[NNTP] [2505] CAPABILITIES indication of features not currently available

[Russ Allbery]

Ken Murchison <ken at oceana.com> writes:

> In all honesty, the current way that we're handling this *is* kind of
> ugly.  I would prefer to go back to listing the SASL mechs on a separate
> capability line (like in the original drafts), so that we don't give the
> impression that AUTHINFO is still a valid command after
> authentication.

Oh, hm, good point.  I'd forgotten we'd been there before.  Clive, what do
you think of this?  Would this address your issue?

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