End-to-end live path now functional: Connect → AuthenticateMe →
RegisterItems → Read → Disconnect. The example reads back the live
TestChildObject.TestInt value (99) over the wire on the first run.
Root-cause of the previous "InvalidConnectionId" mystery: it was
never an HMAC verification failure. `AuthenticateMe` is one-way
(`AsbContracts.cs:18`) and the server commits auth state
asynchronously after the request lands. A Register that follows too
quickly sees the connection in pre-authenticated state and returns
`AsbErrorCode.InvalidConnectionId` (= 1).
.NET's `MxAsbDataClient.RegisterMany` (`cs:191-204`) handles this
explicitly with a retry loop:
for (int attempt = 1; attempt < 5
&& response.Result.ErrorCode == InvalidConnectionId; attempt++)
{
Thread.Sleep(TimeSpan.FromMilliseconds(100 * attempt));
response = RegisterOnce(items);
}
We now mirror the same pattern in `AsbClient::register_items_once`
followed by a retry loop in `register_items` — up to 5 attempts with
`100 * attempt` ms backoff.
Supporting changes:
- `RegisterItemsResponse` gains `result_code: Option<u32>` +
`success: Option<bool>` so callers can read `Result.resultCodeField`
+ `successField` from the response. `decode_register_items_response`
now tolerates an empty `<ASBIData />` Status array (server returns
empty when the operation fails server-side) instead of erroring
with `MissingField`. New helper `find_text_in_named_element` walks
the body token stream.
- New public constant `RESULT_CODE_INVALID_CONNECTION_ID = 1` for
callers that want to detect this status outside the retry path.
- The previously-failing test `decode_register_items_response_returns_
missing_field_when_status_absent` was renamed and rewritten as
`decode_register_items_response_returns_empty_status_when_absent`
to match the new tolerant decode contract.
F31 closed. F30 (read-side dict-id resolution, landed in `eb6c689`)
was the unblocker — without it we couldn't see the
`<resultCodeField>1</>` element in the response and the failure mode
looked like a HMAC mismatch instead of a transient retryable error.
Workspace: 711 unit tests pass. Clippy clean.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.7 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
design/ — Rust port architectural plan
This folder is the design contract for the Rust replacement of AVEVA/Wonderware MXAccess. It is the gap between the .NET reference in src/ and the Rust crates that will be written under a sibling rust/ workspace (per CLAUDE.md).
The folder is structured as a small set of focused documents. Read in order; each builds on the previous.
| File | Purpose |
|---|---|
00-overview.md |
Mission, two-layer goal, architectural principles, non-goals |
10-raw-layer.md |
Byte-accurate raw MXAccess layer (codec + transport + session) |
20-async-layer.md |
Idiomatic Tokio async layer on top of the raw layer |
30-crate-topology.md |
Cargo workspace, crates, dependencies, build/test commands |
40-protocol-invariants.md |
Bill of materials: IIDs, opnums, envelope/handle bytes |
50-error-model.md |
MxStatus, error types, panic/cancellation policy |
60-roadmap.md |
Milestones M0..M6, validation strategy |
70-risks-and-open-questions.md |
Parity gaps, unproven flows, cross-platform constraints |
dependencies.md |
Cross- and within-milestone parallelism map; agent budget per phase |
review.md |
Adversarial review log (BLOCKER/MAJOR/MINOR/NIT findings, all resolved) |
prompt.md |
/loop driver prompt for autonomous M2–M6 execution |
followups.md |
Open / resolved deferred work items; auto-triaged by prompt.md Step 0 (created on first /loop run if missing) |
The design is grounded in the .NET reference at src/ and the protocol artifacts in docs/, analysis/, and captures/. Do not introduce protocol behavior in these documents that is not already proven in the reference. When adding a new claim about wire format, cite either:
- a
.csfile path insrc/MxNativeCodec/,src/MxNativeClient/, orsrc/MxAsbClient/, or - a
docs/*.mdspec file, or - a
captures/0NN-frida-*directory oranalysis/frida/*.tsvrow.
This folder is documentation, not code. When the Rust workspace is created, the design here is the contract it must satisfy. When evidence in captures/ invalidates a design decision here, update the design first, then the code.
Reading order
- New contributor: 00 → 30 → 10 → 40 → 20 → 50 → 60 → 70.
- Protocol question: 40 first, then the relevant section of 10.
- API question: 20 first, then 50.
- Planning a milestone: 60 first, cross-reference 70 for blockers.
- Scheduling concurrent work:
dependencies.mdfor the per-phase parallelism map. - Driving M2–M6 autonomously via
/loop:prompt.md(and thefollowups.mdtriage log it maintains).