <t>If of equal cost.  The forwarding engine identifies paths by next-hop.  When forwarding a middlebox strips options but otherwise passes packet the packets unchanged, MPTCP will behave safely. If router must decide which next-hop (path) to use.  This document gives an MP_CAPABLE option is dropped on either analysis of one method for making that decision.  The analysis includes the outgoing or performance of the return path, algorithm and the initiating host can fall back disruption caused by changes to regular TCP, as illustrated the set of next-hops.  This memo provides information for the Internet community.</t>
            </abstract>
          </front>
          <seriesInfo name="RFC" value="2992"/>
          <seriesInfo name="DOI" value="10.17487/RFC2992"/>
        </reference>
        <reference anchor="RFC3022" target="https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc3022" quoteTitle="true" derivedAnchor="RFC3022">
          <front>
            <title>Traditional IP Network Address Translator (Traditional NAT)</title>
            <author initials="P." surname="Srisuresh" fullname="P. Srisuresh">
              <organization showOnFrontPage="true"/>
            </author>
            <author initials="K." surname="Egevang" fullname="K. Egevang">
              <organization showOnFrontPage="true"/>
            </author>
            <date year="2001" month="January"/>
            <abstract>
              <t>The NAT operation described in <xref target="fig_syn"/> and discussed this document extends address translation introduced in <xref target="sec_init"/>.</t>

          <t>Subflow SYNs contain the MP_JOIN option. If RFC 1631 and includes a new type of network address and TCP/UDP port translation.  In addition, this option is stripped on document corrects the outgoing path, Checksum adjustment algorithm published in RFC 1631 and attempts to discuss NAT operation and limitations in detail.  This memo provides information for the SYN will appear Internet community.</t>
            </abstract>
          </front>
          <seriesInfo name="RFC" value="3022"/>
          <seriesInfo name="DOI" value="10.17487/RFC3022"/>
        </reference>
        <reference anchor="RFC3135" target="https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc3135" quoteTitle="true" derivedAnchor="RFC3135">
          <front>
            <title>Performance Enhancing Proxies Intended to be Mitigate Link-Related Degradations</title>
            <author initials="J." surname="Border" fullname="J. Border">
              <organization showOnFrontPage="true"/>
            </author>
            <author initials="M." surname="Kojo" fullname="M. Kojo">
              <organization showOnFrontPage="true"/>
            </author>
            <author initials="J." surname="Griner" fullname="J. Griner">
              <organization showOnFrontPage="true"/>
            </author>
            <author initials="G." surname="Montenegro" fullname="G. Montenegro">
              <organization showOnFrontPage="true"/>
            </author>
            <author initials="Z." surname="Shelby" fullname="Z. Shelby">
              <organization showOnFrontPage="true"/>
            </author>
            <date year="2001" month="June"/>
            <abstract>
              <t>This document is a regular SYN survey of Performance Enhancing Proxies (PEPs) often employed to improve degraded TCP performance caused by characteristics of specific link environments, for example, in satellite, wireless WAN, and wireless LAN environments.  This memo provides information for the Internet community.</t>
            </abstract>
          </front>
          <seriesInfo name="RFC" value="3135"/>
          <seriesInfo name="DOI" value="10.17487/RFC3135"/>
        </reference>
        <reference anchor="RFC4086" target="https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4086" quoteTitle="true" derivedAnchor="RFC4086">
          <front>
            <title>Randomness Requirements for Security</title>
            <author initials="D." surname="Eastlake 3rd" fullname="D. Eastlake 3rd">
              <organization showOnFrontPage="true"/>
            </author>
            <author initials="J." surname="Schiller" fullname="J. Schiller">
              <organization showOnFrontPage="true"/>
            </author>
            <author initials="S." surname="Crocker" fullname="S. Crocker">
              <organization showOnFrontPage="true"/>
            </author>
            <date year="2005" month="June"/>
            <abstract>
              <t>Security systems are built on strong cryptographic algorithms that foil pattern analysis attempts.  However, the security of these systems is dependent on generating secret quantities for passwords, cryptographic keys, and similar quantities.  The use of pseudo-random processes to Host B.&nbsp; Depending on whether there is a listening socket on
the target port, Host B will reply either with SYN/ACK or RST (subflow connection fails). When Host generate secret quantities can result in pseudo-security. A
receives the SYN/ACK sophisticated attacker may find it sends a RST because easier to reproduce the SYN/ACK does not contain environment that produced the MP_JOIN option secret quantities and its token.
Either way, the subflow setup fails, but otherwise does not affect the MPTCP connection as a whole.</t>

        <figure align="center" anchor="fig_syn" title="Connection Setup with Middleboxes that Strip Options from Packets">
          <artwork align="left"><![CDATA[
     Host A                             Host B
      |              Middlebox M            |
      |                   |                 |
      |  SYN(MP_CAPABLE)  |        SYN      |
      |-------------------|---------------->|
      |                SYN/ACK              |
      |<------------------------------------|
  a) MP_CAPABLE option stripped on outgoing path

    Host A                               Host B
      |            SYN(MP_CAPABLE)          |
      |------------------------------------>|
      |             Middlebox M             |
      |                 |                   |
      |    SYN/ACK      |SYN/ACK(MP_CAPABLE)|
      |<----------------|-------------------|
  b) MP_CAPABLE option stripped on return path
           ]]></artwork>
        </figure>

        <t>We now examine data flow with MPTCP, assuming to search the flow is correctly resulting small set up, which implies of possibilities than to locate the options quantities in the SYN
packets were allowed through by whole of the relevant middleboxes. If options are allowed through potential number space.</t>
              <t>Choosing random quantities to foil a resourceful and there motivated adversary is no resegmentation surprisingly difficult.  This document points out many pitfalls in using poor entropy sources or
coalescing traditional pseudo-random number generation techniques for generating such quantities.  It recommends the use of truly random hardware techniques and shows that the existing hardware on many systems can be used for this purpose. It provides suggestions to ameliorate the problem when a hardware solution is not available, and it gives examples of how large such quantities need to be for some applications.  This document specifies an Internet Best Current Practices for the Internet Community, and requests discussion and suggestions for improvements.</t>
            </abstract>
          </front>
          <seriesInfo name="BCP" value="106"/>
          <seriesInfo name="RFC" value="4086"/>
          <seriesInfo name="DOI" value="10.17487/RFC4086"/>
        </reference>
        <reference anchor="RFC4987" target="https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4987" quoteTitle="true" derivedAnchor="RFC4987">
          <front>
            <title>TCP SYN Flooding Attacks and Common Mitigations</title>
            <author initials="W." surname="Eddy" fullname="W. Eddy">
              <organization showOnFrontPage="true"/>
            </author>
            <date year="2007" month="August"/>
            <abstract>
              <t>This document describes TCP segments, Multipath TCP flows can proceed without problems.</t>

        <t>The case when options get stripped on data packets has SYN flooding attacks, which have been discussed in well-known to the Fallback section.
        If only some MPTCP options are stripped, behavior is not deterministic. If some data sequence mappings community for several years.  Various countermeasures against these attacks, and the trade-offs of each, are lost, described.  This document archives explanations of the connection can continue so long as mappings exist attack and common defense techniques for the subflow-level data (e.g., if multiple maps have been sent that reinforce each other). If some subflow-level space is left unmapped, however, benefit of TCP implementers and administrators of TCP servers or networks, but does not make any standards-level recommendations.  This memo provides information for the subflow is treated as broken Internet community.</t>
            </abstract>
          </front>
          <seriesInfo name="RFC" value="4987"/>
          <seriesInfo name="DOI" value="10.17487/RFC4987"/>
        </reference>
        <reference anchor="RFC5681" target="https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5681" quoteTitle="true" derivedAnchor="RFC5681">
          <front>
            <title>TCP Congestion Control</title>
            <author initials="M." surname="Allman" fullname="M. Allman">
              <organization showOnFrontPage="true"/>
            </author>
            <author initials="V." surname="Paxson" fullname="V. Paxson">
              <organization showOnFrontPage="true"/>
            </author>
            <author initials="E." surname="Blanton" fullname="E. Blanton">
              <organization showOnFrontPage="true"/>
            </author>
            <date year="2009" month="September"/>
            <abstract>
              <t>This document defines TCP's four intertwined congestion control algorithms: slow start, congestion avoidance, fast retransmit, and is closed, through fast recovery.  In addition, the process described in <xref target="sec_fallback"/>. MPTCP document specifies how TCP should survive with begin transmission after a loss of some Data ACKs, but performance will degrade relatively long idle period, as well as discussing various acknowledgment generation methods.  This document obsoletes RFC 2581.  [STANDARDS-TRACK]</t>
            </abstract>
          </front>
          <seriesInfo name="RFC" value="5681"/>
          <seriesInfo name="DOI" value="10.17487/RFC5681"/>
        </reference>
        <reference anchor="RFC6181" target="https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6181" quoteTitle="true" derivedAnchor="RFC6181">
          <front>
            <title>Threat Analysis for TCP Extensions for Multipath Operation with Multiple Addresses</title>
            <author initials="M." surname="Bagnulo" fullname="M. Bagnulo">
              <organization showOnFrontPage="true"/>
            </author>
            <date year="2011" month="March"/>
            <abstract>
              <t>Multipath TCP (MPTCP for short) describes the fraction extensions proposed for TCP so that endpoints of stripped options increases.
We do not expect such cases to appear in practice, though: most
middleboxes will either strip all options or let them all through.</t>

       <t>We end this section with a list of middlebox classes, their behavior, and given TCP connection can use multiple paths to exchange data.  Such extensions enable the elements exchange of segments using different source-destination address pairs, resulting in the MPTCP design
that allow operation through such middleboxes. Issues surrounding dropping packets with options
or stripping options were discussed above, capability of using multiple paths in a significant number of scenarios.  Some level of multihoming and are not included here:

