Hi, Barry,
> On Jul 3, 2019, at 9:17 AM, Barry Leiba <barryle...@computer.org> wrote:
>
> Thanks, Carlos, for the review.
Anytime!
>
> On one item in your list:
>
>> 4. S3.4. Does this text imply there is no zero fee or credit possible? Might
>> be
>> useful to explicitly set guidance for the use of 0/null fee/credit.
>>
>> A <fee:fee> element MUST
>> have a non-negative value. A <fee:credit> element MUST have a
>> negative value.
>
> The text says the fee can be zero ("non-negative"), but the credit
> can't (has to be negative). That makes general sense, doesn't it? Do
> you really think there needs to be further explanation of that?
Since zero is neither negative nor positive, I thought it was potentially a
source of misinterpretation.
But you are correct, the text as-is is accurate and perfect.
That is why I marked these as “Minor comments, questions, and nits for your
consideration”. As this is an Ops-Dir review, Appendix A of RFC 5706 is
detailed about defaults, boundary conditions, hence asking :-)
BTW, re-reading that section, I noticed:
A server MAY respond with multiple <fee:fee> and <fee:credit>
elements in the same response. In such cases, the net fee or credit
applicable to the transaction is the arithmetic sum of the values of
each of the <fee:fee> and/or <fee:credit> elements.
Do these need to include the same <fee:currency> or otherwise how would the
arithmetic sum work?
Thanks,
-- Carlos.
>
> Barry
_______________________________________________
regext mailing list
regext@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/regext
