[PATCH 0/4] Add support for CPHS customer service profile
Hi all, This series adds support for CPHS CSP PLMN mode into the netreg atom. Cheers, Aki ___ ofono mailing list ofono@ofono.org http://lists.ofono.org/listinfo/ofono
Re: [PATCH 0/4] Add support for CPHS customer service profile
Hi Marcel, 2011/1/26 Marcel Holtmann mar...@holtmann.org: one open question here is still if we also have to disallow scanning when this is set? So we might wanna update the Scan() and Register() method with the proper error codes and put a note in there for mode = auto-only. Good point, it's also missing from the Scan() implementation. I meant to add it for but forgot. I'll send a v2 shortly. The other open item was whether to create a new error code for this or reuse the existing access denied error (my preference). Cheers, Aki ___ ofono mailing list ofono@ofono.org http://lists.ofono.org/listinfo/ofono
Re: [PATCH 0/4] Add support for CPHS customer service profile
Hi Aki, one open question here is still if we also have to disallow scanning when this is set? So we might wanna update the Scan() and Register() method with the proper error codes and put a note in there for mode = auto-only. Good point, it's also missing from the Scan() implementation. I meant to add it for but forgot. I'll send a v2 shortly. The other open item was whether to create a new error code for this or reuse the existing access denied error (my preference). good question. I can see the benefit of having a proper error code, but I have no preference here right now. Regards Marcel ___ ofono mailing list ofono@ofono.org http://lists.ofono.org/listinfo/ofono
Re: [PATCH 0/4] Add support for CPHS customer service profile
Hi Marcel, 2011/1/26 Marcel Holtmann mar...@holtmann.org: one open question here is still if we also have to disallow scanning when this is set? So we might wanna update the Scan() and Register() method with the proper error codes and put a note in there for mode = auto-only. Good point, it's also missing from the Scan() implementation. I meant to add it for but forgot. I'll send a v2 shortly. The other open item was whether to create a new error code for this or reuse the existing access denied error (my preference). good question. I can see the benefit of having a proper error code, but I have no preference here right now. I really would prefer to use the existing one, which I think came with the lockdown property. It fits the bill here as well, and since access denied won't ever occur for these methods for any other reason, the code will look exactly the same on the client side. Cheers, Aki ___ ofono mailing list ofono@ofono.org http://lists.ofono.org/listinfo/ofono
