error 58009.C.19 - secktn vs. sectkn

[Myrna van Lunteren <m....@gmail.com>]

Hi,

Someone asked me a question about error 58009.C.19=Network protocol
exception: secktn was not returned.  The connection has been
terminated.

This is NET_SECTKN_NOT_RETURNED in
org.apache.derby.drda.client.net.NetConnection.java

I searched in the drda specs but I could not find SECKTN, but I *did*
find SECTKN.
So...I think the error message should get changed to sectkn.
Should it also get changed in the Brazilian messages? And modified in
the manual re error messages?
And, should it be uppercase because that seems to be how things are
done in the DRDA spec?

Opinions?

Thx,
Myrna

Re: error 58009.C.19 - secktn vs. sectkn

[Bryan Pendleton <bp...@amberpoint.com>]

Myrna van Lunteren wrote:
> So...I think the error message should get changed to sectkn.
> Should it also get changed in the Brazilian messages? And modified in
> the manual re error messages?
> And, should it be uppercase because that seems to be how things are
> done in the DRDA spec?

Those all seem like good suggestions to me. Arguably we could say
"Security Token" rather than the cryptic "sectkn", but ordinary users
aren't going to find that much more helpful, although they might have
a better chance of guessing it's security-related. I think it's best, when
the problems are tied directly to DRDA protocol issues, to try to
match the DRDA spec very closely, as that is where the sleuths will
have to look for further information.

thanks,

bryan