        <list style="symbols">
          <t>NATs <xref target="RFC3022"/> (Network Address (and Port) Translators) change mobility support can be achieved through these extensions.  However, the source address (and often source port) support for multiple IP addresses per endpoint may have implications on the security of packets. the resulting MPTCP.  This means that note includes a host will not know its
    public-facing address threat analysis for signaling in MPTCP. Therefore, MPTCP permits implicit address addition via This document is not an Internet Standards Track specification; it is published for informational purposes.</t>
            </abstract>
          </front>
          <seriesInfo name="RFC" value="6181"/>
          <seriesInfo name="DOI" value="10.17487/RFC6181"/>
        </reference>
        <reference anchor="RFC6182" target="https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6182" quoteTitle="true" derivedAnchor="RFC6182">
          <front>
            <title>Architectural Guidelines for Multipath TCP Development</title>
            <author initials="A." surname="Ford" fullname="A. Ford">
              <organization showOnFrontPage="true"/>
            </author>
            <author initials="C." surname="Raiciu" fullname="C. Raiciu">
              <organization showOnFrontPage="true"/>
            </author>
            <author initials="M." surname="Handley" fullname="M. Handley">
              <organization showOnFrontPage="true"/>
            </author>
            <author initials="S." surname="Barre" fullname="S. Barre">
              <organization showOnFrontPage="true"/>
            </author>
            <author initials="J." surname="Iyengar" fullname="J. Iyengar">
              <organization showOnFrontPage="true"/>
            </author>
            <date year="2011" month="March"/>
            <abstract>
              <t>Hosts are often connected by multiple paths, but TCP restricts communications to a single path per transport connection.  Resource usage within the MP_JOIN option, network would be more efficient were these multiple paths able to be used concurrently.  This should enhance user experience through improved resilience to network failure and higher throughput.</t>
              <t>This document outlines architectural guidelines for the handshake mechanism ensures that connection attempts to private addresses <xref target="RFC1918"/>, since they are authenticated, will only set up subflows development of a Multipath Transport Protocol, with references to how these architectural components come together in the correct hosts.
    Explicit address removal development of a Multipath TCP (MPTCP).  This document lists certain high-level design decisions that provide foundations for the design of the MPTCP protocol, based upon these architectural requirements.  This document  is not an Internet Standards Track specification; it is undertaken published for informational purposes.</t>
            </abstract>
          </front>
          <seriesInfo name="RFC" value="6182"/>
          <seriesInfo name="DOI" value="10.17487/RFC6182"/>
        </reference>
        <reference anchor="RFC6356" target="https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6356" quoteTitle="true" derivedAnchor="RFC6356">
          <front>
            <title>Coupled Congestion Control for Multipath Transport Protocols</title>
            <author initials="C." surname="Raiciu" fullname="C. Raiciu">
              <organization showOnFrontPage="true"/>
            </author>
            <author initials="M." surname="Handley" fullname="M. Handley">
              <organization showOnFrontPage="true"/>
            </author>
            <author initials="D." surname="Wischik" fullname="D. Wischik">
              <organization showOnFrontPage="true"/>
            </author>
            <date year="2011" month="October"/>
            <abstract>
              <t>Often endpoints are connected by an Address ID multiple paths, but communications are usually restricted to allow no knowledge of a single path per connection.  Resource usage within the source address.</t>

          <t>Performance Enhancing Proxies (PEPs) <xref target="RFC3135"/> might proactively ACK data network would be more efficient were it possible for these multiple paths to increase performance. MPTCP, however, relies on accurate congestion control signals from the end host, and non-MPTCP-aware PEPs will not be able used concurrently.  Multipath TCP is a proposal to provide achieve multipath transport in TCP.</t>
              <t>New congestion control algorithms are needed for multipath transport protocols such signals. MPTCP will, therefore, fall back to single-path as Multipath TCP, or close the problematic subflow (see <xref target="sec_fallback"/>).</t>

          <t>Traffic Normalizers <xref target="norm"/> may not allow holes as single path algorithms have a series of issues in sequence numbers, and may cache packets and retransmit the same data.
MPTCP looks like multipath context.  One of the prominent problems is that running existing algorithms such as standard TCP independently on each path would give the wire, and multipath flow more than its fair share at a bottleneck link traversed by more than one of its subflows.  Further, it is desirable that a source with multiple paths available will not retransmit different data on transfer more traffic using the same subflow sequence number. In least congested of the event paths, achieving a property called "resource pooling" where a bundle of links effectively behaves like one shared link with bigger capacity.  This would increase the overall efficiency of the network and also its robustness to failure.</t>
              <t>This document presents a retransmission, congestion control algorithm that couples the same data will be retransmitted congestion control algorithms running on different subflows by linking their increase functions, and dynamically controls the original TCP subflow even if it overall aggressiveness of the multipath flow.  The result is additionally retransmitted a practical algorithm that is fair to TCP at bottlenecks while moving traffic away from congested links.  This document defines an Experimental  Protocol for the connection level on a different subflow.</t>

          <t>Firewalls <xref target="RFC2979"/> might perform initial sequence number randomization on Internet community.</t>
            </abstract>
          </front>
          <seriesInfo name="RFC" value="6356"/>
          <seriesInfo name="DOI" value="10.17487/RFC6356"/>
        </reference>
        <reference anchor="RFC6528" target="https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6528" quoteTitle="true" derivedAnchor="RFC6528">
          <front>
            <title>Defending against Sequence Number Attacks</title>
            <author initials="F." surname="Gont" fullname="F. Gont">
              <organization showOnFrontPage="true"/>
            </author>
            <author initials="S." surname="Bellovin" fullname="S. Bellovin">
              <organization showOnFrontPage="true"/>
            </author>
            <date year="2012" month="February"/>
            <abstract>
              <t>This document specifies an algorithm for the generation of TCP connections. MPTCP uses relative Initial Sequence Numbers (ISNs), such that the chances of an off-path attacker guessing the sequence numbers in data sequence mapping to cope with this. Like NATs, firewalls will not permit many incoming connections, so
MPTCP supports address signaling (ADD_ADDR) so that use by a multiaddressed host can invite its peer behind target connection are reduced.  This document revises (and formally obsoletes) RFC 1948, and takes the firewall/NAT ISN generation algorithm originally proposed in that document to connect
out Standards Track, formally updating RFC 793.   [STANDARDS-TRACK]</t>
            </abstract>
          </front>
          <seriesInfo name="RFC" value="6528"/>
          <seriesInfo name="DOI" value="10.17487/RFC6528"/>
        </reference>
        <reference anchor="RFC6824" target="https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6824" quoteTitle="true" derivedAnchor="RFC6824">
          <front>
            <title>TCP Extensions for Multipath Operation with Multiple Addresses</title>
            <author initials="A." surname="Ford" fullname="A. Ford">
              <organization showOnFrontPage="true"/>
            </author>
            <author initials="C." surname="Raiciu" fullname="C. Raiciu">
              <organization showOnFrontPage="true"/>
            </author>
            <author initials="M." surname="Handley" fullname="M. Handley">
              <organization showOnFrontPage="true"/>
            </author>
            <author initials="O." surname="Bonaventure" fullname="O. Bonaventure">
              <organization showOnFrontPage="true"/>
            </author>
            <date year="2013" month="January"/>
            <abstract>
              <t>TCP/IP communication is currently restricted to its additional interface.</t>

          <t>Intrusion Detection/Prevention Systems (IDS/IPS) observe packet streams a single path per connection, yet multiple paths often exist between peers.  The simultaneous use of these multiple paths for patterns and content that could threaten a network. MPTCP may require TCP/IP session would improve resource usage within the
instrumentation of additional paths, network and, thus, improve user experience through higher throughput and an MPTCP-aware IDS/IPS would need to read MPTCP tokens to correlate data from mutliple subflows improved resilience to maintain comparable visibility into all of network failure.</t>
              <t>Multipath TCP provides the traffic ability to simultaneously use multiple paths between devices. Without such changes, an IDS would get an incomplete view of the traffic, increasing the risk of missing traffic peers.  This document presents a set of interest (false negatives), and increasing extensions to traditional TCP to support multipath operation.  The protocol offers the chances same type of erroneously identifying a subflow as a risk due service to only seeing partial data (false positives).</t>

          <t>Application-level middleboxes such as content-aware firewalls may alter the payload within a subflow, such applications as rewriting URIs in HTTP traffic. MPTCP will detect these using the checksum TCP (i.e., reliable bytestream), and close the affected subflow(s), if there are other subflows that can be used. If all subflows are affected, multipath
will fall back to TCP, allowing such middleboxes to change it provides the payload. MPTCP-aware middleboxes should be able components necessary to adjust the payload establish and MPTCP metadata in order not to break use multiple TCP flows across potentially disjoint paths.  This  document defines an Experimental Protocol for the connection.</t>
        </list>

        In addition, all classes of middleboxes may affect Internet community.</t>
            </abstract>
          </front>
          <seriesInfo name="RFC" value="6824"/>
          <seriesInfo name="DOI" value="10.17487/RFC6824"/>
        </reference>
        <reference anchor="RFC6897" target="https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6897" quoteTitle="true" derivedAnchor="RFC6897">
          <front>
            <title>Multipath TCP traffic in (MPTCP) Application Interface Considerations</title>
            <author initials="M." surname="Scharf" fullname="M. Scharf">
              <organization showOnFrontPage="true"/>
            </author>
            <author initials="A." surname="Ford" fullname="A. Ford">
              <organization showOnFrontPage="true"/>
            </author>
            <date year="2013" month="March"/>
            <abstract>
              <t>Multipath TCP (MPTCP) adds the following ways:
        <list style="symbols">
          <t>TCP options may be removed, or packets with unknown options dropped, by many classes capability of middleboxes. It is intended
that the initial SYN exchange, with using multiple paths to a TCP option, will regular TCP session.  Even though it is designed to be sufficient totally backward compatible to identify applications, the path capabilities. If such a packet does
not get through, MPTCP will end up falling back data transport differs compared to regular TCP.</t>

          <t>Segmentation/Coalescing (e.g., TCP segmentation offloading) might copy options between packets TCP, and might
strip some options. MPTCP's data sequence mapping includes the relative subflow sequence number instead of using the sequence
number in the segment. In this way, the mapping is independent there are several additional degrees of the packets freedom that carry it.</t>

          <t>The receive window applications may be shrunk by some middleboxes at wish to exploit.  This document summarizes the subflow level. impact that MPTCP will use may have on applications, such as changes in performance.  Furthermore, it discusses compatibility issues of MPTCP in combination with non-MPTCP-aware applications. Finally, the maximum window at data level, but will also obey
subflow-specific windows.</t>
        </list>
      </t>

