[NNTP] Additions to LIST commands

[Russ Allbery]

Antti-Juhani Kaijanaho <antti-juhani at kaijanaho.fi> writes:

> It occurs to me now that much more useful for that purpose is just to
> have a customized message along with the POST rejection.  LIST ACTIVE is
> not going to be commonly checked, unless there's some what I'm
> forgetting for the client to request updates in the style of NEWGROUPS.

The drawback to reporting this with a POST rejection is that by the time
the client gets a POST rejection, the user has already spent a bunch of
time composing the post.

> And in any case, I'm a bit wary about adding unimplemented features in
> standards, even though a Proposed Standard is allowed them.

This is a good point.  It might be best to stick with just the things INN
has already implemented for the Proposed Standard document and add
anything new in a separate document.  It's more work and more writing, but
it's the more conservative standardization approach.  The other document
can be on a different track (experimental, for instance) until the new
ideas prove themselves useful.

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