[NNTP] [dispatch] Internet Draft for NNTP additions submitted

[Julien ÉLIE]

Hi Ken,
>> *************************************************
>> - Servers which support 64-bit (large) article counters advertise a
>> capability such as 'LARGEGROUP' (or some better named capability).
>>
>> - Servers always hide (411 response for [LIST]GROUP, ommission from LIST
>> ACTIVE response) groups which have exceeded the 32-bit article count
>> from clients until the client tells the server that it can support such
>> groups.
>>
>> - A client tells the server that it supports large groups by using the
>> new keyword 'LARGEGROUP' as an argument to the CAPABILITY command.
>>
>> - The server can then use the existing response codes for the
>> [LIST]GROUP and LIST ACTIVE commands.
>> *************************************************
> 
> At this point, why not just define a NNTP VERSION 3 capability which 
> indicates that all commands that accept/return article numbers can be 63 
> bit?  This requires no changes to existing commands, and clients will 
> know right away from the capabilities whether they should proceed or not.

This would mean that the server will send 63-bit article numbers to 
clients that may not be prepared to deal with them.  In answers to LIST 
ACTIVE and GROUP for instance.  It may make them crash (segfault) and 
break inter-operability...

-- 
Julien ÉLIE

« En fait, je n'ai qu'une prétention, c'est de ne pas plaire à tout
   le monde. Plaire à tout le monde, c'est plaire à n'importe qui. »
   (Sacha Guitry)