Yoshihiro Ohba wrote: > On Sat, Feb 10, 2007 at 02:27:04AM +0200, Alper Yegin wrote: > (snip) > >> Thinking more about what we can toss away... How about getting rid of >> PANA-Error messages? We can include error AVPs in any response message if >> the request message had an issue. If the response message has an issue, we >> do nothing (silent discard). >> > > I am wondering if we could remove not only PANA-Error message but also > error AVPs (Failed-AVP and Failed-Message-Header AVPs) and protocol > error result codes described in Section 8.8.2) entirely. These are > mostly for debugging purpose and we could deal with them by silent > discard and error logging. > While certainly verbose, I didn't find this a particularly complex part of your protocol. Debugging tools are generally a good thing, particularly with such a complex combination of messages and state machine. If you end up simplifying your state machine and set of messages, then reducing the number of possible errors to report on may very well follow naturally.
- Mark > Yoshihiro Ohba > > >> Alper >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Pana mailing list >> [email protected] >> https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pana >> >> > > _______________________________________________ Pana mailing list [email protected] https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pana
