Subject: Re: [pcp] Do it differently when PCP response would have exceeded the maximum PCP message size?

From: "Dan Wing" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 12 Mar 2012 15:17:45 -0700

I didn't see any followups on this suggestion to create a new error code
(e.g., RESPONSE_TOO_BIG), so I will leave the text as-is.

-d

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Xiaohong Deng [mailto:[email-masked]]
> Sent: Monday, February 20, 2012 12:06 AM
> To: [email-masked]; [email-masked]
> Subject: Do it differently when PCP response would have exceeded the
> maximum PCP message size?
> 
> In the -23, it suggests in page 17 that:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> If a PCP response would have exceeded the maximum PCP message size,
> 
> the PCP server SHOULD respond with MALFORMED_REQUEST.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> While MALFORMED_REQUEST means the request could not be successfully
> parsed, yet the scenario that text here is trying to describe
> (explained by Dan):
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 1. a request arrives, and has two fancy new PCP Options, one says "tell
> me
> 
>    the human-assigned name for this mapping", and the other says "tell
> 
>    me the manufacturer and version of the PCP server"
> 
> 2. the human-assigned name is 1000 bytes, and the manufacturer name is
> 
>    50 bytes.
> 
> 3. the response is built but its length exceeds the 1024 maximum
> 
>    size allowed.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> How about do something differently than MALFORMED_REQUEST? For example,
> define a new error code for the sake of accuracy or simply truncate the
> 
> response at 1024 bytes to fit?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Cheers,
> 
> Xiaohong