[INFOD-WG] Faults

[Fisher, SM (Steve)]

Ronny,

But as we have it the registry does not even have to try to explain why
it has ignored a message!

Are you also saying the mechanism to return a fault is quite different
from that to return a success message to the extent that it may not be
possible to send a faulyt but always possible to send a success message?


Steve

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Ronny Fehling [mailto:ronny.fehling at oracle.com] 
> Sent: 02 April 2007 15:52
> To: Fisher, SM (Steve)
> Cc: infod-wg at ggf.org
> Subject: Re: [INFOD-WG] Faults
> 
> I think we had put this in because we do not require the 
> calling service to have a call-back number
> 
> Fisher, SM (Steve) wrote:
> > Chapter 2 says in each response section:
> >
> > "If the INFOD registry accepts ... MUST ...
> > Instead ... MAY send the following faults ..."
> >
> >
> > Don't we want to say:
> >
> > "If the INFOD registry accepts ... MUST ...
> > otherwise ... MUST send one of the following faults ..."
> >
> >
> > Of course we cannot guarantee succesful transmission of the fault - 
> > but nor can we be sure that the happy response wil get though.
> >
> > Steve
> > --
> >   infod-wg mailing list
> >   infod-wg at ogf.org
> >   http://www.ogf.org/mailman/listinfo/infod-wg
> >   
>