Incorrect interface name GetAssignedMediaSigningCertificates#730
Closed
bsriramprasad wants to merge 7 commits intodevelopmentfrom
Closed
Incorrect interface name GetAssignedMediaSigningCertificates#730bsriramprasad wants to merge 7 commits intodevelopmentfrom
bsriramprasad wants to merge 7 commits intodevelopmentfrom
Conversation
bjornvolcker
approved these changes
Mar 10, 2026
Contributor
Author
|
2026-03-10
|
Contributor
Author
|
closed in favor of #739 |
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
2 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Ref: https://www.onvif.org/specs/srv/security/ONVIF-Security-Service-Spec.pdf
Section 5.5.4 GetAssignedMediaSigningCertificates
This interface is actually returning a LIST of 'CertificationPathIDs', with a minimum of 1 and maximum of 2 in the list, but the interface name looks like its returning list of CertificateIDs, which led to query from the DTT vendor.
Hence this PR addresses inclusion of a new interface name, keeping existing interface but marking it as deprecated for backward compatibility reasons.
Since we are just starting off the conformance process, its important to fix it NOW to be able to use the right interface in the conformance requirements, not the older/incorrect one.
In addition also did few editorial changes for clarifying the section introduction as well as few docbook render issues.