ietf-nntp Section 11.5 - NEWNEWS

[Clive D.W. Feather]

Lee Kindness said:
>> The DATE command returns UTC.  It SHOULD be accurate.
> 
> Why? What in the spec requires an accurate time? I believe the DATE
> command should return an arbitrary string/token - The client shouldn't
> care in the slightest what it parses to - DATE is only really being
> used to mark/note the time of the last NEWNEWS (or NEWGROUPS) command
> issued. Clients should file this away and then resurrect it (and parse 
> it slightly) for sending as an argument to the next NEWNEWS/NEWGROUPS
> call...

I suggest that we say that it SHOULD be close to the GMT time (see my other
message), and that the DATE/NEW* relationship MUST be maintained (that is,
if you do:

>  [c] DATE
>  [s] 111 20001121113200
>  [c] (stores date for future use, sends NEWGROUPS command with last
>      saved date, or current (client) date)
>  [c] QUIT
> 
> And on the next connection:
> 
>  [c] DATE
>  [s] 111 20001122120000
>  [c] NEWGROUPS 20001121 113200 GMT
>  [s] 230 list of new newsgroups follows 
>  [s] .
>  [c] QUIT

you won't miss any articles).

> I also think all references to UTC as command arguments should be
> removed from the spec - this is not current practise and does not buy
> us anything over just using GMT as the token. GMT and UTC are being
> used interchangeably in the specification, so one token should
> suffice.

Agreed.

-- 
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