IETF Logo Mail Archive

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

Jack De Winter <jack@wildbear.on.ca> Thu, 31 October 1996 20:28 UTC

Received: from cnri by ietf.org id aa23033; 31 Oct 96 15:28 EST
Received: from PHEASANT.ACADEM.COM by CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa20172; 31 Oct 96 15:28 EST
Received: (from majordom@localhost) by pheasant.ACADEM.COM (8.7.5/8.7.3) id OAA12082 for ietf-nntp-outgoing; Thu, 31 Oct 1996 14:25:43 -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 OAA12077 for <ietf-nntp@PHEASANT.ACADEM.COM>; Thu, 31 Oct 1996 14:25:40 -0600
Received: from lacroix.wildbear.on.ca ([199.246.132.198]) by academ.com (8.7.6/8.7.1) with ESMTP id OAA11465 for <ietf-nntp@academ.com>; Thu, 31 Oct 1996 14:25:36 -0600 (CST)
Received: by lacroix.wildbear.on.ca from localhost (router,SLmailNT V3.0 (alpha 1)); Thu, 31 Oct 1996 15:17:51 -0500
Received: by lacroix.wildbear.on.ca from tester.wildbear.on.ca (199.246.132.199::mail daemon,SLmailNT V3.0 (alpha 1)); Thu, 31 Oct 1996 15:17:50 -0500
X-Sender: "Jack De Winter" <jack@wildbear.on.ca>
X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Version 2.1.1
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
To: Jeff Coffler <jeffc@netmanage.com>, Keith Moore <moore@cs.utk.edu>, Nat Ballou <natba@ims.microsoft.com>
From: Jack De Winter <jack@wildbear.on.ca>
Subject: Re: nntp-extensions Re: ietf-nntp NNTP SEARCH extension internet-draft available
Cc: bhern@netscape.com, ietf-nntp@academ.com, imap@cac.washington.edu, moore@cs.utk.edu, nntp-extensions@academ.com, Rich Salz <rsalz@osf.org>
Date: Thu, 31 Oct 1996 15:17:51 -0500
Message-Id: <19961031151751.056f994a.in@lacroix.wildbear.on.ca>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: owner-ietf-nntp@academ.com
Precedence: bulk

Well, proven does not always equal right.  UUEncoding was supposed to be
proven, and there are tonnes of variations.  

I think the original point that was made is that NNTP was designed
originally for news transfer, not reading.  IMAP was designed to handle
messages, and was focused on mail messages because it seemed like a better
bet.

My personal preferences would be to see NNTP set as a transfer protocol
and IMAP used to read the articles.  NNTP is good for transfering articles,
but the specs for any of the news reading stuff is poorly done. (I have
talked to the gent responsible for the NNTP update, but he insists that
saying 'look at this file in this system, and if you don't have TAR, that
isn't my problem' is sufficient for describing the overview structure,
as an example).

I am not against someone trying to improve NNTP for client access, but see
it as running down a dream for the sake of running, not to try and make a
better client for people.  IMAP goes a long way towards making the client
access for news and mail universal.

regards,
Jack

At 09:18 AM 10/31/96 PST, Jeff Coffler wrote:
>I strongly disagree with your analysis.
>
>I think that, for reading news, NOTHING is as proven as NNTP is today.
>NNTP is routinely used to transfer perhaps billions of messages (when
>you consider all the news server machines on the Internet today) daily
>both between server to server and server to client.
>
>I see no reason that IMAP should replace NNTP.  Perhaps it should augment
>it (such that servers of the future can answer on both ports), at the
>most, but certainly not replace.
>
>NNTP is very useful.  And I, for one, applaude Stan's efforts to both
>document existing practices, and document extensions mechanisms.
-------------------------------------------------
Jack De Winter - Wildbear Consulting, Inc.
(519) 576-3873		http://www.wildbear.on.ca/

Author of SLMail(95/NT) (http://www.seattlelab.com/) and other great products.

v2.8.7 | Report a Bug | By Email