ietf-nntp Another message from urs@akk.org about tin

[Clive D.W. Feather]

Stan O. Barber said:
>>>> In addition to this, I think it is important that the new spec
>>>> mandates this - intelligent/obvious - behaviour:
>>>>
>>>>   All unrecognised 200 series codes should be assumed as
>>>>   success.
>> [...]
>>> Seems like a good clarification to me. Any other opinions?
>> 
>> Some time ago I proposed the wording:
>> 
>>   If a client receives an unexpected response, it SHOULD use the first
>>   digit to determine what action to take. In most cases, a reasonable
>>   action would be that taken for a valid response with the same first
>>   digit.
>> 
>> What is wrong with it ?
> 
> Are you saying you have a different opinion or the same opinion?

A similar opinion. I agree the issue should be clarified; I think that
Lee's wording is too detailed and inflexible.

> I am sure that
> others will chime in if they like your wording over that offered by Lee Kindness

Well, I would hope so, but I seem to have seen little or no comment on much
of the wording I have proposed.

> (which you chose not to correctly indicate in your quotation of my message).

Excuse me ? I quoted enough (unchanged) to make it clear what was being
talked about, and snipped excess text that was not necessary to understand
the context of my reply. I don't understand what you are complaining about
here.

-- 
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