Re: Some More Off-List Comments

[Daniel Manley <dmanley@tucows.com>]

Shouldn't the "reason" tie in with the array of <values>?  Because each 
field could have a different reason.

Dan


Hollenbeck, Scott wrote:

>The <msg> element is used to carry only a specified set of response messages
>used to describe the response codes.  As it was explained to me, the
><reason> element would be optional, and could be used to provide additional
>info that would help a client understand why an error occurred.
>
>For example, if an error response of 2306 (Parameter value policy error) is
>returned, the <msg> element would carry "Parameter value policy error" and
>the <reason> element could be used to explain exactly what the policy
>violation is.  This should be helpful both for clients who are trying to
>understand what went wrong and customer service folks on the server side who
>might have to help debug client problems.
>
>-Scott-
>
>>-----Original Message-----
>>From: Lynette Khirallah [mailto:lynettek@netnumber.com]
>>Sent: Thursday, March 07, 2002 1:58 PM
>>To: 'Hollenbeck, Scott'; ietf-provreg@cafax.se
>>Subject: RE: Some More Off-List Comments
>>
>>
>>is there already a <msg> element in the <result> that is 
>>being used for
>>human-readable error condition explanations? I just checked the latest
>>contact draft and there is a <msg> element in the <result>. 
>>How is this
>><reason> element any different from <msg>?
>>If you do add another text element, can it be optional?
>>
>>thanks,
>>Lynette
>>