Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

BdxlLocator and BusdoxLocator reports network-level erros as "participant not found" #56

Closed
steinarhenriksen opened this issue Mar 7, 2024 · 3 comments
Assignees
Labels
Completed Already fixed/released
Milestone

Comments

@steinarhenriksen
Copy link

steinarhenriksen commented Mar 7, 2024

BdxlLocator and BusdoxLocator reports network-level erros as if the participant was not found, for example: Identifier '0192:992090006' is not registered in SML

I believe this to be a real and significant issue.

Incorrectly reporting network-level errors as participant not found is causing service providers operational issues. These issues have been present for a long while and is causing service providers to lose trust in the network and the SMPs.

Please examine the following lines of code:

String.format("Identifier '%s' is not registered in SML.", participantIdentifier.toString()));

https://github.com/OxalisCommunity/vefa-peppol/blob/v3.4.0/peppol-lookup/src/main/java/network/oxalis/vefa/peppol/lookup/locator/BusdoxLocator.java#L109

These exceptions could be caused by a missing/non-registered participant in the network, which is fine and in line with the error message and exception name.

But the exceptions could also be caused by a network level issue at the client, at the DNS-server being used by the client, or somewhere in between. It is very misleading to report these situations as not found.

We hope this issue can prioritized and resolved 👍

It was previously reported in 2021 to the Oxalis project, and marked as resolved, but it is still present. See OxalisCommunity/oxalis#497

A related issue (but I think not the same) is currently open at OxalisCommunity/oxalis#586

@pingurunextleft
Copy link

Really important to resolve this! Per Inge Rygg, Vieri

@aaron-kumar aaron-kumar added the Under review Issues currently being reviewed label May 3, 2024
@aaron-kumar aaron-kumar modified the milestones: 7.x.x, 6.x.x May 3, 2024
@canilsenlogiq
Copy link

canilsenlogiq commented Jul 4, 2024

I believe the changes I did in my pull-request #58 solved a lot of the false-negative lookup results that we were having.

@aaron-kumar aaron-kumar self-assigned this Jul 19, 2024
@aaron-kumar aaron-kumar added the Fixing Fix/Development in progress label Jul 19, 2024
aaron-kumar added a commit that referenced this issue Aug 2, 2024
@aaron-kumar aaron-kumar removed the Under review Issues currently being reviewed label Aug 7, 2024
@aaron-kumar aaron-kumar added Completed Already fixed/released and removed Fixing Fix/Development in progress labels Aug 15, 2024
@aaron-kumar
Copy link
Member

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Completed Already fixed/released
Projects
Status: Completed
Development

No branches or pull requests

4 participants