ietf-nntp LIST EXTENSION response 205 vs 215

[Phil Peterson]

Yes, Communicator B2 correctly interprets 2xx return codes.

-- Phil.

David Johnson (Exchange) wrote:
> 
> Yes, the current practices draft should correctly document the responses
> for the widely used LIST commands -- there is no point breaking existing
> implementations to fix them. But it should NOT state that LIST
> EXTENSIONS returns 215. This command does not fall under "current
> practice" and has been documented from the start as returning response
> 205. Response 205 is what we have implemented in Exchange server.
> 
> In any case, clients should be designed so they do not attempt to
> interpret the 2nd digit. I hope this has been fixed in the latest
> Communicator beta.
> 
> - david
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: bpolk at netscape.com [SMTP:bpolk at netscape.com]
> >
> > According to the charter of the group, we are going to produce a
> > document that describes current practice, plus has the LIST
> > EXTENSIONS mechanism in it.  The current practice is that the
> > above commands return 215, so that is what the current practices
> > document should state.
> >