Subject: Re: [NNTP] Capabilities in responses (Was: MODE READER)

From: "Clive D.W. Feather" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 18 Nov 2004 09:21:33 +0000

Ken Murchison said:
>>>This is *VERY* late in the
>>>day to be making significant changes to the wire protocol, particular
>>>when these changes are forced on all clients whether they like it or not,
>>>and when there seem to be ramifications (e.g. piggybacking on the SASL
>>>completion response) that still aren't clear.
> We're not *forcing* anything on the client.

I can't remember what I was thinking when I wrote that, so I'm going to
drop it.

> We're simply putting some 
> structured text in the free-text area that a client is free to use or 
> ignore as they see fit.

However, this free text is going to be almost completely unlike the
standard way of expressing capabilities. I'd much rather find an approach
that doesn't require two totally different parsers.

> Please point out the unclear SASL ramifications, so we can address them. 

There was something in another thread about SASL that was still in the "not
sorted out" state when I wrote that. IIRC it was:

> I don't see any problems.  If 
> we're talking about SASL security layers, this is nothing new and isn't 
> a show stopper.

i.e. the bit about the new information arriving outside the security layer
and therefore being nugatory.

-- 
Clive D.W. Feather  | Work:  <[email-masked]>   | Tel:    +44 20 8495 6138
Internet Expert     | Home:  <[email-masked]>  | Fax:    +44 870 051 9937
Demon Internet      | WWW: http://www.davros.org | Mobile: +44 7973 377646
Thus plc            |                            |