    </section>

    <section anchor="Acknowledgments" title="Acknowledgments">
      <!-- <t>The authors were originally supported by Trilogy (http://www.trilogy-project.org), document describes a research project (ICT-216372) partially funded by the European Community under its Seventh Framework Program.</t>
      <t>Alan Ford was originally supported by Roke Manor Research and later Cisco Systems.</t> -->
      <t>The authors gratefully acknowledge significant input into this basic application interface that is a simple extension of TCP's interface for MPTCP-aware applications.</t>
            </abstract>
          </front>
          <seriesInfo name="RFC" value="6897"/>
          <seriesInfo name="DOI" value="10.17487/RFC6897"/>
        </reference>
        <reference anchor="RFC7323" target="https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7323" quoteTitle="true" derivedAnchor="RFC7323">
          <front>
            <title>TCP Extensions for High Performance</title>
            <author initials="D." surname="Borman" fullname="D. Borman">
              <organization showOnFrontPage="true"/>
            </author>
            <author initials="B." surname="Braden" fullname="B. Braden">
              <organization showOnFrontPage="true"/>
            </author>
            <author initials="V." surname="Jacobson" fullname="V. Jacobson">
              <organization showOnFrontPage="true"/>
            </author>
            <author initials="R." surname="Scheffenegger" fullname="R. Scheffenegger" role="editor">
              <organization showOnFrontPage="true"/>
            </author>
            <date year="2014" month="September"/>
            <abstract>
              <t>This document from S&eacute;bastien Barr&eacute; specifies a set of TCP extensions to improve performance over paths with a large bandwidth * delay product and Andrew McDonald.</t>
      <t>The authors also wish to acknowledge reviews provide reliable operation over very high-speed paths.  It defines the TCP Window Scale (WS) option and contributions from Iljitsch van Beijnum, Lars Eggert, Marcelo Bagnulo, Robert Hancock, Pasi Sarolahti, Toby Moncaster, Philip Eardley, Sergio Lembo, Lawrence Conroy, Yoshifumi Nishida, Bob Briscoe, Stein Gjessing, Andrew McGregor, Georg Hampel, Anumita Biswas, Wes Eddy, Alexey Melnikov, Francis Dupont, Adrian Farrel, Barry Leiba, Robert Sparks, Sean Turner, Stephen Farrell, Martin Stiemerling, Gregory Detal, Fabien Duchene, Xavier de Foy, Rahul Jadhav, Klemens Schragel, Mirja Kuehlewind, Sheng Jiang, Alissa Cooper, Ines Robles, Roman Danyliw, Adam Roach, Barry Leiba, Alexey Melnikov, Eric Vyncke, the TCP Timestamps (TS) option and Ben Kaduk.</t>
    </section>

    <section anchor="IANA" title="IANA Considerations"> their semantics.  The Window Scale option is used to support larger receive windows, while the Timestamps option can be used for at least two distinct mechanisms, Protection Against Wrapped Sequences (PAWS) and Round-Trip Time Measurement (RTTM), that are also described herein.</t>
              <t>This document obsoletes RFC6824 RFC 1323 and as such IANA is requested to update the TCP option space registry to point to this describes changes from it.</t>
            </abstract>
          </front>
          <seriesInfo name="RFC" value="7323"/>
          <seriesInfo name="DOI" value="10.17487/RFC7323"/>
        </reference>
        <reference anchor="RFC7413" target="https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7413" quoteTitle="true" derivedAnchor="RFC7413">
          <front>
            <title>TCP Fast Open</title>
            <author initials="Y." surname="Cheng" fullname="Y. Cheng">
              <organization showOnFrontPage="true"/>
            </author>
            <author initials="J." surname="Chu" fullname="J. Chu">
              <organization showOnFrontPage="true"/>
            </author>
            <author initials="S." surname="Radhakrishnan" fullname="S. Radhakrishnan">
              <organization showOnFrontPage="true"/>
            </author>
            <author initials="A." surname="Jain" fullname="A. Jain">
              <organization showOnFrontPage="true"/>
            </author>
            <date year="2014" month="December"/>
            <abstract>
              <t>This document for Multipath TCP, as follows:</t>

      <texttable anchor="table_tcpo" title="TCP Option Kind Numbers">
        <ttcol align="center">Kind</ttcol>
        <ttcol align="center">Length</ttcol>
        <ttcol align="center">Meaning</ttcol>
        <ttcol align="center">Reference</ttcol>

        <c>30</c>
        <c>N</c>
        <c>Multipath TCP (MPTCP)</c>
        <c>This document</c>
      </texttable>

    <section anchor="IANA_subtypes" title="MPTCP Option Subtypes">
      <t>The 4-bit MPTCP subtype sub-registry ("MPTCP Option Subtypes" under the "Transmission Control Protocol (TCP) Parameters" registry) was defined in RFC6824. Since RFC6824 was describes an Experimental not Standards Track RFC, and since no further entries have occurred beyond those pointing to RFC6824, IANA is requested experimental TCP mechanism called TCP Fast Open (TFO).  TFO allows data to replace be carried in the existing registry with <xref target="table_iana"/> SYN and with the following explanatory note.</t>

      <t>Note: This registry specifies SYN-ACK packets and consumed by the MPTCP Option Subtypes for MPTCP v1, which obsoletes receiving end during the Experimental MPTCP v0. For initial connection handshake, and saves up to one full round-trip time (RTT) compared to the MPTCP v0 subtypes, please refer standard TCP, which requires a three-way handshake (3WHS) to RFC6824.</t>

      <texttable anchor="table_iana" title="MPTCP Option Subtypes">
        <ttcol align="center">Value</ttcol>
        <ttcol align="center">Symbol</ttcol>
        <ttcol align="center">Name</ttcol>
        <ttcol align="center">Reference</ttcol>

        <c>0x0</c>
        <c>MP_CAPABLE</c>
        <c>Multipath Capable</c>
        <c>This document, <xref target="sec_init"/></c>

        <c>0x1</c>
        <c>MP_JOIN</c>
        <c>Join Connection</c>
        <c>This document, <xref target="sec_join"/></c>

        <c>0x2</c>
        <c>DSS</c>
        <c>Data Sequence Signal (Data ACK and complete before data sequence mapping)</c>
        <c>This document, <xref target="sec_generalop"/></c>

        <c>0x3</c>
        <c>ADD_ADDR</c>
        <c>Add Address</c>
        <c>This document, <xref target="sec_add_address"/></c>

        <c>0x4</c>
        <c>REMOVE_ADDR</c>
        <c>Remove Address</c>
        <c>This document, <xref target="sec_remove_addr"/></c>

        <c>0x5</c>
        <c>MP_PRIO</c>
        <c>Change Subflow Priority</c>
        <c>This document, <xref target="sec_policy"/></c>

        <c>0x6</c>
        <c>MP_FAIL</c>
        <c>Fallback</c>
        <c>This document, <xref target="sec_fallback"/></c>

        <c>0x7</c>
        <c>MP_FASTCLOSE</c>
        <c>Fast Close</c>
        <c>This document, <xref target="sec_fastclose"/></c>

        <c>0x8</c>
        <c>MP_TCPRST</c>
        <c>Subflow Reset</c>
        <c>This document, <xref target="sec_reset"/></c>

        <c>0xf</c>
        <c>MP_EXPERIMENTAL</c>
        <c>Reserved for private experiments</c>
        <c></c>

      </texttable>

      <t>Values 0x9 through 0xe are currently unassigned. Option 0xf is reserved for use by private experiments. Its use may can be formalized exchanged.  However, TFO deviates from the standard TCP semantics, since the data in a future specification. Future assignments the SYN could be replayed to an application in some rare circumstances.  Applications should not use TFO unless they can tolerate this registry are to be defined by Standards Action issue, as defined by <xref target="RFC8126"/>.  Assignments consist of detailed in the MPTCP subtype's symbolic name and its associated value, Applicability section.</t>
            </abstract>
          </front>
          <seriesInfo name="RFC" value="7413"/>
          <seriesInfo name="DOI" value="10.17487/RFC7413"/>
        </reference>
        <reference anchor="RFC7430" target="https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7430" quoteTitle="true" derivedAnchor="RFC7430">
          <front>
            <title>Analysis of Residual Threats and a reference to its specification.</t>
    </section>

    <section anchor="IANA_handshake" title="MPTCP Handshake Algorithms">

      <t>The "MPTCP Handshake Algorithms" sub-registry under Possible Fixes for Multipath TCP (MPTCP)</title>
            <author initials="M." surname="Bagnulo" fullname="M. Bagnulo">
              <organization showOnFrontPage="true"/>
            </author>
            <author initials="C." surname="Paasch" fullname="C. Paasch">
              <organization showOnFrontPage="true"/>
            </author>
            <author initials="F." surname="Gont" fullname="F. Gont">
              <organization showOnFrontPage="true"/>
            </author>
            <author initials="O." surname="Bonaventure" fullname="O. Bonaventure">
              <organization showOnFrontPage="true"/>
            </author>
            <author initials="C." surname="Raiciu" fullname="C. Raiciu">
              <organization showOnFrontPage="true"/>
            </author>
            <date year="2015" month="July"/>
            <abstract>
              <t>This document analyzes the "Transmission Control Protocol (TCP) Parameters" registry was defined in RFC6824. Since RFC6824 was an Experimental not Standards Track RFC, residual threats for Multipath TCP (MPTCP) and since no further entries have occurred beyond those pointing to RFC6824, IANA is requested explores possible solutions to replace the existing registry address them.</t>
            </abstract>
          </front>
          <seriesInfo name="RFC" value="7430"/>
          <seriesInfo name="DOI" value="10.17487/RFC7430"/>
        </reference>
        <reference anchor="RFC8041" target="https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8041" quoteTitle="true" derivedAnchor="RFC8041">
          <front>
            <title>Use Cases and Operational Experience with <xref target="table_crypto"/> Multipath TCP</title>
            <author initials="O." surname="Bonaventure" fullname="O. Bonaventure">
              <organization showOnFrontPage="true"/>
            </author>
            <author initials="C." surname="Paasch" fullname="C. Paasch">
              <organization showOnFrontPage="true"/>
            </author>
            <author initials="G." surname="Detal" fullname="G. Detal">
              <organization showOnFrontPage="true"/>
            </author>
            <date year="2017" month="January"/>
            <abstract>
              <t>This document discusses both use cases and operational experience with the following explanatory note.</t>

