[NNTP] Additions to LIST commands

[Jeffrey M. Vinocur]

On Tue, 17 Nov 2009, Russ Allbery wrote:

> Julien ÉLIE <julien at trigofacile.com> writes:
> 
> >    * how to write an extension of RFC 3977 without defining
> >      a new capability;
> 
> For the new LIST ACTIVE flags, no CAPABILITIES line should be required,
> since the client doesn't need to know whether or not the server might send
> these flags before the server sends them.  That was intentional in how we
> defined LIST ACTIVE in RFC 3977:
> 
>    Other values for the status may exist; the definition of these other
>    values and the circumstances under which they are returned may be
>    specified in an extension or may be private to the server.  A client
>    SHOULD treat an unrecognized status as giving no information.

Although, what if there are two separate specifications that define a 
given flag differently?  In that case, the client will not know which 
meaning the server intends.

So perhaps it's worth having the server advertise what addon 
specifications it implements?


-- 
Jeffrey M. Vinocur
jeff at litech.org