ietf-nntp Draft 17 pre-2

[Russ Allbery]

Jeffrey M Vinocur <jeff at litech.org> writes:
> 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?

I don't really like that either, although that's just an intuitive
response and I could be convinced that there are good reasons in favor of
doing things that way.  But my initial reaction is to agree with Clive and
to go a step further; I don't really like having LIST EXTENSIONS ever be
mandatory rather than simply informative.

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