ietf-nntp DEBUG command (9xx)

[Clive D.W. Feather]

Stan O. Barber said:
>>> However, RFC 977 does not agree with either of you, so we can't go down
>>> that path.

Why not ?

[And why doesn't this apply to (say) the DEBUG command ?]

>> RFC 977 disagrees with existing practice, which is that x8x codes are used
>> for widely deployed extensions which should be standardized.  In this
>> particular type of conflict between RFC 977 and existing practice, I think
>> RFC 977 has to lose, particularly given the additional comments from
>> Brian.

If we agree on what existing practice is, aren't we supposed to be
documenting it ?

Remind me: is this document meant to be existing practice, best bits
of existing practice, or existing practice with a few improvements that
have consensus ? I thought it was the last.

> Then, the document must explicitly say this. It does not today.

Fine.

*IF* we have consensus on this path, then let's *make* the document say it.
I'll even do wording, but not until someone else tells me we have consensus
(I've already done three versions of this wording; I'm getting confused).

-- 
Clive D.W. Feather  | Work:  <clive at demon.net>   | Tel:  +44 20 8371 1138
Internet Expert     | Home:  <clive at davros.org>  | Fax:  +44 20 8371 1037
Demon Internet      | WWW: http://www.davros.org | DFax: +44 20 8371 4037
Thus plc            |                            | Mobile: +44 7973 377646