[NNTP] Re: Nearly there
rra at stanford.edu
Thu Aug 10 07:27:11 PDT 2006
Clive D W Feather <clive at demon.net> writes:
> Okay, trawling through the archives ...
> (1) Keywords (which include capability names) are limited to 12 characters,
> but we already have a keyword ("IMPLEMENTATION") which is longer than that.
> The majority view was to remove the limit completely:
> A "keyword" MUST consist only of US-ASCII letters, digits, and the
> characters dot (".") and dash ("-"), and MUST begin with a letter.
> Keywords MUST be at least three characters.
> keyword = ALPHA 2*(ALPHA / DIGIT / "." / "-")
> I'm very nervous about raising this, after all the arguments this time
> last year, but I believe that changing it to 2^31-1 is the correct thing
> to do *FOR THIS VERSION OF THE NNTP SPECIFICATION*.
I won't argue against either 2^31-1 or 2^32-1, but I'm not sure how much
we can get away with changing at this stage in the actual protocol
> (3) It was noted that some servers may be getting near this limit and we
> don't yet have a good mechanism for dealing with this. It was therefore
> proposed to add wording saying that this is unsatisfactory but is being
> worked on ready for the next version.
> It is likely that at some stage at least one NNTP server will reach
> the limit of [4,294,967,295] in at least one newsgroup. Ways to deal
> with this while not gratuitously breaking compatibility are still
> being investigated and are likely to result in publication of a
> revision or extension to this specification at some future date.
> While servers MUST NOT send article numbers greater than this limit,
> client and server developers are advised to use internal structures
> and datatypes capable of handling larger values in anticipation of
> such a change.
I'm not sure what to think about this. I think overall it's not a bad
idea, though, and might be helpful. Since the above doesn't change the
protocol specification, it's more palatable during AUTH48 to me.
Russ Allbery (rra at stanford.edu) <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>
More information about the ietf-nntp