RE: RE : : Using DIAMETER_MISSING_AVP for optional AVP

Sorry Lionel,

I forgot to add the essential part of my answer.

Also, if a server doesn't receives an AVP that a particular
implementation or application is expecting for the successful processing
of the request, although optional in the ABNF but e.g. defined to
present under certain conditions, the failed answer includes the
Failed-AVP AVP.

Br
Marco

-----Original Message-----
From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf
Of STURA Marco Consultant
Sent: Thursday, November 11, 2004 9:53 AM
To: MORAND Lionel RD-CORE-ISS
Cc: [email protected]
Subject: RE: RE : [AAA-WG]: Using DIAMETER_MISSING_AVP for optional AVP

Lionel,

I think the conclusion was "yes it is possible", and indeed it is.

If a server receives an AVP with M bit set that cannot recognize,
although the AVP is optional in the ABNF (i.e. in square brackets), the
Failed-AVP AVP is included in the failed answer.

Similarly, if the value of the AVP (which has the M bit set) is not
recognized the failed answer includes the Failed-AVP AVP.

Br
Marco
-----Original Message-----
From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf
Of MORAND Lionel RD-CORE-ISS
Sent: Wednesday, November 10, 2004 5:45 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: RE : [AAA-WG]: Using DIAMETER_MISSING_AVP for optional AVP

Any other thought on this thread?
The initial question was:

"Based on the RFC 3588, is it possible to use the DIAMETER_MISSING_AVP
result code along with the Failed-AVP AVP to indicate that an optional
AVP (from the ABNF point of view) is missing in the received command? If
not, could you identify some operational issues?"

BR,

Lionel