ietf-nntp draft-ietf-nntpext-base-17

[Russ Allbery]

Jeffrey M Vinocur <jeff at litech.org> writes:
> On Tue, 1 Apr 2003, Russ Allbery wrote:
>> Clive D W Feather <clive at on-the-train.demon.co.uk> writes:

>>> Two questions:
>>> (1) Is NEWGROUPS supposed to be consistent with LIST ACTIVE.TIMES? Is
>>> this a SHOULD or a MUST sort of thing?

>> I'd say it's a SHOULD thing.  Anyone have any objections there?

> I definitely don't want it to be MUST.  I'm not sure it should even by
> SHOULD.  I mean, do we really want the server to be checking up on
> whether the admin has modified one of the data files (assuming an
> INN-like implementation) and throwing a fit if the two lists aren't
> consistent?  That doesn't seem necessary to me.

Well, with an INN implementation it's the same file.  LIST ACTIVE.TIMES is
optional, so an implementation that didn't want to bother could just not
implement it....

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