Clive D.W. Feather
clive at demon.net
Thu Jul 27 13:47:29 PDT 2000
Stan O. Barber said:
> I remain concerned about this type of change given the charter of clarifying
> Does this clarify RFC977 or does it actually change the protocol specified in
This is an area where RFC977 is silent.
I believe the silence is unhelpful (risking the same problem as SMTP).
Many well-known clients rely on pipelining in at least some situations.
No servers are reported to not handle pipelining.
> If the former, great. Let's do it. If the later, then it should not be done
> unless we explicitly say in the document that this is a change relative to the
> original document and there is considerable consensus to make it so.
I believe it's the former. However, I would like to be sure that what I've
written is acceptable to both client and server authors.
> Based on
> the past discussions, there is not considerable consensus to make it so,
> however, I am quite open to reevaluating the consensus.
I haven't seen any objections other than querying the need.
Clive D.W. Feather | Work: <clive at demon.net> | Tel: +44 20 8371 1138
Internet Expert | Home: <clive at davros.org> | Fax: +44 20 8371 1037
Demon Internet | WWW: http://www.davros.org | DFax: +44 20 8371 4037
Thus plc | | Mobile: +44 7973 377646
More information about the ietf-nntp