[OPSAWG]Re: Andy Newton's Discuss on draft-ietf-opsawg-prefix-lengths-08: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)

[John R Levine <[e-mail]>]

On Thu, 4 Dec 2025, Andy Newton wrote:
>>>>   Upon encountering an erroneous entry in a prefixlen file, consumer
>>>>   implementations MUST skip that entry, and SHOULD log the error, and 
>>>> continue
>>>>   processing the remaining entries.
>> 
>> Consumers should be allowed to process erroneous entries if they can derive 
>> the intended entry.
>
> If this is to stay as a SHOULD, a qualification should be given (see the IESG 
> statement on BCP 14 language).
> If the intent is to allow consumers that can derive information from 
> erroneous entries to continue
> processing the entry, then perhaps:
>
>>  Upon encountering an erroneous entry in a prefixlen file, consumer
>>  implementations SHOULD skip that entry, log the error, and continue
>>  processing the remaining entries if accurate information cannot be
>>  derived from the erroneous entry.

If it were up to me, I would remove this entire section.  The point of a 
spec is to tell people how to interoprate, not how to guess what someone 
else might have meant if they didn't do what the spec says.

R's,
John