7 Apr
2016
7 Apr
'16
9:28 a.m.
On 07 Apr 2016, at 02:52, Neels Hofmeyr
<nhofmeyr(a)sysmocom.de> wrote:
You didn't bump to v2 because it is supposedly backwards compatible to
subscriber-modify-v1 without auth info, right?
right. The v1 testcase is still passing and the customer using this interface will not
notice any change.
Also, this will always clear out the lastauthtuple,
regardless of the auth info
being changed or not. Even if I again pass the same algo+KI as were stored
previously. OTOH clearing might be good when the IMSI has changed?? :P
IMSI has changed == new subscriber. Also for a CTRL interface only case we could not have
set the keys before, so clearing the auth tuples has no effect. But anyway, I have sent a
v2 that moves this handling into an if so there is no semantic change for the current
usage of the interface.
Maybe it's better / less complex to have a separate command for auth or bump to
v2...
I didn't want to open the can of deprecation and removing old commands yet. The v1
behavior is tested (the test should actually check the DB for the state or such but that
is a different topic). I found it easier to add to the existing command and based on the
ctrl test I am confident to not break the users of that interface.
+ r =
self.do_set('subscriber-modify-v1', '2620345,445566,xor')
+ self.assertEquals(r['mtype'], 'ERROR')
+ self.assertEquals(r['error'], 'Value failed verification.')
I'm not familiar with the ctrl interface, but couldn't the error message be
more descriptive, like "missing KI argument"?\ log msg:
fixed locally but that is not in the v2 patch
holger
The algorithm and ki are considered optional but
if a valid
and non none algorithm is passed, a KI must be passed as well.
rather say 'not-none' or 'a valid algorithm other than "none"'.