1201   inconsistent-parameters for Oper_req

This tissue has following status: blue

Created: 10 Jan 2014

Links:

Page: 157

Clause: 20.1 - Table 47

Paragraph:

Category: Issue for edition 2 of this part

Issue: In table 47 in State "PerformTest" is a missing item for Oper_req in case of discrepancy between Select service parameter und Oper.

Proposal: Add the line:
State: PerformTest
Service request: Oper_req
Action: Oper_req(inconsistent-parameters)
Comments: Discrepancy between Select and Oper service parameters

Discussion Created Status
?
Ballot until Editor
According to the state machine in 7-2, there is no transition from performTest State back to Ready State (state where the Control Object is still selected and wait for an Oper request).
And this would be a state transition.
The desired behavior requested in the latest comment is not compliant neither with Ed1 nor with Ed2. The proposal is therewith not backward compatible.
The UCA Test Procedures expect here the Oper_resp-(inconsistent-paramters) and a transition to the unselected state as specified in the standard.

These implicates that a cancel_resp+ and an oper_resp-(inconsistent_parameters) do perform the same action as defined in the 7-2 State machine SBO control with enhanced security.
21 Jan 14 blue
Why does an oper_resp-(inconsistent_parameters) lead to a state change?
This should also be ignored because it is a wrong request and not case of an invalid test.

These implicates that a cancel_resp+ and an oper_resp-(inconsistent_parameters) do perform the same action!
13 Jan 14 blue
the expected behavior oper_resp-(inconsistent_parameters) is already despicted in the control state machine. The oper_req with inconsistent paramters lead to a state change.
Table 47 contains the handling of control model related service request, which do not change the state and are negatively responsded (see text before table 47).
10 Jan 14 blue

 

Privacy | Contact | Disclaimer