ietf-nntp MODE READER proposed text

[Charles Lindsey]

In <ylu274pdsr.fsf at windlord.stanford.edu> Russ Allbery <rra at stanford.edu> writes:


>Charles Lindsey <chl at clw.cs.man.ac.uk> writes:

>> 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.

Yes, but I was just trying to find a way to get the magic number 433 into
our document, without breaking our charter too much. If such mutual
peer-to-peer arrangements are going to be common, then life will be
simpler if they all know about the "official" number.

-- 
Charles H. Lindsey ---------At Home, doing my own thing------------------------
Email:     chl at clw.cs.man.ac.uk  Web:   http://www.cs.man.ac.uk/~chl
Voice/Fax: +44 161 436 6131      Snail: 5 Clerewood Ave, CHEADLE, SK8 3JU, U.K.
PGP: 2C15F1A9     Fingerprint: 73 6D C2 51 93 A0 01 E7 65 E8 64 7E 14 A4 AB A5