headers
Ned Freed | 6 Nov 2006 18:59

Re: [NNTP] RFCs

> In case nobody noticed, our RFCs are finally published!

> So what happens now?

Party!

				Ned
Permalink | Reply | 1 comment |
headers
Russ Allbery | 6 Nov 2006 19:21
Picon
Favicon
Gravatar

Re: [NNTP] RFCs

Clive D W Feather <clive <at> demon.net> writes:

> In case nobody noticed, our RFCs are finally published!
> So what happens now?

Well, here are the things that ideally should happen next, in roughly the
order that I'd like to try to work on them.  The amount of time I'm going
to have available is very much up in the air at the moment.

 * Implement the new standard more broadly.  In particular, I want to
   bring INN in compliance with the new standard fully.  This is a fair
   amount of work, several months of concentrated programming at the
   least, so given development resources right now it's going to take a
   while.

 * Start gathering implementation information for a move to draft
   standard, which of course requires that there be implementation
   information to gather.  I had a grand idea of putting together a more
   comprehensive guide to NNTP based on the RFCs but adding known
   implementation variations and the other protocol extensions that
   haven't been standardized.  I'm not sure if I'll have time or not.

 * Return to the extensions that we discussed but didn't implement in the
   first round.  In particular, we put off dealing with large article
   numbers and XPAT, and I'm still undecided on whether it would be worth
   writing an informational RFC on the XBATCH extension.

Between all of that, I do want to put more work into the article format
standard, since it's now considerably behind NNTP.
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
Charles Lindsey | 18 Nov 2006 20:21
Picon
Picon

[NNTP] draft-ellermann-news-nntp-uri-02

About 18 months ago, there were two competing drafts for updating the news
and nntp URI schemes:

         draft-ellermann-news-nntp-uri-00
         draft-lindsey-news-nntp-uri-00

The main difference, apart from style, was that mine advocated the use of
wildmats in place of the old '*' in the news scheme (meaning select all
groups) and the possibility of using a range as well as the number of a
single article in the nntp scheme.

There was also some discussion on this list which indicated that at least
the wildmats were a good idea. I suppose I should have followed up with a
revision of mine taking account of the discussion, but now Frank has
beaten me to it by publishing draft-ellermann-news-nntp-uri-02. He has, at
least, including wildmats (but not in their fullest form), which is
progress of a sort, but his text is IMHO over verbose and defines too much
details (e.g. precise characters allowed in a Message-ID - which is more a
matter to be sorted out by the NNTP server you connect to than by the
client making the request).

Anyway, what I would like from this list is some guidance as to what we
should be aiming for as regards the features to be provided. For details
on the text of the draft, the proper place to discuss it is on the
uri <at> w3.org list.

So, quick summary. The difference between the news and nntp schemes is
that the nntp is intended to work with article numbers, and hence
specifying the server is mandatory. So you can say
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |

Gmane