perfsonar development work

[Verena Venus <>]

Am Freitag, 29. Februar 2008 16:17:47 schrieb Jason Zurawski:
> All;
>
> This builds upon: https://bugzilla.perfsonar.net/show_bug.cgi?id=331 But
> I have not seen the issue brought to the entire list yet.
>
> In testing messages to services with the wrong MessageType
> ('MetadataKeyRequest' is correct, 'MDKeyRequest' is not for example) the
> service must respond with something.  I propose that in the event that a
> service does not understand the initial Request it responds with a set
> Message response.  Currently perfSONAR_PS services will respond with
> 'response', although it has been suggested that 'perfSONARResponse',
> 'ExceptionResponse' or 'Response' be used instead.
>
> Since this will effect many services in the upcoming releases I suggest
> we implement something quickly so testing can proceed.
>
> Does anyone have any strong opinions?
>

At the moment our service responds with MessageType "ErrorReturn" and adds a 
result code "error.common.action_not_supported" with description "Unknown 
MessageType: $messagetype".

We use "ErrorResponse" in all cases where the parsing of the message content 
(all below the message tag) is  not done to whatever reason.

My opinion to this is:
The messagetype can be set to two different modes: 
1. the proper response type to the request (which btw should be defined 
somewhere)
2. something else because 1. was not possible

In the second case, obviously something utterly wrong happend so this should 
be indicated by a meaningful name. Just "Response" is not enough if you ask 
me. I'm not sure if "perfSONARResponse" is right. There might be 
implementations which use the schemata without perfSONAR, but I'm not sure 
about this. In any case, I don't see the benefit of naming 
it "perfSONARResponse". But someone might have good arguments, so please feel 
free to convince me.

My favorites are:

"ExceptionResponse" or "ErrorResponse" or somehting along those lines 

Just my two cents,
Verena