      <t>Note: This registry specifies the MPTCP Handshake Algorithms for MPTCP v1, which obsoletes the Experimental MPTCP v0. For the MPTCP v0 subtypes, please refer Multipath TCP (MPTCP) in real networks.  It lists several prominent use cases where Multipath TCP has been considered and is being used.  It also gives insight to RFC6824.</t>

      <texttable anchor="table_crypto" title="MPTCP Handshake Algorithms">
        <ttcol align="center">Flag Bit</ttcol>
        <ttcol align="center">Meaning</ttcol>
        <ttcol align="center">Reference</ttcol>

        <c>A</c>
        <c>Checksum required</c>
        <c>This document, <xref target="sec_init"/></c>

        <c>B</c>
        <c>Extensibility</c>
        <c>This document, <xref target="sec_init"/></c>

        <c>C</c>
        <c>Do not attempt some heuristics and decisions that have helped to establish new subflows realize these use cases and suggests possible improvements.</t>
            </abstract>
          </front>
          <seriesInfo name="RFC" value="8041"/>
          <seriesInfo name="DOI" value="10.17487/RFC8041"/>
        </reference>
        <reference anchor="RFC8126" target="https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8126" quoteTitle="true" derivedAnchor="RFC8126">
          <front>
            <title>Guidelines for Writing an IANA Considerations Section in RFCs</title>
            <author initials="M." surname="Cotton" fullname="M. Cotton">
              <organization showOnFrontPage="true"/>
            </author>
            <author initials="B." surname="Leiba" fullname="B. Leiba">
              <organization showOnFrontPage="true"/>
            </author>
            <author initials="T." surname="Narten" fullname="T. Narten">
              <organization showOnFrontPage="true"/>
            </author>
            <date year="2017" month="June"/>
            <abstract>
              <t>Many protocols make use of points of extensibility that use constants to the source address.</c>
        <c>This document, <xref target="sec_init"/></c>

        <c>D-G</c>
        <c>Unassigned</c>
        <c></c>

        <c>H</c>
        <c>HMAC-SHA256</c>
        <c>This document, <xref target="sec_join"/></c>
      </texttable>

      <t>Note identify various protocol parameters.  To ensure that the meanings of bits D through H can be dependent upon bit B,
      depending on how Extensibility is defined in future specifications; see
      <xref target="sec_init"/> for more information.</t>

      <t>Future assignments values in this registry are also these fields do not have conflicting uses and to be defined promote interoperability, their allocations are often coordinated by Standards Action as defined a central record keeper.  For IETF protocols, that role is filled by <xref target="RFC8126"/>.
      Assignments consist of the value of the flags, Internet Assigned Numbers Authority (IANA).</t>
              <t>To make assignments in a symbolic name for given registry prudently, guidance describing the algorithm, conditions under which new values should be assigned, as well as when and a reference how modifications to its specification.</t>
    </section>

    <section anchor="IANA_rst" title="MP_TCPRST Reason Codes">
      <t>IANA existing values can be made, is requested to create needed.  This document defines a further sub-registry, "MPTCP MP_TCPRST Reason Codes" under the "Transmission Control Protocol (TCP) Parameters" registry, based on the reason code in MP_TCPRST (<xref target="sec_reset"/>) message. Initial values framework for this registry are given in <xref target="table_rstcodes"/>; future assignments are to be defined by Specification Required as defined by <xref target="RFC8126"/>. Assignments consist of the value of the code, a short description documentation of its meaning, and a reference these guidelines by specification authors, in order to its specification. The maximum value is 0xff.</t>
      <t>As assure that the provided guidance to for the Designated Expert <xref target="RFC8126"/>, assignments should not normally be refused unless codepoint space is becoming scarce, providing that there IANA Considerations is a clear distinction from other, already-existing codes, and also providing there is sufficient guidance for implementors both sending and receiving these codes.</t>

      <texttable anchor="table_rstcodes" title="MPTCP MP_TCPRST Reason Codes">
        <ttcol align="center">Code</ttcol>
        <ttcol align="center">Meaning</ttcol>
        <ttcol align="center">Reference</ttcol>

        <c>0x00</c>
        <c>Unspecified TCP error</c>
        <c>This document, <xref target="sec_reset"/></c>

        <c>0x01</c>
        <c>MPTCP specific error</c>
        <c>This document, <xref target="sec_reset"/></c>

        <c>0x02</c>
        <c>Lack of resources</c>
        <c>This document, <xref target="sec_reset"/></c>

        <c>0x03</c>
        <c>Administratively prohibited</c>
        <c>This document, <xref target="sec_reset"/></c>

        <c>0x04</c>
        <c>Too much outstanding data</c>
        <c>This document, <xref target="sec_reset"/></c>

        <c>0x05</c>
        <c>Unacceptable performance</c>
        <c>This document, <xref target="sec_reset"/></c>

        <c>0x06</c>
        <c>Middlebox interference</c>
        <c>This document, <xref target="sec_reset"/></c>
      </texttable>
      </section>

    </section>
  </middle>

  <!--  *****BACK MATTER ***** -->

  <back>

    <references title="Normative References">
      &RFC0793;
      &RFC2104;
      &RFC2119;
      &RFC5961;
      &RFC6234;
      &RFC8174;

    </references>

    <references title="Informative References">
      &RFC1122;
      &RFC7323;
      &RFC1918;
      &RFC2018;
      &RFC5681;
      &RFC2979;
      &RFC2992;
      &RFC3022;
      &RFC3135;
      &RFC4086;
      &RFC4987;
      &RFC8126;
      &RFC6181;
      &RFC6356;
      &RFC6897;
      &RFC6182;
      &RFC6528;
      &RFC7413;
      &RFC7430;
      &RFC8041;

<!--      &TCPLO; draft-ananth-tcpm-tcpoptext-00; Expired--> addresses the various issues that are likely in the operation of a registry.</t>
              <t>This is the third edition of this document; it obsoletes RFC 5226.</t>
            </abstract>
          </front>
          <seriesInfo name="BCP" value="26"/>
          <seriesInfo name="RFC" value="8126"/>
          <seriesInfo name="DOI" value="10.17487/RFC8126"/>
        </reference>
        <reference anchor='TCPLO'> anchor="I-D.ananth-tcpm-tcpoptext" quoteTitle="true" target="https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ananth-tcpm-tcpoptext-00" derivedAnchor="TCPLO">
          <front>
            <title>TCP option space extension</title>
            <author initials='A' surname='Ramaiah' fullname='Anantha Ramaiah'> initials="A" surname="Ramaiah" fullname="Anantha Ramaiah">
              <organization /> showOnFrontPage="true"/>
            </author>
            <date month='March' day='26' year='2012' />

<abstract><t>The month="March" day="26" year="2012"/>
            <abstract>
              <t>The document goals are as follows: Firstly, this document summarizes the motivations for extending TCP option space.  Secondly, It tries to summarize the various known issues that needs to be taken into account while extending the TCP option space.  Thirdly, it briefly provides a short summary of the various TCP option space proposals that has been proposed so far.  Some additional proposals which includes variations to the existing proposals are also presented. The goal of this document is to rejuvenate the discussions on this topic and eventually to converge on a scheme for extending TCP option space.</t></abstract>

</front>

<seriesInfo name='Work in' value='Progress' />

</reference>

<reference anchor='norm' target="http://www.usenix.org/events/sec01/full_papers/handley/handley.pdf"><front><title abbrev="Network Intrusion Detection: Evasion, Traffic Normalization, and End-to-End Protocol Semantics ">Network Intrusion Detection: Evasion, Traffic Normalization, and End-to-End Protocol Semantics</title><author initials='M.' surname='Handley' fullname='Mark Handley'><organization>ACIRI</organization></author><author initials='V.' surname='Paxson' fullname='Vern Paxson'><organization>ACIRI</organization></author><author initials='C.' surname='Kreibich' fullname='Christian Kreibich'><organization>Technische Universitat Munchen</organization></author><date year="2001"/></front><seriesInfo name="Usenix Security" value="2001"/></reference>

<reference anchor='howhard' target="https://www.usenix.org/conference/nsdi12/how-hard-can-it-be-designing-and-implementing-deployable-multipath-tcp">
<front><title abbrev="How Hard Can It Be? Designing and Implementing a Deployable Multipath TCP">How Hard Can It Be? Designing and Implementing a Deployable Multipath TCP</title>
<author initials='C.' surname='Raiciu' fullname='Costin Raiciu'><organization>Universitatea Politehnica Bucuresti</organization></author>
<author initials='C.' surname='Paasch' fullname='Christoph Paasch'><organization>Universite Catholique de Louvain</organization></author>
<author initials='S.' surname='Barre' fullname='Sebastien Barre'><organization>Universite Catholique de Louvain</organization></author>
<author initials='A.' surname='Ford' fullname='Alan Ford'><organization/></author>
<author initials='M.' surname='Honda' fullname='Michio Honda'><organization>Keio University</organization></author>
<author initials='F.' surname='Duchene' fullname='Fabien Duchene'><organization>Universite Catholique de Louvain</organization></author>
<author initials='O.' surname='Bonaventure' fullname='Olivier Bonaventure'><organization>Universite Catholique de Louvain</organization></author>
<author initials='M.' surname='Handley' fullname='Mark Handley'><organization>University College London</organization></author>
<date year="2012" /> space.</t>
            </abstract>
          </front>
          <seriesInfo name="Usenix Symposium on Networked Systems Design and Implementation" value="2012"/> name="Internet-Draft" value="draft-ananth-tcpm-tcpoptext-00"/>
          <format type="TXT" target="http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ananth-tcpm-tcpoptext-00.txt"/>
          <refcontent>Work in Progress</refcontent>
        </reference>

