Re: [NNTP] New draft for LIST additions (-02)

Hi all,

>> Text version:
>>    http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-elie-nntp-list-additions-=
02.txt
>>
>> HTML version:
>>    http://iulius.dinauz.org/draft-elie-nntp-list-additions-02.html
>
> We plan on releasing a new version of INN in March.
>
> Can we advertise the COUNTS, DISTRIBUTIONS, MODERATORS, MOTD and SUBSCR=
IPTIONS
> variants of the LIST command?  I believe the description of these comma=
nds
> are stable and won't change from what is already specified in the above=
 draft.
> Therefore, it should not hurt if we advertise them even though they are=
 currently
> described only in this Internet-Draft.

After all, it is better to delay such an advertisement after, at least, a=
 Last
Call.  In case there were something to change...
So these variants will not be advertised in INN 2.5.2.  Maybe for the fol=
lowing
release!


> Another question:  can we implement the "Y" and "M" status fields?  Do =
you
> have any objection about them?
> It will allow to have all possible cases regarding how an article shoul=
d
> be handled.

These two status fields will be removed in the -03 draft.  Urs convinced =
me :)
There is no good reason to define them.  It can cause problems to readers
that do not understand 'M'.  I was only suggesting 'Y' and 'M' for the be=
auty
of the protocol, covering all possible cases with local/peer rights.
Better stick to what is already implemented for a Proposed Standard.

--=20
Julien =C9LIE

=AB Plus un ordinateur poss=E8de de RAM, plus vite il peut g=E9n=E9rer un=
 message d'erreur. =BB=20