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