Issue 9 and 19: Error codes defined in the wrong category Issue: Unclear what the differences are between error codes DIAMETER_INVALID_AVP_BIT_COMBO and DIAMETER_INVALID_AVP_BITS. DIAMETER_INVALID_AVP_BIT_COMBO is either in the wrong category or redundant. DIAMETER_INVALID_BIT_IN_HEADER and DIAMETER_INVALID_MESSAGE_LENGTH could be considered protocol errors as well ? DIAMETER_COMMAND_UNSUPPORTED and DIAMETER_INVALID_AVP_BITS should be moved to permanent failure category ? Related to end-to-end behavior Proposed Solution ? |