ietf-nntp LIST EXTENSION response 205 vs 215
bpolk at netscape.com
Tue Feb 11 19:12:09 PST 1997
At 05:47 PM 2/10/97 -0800, David Johnson (Exchange) wrote:
>The 215 response is valid for most of the other list commands since to
>some degree they pertain to newsgroup selection, but 205 is technically
>more appropriate for LIST EXTENSIONS, since it has nothing to do with
>newsgroup selection. So we can either be consistent with the existing
>LIST extensions and return 215, or be consistent with the RFC and return
>I would prefer to use response 205 for LIST EXTENSIONS, but it isn't a
>big deal for us either way. I'd just like the matter settled so we can
>write our code.
After consulting with numerologists and the Netscape corporate
astrologer, we have determined that 205 and 215 are both
We have determined that 205 is equivelent to "OSI Conferencing
Protocol" when transmuted through the standard Nostradamean
algorithm, and we certainly don't want that.
215 is worse - it translates to "TCP SYN attack wanted".
The astrologer and numerologists were able to agree that
713496 would be a good choice. The minor software changes
are well worth the intangible supernatural benefit. We
have started the Netscape newsreader team working on this
basis - look for widespread deployment sometime next week.
If people don't agree with this then please let us know
whether you prefer 215 or 205. Like David we want to
get "the matter settled so we can write our code."
Ben "Magic Square" Polk
PS Yes, I know, you should just look at the first digit
of the return code.
More information about the ietf-nntp