[NNTP] draft-ietf-nntpext-tls-nntp-02.txt

Clive D.W. Feather clive at demon.net
Fri Oct 1 04:58:20 PDT 2004


Ken Murchison said:
> Note that the option of closing the connection is something that is not 
> present in RFC 3207 (on which most of this text is based).  It was added 
> by Jeff because he felt that servers may not want to have client beating 
> on them after a failed TLS.  I never really liked this text

Nor do I: a dropped connection is likely to be seen as an error and the
client could then retry automatically. So it beats on the server anyway.

> and would 
> prefer to just stick with the original RFC 3207 text (just issue 483 
> responses to subsequent commands).  Doesn't the base doc already allow 
> servers to unilaterally terminate the connection and addresses how to do 
> this?  If so, do we need to address this in the STARTTLS doc?

I think that the STARTTLS doc just needs to say something like "If the
client is unhappy with the state of the connection, issue QUIT. If the
server is unhappy with the state of the connection, issue 483 if more TLS
negotiation could fix it and 400 (and terminate) if it can't." Only in
better words, of course.

-- 
Clive D.W. Feather  | Work:  <clive at demon.net>   | Tel:    +44 20 8495 6138
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            |                            |



More information about the ietf-nntp mailing list