[ietf-nntp] new NNTP standard, comments
rra at stanford.edu
Sat Mar 13 12:28:54 PST 2004
Guy Middleton <guy at obstruction.com> writes:
> Section 3.2.1 says this now: "If the command is not recognised, or it is
> an optional command or extension that is not implemented by the server,
> the response code 500 MUST be returned". This could be read to prohibit
> disconnection, but it would be nice if the standard could make the
> prohibition explicit.
I don't think we can really prohibit disconnection any more explicitly
than that without outlawing things that will happen anyway, like network
drops, or actions that a server may need to take against abuse (for
example, some servers are configured to drop connections after a few
consecutive unknown commands to prevent abuse via HTTP CONNECT proxies).
Russ Allbery (rra at stanford.edu) <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>
More information about the ietf-nntp