JiscMail Logo
Email discussion lists for the UK Education and Research communities

Help for MOONSHOT-COMMUNITY Archives


MOONSHOT-COMMUNITY Archives

MOONSHOT-COMMUNITY Archives


MOONSHOT-COMMUNITY@JISCMAIL.AC.UK


View:

Message:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Topic:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Author:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

Font:

Proportional Font

LISTSERV Archives

LISTSERV Archives

MOONSHOT-COMMUNITY Home

MOONSHOT-COMMUNITY Home

MOONSHOT-COMMUNITY  October 2010

MOONSHOT-COMMUNITY October 2010

Options

Subscribe or Unsubscribe

Subscribe or Unsubscribe

Log In

Log In

Get Password

Get Password

Subject:

Re: [Luke Howard] resolve question

From:

Nicolas Williams <[log in to unmask]>

Reply-To:

Moonshot community list <[log in to unmask]>, Nicolas Williams <[log in to unmask]>

Date:

Thu, 21 Oct 2010 19:32:40 -0500

Content-Type:

text/plain

Parts/Attachments:

Parts/Attachments

text/plain (47 lines)

On Thu, Oct 21, 2010 at 07:14:46PM -0400, Scott Cantor wrote:
> Yes, and I'm dealing internally with at least that many layers in my own
> code. There are also specific requirements to *prevent* errors from being
> seen because there's client-side failover support for SAML queries when the
> authority advertises multiple endpoints. And there's chaining of attribute
> sources themselves on top of that. The solution here is to decorate the
> normal API for resolving attributes with optional status information from
> the underlying components.

Yes, that works.  If there are context handles then you can use those to
stash trace/debug/error information too.

> > The first problem is dealing with the error handling limitations of each
> > layer, which often requires extensive surgery (and API extensions) or
> > outright new APIs (too much work).  The second is that often apps can
> > only pass detailed error information to users, as opposed to acting on
> > detailed error information to remediate the situation (often there's
> > nothing they could do to remediate the situation).  But one must not
> > underestimate the value of making detailed error information available
> > to the user.
> 
> No, but one must not overestimate it either. It needs to be visible, but to
> the person resolving the problem, not necessarily to the user. In this case,
> it's always visible in my logs, but I can add some additional bandwidth to
> my APIs if people want to do more.

Consider a typical ssh(1) error message when using "gss keyex", where
the server's GSS error token says "I don't have that key version": the
client should delete the old service ticket and tell the user to retry
(if not retry automatically).  Versus an error saying "I don't have keys
for the requested service principal", in which case the client should
tell the user to call file a ticket with the relevant helpdesk.  There's
a fair number of such error codes, and the main thing is to translate
them into messages that are useful to the user or into remediation
actions.  For Kerberos this means that there should be two error
strings, not one, for a number of error codes, because the error
code->string context (client-side vs. server-side) matters.

(I realize I'm just spouting generic advice here, and that it's not
necessarily useful.  But do note that we, in Solaris engineering, very
much care about handling these sorts of errors in reasonable ways.  I
would like to see such ideas spread, so that we don't have new UI
disasters such as the libldap situation that I described.)

Nico
-- 

Top of Message | Previous Page | Permalink

JiscMail Tools


RSS Feeds and Sharing


Advanced Options


Archives

March 2022
December 2021
October 2021
September 2021
August 2021
June 2021
April 2021
February 2021
January 2021
December 2020
November 2020
October 2020
August 2020
July 2020
June 2020
May 2020
April 2020
March 2020
January 2020
November 2019
October 2019
September 2019
July 2019
June 2019
May 2019
April 2019
March 2019
February 2019
January 2019
December 2018
June 2018
April 2018
November 2017
October 2017
September 2017
August 2017
July 2017
May 2017
April 2017
March 2017
February 2017
November 2016
October 2016
August 2016
July 2016
June 2016
May 2016
March 2016
February 2016
January 2016
November 2015
October 2015
September 2015
August 2015
July 2015
June 2015
May 2015
April 2015
March 2015
February 2015
January 2015
December 2014
November 2014
October 2014
September 2014
August 2014
July 2014
June 2014
May 2014
April 2014
March 2014
February 2014
January 2014
December 2013
November 2013
October 2013
September 2013
August 2013
July 2013
June 2013
May 2013
April 2013
March 2013
February 2013
January 2013
December 2012
November 2012
October 2012
September 2012
August 2012
July 2012
June 2012
May 2012
April 2012
March 2012
February 2012
January 2012
December 2011
November 2011
October 2011
September 2011
August 2011
July 2011
June 2011
May 2011
April 2011
March 2011
February 2011
January 2011
November 2010
October 2010
September 2010
August 2010
July 2010
June 2010
May 2010
April 2010
March 2010
February 2010


JiscMail is a Jisc service.

View our service policies at https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/policyandsecurity/ and Jisc's privacy policy at https://www.jisc.ac.uk/website/privacy-notice

For help and support help@jisc.ac.uk

Secured by F-Secure Anti-Virus CataList Email List Search Powered by the LISTSERV Email List Manager