Ftp-WG: Re: comments on the MLST draft

> Yes, it often is, but I don't think we ought to encourage that.
> In practice, lots of commands are pretty obviously going to have no
> effect, but I wouldn't like to constrain implementations too much.
> The doc is (I think) fairly clear that it is pretty undefined to do
> REST other than just before a transfer.

I guess my only real point there, then, is the 300 reply.  that indicates
the next command MUST be a transfer command.  959 already says must, so the
300 is appropriate, but actually specifying 300 breaks all those existing
implementations and .. if you can't tell .. I'm real big on trying to live
with the mess created by existing implementations.