ietf-nntp Pipelining

[Clive D.W. Feather]

Stan O. Barber said:
> I remain concerned about this type of change given the charter of clarifying
> RFC977. 
> 
> Does this clarify RFC977 or does it actually change the protocol specified in
> RFC977?

This is an area where RFC977 is silent.
I believe the silence is unhelpful (risking the same problem as SMTP).
Many well-known clients rely on pipelining in at least some situations.
No servers are reported to not handle pipelining.

> If the former, great. Let's do it. If the later, then it should not be done
> unless we explicitly say in the document that this is a change relative to the
> original document and there is considerable consensus to make it so.

I believe it's the former. However, I would like to be sure that what I've
written is acceptable to both client and server authors.

> Based on
> the past discussions, there is not considerable consensus to make it so,
> however, I am quite open to reevaluating the consensus.

I haven't seen any objections other than querying the need.

-- 
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