Re: nntp-extensions Re: ietf-nntp NNTP SEARCH extension internet-draft available

Nat Ballou <natba@ims.microsoft.com> Thu, 31 October 1996 20:48 UTC

Received: from cnri by ietf.org id aa23494; 31 Oct 96 15:48 EST
Received: from PHEASANT.ACADEM.COM by CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa20756; 31 Oct 96 15:48 EST
Received: (from majordom@localhost) by pheasant.ACADEM.COM (8.7.5/8.7.3) id OAA12344 for ietf-nntp-outgoing; Thu, 31 Oct 1996 14:45:37 -0600
X-Authentication-Warning: pheasant.ACADEM.COM: majordom set sender to owner-ietf-nntp using -f
Received: from academ.com (root@ACADEM.COM [198.137.249.2]) by pheasant.ACADEM.COM (8.7.5/8.7.3) with ESMTP id OAA12336 for <ietf-nntp@PHEASANT.ACADEM.COM>; Thu, 31 Oct 1996 14:45:33 -0600
Received: from tide03.microsoft.com (firewall-user@tide03.microsoft.com [131.107.3.13]) by academ.com (8.7.6/8.7.1) with ESMTP id OAA13054; Thu, 31 Oct 1996 14:45:27 -0600 (CST)
Received: by tide03.microsoft.com; id MAA12578; Thu, 31 Oct 1996 12:45:24 -0800 (PST)
Received: from unknown(157.54.17.74) by tide03.microsoft.com via smap (V3.1) id xma012574; Thu, 31 Oct 96 12:45:19 -0800
Received: from IMSMAIL ([157.55.65.201]) by imail2.microsoft.com (8.7.3/8.7.1) with ESMTP id MAA08260; Thu, 31 Oct 1996 12:44:45 -0800 (PST)
Received: from natba - 172.31.178.72 by ims.microsoft.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Thu, 31 Oct 1996 12:50:22 -0800
From: Nat Ballou <natba@ims.microsoft.com>
To: ietf-nntp@academ.com, imap@cac.washington.edu, nntp-extensions@academ.com
MMDF-Warning: Parse error in original version of preceding line at CNRI.Reston.VA.US
Subject: Re: nntp-extensions Re: ietf-nntp NNTP SEARCH extension internet-draft available
Date: Thu, 31 Oct 1996 12:45:26 -0800
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Priority: 3
X-Mailer: Microsoft Internet Mail 4.71.0125.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-ID: <0ce0a2250201fa6IMSMAIL@ims.microsoft.com>
Sender: owner-ietf-nntp@academ.com
Precedence: bulk

On Thursday, October 31, 1996 11:50 AM, Mark Krispin Wrote:
> 
> On Thu, 31 Oct 1996 08:01:27 -0800, Brian Kantor wrote:
> > Stan, I think we should continue the NNTP effort.  If some other
> > protocol should become more popular for reading news, whether because
> > of its technical merit or for more prosaic reasons, that does not
> > negate the effort.  I see no reason why there cannot be many mansions
> > in one house; the more there are to choose from [as they say about
> > standards] the more likely people are to find one that suits them
> > best.
> 
> This splits the effort into multiple non-interoperable communities, none of
> which enjoy the benefit of the experience and knowledge of all the news
> experts.
> 
> I feel that such a result would be unfortunate.

I agree 100%.

So, taking a pragmatic approach, the SEARCH that has been proposed
for NNTP introduces significant changes to the SEARCH in IMAP.

Since IMAP is in final review, it seems to make more sense to add 
IMAP search to NNTP than to back fit the proposed NNTP Search into 
IMAP.  Seems rather straight forward to me - I'll even write up
the RFC.

Overtime, we can add the features proposed in NNTP SEARCH to both
protocols - or if one wins out over the other, we only have one
protocol to update.

Nat