ietf-nntp MODE READER issue

[Russ Allbery]

Clive D W Feather <clive at demon.net> writes:

> Very probably not.

> At one point we'd decided that 502 meant "you aren't somebody allowed to
> do this" and 480 was "you aren't in the right state to do this". That
> (using SHOULD) is what's in draft 19. However, we then revisited the
> issue of authentication/encryption/etc. responses, and it's currently
> sitting as one of the few remaining open issues.

Ah, okay.  Right, that sounds familiar.

> I don't remember MODE READER state coming up in this context, but if you
> tell me that we agreed that 500 was wrong then that's fine by me.

Right.  500 seems very wrong to me since it says that the command isn't
implemented, when in fact it is if one just switches modes first.

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