Response code 90

[tombruijn]

In omni_kassa/response.rb response code 90 is handled as a pending response. However in the documentation I received from Rabobank ("Integratiehandleiding Rabo OmniKassa, versie 7.1, april 2014") it is being defined as:

• Page 31, "10.6 Overzicht responscodes MasterCard, VISA, Maestro, V PAY en Bancontact/Mister Cash":
  90 Rabo OmniKassa-server tijdelijk niet bereikbaar
• Page 32, "10.7 Overzicht responscodes iDEAL":
  Failure sending in, De bank van de betaler niet bereikbaar. 90 Nee
• Page 33, "10.8 Overzicht responscodes MiniTix":
  90 Systeemfout 90 Nee

Which seems to be an error response in all cases it is defined (in the manual).

Did something change, did I miss something in the manual that says it should be treated as a pending response?

[pepijn]

Hmmm I think that we received this error sometimes, while nothing was wrong. The OmniKassa-server was temporarily unavailable, as it says in your first example. When it retries later, it works. So that's why it is #pending?. Makes sense?

[tombruijn]

I can't really test to see how it works when naturally throwing an 90 response code. If I make it throw response code 90, through one of the CC options and making the last two numbers of the card 90, it won't retry the order at a later time, is this supposed to happen?

[pepijn]

Maybe @koenpunt remembers? 8d05798eff69dcc4045cb36b70af72f65d136e75

[tombruijn]

I see it's also the case in the "official" PHP (and .NET) example code Koen mentions in his commit.

// Translate transaction status code
protected function getTransactionStatus($sTransactionCode)
{
  if(in_array($sTransactionCode, array('00'))) // SUCCESS
  {
    return 'SUCCESS';
  }
  elseif(in_array($sTransactionCode, array('60', '90'))) // PENDING
  {
    return 'PENDING';
  }
  elseif(in_array($sTransactionCode, array('97'))) // EXPIRED
  {
    return 'EXPIRED';
  }
  elseif(in_array($sTransactionCode, array('17'))) // CANCELLED
  {
    return 'CANCELLED';
  }

  return 'FAILED';
}

I just don't know if maybe things have changed since then, unlikely, but so far I haven't seen why this would differ from the docs, based on the tests I've done with the test integration. So far, the documented meaning of code 90 doesn't reflect their example code.

[pepijn]

Can we close this issue, or do you still face problems concerning the status codes?

[koenpunt]

I don't know. I don't believe I still have the documentation from that time so I can't compare..

[tombruijn]

I've forked the repo and made a branch that handles response code 90 differently: tombruijn/omni_kassa/tree/response_code_90

I'll run this implementation for now while I'll contact Rabobank support. For now you can close this issue @pepijn. If anything breaks or I get a definitive answer about the response code I'll update this issue or create a new one referencing this one.

[pepijn]

Cool, thanks!

[tombruijn]

So I got a response back from Rabobank OmniKassa, really quickly as well. They said the code examples were not correct and that code 90 is an error code as described in the documentation. They'll update the examples next week or the week after that. I asked to be notified when that happens.

Until then I'll keep handling code 90 as an error code. I've also created pull request #7 to update the OmniKassa::Response class to update the response handling. I hope you'll merge it in, but if you want to wait until the example code is updated I can understand that as well. Please leave it open until the code is updated in the coming weeks.

[pepijn]

I think this it what everyone should be doing then, so I've merged it. Thanks!

[pepijn]

https://github.com/pepijn/omni_kassa/releases/tag/v1.5.0