ietf-nntp DRAFT summary of IETF 49

[Jim Calvin]

>Charles Lindsey <chl at clw.cs.man.ac.uk> writes:
>
>>  Yes, that is OK, but it needs to be explicitly stated that attempting to
>>  read puts you into reader mode automatically (insofar as that concept is
>>  meaningful outside of particular implementations). It might also be said
>>  that using IHAVE automatically takes you out of that mode. You then
>>  include the MODE READ command as an obsolescent feature and deprecate
>>  implementations that require it.
>
>So basically you're advocating outlawing any implementation that uses two
>separate programs to handle feeds and reading connections.
>
>Or am I misunderstanding what you're saying?

Russ suggested considering the use of an alternate port. Once upon a 
time, someone started to do this. Port 443 is reserved for NNSP, 
which when I last looked at it, appeared to be a stripped down 
version of the NNTP protocol. Basically it removed all reader class 
commands.

Certainly worth considering a such a split.
-- 
Jim