[NNTP] Snapshot 4
Russ Allbery
rra at stanford.edu
Fri Dec 3 08:41:16 PST 2004
Clive D W Feather <clive at demon.net> writes:
> Ken Murchison said:
>> VERSION 2,3
> <Cringe />
> If people want the version information in the initial response line, then
> we could put it there, and like that, instead of a capability line. This
> would then mean there's no reason at all to require the lines to be
> ordered.
> Pre-4 defines the version numbers as just that, integers. Since the message
> is "I support this one and that one and that one", I would suggest using +
> or & rather than comma:
> [C] CAPABILITIES
> [S] 101 2+3+7 I'm talented, I am. Here's the capability list.
> [S] READER
> [S] OVER MSGID
> [S] HDR
> [S] .
> Preferences from others? VERSION line with spaces, or argument to the 101
> response with plus signs?
Bleh. I don't want yet another delimiter and parsing problem to show up.
I'm not sure the problem is complex enough to invent even more syntax.
>> BTW, didn't Russ say that he preferred "NNTPv2" to "VERSION 2"?
I did, but also that I didn't feel that strongly about it.
> But I don't. In particular, I don't want "NNTPv2 NNTPv3" as a capability
> line.
They'd be separate lines, in the vague way I'd been thinking about the
world, for whatever it's worth.
--
Russ Allbery (rra at stanford.edu) <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>
More information about the ietf-nntp
mailing list