perfsonar development work

[Verena Venus <>]

Am Montag, 3. März 2008 11:04:23 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
> >
> > Hi, I agree. I like "ErrorResponse" but will accept any other good name.
>
> I think ErrorResponse would fit our general pattern of names thus far.
>

Great, in this case, I do not have to change anything :)

> > Another question - for Release Team is whether we should implement it
> > for java services of pS 3.0?
> >
> > The change won't be complicated, but all developers of Java services
> > will need to upgrade ps-base to the newest version supporting this type.
> >
> > I can do the change very quickly.
>
> We intend to implement this immediately as well, particularly for
> perfSONARBOUY and PingER for the MDM release.
>

If we stay with "ErrorResponse" it's already in our contribution for the 
release. Any other name will lead to approximately half an hour of work, so I 
see no problem with the release.

Regards,
Verena