ietf-nntp MODE READER proposed text

[Russ Allbery]

Charles Lindsey <chl at clw.cs.man.ac.uk> writes:
>>> Russ Allbery <rra at stanford.edu> writes:

>>>>    Servers are encouraged to not require this command even though
>>>>    clients SHOULD send it when appropriate.  It is present to support
>>>>    some news architectures which switch between modes based on whether
>>>>    a given connection is a peer-to-peer connection with another server
>>>>    or a news reading client.  It is preferrable instead to accept
>>>>    peer-to-peer connections on a different port and to assume that all
>>>>    connections to the standard NNTP port are from news reading clients.

> Well if that is out of scope, then so is the last sentence of what you
> wrote. But it seems stupid to demand a separate RFD on so small an
> issue.

I don't see why you would say that.  Saying that one can use a separate
port chosen by mutual agreement with one's peers for peer-to-peer
connections and reserve the standard NNTP port for reading clients sounds
like a completely different level of statement from standardizing an
additional port to me.

-- 
Russ Allbery (rra at stanford.edu)             <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>