<reference anchor='deployments' target="https://www.ietfjournal.org/multipath-tcp-deployments/"><front><title abbrev="MPTCP Deployments">Multipath TCP Deployments</title><author initials='O.' surname='Bonaventure' fullname='Olivier Bonaventure'><organization>Universite Catholique de Louvain</organization></author><author initials='S.' surname='Seo' fullname='SungHoon Seo'></author><date day="1" month="November" year="2016"/></front><seriesInfo name="IETF Journal" value="2016"/></reference>
      </references>
    </references>
    <section title="Notes anchor="app_options" numbered="true" toc="include" removeInRFC="false" pn="section-appendix.a">
      <name slugifiedName="name-notes-on-use-of-tcp-options">Notes on Use of TCP Options" anchor="app_options">
      <t>The Options</name>
      <t pn="section-appendix.a-1">The TCP option space is limited due to the length of the Data Offset field in the TCP header (4 bits), which defines the TCP header length in 32-bit words. With the standard TCP header being 20 bytes, this leaves a maximum of 40 bytes for options, and many of these may already be used by options such as timestamp and SACK.</t>

      <t>We have
      <t pn="section-appendix.a-2">We performed a brief study on the commonly used TCP options in SYN,
 data, and pure ACK packets, packets and found that there is enough room
 to fit all the options we propose using discussed in this document.</t>

      <t>SYN
      <t pn="section-appendix.a-3">SYN packets typically include the following options: Maximum Segment Size (MSS) (4 bytes),
      window scale (3 bytes), SACK permitted (2 bytes), (2 bytes), and timestamp (10 bytes) options. Together these
      (10 bytes). The sum to 19 bytes. of these options is 19 bytes. Some operating
      systems appear to pad each option up to a word boundary, thus using 24
      bytes (a brief survey suggests that Windows XP and Mac OS X do this, whereas Linux does not).

      Optimistically, therefore, we have 21 bytes spare, available, or 16 if it has options have to be
      word-aligned. In either case, however, the SYN versions of Multipath Capable (12 bytes)
      MP_CAPABLE (12 bytes) and Join MP_JOIN (12 or 16 bytes) options 16 bytes) will fit in this remaining space.</t>

      <t>Note
      <t pn="section-appendix.a-4">Note that due to the use of a 64-bit data-level sequence space, it is
      feasible that MPTCP will not require the timestamp option for
      protection against wrapped sequence numbers (PAWS (per the Protection
      Against Wrapped Sequences (PAWS) mechanism, as described in <xref target="RFC7323"/>), target="RFC7323" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="RFC7323"/>), since the data-level sequence space has far less
      chance of wrapping. Confirmation of the validity of this optimisation optimization is
      left for further study.</t>

      <t>TCP
      <t pn="section-appendix.a-5">TCP data packets typically carry timestamp options in every packet,
      taking 10 bytes (or 12 12, with padding). That leaves 30 bytes (or 28, if
      word-aligned). The Data Sequence Signal (DSS) DSS option varies in length length, depending on whether (1) whether the data sequence mapping and DATA_ACK
      Data Sequence Mapping, DATA_ACK, or both are included, and whether (2) whether the
      sequence numbers in use are 4 or 8 octets. octets, and (3) whether the
      checksum is present. The maximum size of the DSS option is 28 bytes, so even that will fit in the available space. But unless a connection is both bidirectional and high-bandwidth, it is unlikely that all that option space will be required on each DSS option.</t>

      <t>Within
      <t pn="section-appendix.a-6">Within the DSS option, it is not necessary to include the data sequence mapping Data Sequence Mapping and DATA_ACK in each packet, and in many cases it may be possible to alternate their presence (so long as the mapping covers the data being sent in the following subsequent packet). It would also be possible to alternate between 4- 4-byte and 8-byte sequence numbers in each option.</t>

      <t>On
      <t pn="section-appendix.a-7">On subflow and connection setup, an MPTCP option is also set on the third packet (an ACK). These are 20 bytes (for Multipath Capable) MP_CAPABLE) and 24 bytes 24 bytes (for Join), MP_JOIN), both of which will fit in the available option space.</t>

      <t>Pure
      <t pn="section-appendix.a-8">Pure ACKs in TCP typically contain only timestamps (10 bytes). Here, Multipath TCP typically
needs to encode only the DATA_ACK (maximum of 12 bytes). Occasionally, ACKs will contain SACK information. Depending
on the number of lost packets, SACK may utilize the entire option space. If a DATA_ACK had to be
included, then it is probably necessary to reduce the number of SACK blocks to accommodate the
DATA_ACK. However, the presence of the DATA_ACK is unlikely to be necessary in a case where SACK is
in use, since until at least some of the SACK blocks have been retransmitted, the cumulative
data-level ACK will not be moving forward (or if it does, due to retransmissions on another path,
then that path can also be used to transmit the new DATA_ACK).</t>

      <t>The
      <t pn="section-appendix.a-9">The ADD_ADDR option can be between 16 and 30 bytes, depending on whether
      (1) whether IPv4 or IPv6 is used, used and whether (2) whether or not the port number is
      present. It is unlikely that such signaling would fit in a data packet
      (although if there is space, it is fine to include it). It is
      recommended to use that duplicate ACKs not be used with no any other payload or options options, in
      order to transmit these rare signals. Note that this is the reason for
      mandating that duplicate ACKs with MPTCP options are not be taken as a signal of congestion.</t>
    </section>
    <section title="TCP anchor="app_tfo" numbered="true" toc="include" removeInRFC="false" pn="section-appendix.b">
      <name slugifiedName="name-tcp-fast-open-and-mptcp">TCP Fast Open and MPTCP" anchor="app_tfo">
      <t>TCP MPTCP</name>
      <t pn="section-appendix.b-1">TCP Fast Open (TFO) is an experimental TCP extension, described in
      <xref target="RFC7413"/>, target="RFC7413" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="RFC7413"/>, which has been introduced to
      allow the sending of data
      one RTT earlier than with regular TCP. This is
      considered a valuable gain gain, as very short connections are very common,
      especially for HTTP request/response schemes. It achieves this by sending
      the SYN-segment SYN segment together with the application's data and allowing the listener to reply
      immediately with data after the SYN/ACK. <xref target="RFC7413"/> target="RFC7413" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="RFC7413"/> secures
      this mechanism, mechanism by using a new TCP option that includes a cookie which that
      is negotiated in a preceding connection.</t>

	<t>When
      <t pn="section-appendix.b-2">When using TCP Fast Open TFO in conjunction with MPTCP, there are two key
        points to take into account, as detailed hereafter.</t> below.</t>
      <section title="TFO cookie request anchor="tfocookie" numbered="true" toc="include" removeInRFC="false" pn="section-b.1">
        <name slugifiedName="name-tfo-cookie-request-with-mpt">TFO Cookie Request with MPTCP" anchor="tfocookie">
	  <t>When MPTCP</name>
        <t pn="section-b.1-1">When a TFO initiator first connects to a listener, it cannot immediately
          include data in the SYN for security reasons <xref target="RFC7413"/>. target="RFC7413" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="RFC7413"/>.
          Instead, it requests a cookie that will be used in subsequent
          connections. This is done with the TCP cookie request/response options,
          of respectively 2 bytes and 6-18 bytes bytes, respectively (depending on the chosen cookie length).</t>

	  <t>TFO
        <t pn="section-b.1-2">TFO and MPTCP can be combined combined, provided that the total length of all the
          options does not exceed the maximum 40 bytes possible in TCP:

	  <list style="symbols">
	  <t>In

        </t>
        <ul spacing="normal" bare="false" empty="false" pn="section-b.1-3">
          <li pn="section-b.1-3.1">In the SYN: MPTCP uses a 4-bytes long 4-byte MP_CAPABLE option. The sum
          of the MPTCP and TFO options sum up to is 6 bytes. With typical TCP-options TCP options using up
          to 19 bytes in the SYN (24 bytes if options are padded at a word boundary),
          there is enough space to combine the MP_CAPABLE with the TFO Cookie Request.</t>

	  <t>In cookie request.</li>
          <li pn="section-b.1-3.2">In the SYN+ACK: SYN + ACK: MPTCP uses a 12-bytes long 12-byte MP_CAPABLE option, but
          now the TFO option can be as long as 18 bytes. Since the maximum option length
          may be exceeded, it is up to the listener to solve avoid this problem by using a
          shorter cookie.
          As an example, if we consider that 19 bytes are used for classical
          TCP options, the maximum possible cookie length would be
	  of
          7 bytes. Note that that, for the SYN packet, the same limitation applies to subsequent
	  connections, for the SYN packet
          connections (because the initiator then echoes back
          the cookie back to the listener). Finally, if the security impact of reducing
          the cookie size is not deemed acceptable, the listener can reduce the
          amount of space used by other TCP-options TCP options by omitting the TCP timestamps (as
          outlined in <xref target="app_options"/>).</t>
	  </list></t> target="app_options" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="Appendix A"/>).</li>
        </ul>
      </section>
      <section title="Data sequence mapping anchor="tfodata" numbered="true" toc="include" removeInRFC="false" pn="section-b.2">
        <name slugifiedName="name-data-sequence-mapping-under">Data Sequence Mapping under TFO" anchor="tfodata">
	  <t>MPTCP uses, in TFO</name>
        <t pn="section-b.2-1">In the TCP establishment phase, MPTCP uses a key exchange that is
          used to generate the Initial Data Sequence Numbers (IDSNs). In particular,
          the SYN with MP_CAPABLE occupies the first octet of the data sequence
          space. With TFO, one way to handle the data sent together with the SYN
          would be to consider an implicit DSS mapping that covers that SYN segment
          (since there is not enough space in the SYN to include a DSS option).
          The problem with that approach is that if a middlebox modifies the TFO
          data, this will not be noticed by MPTCP because of the absence of a
	  DSS-checksum.
          DSS checksum. For example, a TCP TCP‑aware (but not MPTCP)-aware MPTCP-aware) middlebox could
          insert bytes at the beginning of the stream and adapt the TCP checksum
          and sequence numbers accordingly. With an implicit mapping, this information would
          give to the initiator and listener a different view on of the DSS-mapping, with DSS
          mapping; there would be no
          way to detect this inconsistency as inconsistency, because the DSS checksum is not present.</t>

