Re: [apps-discuss] APPSDIR review of draft-ietf-simple-chat-13

["Miguel A. Garcia" <[e-mail]>]

Yes, I will ping the SIMPLE WG.

/Miguel


On 07/02/2012 21:11, Ben Campbell wrote:
>
> On Feb 7, 2012, at 8:12 AM, Miguel A. Garcia wrote:
>
>>> In Section 7.1:
>>>
>>>      The reservation of a nickname can fail, e.g. if the NICKNAME request
>>>      contains a malformed or non-existent Use-Nickname header field, or
>>>      if the same nickname has already been reserved by another
>>>      participant (i.e., by another URI) in the chat room.  The
>>>      validation can also fail where the sender of the message is not
>>>      entitled to reserve the nickname.  In any of these cases the MSRP
>>>      switch MUST answer the NICKNAME request with a 423 response.  The
>>>      semantics of the 423 response are: "Nickname usage failed; the
>>>      nickname is not allocated to this user".
>>>
>>> It would be better to use different response codes for different error
>>> conditions.
>>
>> I also sympathize your proposal. We had this for avoiding creating very detailed error conditions. But I wouldn't mind to differentiate both error cases. Perhaps we should take this to the WG for comments.
>
> I agree that if we think we need to allocate additional error codes, we should run that by the work group. Miguel, can you send a note to the SIMPLE list on that?
>
> Thanks!
>
> Ben.

-- 
Miguel A. Garcia
[phone]
Ericsson Spain