Audit of INN against draft-ietf-nntpext-base-13.txt complete
rra at stanford.edu
Mon Jul 9 09:49:56 UTC 2001
Alex Kiernan <alexk at demon.net> writes:
> Mostly its people emulating a site, so they'll pull a feed using
> something like slurp, then batch back posts to us. I'd guess a fair
> number are running INN locally.
> In our current server IHAVE and POST are more or less the same command
> (modulo the arguments), just with different return codes. I doubt that
> what we have today deals with the wrinkles highlighted in ietf-nntp
> recently for this scenario though.
Hm. By "more or less the same command," do you mean that your IHAVE
implementation is willing to do things like add Date headers, assign
message IDs, add injection headers, and so forth? That I might object to,
since that's really not what IHAVE is supposed to do; IHAVE says that the
article has already been injected and it's being relayed to another site,
which means that the much stricter requirements for a relayer come into
play (and really the only headers that the server should be modifying are
Path and Xref).
Russ Allbery (rra at stanford.edu) <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>
More information about the inn-workers