	  <t>To
        <t pn="section-b.2-2">To solve this, this issue, the TFO data must not be considered part of the
	  Data Sequence Number
          data sequence number space: the SYN with MP_CAPABLE still occupies
          the first octet of data sequence space, but then the first non-TFO
          data byte occupies the second octet. This guarantees that, if the
          use of DSS-checksum the DSS checksum is negotiated, all data in the data sequence
          number space is checksummed. We also note that this does not entail
          a loss of functionality, because TFO-data TFO data is always only sent on the
          initial subflow subflow, before any attempt to create additional subflows.</t>
      </section>
      <section title="Connection establishment examples" anchor="tfoexamples">
          <t>The following shows a anchor="tfoexamples" numbered="true" toc="include" removeInRFC="false" pn="section-b.3">
        <name slugifiedName="name-connection-establishment-ex">Connection Establishment Examples</name>
        <t pn="section-b.3-1">A few examples of possible TFO+MPTCP "TFO + MPTCP"
          establishment scenarios.</t>

          <t>Before scenarios are shown below.</t>
        <t pn="section-b.3-2">Before an initiator can send data together with the SYN, it must request
          a cookie to from the listener, as shown in <xref target="fig_tfocookie"/>. target="fig_tfocookie" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="Figure 18"/>.  (Note:  The sequence number
and length are annotated in <xref target="fig_tfocookie" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="Figure 18"/> as
Seq(Length) (e.g., "S. 0(0)") and used as such in the subsequent figures
        (e.g., "S  0(20)" in <xref target="fig_tfodata" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="Figure 19"/>).) This is done by simply combining the TFO and MPTCP options.</t>
        <figure align="center" anchor="fig_tfocookie" title="Cookie request - sequence number and length are annotated as Seq(Length) and used hereafter in the figures."> align="left" suppress-title="false" pn="figure-18">
          <name slugifiedName="name-cookie-request">Cookie Request</name>
          <artwork align="left"><![CDATA[ align="left" name="" type="" alt="" pn="section-b.3-3.1">
initiator                                                    listener
    |                                                           |
    |   S Seq=0(Length=0) <MP_CAPABLE>, <TFO &lt;MP_CAPABLE&gt;, &lt;TFO cookie request> request&gt;    |
    | -----------------------------------------------------------> --------------------------------------------------------&gt; |
    |                                                           |
    |   S. 0(0) ack 1 <MP_CAPABLE>, <TFO cookie> &lt;MP_CAPABLE&gt;, &lt;TFO cookie&gt;                |
    | <----------------------------------------------------------- &lt;-------------------------------------------------------- |
    |                                                           |
    |   .  0(0) ack 1 <MP_CAPABLE> &lt;MP_CAPABLE&gt;                              |
    | -----------------------------------------------------------> --------------------------------------------------------&gt; |
    |                                                           |
           ]]></artwork> </artwork>
        </figure>

          <t>Once
        <t pn="section-b.3-4">Once this is done, the received cookie can be used for TFO, as shown
          in <xref target="fig_tfodata"/>. target="fig_tfodata" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="Figure 19"/>. In this example, the initiator first
          sends 20 bytes in the SYN. The listener immediately replies with 100 bytes
          following the SYN-ACK upon SYN-ACK, to which the initiator replies with 20 more bytes.
          Note that the last segment in the figure
          has a TCP sequence number of 21, while the DSS subflow sequence
          number is 1 (because the TFO data is not part of the data sequence
          number space, as explained in Section <xref target="tfodata"/>.</t> target="tfodata" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="Appendix B.2"/>.</t>
        <figure align="center" anchor="fig_tfodata" title="The listener supports TFO"> align="left" suppress-title="false" pn="figure-19">
          <name slugifiedName="name-the-listener-supports-tfo">The Listener Supports TFO</name>
          <artwork align="left"><![CDATA[ align="left" name="" type="" alt="" pn="section-b.3-5.1">
initiator                                                    listener
    |                                                           |
    |    S  0(20) <MP_CAPABLE>, <TFO cookie> &lt;MP_CAPABLE&gt;, &lt;TFO cookie&gt;                    |
    | -----------------------------------------------------------> --------------------------------------------------------&gt; |
    |                                                           |
    |    S. 0(0) ack 21 <MP_CAPABLE> &lt;MP_CAPABLE&gt;                            |
    | <----------------------------------------------------------- &lt;-------------------------------------------------------- |
    |                                                           |
    |    .  1(100) ack 21 <DSS &lt;DSS ack=1 seq=1 ssn=1 dlen=100> dlen=100&gt;      |
    | <----------------------------------------------------------- &lt;-------------------------------------------------------- |
    |                                                           |
    |    .  21(0) ack 1 <MP_CAPABLE> &lt;MP_CAPABLE&gt;                            |
    | -----------------------------------------------------------> --------------------------------------------------------&gt; |
    |                                                           |
    |    .  21(20) ack 101 <DSS &lt;DSS ack=101 seq=1 ssn=1 dlen=20> dlen=20&gt;    |
    | -----------------------------------------------------------> --------------------------------------------------------&gt; |
    |                                                           |
           ]]></artwork> </artwork>
        </figure>

          <t>In
        <t pn="section-b.3-6">In <xref target="fig_tfofallback"/>, target="fig_tfofallback" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="Figure 20"/>, the listener does not support TFO.  The initiator detects
          that no state is created in the listener (as no data is acked), ACKed) and now
          sends the MP_CAPABLE in the third ack, packet, in order for the listener to
          build its MPTCP context at then the end of the establishment.  Now, the
          tfo
          TFO data, when retransmitted, becomes part of the data sequence mapping Data Sequence Mapping
          because it is effectively sent (in fact re-sent) re‑sent) after the
          establishment.</t>
        <figure align="center" anchor="fig_tfofallback" title="The listener does not support TFO"> align="left" suppress-title="false" pn="figure-20">
          <name slugifiedName="name-the-listener-does-not-suppo">The Listener Does Not Support TFO</name>
          <artwork align="left"><![CDATA[ align="left" name="" type="" alt="" pn="section-b.3-7.1">
initiator                                                    listener
    |                                                           |
    |    S  0(20) <MP_CAPABLE>, <TFO cookie> &lt;MP_CAPABLE&gt;, &lt;TFO cookie&gt;                    |
    | -----------------------------------------------------------> --------------------------------------------------------&gt; |
    |                                                           |
    |    S. 0(0) ack 1 <MP_CAPABLE> &lt;MP_CAPABLE&gt;                             |
    | <----------------------------------------------------------- &lt;-------------------------------------------------------- |
    |                                                           |
    |    .  1(0) ack 1 <MP_CAPABLE> &lt;MP_CAPABLE&gt;                             |
    | -----------------------------------------------------------> --------------------------------------------------------&gt; |
    |                                                           |
    |    .  1(20) ack 1 <DSS &lt;DSS ack=1 seq=1 ssn=1 dlen=20> dlen=20&gt;         |
    | -----------------------------------------------------------> --------------------------------------------------------&gt; |
    |                                                           |
    |    .  0(0) ack 21 <DSS &lt;DSS ack=21 seq=1 ssn=1 dlen=0> dlen=0&gt;         |
    | <----------------------------------------------------------- &lt;-------------------------------------------------------- |
    |                                                           |
           ]]></artwork> </artwork>
        </figure>

          <t>It
        <t pn="section-b.3-8">It is also possible that the listener acknowledges only part of the TFO
          data, as illustrated in <xref target="fig_tfopartial"/>. target="fig_tfopartial" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="Figure 21"/>. The
          initiator will simply retransmit the missing data together with a DSS-mapping.</t>
 DSS mapping.</t>
        <figure align="center" anchor="fig_tfopartial" title="Partial data acknowledgement"> align="left" suppress-title="false" pn="figure-21">
          <name slugifiedName="name-partial-data-acknowledgment">Partial Data Acknowledgment</name>
          <artwork align="left"><![CDATA[ align="left" name="" type="" alt="" pn="section-b.3-9.1">
initiator                                                    listener
    |                                                           |
    |    S  0(1000) <MP_CAPABLE>, <TFO cookie> &lt;MP_CAPABLE&gt;, &lt;TFO cookie&gt;                  |
    | -----------------------------------------------------------> --------------------------------------------------------&gt; |
    |                                                           |
    |    S. 0(0) ack 501 <MP_CAPABLE> &lt;MP_CAPABLE&gt;                           |
    | <----------------------------------------------------------- &lt;-------------------------------------------------------- |
    |                                                           |
    |    .  501(0) ack 1 <MP_CAPABLE> &lt;MP_CAPABLE&gt;                           |
    | -----------------------------------------------------------> --------------------------------------------------------&gt; |
    |                                                           |
    |    .  501(500) ack 1 <DSS &lt;DSS ack=1 seq=1 ssn=1 dlen=500> dlen=500&gt;     |
    | -----------------------------------------------------------> --------------------------------------------------------&gt; |
    |                                                           |
           ]]></artwork> </artwork>
        </figure>
      </section>
    </section>
    <section title="Control Blocks" anchor="app_tcb">
<t>Conceptually, anchor="app_tcb" numbered="true" toc="include" removeInRFC="false" pn="section-appendix.c">
      <name slugifiedName="name-control-blocks">Control Blocks</name>
      <t pn="section-appendix.c-1">Conceptually, an MPTCP connection can be represented as an MPTCP protocol control
block (PCB) that contains several variables that track the progress and the
state of the MPTCP connection and a set of linked TCP control blocks
that correspond to the subflows that have been established.</t>

