ietf-nntp Response code warts

[Russ Allbery]

greg andruk <gja at meowing.net> writes:

> Right, it's going to probably have to be a permanent blemish.  It does
> bear mention, since it violates the draft's own rule that "[e]ach
> response MUST start with a three-digit response code that is sufficient
> to distinguish all responses" and LISTGROUP is supposed to be an example
> of the right way to add an extension :(

> A note can be added, um, somewhere (up in the Response Codes section?).

>   Common response codes with conflicting behavior are to be avoided in
>   newly written extensions.  One historical exception is LISTGROUP, which
>   adds a multiline variant to the single line GROUP 211 response.

I agree with this proposed change (and I see that it's already in Clive's
list of minor changes, so I won't note this proposal separately).

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