active file too far ahead

Per Hedeland per at erix.ericsson.se
Wed Oct 27 23:45:16 UTC 1999


Russ Allbery <rra at stanford.edu> wrote:
>
>Per Hedeland <per at erix.ericsson.se> writes:
>
>> It's my understanding that Usefor doesn't do NNTP, and thus while the
>> issue of article numbering in general (or reinstatement in particular)
>> is something for Usefor to consider/decide, the response to the NNTP
>> GROUP command is not - but I haven't followed Usefor either.:-)
>
>usefor isn't doing either, so far as I understand it; I think article
>numbers were ruled to be a property of the NNTP protocol, not the article
>format.

Oops, I'm not sure that was a wise choice, it seems to me that the means
to identify articles (i.e. server+group+number and/or Message-ID)
shouldn't be a property of a specific access protocol, but perhaps
that's mostly academic. Presumably they're not doing the Xref: header as
part of article format either then...

>  All this is being discussed on the ietf-nntp mailing list, which
>seems to get about two messages every three months.

Seems the NNTP protocol continues to resist formal standardization,
then.:-)

--Per


More information about the inn-workers mailing list