<t>RFC
      <t pn="section-appendix.c-2">RFC 793 <xref target="RFC0793"/> target="RFC0793" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="RFC0793"/> specifies several state variables. Whenever possible, we reuse
the same terminology as RFC 793 RFC 793 to describe the state variables that are
maintained by MPTCP.</t>
      <section title="MPTCP numbered="true" toc="include" removeInRFC="false" pn="section-c.1">
        <name slugifiedName="name-mptcp-control-block">MPTCP Control Block">
<t>The Block</name>
        <t pn="section-c.1-1">The MPTCP control block contains the following variable variables per connection.</t>
        <section title="Authentication and Metadata">
<t><list style="hanging">
<t hangText="Local.Token numbered="true" toc="include" removeInRFC="false" pn="section-c.1.1">
          <name slugifiedName="name-authentication-and-metadata">Authentication and Metadata</name>
          <dl newline="false" spacing="normal" indent="3" pn="section-c.1.1-1">
            <dt pn="section-c.1.1-1.1">Local.Token (32 bits):"> bits):</dt>
            <dd pn="section-c.1.1-1.2"> This is the token chosen by the local host on
this MPTCP connection. The token must be unique among all established
MPTCP connections, connections and is generated from the local key.</t>
<t hangText="Local.Key key.</dd>
            <dt pn="section-c.1.1-1.3">Local.Key (64 bits):"> bits):</dt>
            <dd pn="section-c.1.1-1.4"> This is the key sent by the local host on this
MPTCP connection.</t>
<t hangText="Remote.Token connection.</dd>
            <dt pn="section-c.1.1-1.5">Remote.Token (32 bits):"> bits):</dt>
            <dd pn="section-c.1.1-1.6"> This is the token chosen by the remote host on
this MPTCP connection, generated from the remote key.</t>
<t hangText="Remote.Key key.</dd>
            <dt pn="section-c.1.1-1.7">Remote.Key (64 bits):"> bits):</dt>
            <dd pn="section-c.1.1-1.8"> This is the key chosen by the remote host on
this MPTCP connection</t>
<t hangText="MPTCP.Checksum (flag):"> connection.</dd>
            <dt pn="section-c.1.1-1.9">MPTCP.Checksum (flag):</dt>
            <dd pn="section-c.1.1-1.10"> This flag is set to true if at least one of the
hosts has set the A "A" bit in the MP_CAPABLE options exchanged during
connection establishment,
and establishment; otherwise,
it is set to false otherwise. false.  If this flag is set, the checksum must be computed in
all DSS options.</t>
</list></t> options.</dd>
          </dl>
        </section>
        <section title="Sending Side">
<t><list style="hanging">
<t hangText="SND.UNA numbered="true" toc="include" removeInRFC="false" pn="section-c.1.2">
          <name slugifiedName="name-sending-side">Sending Side</name>
          <dl newline="false" spacing="normal" indent="3" pn="section-c.1.2-1">
            <dt pn="section-c.1.2-1.1">SND.UNA (64 bits):"> bits):</dt>
            <dd pn="section-c.1.2-1.2"> This is the data sequence number of the next byte to be
acknowledged, at the MPTCP connection level. This variable is updated
upon reception of a DSS option containing a DATA_ACK.</t>
<t hangText="SND.NXT DATA_ACK.</dd>
            <dt pn="section-c.1.2-1.3">SND.NXT (64 bits):"> bits):</dt>
            <dd pn="section-c.1.2-1.4"> This is the data sequence number of the next byte to be
sent. SND.NXT is used to determine the value of the DSN in the DSS option.</t>
<t hangText="SND.WND option.</dd>
            <dt pn="section-c.1.2-1.5">SND.WND (32 bits with RFC 7323, 16 bits otherwise):"> bits):</dt>
            <dd pn="section-c.1.2-1.6"> This is the sending send window.  32 bits if the features in RFC
            7323 are used; 16 bits otherwise. MPTCP maintains the sending send window at the MPTCP connection level level, and the same
window is shared by all subflows. All subflows use the MPTCP connection
level connection-level
SND.WND to compute the SEQ.WND value that is sent in each
transmitted segment.</t>
</list></t> segment.</dd>
          </dl>
        </section>
        <section title="Receiving Side">
<t><list style="hanging">
<t hangText="RCV.NXT numbered="true" toc="include" removeInRFC="false" pn="section-c.1.3">
          <name slugifiedName="name-receiving-side">Receiving Side</name>
          <dl newline="false" spacing="normal" indent="3" pn="section-c.1.3-1">
            <dt pn="section-c.1.3-1.1">RCV.NXT (64 bits):"> bits):</dt>
            <dd pn="section-c.1.3-1.2"> This is the data sequence number of the next byte that
is expected on the MPTCP connection. This state variable is modified
upon reception of in-order data. The value of RCV.NXT is used to specify
the DATA_ACK that is sent in the DSS option on all subflows.</t>
<t hangText="RCV.WND subflows.</dd>
            <dt pn="section-c.1.3-1.3">RCV.WND (32 bits with RFC 7323, 16 bits otherwise):"> bits):</dt>
            <dd pn="section-c.1.3-1.4"> This is the connection-level receive window, which is the
            maximum of the RCV.WND on all the subflows.</t>
</list></t> subflows.  32 bits if the features in RFC 7323 are used; 16 bits otherwise.</dd>
          </dl>
        </section>
      </section>
      <section title="TCP numbered="true" toc="include" removeInRFC="false" pn="section-c.2">
        <name slugifiedName="name-tcp-control-blocks">TCP Control Blocks">
<t>The Blocks</name>
        <t pn="section-c.2-1">The MPTCP control block also contains a list of the TCP control blocks
that are associated with the MPTCP connection.</t>

<t>Note
        <t pn="section-c.2-2">Note that the TCP control block on the TCP subflows does not contain the
RCV.WND and SND.WND state variables variables, as these are maintained at the MPTCP
connection level and not at the subflow level.</t>

<t>Inside
        <t pn="section-c.2-3">Inside each TCP control block, the following state variables are defined.</t>
        <section title="Sending Side">
<t><list style="hanging">
<t hangText="SND.UNA numbered="true" toc="include" removeInRFC="false" pn="section-c.2.1">
          <name slugifiedName="name-sending-side-2">Sending Side</name>
          <dl newline="false" spacing="normal" indent="3" pn="section-c.2.1-1">
            <dt pn="section-c.2.1-1.1">SND.UNA (32 bits):"> bits):</dt>
            <dd pn="section-c.2.1-1.2"> This is the sequence number of the next byte to be
acknowledged on the subflow. This variable is updated upon reception of
each TCP acknowledgment on the subflow.</t>
<t hangText="SND.NXT subflow.</dd>
            <dt pn="section-c.2.1-1.3">SND.NXT (32 bits):"> bits):</dt>
            <dd pn="section-c.2.1-1.4"> This is the sequence number of the next byte to be
sent on the subflow. SND.NXT is used to set the value of SEG.SEQ upon
transmission of the next segment.</t>
</list></t> segment.</dd>
          </dl>
        </section>
        <section title="Receiving Side">
<t><list style="hanging">
<t hangText="RCV.NXT numbered="true" toc="include" removeInRFC="false" pn="section-c.2.2">
          <name slugifiedName="name-receiving-side-2">Receiving Side</name>
          <dl newline="false" spacing="normal" indent="3" pn="section-c.2.2-1">
            <dt pn="section-c.2.2-1.1">RCV.NXT (32 bits):"> bits):</dt>
            <dd pn="section-c.2.2-1.2"> This is the sequence number of the next byte that
is expected on the subflow. This state variable is modified upon
reception of in-order segments. The value of RCV.NXT is copied to the
SEG.ACK field of the next segments transmitted on the subflow.</t>
<t hangText="RCV.WND subflow.</dd>
            <dt pn="section-c.2.2-1.3">RCV.WND (32 bits with RFC 7323, 16 bits otherwise):"> This bits):</dt>
            <dd pn="section-c.2.2-1.4">This is the subflow-level receive window that is updated with
            the window field from the segments received on this subflow.</t>
</list></t> subflow.  32
            bits if the features in RFC 7323 are used; 16 bits otherwise.</dd>
          </dl>
        </section>
      </section>
    </section>
    <section title="Finite anchor="app_fsm" numbered="true" toc="include" removeInRFC="false" pn="section-appendix.d">
      <name slugifiedName="name-finite-state-machine">Finite State Machine" anchor="app_fsm">
      <t>The Machine</name>
      <t pn="section-appendix.d-1">The diagram in <xref target="fig_fsm"/> target="fig_fsm" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="Figure 22"/> shows the
      Finite State Machine for connection-level closure.  This illustrates how
      the DATA_FIN connection-level signal (indicated in the diagram as the
      DFIN flag on a DATA_ACK) (1) interacts with subflow-level FINs, FINs and (2) permits "break-before-make" break-before-make handover between subflows.</t>
      <figure align="center" anchor="fig_fsm" title="Finite align="left" suppress-title="false" pn="figure-22">
        <name slugifiedName="name-finite-state-machine-for-co">Finite State Machine for Connection Closure"> Closure</name>
        <artwork align="left"><![CDATA[ align="left" name="" type="" alt="" pn="section-appendix.d-2.1">
                             +---------+
                             | M_ESTAB |
                             +---------+
                    M_CLOSE    |     |    rcv DATA_FIN
                     -------   |     |    -------
+---------+       snd DATA_FIN /       \ snd DATA_ACK[DFIN] +---------+ +-------+
|  M_FIN  |<-----------------           ------------------->| M_CLOSE |  |&lt;-----------------           -------------------&gt;|M_CLOSE|
| WAIT-1  |---------------------------                      |  WAIT |
+---------+               rcv DATA_FIN \                    +---------+                    +-------+
  | rcv DATA_ACK[DFIN]         ------- |                   M_CLOSE |
  | --------------        snd DATA_ACK |                   ------- |
  | CLOSE all subflows                 |              snd DATA_FIN |
  V                                    V                           V
+-----------+              +-----------+                  +-----------+                 +----------+
|M_FINWAIT-2|              | M_CLOSING |                  | M_LAST-ACK|
 +-----------+                 |M_LAST-ACK|
+-----------+              +-----------+                 +----------+
  |              rcv DATA_ACK[DFIN] |           rcv DATA_ACK[DFIN] |
  | rcv DATA_FIN     -------------- |               -------------- |
  |  -------     CLOSE all subflows |           CLOSE all subflows |
  | snd DATA_ACK[DFIN]              V            delete MPTCP PCB  V
  \                          +-----------+                  +---------+
     ------------------------>|M_TIME WAIT|----------------->| M_CLOSED|                 +--------+
    ------------------------&gt;|M_TIME WAIT|----------------&gt;|M_CLOSED|
                             +-----------+                  +---------+                 +--------+
                                        All subflows in CLOSED
                                            ------------
                                        delete MPTCP PCB
         ]]></artwork> </artwork>
      </figure>
    </section>
    <section title="Changes anchor="app_changelog" numbered="true" toc="include" removeInRFC="false" pn="section-appendix.e">
      <name slugifiedName="name-changes-from-rfc-6824">Changes from RFC6824" anchor="app_changelog">
      <t>This section RFC 6824</name>
      <t pn="section-appendix.e-1">This appendix lists the key technical changes between RFC6824, specifying <xref target="RFC6824" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="RFC6824"/>,
      which specifies MPTCP v0, v0; and this document, which obsoletes RFC6824 <xref target="RFC6824" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="RFC6824"/> and specifies MPTCP v1. Note that this specification is not backwards backward compatible with RFC6824.

