Re: [dcdev] adc
Todd Pederzani
2004-01-20 5:23
Direct Connect developers

eric wrote:

Using an error code in ERR is a good idea however but the code you gave is rather ... illogical. They seems to be grouped by program sending them (client, hub, ...) but I think it is more logic to group them by kind of results (ok, recoveral, not recoverable, fatal) and then by program (or program and then kind).

Good point, Eric.  I think Arne expanded error codes based on a couple pieces of feedback.  The feedback may not have been all coherent though.  I think I prefer SMTP[1] style codes over HTTP[2] style ones.  I'm not sure how well they map to error conditions in the current or next protocols, but...

From RFC0812:

1yz   Positive Preliminary reply
2yz   Positive Completion reply
3yz   Positive Intermediate reply
4yz   Transient Negative Completion reply
5yz   Permanent Negative Completion reply

It has a nice mirroring of the fourcc code in ADC... but it might not be too applicable.

- Todd

[1] = http://www.w3.org/Protocols/rfc2616/rfc2616-sec6.html#sec6.1.1
[2] = http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc0821.txt
DC Developers mailinglist