dateTime format: Missing or invalid XML node; element="Value"

1

Hello.

Im havig the message 'Missing or invalid XML node; element=“Value” ’ for some responses of a value of datetime, but other does not. I dont know if this is some bad manage of CPE or it is some bug for different format:

GOT the error over response:
soap-enc:arrayType=“xsd:string[1]”>Device.IP.Interface.1.IPv6Address.1.ValidLifetime</cwmp:GetParameterValues></soap-env:Body></soap-env:Envelope>
body: “<?xml version=\"1.0\" encoding=\"UTF-8\"?>\n<SOAP-ENV:Envelope xmlns:SOAP-ENV=“http://schemas.xmlsoap.org/soap/envelope/” xmlns:SOAP-ENC=“http://schemas.xmlsoap.org/soap/encoding/” xmlns:xsi=“http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance” xmlns:xsd=“XML Schema” xmlns:cwmp=“urn:dslforum-org:cwmp-1-0”>\n\tSOAP-ENV:Header\n\t\t<cwmp:ID SOAP-ENV:mustUnderstand=“1”>17bd77dd6240000</cwmp:ID>\n\t</SOAP-ENV:Header>\n\tSOAP-ENV:Body\n\t\tcwmp:GetParameterValuesResponse\n\t\t\t<ParameterList xsi:type=“SOAP-ENC:Array” SOAP-ENC:arrayType=“cwmp:ParameterValueStruct[1]”>\n\t\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\t\tDevice.IP.Interface.1.IPv6Address.1.ValidLifetime\n\t\t\t\t\t<Value xsi:type=“xsd:dateTime”>0-12-31T23:59:59\n\t\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\n\t\t</cwmp:GetParameterValuesResponse>\n\t</SOAP-ENV:Body>\n</SOAP-ENV:Envelope>\r\n”

I do NOT have error on this one:
root@GenieACS:/mnt/usb-drive/log/genieacs# tail -f genieacs-debug.yaml | grep “Device.Time.CurrentLocalTime”
soap-enc:arrayType=“xsd:string[1]”>Device.Time.CurrentLocalTime</cwmp:GetParameterValues></soap-env:Body></soap-env:Envelope>
body: “<?xml version=\"1.0\" encoding=\"UTF-8\"?>\n<SOAP-ENV:Envelope xmlns:SOAP-ENV=“http://schemas.xmlsoap.org/soap/envelope/” xmlns:SOAP-ENC=“http://schemas.xmlsoap.org/soap/encoding/” xmlns:xsi=“http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance” xmlns:xsd=“XML Schema” xmlns:cwmp=“urn:dslforum-org:cwmp-1-0”>\n\tSOAP-ENV:Header\n\t\t<cwmp:ID SOAP-ENV:mustUnderstand=“1”>17bd777c51c0000</cwmp:ID>\n\t</SOAP-ENV:Header>\n\tSOAP-ENV:Body\n\t\tcwmp:GetParameterValuesResponse\n\t\t\t<ParameterList xsi:type=“SOAP-ENC:Array” SOAP-ENC:arrayType=“cwmp:ParameterValueStruct[1]”>\n\t\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\t\tDevice.Time.CurrentLocalTime\n\t\t\t\t\t<Value xsi:type=“xsd:dateTime”>2021-09-12T00:45:55.980000Z\n\t\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\n\t\t</cwmp:GetParameterValuesResponse>\n\t</SOAP-ENV:Body>\n</SOAP-ENV:Envelope>\r\n”

This are the difference (another example)
OK: “xsd:dateTime”>2021-09-12T00:45:55.980000Z\n\t\t\t\t
NOK: “xsd:dateTime”>1-01-01T00:00:50\n\t\t\t\t

Thank you

2

This 1-01-01T00:00:50 is not a ISO-8601 string. The year part must be at least 4 digits.

1 Like
3

Thank you Zaidka, will check with the vendor. It seems that the responses have a mixed format for some nodes

again thank you for the quick precise technical information

4

Hello Zadika, i do some resarch about this point about zero value

TR-69 Amendment: https://www.broadband-forum.org/technical/download/TR-106_Amendment-2.pdf, Table 1 from section 3.2 Data Types, page 20, dateTime row. Unknown time syntax is described as 0001-01-01T00:00:00.

And, from RFC:
https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc5905
Timestamps are unsigned values, and operations on them produce a result in the same or adjacent eras. Era 0 includes dates from the prime epoch to some time in 2036, when the timestamp field wraps around and the base date for era 1 is established. In either format, a value of zero is a special case representing unknown or unsynchronized time.

So, 0 may shall be used. However, may be ACS should translates 0001-01-01T00:00:00 …? since 0 must be expected.
But if the CPE express other than “0” , like 1-01-01T00:00:00 , it shoud do a fix to correct to 0001-01-01T00:00:00, right?

let me know what you think, and thanks to had time to read this.

Best regards!,
MT

5

Sorry, I don’t understand. How is RFC 5905 relevant here?

6

I take RCF for ntp timing protocol, may be is not relevant but i hardly try to found what “If the time is unknown or not applicable” (unnkow value) is defined to be interpreted as “0001-01-01T00:00:00” when returned value is not proper defined (like 1-01-01T00:00:00, garbage or “0”).
NTP time protocol refeers for 0 as a valid value for unkow or unsynchronized… thats why i come up with this rfc.

May be the any unknow value should be expresed right as 0001-01-01T00:00:00 or 0001-01-01T00:00:00Z, and thats it… i just want to confirm with you if im in the right way.

thank you.

7

Yeah, this has no bearing whatsoever on the question of whether the CPE’s datetime string is valid.

8

understood, thanks.

BR