ietf-nntp HDR

Clive D.W. Feather clive at demon.net
Tue Jan 8 12:09:26 PST 2002


Ade Lovett said:
>> Making one command require another one to be used first is a bad idea
>> unless it can be justified in contextual terms. Requiring GROUP before NEXT
>> makes sense. Requring LIST OVERVIEW.FMT before HDR doesn't. What are you
>> going to do if the client doesn't bother ? Reject it for being awkward ?
> Then change it to a SHOULD (and be prepared to deal with the consequences if
> it doesn't,

*what* consequences ?

> asks for something that¹s not in the indexed headers, and gets a
> nice 5xx response code).

Everyone seems to be happy with the idea that HDR MAY return a 5xx for
something not in the database. That is not an issue.

But why do you want to require (even at the SHOULD level) that clients
examine LIST OVERVIEW.FMT ?

> Indeed, it seems that most clients out there simply assume that the overview
> is going to be in NOV format, when that is not necessarily guaranteed to be
> the case.

Yes it is, in our spec.

-- 
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 4037
Demon Internet      | WWW: http://www.davros.org | Mobile: +44 7973 377646
Thus plc            |                            |



More information about the ietf-nntp mailing list