ietf-nntp LIST ACTIVE issues

[Clive D.W. Feather]

Russ Allbery said:
> 8.6.1.2. Description (LIST ACTIVE)
>   Yes, it is "last first status"; the current text is wrong.  The order is
>   the opposite of the order returned by GROUP.  Historical wart.

Fixed.

>   Right now, our description of other status strings says that they must
>   all be specified somewhere, but it's fairly common to use them for
>   various local extensions as well.

Text edited.

>   Should high and low be used here instead of first and last to be
>   consistent with the terms used in GROUP?

Yes; I'll clean that up.

>   I would remove the sentence "That is indicated by the status code
>   returned as part of the greeting." since it's not always accurate.  In
>   particular, a client welcomed with 200 still won't normally be able to
>   post to a group with status "n", but the server may have a way to allow
>   certain authenticated clients to post to groups with "n" status (INN
>   does, for example) and they may still show up as "n" (since the active
>   file is often served directly from disk for speed rather than customized
>   for each client).  I don't think that sentence really adds anything.

Replaced the text with:

    The status of a newsgroup only indicates how posts to that newsgroup
    are normally processed; if the current client is forbidden from
    posting, then this will apply equally to groups with status "y".
    Conversely, a client with special privileges (not defined by this
    specification) might be able to post to a group with status "n".

>   It would be good to include some examples of non-"y" status in the
>   examples.

Done.

-- 
Clive D.W. Feather  | Work:  <clive at demon.net>   | Tel:  +44 20 8371 1138
Internet Expert     | Home:  <clive at davros.org>  | Fax:  +44 870 051 9937
Demon Internet      | WWW: http://www.davros.org | Mobile: +44 7973 377646
Thus plc            |                            |