This thread has been locked.

If you have a related question, please click the "Ask a related question" button in the top right corner. The newly created question will be automatically linked to this question.

TI-API: About statusCode response of Backlog advanced ship notice (ASN) retrieve API

Part Number: TI-API

I have a question regarding the response when executing the ASN retrieve API.

The statusCode when the "TI-TXT-007" message is returned is Previously it was "422 Unprocessable Entity"

but now it is "404 Not Found" I understand that it has changed. Is this the correct understanding?

  • Hi Edpsinfo,

    404 is the correct code.

  • Hi Faye,

    Did the specifications change along the way?

  • Edpsinfo,

    I'm checking with the application owners.   I should have a response later in the day.

    Regards,

    Faye

  • Edpsinfo,

    We had a major release in December and changed out this code/message.  Prior to Dec, we received feedback that we should not be generating an ERROR and that the message was incorrect..   So, a fix was released  to replace TI-TXT-004 (which is an ERROR), with TI-TXT-007 (which is an informational (INFO) message).   See snippets below.  Let me know if you have any other questions.

    TI-TXT-004 

    TI-TXT-007

    Regards,

    Faye

  • Faye,

    Regarding "http status", at "Mon, 04 Mar 2024 22:32:51 GMT" it was "422 Unprocessable Entity",
    but at "Tue, 05 Mar 2024 22:32:10 GMT" it was "404 Not Found" ” had been changed. What do you think about this?
  • Edpsinfo,

    Can you send the ANS output associated with each of these so that we can look into it?

  • Faye,


    Could you investigate your logs if we provide the date and time, URL, and parameters when we executed the ASN retrieve API?
  • Faye,


    The two lines in the sent file execute the same API, but the "statusCode" is different. I would like to know this difference.asn.xlsx
  • The response messages in the previous post are both "TI-TXT-007".
  • Edpsinfo,

    I can see where some of your calls are successful and some are failing.  I do see the 404 vs 422 codes and the calls look to be the same , but, the error results are different.  I'm asking our developers to investigate this and provide an  explanation. This may take some time, but, I hope to provide you with an update on tomorrow. 

  • Also, while this is being investigated, I noticed that you are making a lot of GET ASN calls.  Did you enable the ASN Push  API?   This will help a great deal because it will allow TI to send/push an update to you when it occurs.   Please reach out to your sales rep for more information on this.

  • Faye,

    "ASN retrieve" processes only a few items per day.

    "ORDER retrieve" is about 200 times a day.

    I know about the Push API and am considering it.

    We are awaiting the results of the investigation.

  • Edpsinfo,

    Here's what happened....

    • Our IT team did an analysis on error codes that were generating high numbers of errors.  Code 422 was in this category. 
    • When looking closer at what was triggering the 422 error, it was determined that there was no data to send back in the "GET ASN" request you had been submitting, and we were returning the wrong message (Unprocessable Entity").  
    • The message we should have sent was "Not Found", to indicate that there was no ASN data to send at the time that you made the call.   This is why the message changed.    Code 422 indicates a customer error or error with the API call, which was not the case.
    • The change from code 422 TO code 404 occurred effective 05Mar.   There have been no more 422 errors since 04Mar.

    Please let me know if this addresses your questions.

    Regards,

    Faye

  • Faye,

    Question solved.
    thank you.
    However, we are aware of a new problem.
    Will customers not be notified of the change from code 422 to code 404?
    I want a system to notify customers when specifications change.
    Please consider it.
  • Edpsinfo,

    We are working with our IT group to develop a communication strategy to help with this.    Thank you for your suggestion and for confirming that the original problem this is resolved.  I'll move forward with closing this thread.

    Regards,

    Faye

**Attention** This is a public forum