Azure-docs: Missing documentation for PhoneFactorProtocolProvider

[John-Garland]

The PhoneFactorProtocolProvider does not appear to be documented within the Reference area of the B2C documentation. There is an article in this section related to Azure Multi-Factor authentication, but no information is provided as to how to select one vs the other. Also, the preferred Phone Factor Protocol article should be linked from the the "Phone factor provider " entry in the "Types of Technical Profiles" section above (https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/azure/active-directory-b2c/technical-profiles-overview#type-of-technical-profiles).

---

Document Details

⚠ Do not edit this section. It is required for docs.microsoft.com ➟ GitHub issue linking.

• ID: fe70bb3e-884f-a8db-eee7-ae98cf653b93
• Version Independent ID: d8647921-91df-9c37-8cd9-d44ce938dd9d
• Content: Overview of technical profiles in custom policies - Azure AD B2C
• Content Source: articles/active-directory-b2c/technical-profiles-overview.md
• Service: active-directory
• Sub-service: b2c
• GitHub Login: @mmacy
• Microsoft Alias: marsma

[MarileeTurscak-MSFT]

@dotnetgator thanks for this. The content author is reviewing your feedback.

[mmacy]

reassign:mmacy

[mmacy]

@yoelhor do you have details on these PhoneFactorProtocolProvider details?

[John-Garland]

@v-shils for what reason was this closed? The TP is still included in the Starter Pack Policies, and remains undocumented. It seems to have been closed without explanation or action item.

[mmacy]

@dotnetgator Hi John,

When a PR in the private repo (azure-docs-pr) is merged, and that PR fixes an issue (includes a "Fixes URLTOTHEISSUE" comment), the issue in azure-docs is automatically closed when the PR reviewer (in this case @v-shils) merges it.

It takes some time to make it from master > live, and then there are two publishing events per day - 10AM PST and 3PM PST - after which the change should be published lived. Thus, there's always a bit of delay prior to the changes showing up on the live site.

[John-Garland]

Thank you @mmacy . There was no indication in the comment above that a PR had been submitted, which I am accustomed to seeing. Usually PRMerger is indicated as the entity that closed the issue. In this case, v-shills closed it without comment.

[mmacy]

@dotnetgator Ah, interesting - without perms in the upstream repo that contains the PR fix, GitHub doesn't display the link.

With perms in upstream repo:

Without perms:

[John-Garland]

Thanks! It was just unusual compared to other updates that I had received, and looked like it had been "just closed". my apologies for the confusion.

[mmacy]

@dotnetgator Oh, and one other tidbit - when you see PRMerger has closed an issue, that means that the edit on the doc was minimal enough that it satisfied the automerge criteria and was automerged by the PRMerger bot when the author signed-off on the PR. When you see a v-dash or other GitHub user has merged the PR, that means it's a large enough edit that it's gone through a human PR review.