[Idr] Warren Kumari's Discuss on draft-ietf-idr-ext-opt-param-11: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)

[Warren Kumari via Datatracker <[e-mail]>]

Warren Kumari has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-idr-ext-opt-param-11: Discuss

When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all
email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this
introductory paragraph, however.)


Please refer to https://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html
for more information about DISCUSS and COMMENT positions.


The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-idr-ext-opt-param/



----------------------------------------------------------------------
DISCUSS:
----------------------------------------------------------------------

This should be a trivial to clear DISCUSS.
This text terrifies me:
"It is not considered a fatal error to receive an OPEN message whose
(non-extended) Optional Parameters Length value is not 255, and whose first
Optional Parameter type code is 255 -- in this case the encoding of this
specification MUST be used for decoding the message. A warning MAY be logged."
It smacks of trying to be too clever, and that the correct response (IMO) when
trying to set up a session with something obviously broken is to abort and
throw an error.

However, I'm sure that there was some discussion, and that the WG decided that
this was a good idea; unfortunately I was unable to find anything discussion on
this, so all I'm asking for is some reassurance that this was discussed and
that this behavior was chosen as a good idea...


----------------------------------------------------------------------
COMMENT:
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Thank you for this document. It is clear, and solves a real problem.

Also, thanks to Al Morton for his OpsDir review - as always, it is much appreciated.