Looks like you’re not a bit worried about this issue from your clients.
Firstly you didn’t helped me with some of the questions I’ve made, like you are ignoring my questions and point of view, and also ignoring suggestions I’ve proposed to you as alternatives of your concerns on abusive applications.
You are saying to me that you’ll be “happy to look into some remedies” only if I have indications of how often the server is returning error? Oh please! If you have a good designed product, you have for sure, statistics on that. You have, for sure, indications if your responses are returning correct/complete/any information, or returning error, and the amount in a period of time.
I’m trying to avoid being billed because of some problems I’ve mentioned. I don’t know the frequency because I’m not yet using the FlightXml API in production, but I have prevision on how many requests I’ll do to your server monthly. I have to simulate this kind of issues happening, of course. The math is simple as I’ve showed to you above.
You seem not worried about this fact, I understand. In your point of view, this kind of situations of unfair billings to your clients, It doesn’t matter, since you’ve receiving free money that way, helping to pay your salaries.
I’m still not knowing if your “attempt to make MapFlight/MapFlightEx return a non-200 response for more conditions that should have been detected as failures, making it easier for applications to distinguish.” will really help me reduce unnecessary requests to your system and consequently not being billed for nothing? If so, how? And when do you have prevision to implement that?
I hope other clients see this post and give also feedback on this.