Re: New NNTP extensions in INN 1.5?

Ben Polk <bpolk@netscape.com> Mon, 15 July 1996 22:12 UTC

Received: from ietf.cnri.reston.va.us by IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa24076; 15 Jul 96 18:12 EDT
Received: from CNRI.Reston.VA.US by IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa24072; 15 Jul 96 18:12 EDT
Received: from PHEASANT.ACADEM.COM by CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa17402; 15 Jul 96 18:12 EDT
Received: from academ.com (root@ACADEM.COM [198.137.249.2]) by pheasant.academ.com (8.7.5/8.6.9) with ESMTP id RAA08039 for <ietf-nntp@PHEASANT.ACADEM.COM>; Mon, 15 Jul 1996 17:08:27 -0500
Received: from hedgehog.mcom.com (h-207-1-136-17.netscape.com [207.1.136.17]) by academ.com (8.7.5/8.7.1) with ESMTP id RAA12870 for <ietf-nntp@academ.com>; Mon, 15 Jul 1996 17:08:25 -0500 (CDT)
Received: from polk ([207.1.137.51]) by hedgehog.mcom.com (Netscape Mail Server v1.1) with SMTP id AAA29464; Mon, 15 Jul 1996 15:07:54 -0700
X-Sender: bpolk@pdmail2.mcom.com
X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 2.1.2
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
To: Jonathan Grobe <grobe@netins.net>, ietf-nntp@academ.com
Sender: ietf-archive-request@IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US
From: Ben Polk <bpolk@netscape.com>
Subject: Re: New NNTP extensions in INN 1.5?
Date: Mon, 15 Jul 1996 15:07:54 -0700
Message-ID: <19960715220753.AAA29464@polk>

At 08:38 AM 7/15/96 -0500, you wrote:
>
>On Mon, 15 Jul 1996, Stan Barber wrote:
>
>> > What new NNTP extensions will there be in INN 1.5?
>> > 
>> > When is INN 1.5 expected to be released?
>> > 
>> > Jonathan Grobe <grobe@netins.net> 
>> 
>> While this is an interesting question, this is not a list about the
>> upcoming INN 1.5 release. It is about work towards a RFC 977 bis.
>> 
>> This question would be better made in the USENET news groups
>> news.software.nntp.
>> 
>I quite disagree. I believe that if new NNTP extensions are included
>INN 1.5 (such as mode streaming?) they should be included in RFC 977 bis.
>I do not think it a good thing for RFC 977 bis to be released and a
>couple months later INN 1.5 comes out with a number of additional
>extensions.

We probably won't go tossing things into the new RFC that are not built 
into software that is not available.  I think everyone involved is eager
to work with the ISC guys to make sure that INN 1.5 interoperates
with other software, but I'd say that the way to make that happen is
to get the software working first, and then put the standards together.

This points to the fact that we need to start nailing down the extension 
mechanism as soon as we can!  The longer we delay, the more new XFOOBAR 
NNTP commands will crop up that will have to be dealt with ad hoc.