Invalid 431 response when server is paused
River Tarnell
river at RT.UK.EU.ORG
Sun Jan 1 20:58:05 UTC 2012
In article <4F0098AE.4010206 at trigofacile.com>,
Julien ÉLIE <julien at trigofacile.com> wrote:
>> CHECK<a at b>
>> 431 testing
>With the patch:
> http://inn.eyrie.org/trac/changeset/9393
>I now see the right behaviour:
>CHECK <test at test>
>431 <test at test> testing
Excellent :-) Thanks.
>Incidentally, does the feeder you are speaking about properly handle
>the 400 response code innd gives when paused and TAKETHIS is used?
It will handle it, but only in the same way it handles any unexpected[0]
response: it will disconnect, wait about 60 seconds, then reconnect and
try again with the same message-id. At the moment I never send a
TAKETHIS without a prior CHECK, so if TAKETHIS <a at b> replies with 400,
the next command in the new connection will be CHECK <a at b>.
[0] By which I mean "not 239 or 439".
>And, more subtle, does it handle 501 response codes?
No. Or rather, it does the same thing as 400: it will try to re-send
the article later. So if the remote server is more strict about
message-ids than we are, the queue would block trying to send the same
article forever.
I just noticed one case where this could happen:
200 RT/NTS 1.0-CURRENT ready -- transit service only (news at RT.UK.EU.ORG).
CHECK <a@@b>
238 <a@@b>
200 isis.rt.uk.eu.org InterNetNews server INN 2.5.2 ready (transit mode)
CHECK <a@@b>
438 <a@@b>
Of course, since INN doesn't actually send 501 at the moment, we avoid
the problem here.
This wasn't a deliberate design decision, I just didn't implement any
special handling for it yet. I think the right (RFC-compliant) response
is to treat it as 438, unless there are servers which can return 501 for
other reasons.
For reference, the feeder source is here:
<http://www.rt.uk.eu.org/cvs/rt/nts/feeder.c?view=markup> (mostly the
fe_running() function).
Regards,
--
-- river. | Free Usenet: http://news.rt.uk.eu.org/
Non-Reciprocal Laws of Expectations: | PGP: 2B9CE6F2
Negative expectations yield negative results.
Positive expectations yield negative results.
More information about the inn-workers
mailing list