xsd:signedInt not recognized

[George Chelidze]

Hi,

One of our device vendors uses xsd:signedInt as a data type in their
implementation. As a result we get the following error as soon as we try
to manipulate these objects:

2018-06-22T07:54:46.688Z [ERROR] Uncaught exception; pid=6676
exceptionName="Error" exceptionMessage="Parameter value type
\"xsd:signedInt\" not recognized." exceptionStack="Error: Parameter
value type \"xsd:signedInt\" not recognized.
    at Object.sanitizeParameterValue (/opt/genieacs/lib/device.js:81:17)
    at /opt/genieacs/lib/session.js:1251:14
    at Map.forEach (native)
    at generateSetRpcRequest (/opt/genieacs/lib/session.js:1239:17)
    at Object.rpcRequest (/opt/genieacs/lib/session.js:1035:37)
    at nextRpc (/opt/genieacs/lib/cwmp.js:455:18)
    at /opt/genieacs/lib/cwmp.js:932:14
    at clear (/opt/genieacs/lib/session.js:1672:12)
    at Object.rpcResponse (/opt/genieacs/lib/session.js:1943:10)
    at processRequest (/opt/genieacs/lib/cwmp.js:928:20)"

After a short discussion with their engineer, they agreed, that they
will request an update from their R&D as signedInt is not mentioned in
any TR-069 related technical references and an ACS can't simply handle
something that looks like "signed integer" as an int or long or integer.
They believe, that this will take some time, so they provided a quick
patch for GenieACS as a short term solution (attached). Here are my
questions:

1. Will this patch alone be enough to accept signedInt as a "valid" data
type or there are other places in the code to be updated at the same time?

2. Does it make sense to create a merge request or it's something that I
should track on my side? There might be other users who use broken
implementations as well.

Best regards,

George Chelidze

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: device.js.patch
Type: text/x-patch
Size: 335 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.genieacs.com/pipermail/users/attachments/20180625/49c894b3/attachment.bin>