ietf-nntp Draft 17 pre-2

[Jeffrey M. Vinocur]

On Tue, 25 Feb 2003, Clive D.W. Feather wrote:

> I'm very unhappy with the idea that LIST EXTENSIONS causes any kind of
> state change in the server. It's a kludge.
> 
> "It is not required that the client issues this command before  
> attempting to make use of any extension."

How do you feel about an extension *requiring* LIST EXTENSIONS from the 
client, but not having any state changed on the server?

(There's something to this effect in the still-in-progress AUTHINFO USER / 
AUTHINFO SASL draft, about the client having to do LIST EXTENSIONS before 
using AUTHINFO USER.  I don't know what Chris had in mind, but my best 
guess is that he wants to ensure that "compliant" clients determine if a 
secure authentication method is available before falling back to 
plaintext.)


-- 
Jeffrey M. Vinocur
jeff at litech.org