[NNTP] Changes to draft-ietf-nntpext-tls-nntp-03

[Ken Murchison]

Based on list traffic, here are the only changes that I have to this 
draft for a -04 revision (and hopefully WGLC).  I'm not sure if the 
"MUST NOT return either 480 or 483" is correct grammar.  Should this be 
"either 480 nor 483", should I remove "either", or is there better 
english available that I'm too thick to come up with?


@@ -233,8 +225,8 @@
  a connection with these properties.  The client MAY therefore send
  STARTTLS after receiving a 483 response; the client also MAY decide to
  send STARTTLS without previously receiving a 483 response.
-Additionally, the server MUST NOT return 483 in response to the
-STARTTLS command.
+Additionally, the server MUST NOT return either 480 or 483 in response
+to the STARTTLS command.

  If the server is unable to initiate the TLS negotiation for any reason
  (e.g. a server configuration or resource problem), the server MUST
@@ -289,8 +281,8 @@
  is not high enough for it to continue, it SHOULD issue a QUIT command
  immediately after the TLS negotiation is complete.  If the NNTP server
  decides that the level of authentication or privacy is not high enough
-for it to continue, it SHOULD either reject further NNTP commands from
-the client (other than a QUIT command) with a 483 response code
+for it to continue, it SHOULD either reject further restricted NNTP
+commands from the client with a 483 response code
  (possibly with a text string such as "Command refused due to lack of
  security"), or reject a command with a 400 response code (possibly
  with a text string such as "Connection closing due to lack of

-- 
Kenneth Murchison     Oceana Matrix Ltd.
Software Engineer     21 Princeton Place
716-662-8973 x26      Orchard Park, NY 14127
--PGP Public Key--    http://www.oceana.com/~ken/ksm.pgp