ietf-nntp Section 7.1 - GREETING step.

[Russ Allbery]

Andrew Gierth <andrew at erlenstar.demon.co.uk> writes:
>>>>>> "David" == David Riley <David.Riley at software.com> writes:

>  David> My point is that if the server will support IHAVE or POST, it
>  David> should respond with a 200.  Currently, it seems that a transit
>  David> server which does not support POST should respond with 201.  I
>  David> believe that such transit server should be able to respond
>  David> with 200.

> Such a transit server does not conform to the current draft anyway (the
> reader commands are not optional).

Hm.  That's an interesting question.  There's certainly existing practice
pointing at the ability to implement a transit server without a reader
component and just returning unimplemented errors for all the reader
commands, so I think that should be reflected in the draft.

-- 
Russ Allbery (rra at stanford.edu)             <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>