IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: ietf-nntp Initial draft FINALLY available

Stan Barber <sob@academ.com> Wed, 02 October 1996 17:05 UTC

Received: from cnri by ietf.org id aa16719; 2 Oct 96 13:05 EDT
Received: from PHEASANT.ACADEM.COM by CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa15375; 2 Oct 96 13:05 EDT
Received: (from majordom@localhost) by pheasant.ACADEM.COM (8.7.5/8.7.3) id LAA25044 for ietf-nntp-outgoing; Wed, 2 Oct 1996 11:56:02 -0500
X-Authentication-Warning: pheasant.ACADEM.COM: majordom set sender to owner-ietf-nntp using -f
Received: from academ.com (sob@ACADEM.COM [198.137.249.2]) by pheasant.ACADEM.COM (8.7.5/8.7.3) with ESMTP id LAA25040 for <ietf-nntp@PHEASANT.ACADEM.COM>; Wed, 2 Oct 1996 11:56:00 -0500
Received: (from sob@localhost) by academ.com (8.7.6/8.7.1) id LAA26767; Wed, 2 Oct 1996 11:55:59 -0500 (CDT)
Message-Id: <199610021655.LAA26767@academ.com>
From: Stan Barber <sob@academ.com>
Date: Wed, 2 Oct 1996 11:55:59 CDT
X-Mailer: Mail User's Shell (7.2.5 10/14/92)
To: Nat Ballou <natba@ims.microsoft.com>, ietf-nntp@academ.com
MMDF-Warning: Parse error in original version of preceding line at CNRI.Reston.VA.US
Subject: Re: ietf-nntp Initial draft FINALLY available
Sender: owner-ietf-nntp@academ.com
Precedence: bulk

> > From: Chris Caputo <ccaputo@alt.net>
> > To: ietf-nntp@academ.com
> > Subject: Re: ietf-nntp Initial draft FINALLY available
> > Date: Wednesday, October 02, 1996 12:45 AM
> > 
> > [ ...]
> > 
> > With this in mind, I believe we should describe AUTHINFO USER|PASS and
> not
> > AUTHINFO SIMPLE.  AUTHINFO GENERIC should continue to be included since
> > there appears to be consensus that this is a good way to extend AUTHINFO.
> 
> Agreed - why break clients that do AUTHINFO USER/PASS today.


It appears that this is considerable sentiment for this, so the next draft
will replace AUTHINFO SIMPLE with AUTHINFO (original).

> As others have stated, there is a use for the NEWNEWS command.  I would
> like 
> to see verbage where server support for this command is a capability.  Some
> NNTP implementations allow the administrator to decide whether to allow
> the NEWNEWS command or not.

We could make it part of the extensions mechanism and that would make it
optional. Does that suit everyone?



-- 
Stan   | Academ Consulting Services        |internet: sob@academ.com
Olan   | For more info on academ, see this |uucp: {mcsun|amdahl}!academ!sob
Barber | URL- http://www.academ.com/academ |Opinions expressed are only mine.

v2.8.7 | Report a Bug | By Email