[NNTP] Snapshot 6

Charles Lindsey chl at clerew.man.ac.uk
Mon Jan 10 05:00:14 PST 2005


In <871xcx86e9.fsf at windlord.stanford.edu> Russ Allbery <rra at stanford.edu> writes:

>Charles Lindsey <chl at clerew.man.ac.uk> writes:
>> Ken Murchison <ken at oceana.com> writes:

>>> 5.2.3:

>>> Second example advertises LIST HEADERS but not HDR, as I feared might
>>> happen in real implementations.  I'm going to renew my concern over
>>> having two capabilities for a single command (HDR & LIST HEADERS,
>>> READER & LIST ACTIVE, etc), but I'll defer to the consensus.

>> Yes. If we no longer have OVER and HDR as extensions, then we have lost
>> the ability to say "If you provide this extension, then you MUST provide
>> BOTH of the following commands". I don't think we ever intended to lose
>> the ability to say that.

>You mean OVER and HDR as capabilities, not extensions, right?

I mean that if the OVER command is merely an "optional" command, and the
LIST OVERVIEW.FMT is also an "optional" command (or an "optional"
parameter to LIST, which comes to the same thing), then there is nothing
to prevent a server offerring either, neither, or both (and at least one
of those 4 possibilities is a nonsense).

In the days when OVER was an extension, then those commands were never
"optional" (they were obligatory if you implemented the extension).

I just want to be sure that the nonsense case(s) does not arise. I am not
sufficiently au fait with the finer details of capabilities and extensions
to be sure that they cannot arise. So please can somebody ensure that it
is covered somehow.

-- 
Charles H. Lindsey ---------At Home, doing my own thing------------------------
Tel: +44 161 436 6131 Fax: +44 161 436 6133   Web: http://www.cs.man.ac.uk/~chl
Email: chl at clerew.man.ac.uk      Snail: 5 Clerewood Ave, CHEADLE, SK8 3JU, U.K.
PGP: 2C15F1A9      Fingerprint: 73 6D C2 51 93 A0 01 E7 65 E8 64 7E 14 A4 AB A5



More information about the ietf-nntp mailing list