[ietf-nntp] Further syntax

[Russ Allbery]

Clive D W Feather <clive at demon.net> writes:

> Okay. In 3.4:

>     [...] There MAY be more than one header line with the same name.
> -   The content MUST NOT contain CRLF but is otherwise unrestricted;
> -   in particular, it MAY be empty. A header may be
> +   The content MUST NOT contain CRLF; it MAY be empty. A header may be
>     "folded"; that is, a CRLF pair may be placed before any TAB or space
>     [...]
>     and servers MAY transfer it to the other without re-folding it.
> +
> +   The content of a header SHOULD be in UTF-8 and clients MUST only use
> +   UTF-8 in header contents. However, if a server receives an article
> +   from elsewhere that uses octets in the range 128 to 255 in some other
> +   manner, it MAY pass it to a client without modification. Therefore
> +   clients MUST be prepared to receive such headers and also data
> +   derived from them (e.g. in the responses from the OVER extension)
> +   and MUST NOT assume that they are always UTF-8.

>     Each article MUST have a unique message-id; two articles offered by
>     [...]

The only remaining question I have here is whether we want to say SHOULD
both directions (client to server as well as server to client) rather than
MUST for client and SHOULD for server.

Right now, given the above, someone cannot reply to a message with
non-UTF-8 content in the Subject without changing it to RFC 2046 or UTF-8
in the reply.

Other than that, everything sounds great to me.

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