ietf-nntp Comments on the lastest rfc977bis draft
sob at academ.com
Fri Mar 27 23:36:41 PST 1998
I have substatially clarified the LIST EXTENSIONS response. I believe folks
should be able to actually implement this now. I also simplified and generalized
the extensions concept a bit. This is something we will need to discuss on
I have taken all the comments I got over the course of the last four months
an intergrated them into the document. There are a couple of troublesome
1. AUTHINFO continues to be trouble. I am tempted to remove it from
the current document and do it as a seperate extension so that all
the various issues in that area could be delt with independent of the
main document. Such a move might be too radical since there would then
be no identification mechanism in base document. I think the biggest
problem here is that there are implementations that do certain things
in certain ways and either we continue down that path (and add other
paths as well) or we don't.
2. The document does not deal well with responses to BODY or ARTICLE
that are binary. It also does not deal well with POST when the body is
binary. The problem here is that the termination sequence is CRLF.CRLF.
However, we are not clear on wether the first CRLF is part of the
body of the article or not. We need some consensus here.
Finally, we need to be sure we are confortable with all the UTF-8 versus US-ASCII
issues. I think we've done ok, but I am no expert in the UTF-8 stuff. Comments
from experts in that area continue to be most welcome.
Thanks in advance for your thoughts on any of this. Please be sure to quote
relevant parts of the current draft when you comment and offer specific
changes that will clarify any of these issues.
More information about the ietf-nntp