Subject: [NNTP] Tr: [Errata Held for Document Update] RFC3977 (1707) -- archive of rationale

From: Julien ÉLIE <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 23 Jan 2010 13:58:51 +0100

Hi,

The rationale for which erratum 1707 for RFC 3977 was "Rejected"
<http://www.rfc-editor.org/errata_search.php?eid=1707> is:

    The high water mark is one less than the low water mark for empty
    newsgroups.  A major reason for doing it this way was to deal with
    clusters of servers.  If they're not perfectly synchronized, then
    a cancel might be visible on one and not another.  So if you connect
    to the second one, it looks as if the article has been reinstated.
    Wording it like this meant we didn't need special treatment of such
    clusters.  The low water mark cannot decrease.

I post it here for the archives (because there is currently no public
trace of the rationale Clive judiciously gave).

Note that the erratum was previously marked as held for document update
but that is currently no longer the case, which is right.  This
erratum must not be verified.

Julien

----- Message d'origine ----- 
De : "RFC Errata System"
À : Clive, Chris, Lisa, Ned, Russ
Cc : Julien, RFC Editor
Envoyé : lundi 23 novembre 2009 22:14
Objet : [Errata Held for Document Update] RFC3977 (1707)

>
> The following errata report has been held for document update
> for RFC3977, "Network News Transfer Protocol (NNTP)".
>
> --------------------------------------
> You may review the report below and at:
> http://www.rfc-editor.org/errata_search.php?rfc=3977&eid=1707
>
> --------------------------------------
> Status: Held for Document Update
> Type: Technical
>
> Reported by: Julien Élie
> Date Reported: 2009-03-05
> Held by: Lisa Dusseault (IESG)
>
> Section: 6.1.1.2
>
> Original Text
> -------------
> The successful selection response will return the article numbers of
> the first and last articles in the group at the moment of selection
> (these numbers are referred to as the "reported low water mark" and
> the "reported high water mark") and an estimate of the number of
> articles in the group currently available.
>
> Corrected Text
> --------------
> The successful selection response will return the article numbers of
> the first and last articles in the group at the moment of selection
> (these numbers are referred to as the "reported low water mark" and
> the "reported high water mark" when the group is not empty) and an
> estimate of the number of articles in the group currently available.
>
>
> Notes
> -----
> The notion of "first and last articles" does not exist when a newsgroup is empty. 
> The meaning of the "reported low water mark" and the "reported high water mark" is 
> explained in a special paragraph afterwards.
>
> To be more precise, if at a given time we have only one article in misc.test and 
> the following answer to a GROUP command:
>
>      [C] GROUP misc.test
>      [S] 211 1 12 12 misc.test
>
> After cancelling this article, the same GROUP command SHOULD give:
>
>      [C] GROUP misc.test
>      [S] 211 0 13 12 misc.test
>
> The low water mark is one more than the high water mark (that is to say that the 
> low water mark has increased, and the high water mark has not decreased).  It will 
> permit the following article arrival to be handled by incrementing the high water 
> mark and leaving the low water mark unchanged.
>
> --------------------------------------
> RFC3977 (draft-ietf-nntpext-base-27)
> --------------------------------------
> Title               : Network News Transfer Protocol (NNTP)
> Publication Date    : October 2006
> Author(s)           : C. Feather
> Category            : PROPOSED STANDARD
> Source              : NNTP Extensions
> Area                : Applications
> Stream              : IETF
> Verifying Party     : IESG
>