[NNTP] Re: New NNTP drafts approaching IETF Last Call

[Russ Allbery]

Mark Crispin <mrc at CAC.Washington.EDU> writes:
> On Tue, 15 Mar 2005, Clive D.W. Feather wrote:

>> This is a Usefor issue, not an NNTP issue.

> IMAP didn't get away with that argument, and NNTP should not be allowed
> to get away with it either.

> I strongly suggest that you read (and understand) RFC 2130.

I'm going to try to get some guidance on this from our AD, since I can see
both sides of this and it's really a question of how the IETF as a whole
wants to coordinate and handle character set issues when updating old
transport protocols (something that cries out for a general policy
decision, IMO).

Mark, I do understand the importance of this and I don't intend to drop
it, but I'd also love to get your opinion on the new CAPABILITIES command
before we get too bogged down in the character set discussion.  Does it
resolve the issues that you had with LIST EXTENSIONS before?  Did we miss
anything?

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