Subject: [AAA-WG]: Issue 248: Error messages: decimal or hex?

From: Mark Eklund <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 25 Jan 2002 00:32:17 -0500 (EST)

I was considering issue #248 which questions if the Result-Code AVP
values should be in decimal or hexadecimal.  After considering the
pros and cons, I think we should leave it as decimal.  I see two main
reasons to change this to Hexadecimal.

1. This allows for a bitmask to determine what type of error was sent.

2. In doing this we will also expand the range of codes for each
   result and thus we can have over a 1000 protocol errors.

My thoughts are
1. Categorizing these errors in groups of 1000 is mostly a
   documentation convenience.  In essence to an application, the
   Result-Code AVP is either Success, a few failures that it
   handles specially and all the other failures.  There is little need
   to distinguish Transient Failures and Permanent Failures. 
   Protocol Errors will be in a packet with the 'E' bit set.
   So being able to use a bitmask to determin what type of error was
   sent is of little.

2. We have used less than 50 total Result-Codes.  Yes, it is possible
   that we will have used up an entire 1000 as some time.  If that 
   happens, we can simply add another range of 1000 for that type of
   error.  Once again, these categorizations are simply a
   documentation convenience.

3. This is a personal preference, but when I see a dump of a diameter
   packet, I typically see the packet broken into information where
   Unsigned32 values converted to decimal.  This is a lame argument,
   but I had to have one more than the arguments for hexadecimal :)

With all that said.  If there is a want or push for Hexadecimal, now
is the time to fix it.  Remember though that if this changes, everyone
that working diameter servers will have to go update their enums and
dictionaries :(

-mark

---

From: David Frascone <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 25 Jan 2002 08:58:13 -0600

I prefer decimal.  HTTP hasn't run out of room yet.

-Dave