ietf-nntp LIST EXTENSION response 205 vs 215

[Ben Polk]

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
>205.
>
>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
"bad". 

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.