      <list style="symbols">
        <t>The <xref target="RFC6824" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="RFC6824"/>.

      </t>
      <ul spacing="normal" bare="false" empty="false" pn="section-appendix.e-2">
        <li pn="section-appendix.e-2.1">This document incorporates lessons learnt learned from the various implementations, deployments deployments, and experiments gathered in the documents "Use Cases and Operational Experience with Multipath TCP" <xref target="RFC8041"/> target="RFC8041" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="RFC8041"/> and the IETF Journal article "Multipath TCP Deployments" <xref target="deployments"/>.</t>
        <t>Connection target="deployments" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="deployments"/>.</li>
        <li pn="section-appendix.e-2.2">Connection initiation, through the exchange of the MP_CAPABLE
        MPTCP option, is different from RFC6824. <xref target="RFC6824" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="RFC6824"/>. The SYN no longer
        includes the initiator's key, allowing to allow the MP_CAPABLE option on the SYN to be shorter in length, length and to avoid duplicating the sending of keying material.</t>
        <t>This material.</li>
        <li pn="section-appendix.e-2.3">This also ensures reliable delivery of the key on the MP_CAPABLE
        option by allowing its transmission to be combined with data and thus
        using TCP's in-built built-in reliability mechanism. If the initiator does not
        immediately have data to send, the MP_CAPABLE option with the keys
        will be repeated on the first data packet. If the other end is the first to send, then the presence of the DSS option implicitly confirms the receipt of the MP_CAPABLE.</t>
        <t>In MP_CAPABLE.</li>
        <li pn="section-appendix.e-2.4">In the Flags field of MP_CAPABLE, C "C" is now assigned to mean that
        the sender of this option will not accept additional MPTCP subflows to
        the source address and port. This is an improves efficiency improvement, -- for example example,
        in cases where the sender is behind a strict NAT.</t>
        <t>In NAT.</li>
        <li pn="section-appendix.e-2.5">In the Flags field of MP_CAPABLE, H "H" now indicates the use of HMAC-SHA256 (rather than HMAC-SHA1).</t>
        <t>Connection HMAC-SHA1).</li>
        <li pn="section-appendix.e-2.6">Connection initiation also defines the procedure for version negotiation, for implementations that support both v0 (RFC6824) <xref target="RFC6824" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="RFC6824"/> and v1 (this document).</t>
        <t>The document).</li>
        <li pn="section-appendix.e-2.7">The HMAC-SHA256 (rather than HMAC-SHA1) algorithm is used, as the algorithm it provides better security. It is used to generate the token in the MP_JOIN and ADD_ADDR messages, messages and to set the initial data sequence number.</t>
        <t>A IDSN.</li>
        <li pn="section-appendix.e-2.8">A new subflow-level option exists to signal reasons for sending a
        RST on a subflow (MP_TCPRST <xref target="sec_reset"/>), which (<xref target="sec_reset" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="Section 3.6"/>)); this can help an implementation decide whether to attempt later re-connection.</t>
        <t>The reconnection.</li>
        <li pn="section-appendix.e-2.9">The MP_PRIO option (<xref target="sec_policy"/>), target="sec_policy" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="Section 3.3.8"/>),
        which is used to signal a change of priority for a subflow, no longer
        includes the AddrID field. Its purpose was to allow the changed
        priority to be applied on a subflow other than the one it was sent
        on. However, it has been realised was determined that this could be used by a
        man-in-the-middle to divert all traffic on to onto its own path, and MP_PRIO
        does not include a token or other type of security mechanism.</t>
        <t>The mechanism.</li>
        <li pn="section-appendix.e-2.10">The ADD_ADDR option (<xref target="sec_add_address"/>), target="sec_add_address" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="Section 3.4.1"/>), which is used to inform the other host about another potential address, is different in several ways. It now includes an HMAC of the added address, for enhanced security. In addition, reliability for the ADD_ADDR option has been added: the IPVer field is replaced with a flag field, and one flag is assigned (E) which ("E") that is used as an 'Echo' "echo" so a host can indicate that it has received the option.</t>
        <t>An option.</li>
        <li pn="section-appendix.e-2.11">This document describes an additional way of performing a Fast
        Close is described, -- by sending a an MP_FASTCLOSE option on a RST on all subflows. This allows the host to tear down the subflows and the connection immediately.</t>
        <t>In immediately.</li>
        <li pn="section-appendix.e-2.12">IANA has reserved the IANA registry a new MPTCP option subtype option, MP_EXPERIMENTAL, is reserved of value 0xf for private experiments. However, the
        Private Use (<xref target="IANA_subtypes" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="Section 7.2"/>). This document doesn't define how to use the subtype option.</t>
        <t>A that value.</li>
        <li pn="section-appendix.e-2.13">This document adds a new Appendix appendix (<xref target="app_tfo" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="Appendix B"/>), which discusses the usage of both the MPTCP options
        and TCP Fast Open TFO options on the same packet (<xref target="app_tfo"/>).</t>
      </list></t> packet.</li>
      </ul>
    </section>
    <section anchor="Acknowledgments" numbered="false" toc="include" removeInRFC="false" pn="section-appendix.f">
      <name slugifiedName="name-acknowledgments">Acknowledgments</name>
      <t pn="section-appendix.f-1">The authors gratefully acknowledge significant input into this
      document from <contact fullname="Sebastien Barre"/> and <contact fullname="Andrew McDonald"/>.</t>
      <t pn="section-appendix.f-2">The authors also wish to acknowledge reviews and contributions from
      <contact fullname="Iljitsch van Beijnum"/>, <contact fullname="Lars       Eggert"/>, <contact fullname="Marcelo Bagnulo"/>, <contact fullname="Robert Hancock"/>, <contact fullname="Pasi Sarolahti"/>,
      <contact fullname="Toby Moncaster"/>, <contact fullname="Philip       Eardley"/>, <contact fullname="Sergio Lembo"/>, <contact fullname="Lawrence Conroy"/>, <contact fullname="Yoshifumi Nishida"/>,
      <contact fullname="Bob Briscoe"/>, <contact fullname="Stein Gjessing"/>,
      <contact fullname="Andrew McGregor"/>, <contact fullname="Georg       Hampel"/>, <contact fullname="Anumita Biswas"/>, <contact fullname="Wes       Eddy"/>, <contact fullname="Alexey Melnikov"/>, <contact fullname="Francis Dupont"/>, <contact fullname="Adrian Farrel"/>,
      <contact fullname="Barry Leiba"/>, <contact fullname="Robert Sparks"/>,
      <contact fullname="Sean Turner"/>, <contact fullname="Stephen       Farrell"/>, <contact fullname="Martin Stiemerling"/>, <contact fullname="Gregory Detal"/>, <contact fullname="Fabien Duchene"/>,
      <contact fullname="Xavier de Foy"/>, <contact fullname="Rahul Jadhav"/>,
      <contact fullname="Klemens Schragel"/>, <contact fullname="Mirja       Kühlewind"/>, <contact fullname="Sheng Jiang"/>, <contact fullname="Alissa Cooper"/>, <contact fullname="Ines Robles"/>, <contact fullname="Roman Danyliw"/>, <contact fullname="Adam Roach"/>,
      <contact fullname="Eric Vyncke"/>, and <contact fullname="Ben Kaduk"/>.</t>
    </section>
    <section anchor="authors-addresses" numbered="false" removeInRFC="false" toc="include" pn="section-appendix.g">
      <name slugifiedName="name-authors-addresses">Authors' Addresses</name>
      <author fullname="Alan Ford" initials="A." surname="Ford">
        <organization showOnFrontPage="true">Pexip</organization>
        <address>
          <email>alan.ford@gmail.com</email>
        </address>
      </author>
      <author fullname="Costin Raiciu" initials="C." surname="Raiciu">
        <organization abbrev="U. Politehnica of Bucharest" showOnFrontPage="true">University Politehnica of Bucharest</organization>
        <address>
          <postal>
            <street>Splaiul Independentei 313</street>
            <city>Bucharest</city>
            <country>Romania</country>
          </postal>
          <email>costin.raiciu@cs.pub.ro</email>
        </address>
      </author>
      <author fullname="Mark Handley" initials="M." surname="Handley">
        <organization abbrev="U. College London" showOnFrontPage="true">University College London</organization>
        <address>
          <postal>
            <street>Gower Street</street>
            <city>London</city>
            <code>WC1E 6BT</code>
            <country>United Kingdom</country>
          </postal>
          <email>m.handley@cs.ucl.ac.uk</email>
        </address>
      </author>
      <author fullname="Olivier Bonaventure" initials="O." surname="Bonaventure">
        <organization abbrev="U. catholique de Louvain" ascii="Universite catholique   de Louvain" showOnFrontPage="true">Université catholique de Louvain</organization>
        <address>
          <postal>
            <street>Pl. Ste Barbe, 2</street>
            <code>1348</code>
            <city>Louvain-la-Neuve</city>
            <country>Belgium</country>
          </postal>
          <email>olivier.bonaventure@uclouvain.be</email>
        </address>
      </author>
      <author fullname="Christoph Paasch" initials="C." surname="Paasch">
        <organization abbrev="Apple, Inc." showOnFrontPage="true">Apple, Inc.</organization>
        <address>
          <postal>
            <street/>
            <city>Cupertino</city>
            <region>CA</region>
            <country>United States of America</country>
          </postal>
          <email>cpaasch@apple.com</email>
        </address>
      </author>
    </section>
  </back>
</rfc>