[3] in GSSAPI Development
GSSAPI errors
tytso@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (tytso@ATHENA.MIT.EDU)
Thu Apr 25 18:03:16 1991
Date: Wed, 24 Apr 91 14:41:16 EDT
From: tytso@athena.mit.edu
To: gssapi-dev@athena.mit.edu
Subject: GSSAPI errors
I've discussed this before, but I believe the #define's of the errors
(on page 11 of draft C of the C bindings spec) should be in upper case,
since that's a pretty standard C convention.
One other item which is a bit more important: I am uncomfortable with
the names of the calling erros, the routine errors, and the
supplementary status bits. They all begin with GSS_S, and they
represent small numbers.
/*
* Calling errors
*/
#define GSS_S_CALL_INACCESSIBLE_READ 1
#define GSS_S_CALL_INACCESSIBLE_WRITE 2
#define GSS_S_CALL_BAD_STRUCTURE 3
/*
* Routine Errors
*/
#define GSS_S_BAD_MECH 1
#define GSS_S_BAD_NAME 2
#define GSS_S_BAD_NAMETYPE 3
....
/*
* Supplementary Status Bits
*/
#define GSS_S_CONTINUE_NEEDED (1 << 0)
#define GSS_S_DUPLICATE_TOKEN (1 << 1)
#define GSS_S_OLD_TOKEN (1 << 2)
#define GSS_S_UNSEQ_TOKEN (1 << 3)
#define GSS_S_COMPLETE 0
The problem with this scheme is that there's nothing to indicate that
this expression will do something other than what a programmer would
expect:
if (gss_calling_error(retval) == GSS_S_BAD_MECH) {
...
}
I propose that we rename the error codes so that the error codes use a
prefix GSS_CE for calling errors, GSS_RE for routine errors and GSS_SS
for supplementary status bits. Comments?
- Ted
