XGTITLE and XPAT

[Russ Allbery]

Julien ÉLIE <julien at trigofacile.com> writes:

> Do you think we should change that in CURRENT?
>
> MODE CANCEL
> <test at test>
> <test2 at test2>
>
> would become
>
> CANCEL <test at test>
> CANCEL <test2 at test2>

Yeah, I was of that opinion when we first started with that.  I don't
remember why I didn't argue more for it.  The extra characters aren't
going to hurt anything, and they make the mode actually compliant with the
NNTP protocol.

> Still only Unix domain sockets allowed?
> Or possibly an option in incoming.conf and why not in readers.conf?

I'd keep it to UNIX domain sockets until someone actually asks for more.
No point in borrowing possible potential security problems if no one
actually cares.

> Amusing thing, indeed.
>
> XBATCH 1
> a
>
> creates a new file containing "a" in the incoming directory!
>
> (A new use of INN to transmit documents between two computers.  :) )

Yup.  :)  It takes the input and runs rnews on it, so you can use it to do
a compressed feed by using a batch processor.  It doesn't quite get you
there, since the overall transport still isn't binary-clean, but if you
take a bunch of news, bzip2 it, and then encode it, you can still end up
with fewer bytes.

-- 
Russ Allbery (rra at stanford.edu)             <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>

    Please send questions to the list rather than mailing me directly.
     <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/faqs/questions.html> explains why.