[NNTP] Re: [ietf-nntp] draft-ietf-nntpext-streaming-01.txt

Russ Allbery rra at stanford.edu
Mon Oct 4 13:07:27 PDT 2004


Ken Murchison <ken at oceana.com> writes:
> Russ Allbery wrote:

>> 431 is used for a deferral after CHECK, but we shouldn't reuse that
>> code since a deferral after TAKETHIS is different and the two may be
>> intermingled.  436 is used as the deferral for IHAVE, both as an
>> initial response and after the article was sent.  We could potentially
>> use it, but I'm not sure if that's a good idea or not.

> Actually (maybe I'm being thick and/or short-sighted), but does it
> matter whether we're getting deferred via CHECK or TAKETHIS?  In either
> case we're going to have to try again.

Hm.  That's a good point.  Maybe it doesn't, actually.  Can anyone else
think of a reason why it might matter?  (It would matter for success or
rejection, since the sender of CHECK and TAKETHIS commands is not required
to keep track of order or figure out if a particular response is in reply
to CHECK or to TAKETHIS, but it seems like the behavior would be the same
either way for a deferral.)

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



More information about the ietf-nntp mailing list