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

Split REQUESTED_KEY_SYSTEMS_UNAVAILABLE #371

Closed
joeyparrish opened this issue May 6, 2016 · 4 comments
Closed

Split REQUESTED_KEY_SYSTEMS_UNAVAILABLE #371

joeyparrish opened this issue May 6, 2016 · 4 comments
Labels
status: archived Archived and locked; will not be updated type: enhancement New feature or request
Milestone

Comments

@joeyparrish
Copy link
Member

The error code REQUESTED_KEY_SYSTEMS_UNAVAILABLE is used when none of the key systems you requested could be instantiated on the platform. However, we also fail key systems when there is no configured license server. So the error could occur simply because of a configuration problem.

We should provide a different error code when the key system is available, but the license server is simply not configured. This would provide a clear path forward for users without diving into the documentation.

@joeyparrish joeyparrish added the type: enhancement New feature or request label May 6, 2016
@joeyparrish joeyparrish added this to the v2.0.0 milestone May 6, 2016
@ddorwin
Copy link

ddorwin commented May 6, 2016

While I don't know the paths that cause this error, you might also consider a new name since failing the EME spec does not distinguish between a key system being unavailable and none of the provided configurations being supported.

An empty configuration should be equivalent to the former, but that may not be advisable. See w3c/encrypted-media#178 (comment).

@joeyparrish
Copy link
Member Author

Good point. We should also update the name REQUESTED_KEY_SYSTEMS_UNAVAILABLE to REQUESTED_KEY_SYSTEM_CONFIG_UNAVAILABLE and be specific in the documentation that user options may cause the error as well as missing key systems.

@ddorwin
Copy link

ddorwin commented May 6, 2016

More specifically, user options = user configurations/choices and consent.

@joeyparrish
Copy link
Member Author

Yes, thank you. We'll be careful with the wording.

@shaka-project shaka-project locked and limited conversation to collaborators Mar 22, 2018
@shaka-bot shaka-bot added the status: archived Archived and locked; will not be updated label Apr 15, 2021
Sign up for free to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.
Labels
status: archived Archived and locked; will not be updated type: enhancement New feature or request
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants