From: Russ Allbery (rra@stanford.edu)
Date: Mon Sep 20 1999 - 10:45:31 CDT
Sorry about the delay.
Charles Lindsey <chl@clw.cs.man.ac.uk> writes:
> 5.4. Subject
> The Subject header contains a short string identifying the topic of
> the message. This is an inheritable header (see ...) to be copied
> into the Subject header of any followup, in which case the new
> header-content SHOULD then start with the string "Re: " (a "back
> reference") followed by the contents of the pure-subject of the
> precursor.
This sounds odd, as it's standard Usenet etiquette to change the Subject
line if the topic of the thread has changed and it sounds like the
standard is discouraging this (with a SHOULD saying the Subject should
stay the same). I realize that you're only specifying behavior of the
agent generating the initial article that a human will then edit, but is
there any way of making that clearer? Perhaps saying that "the new
header-content SHOULD default to the string "Re: " ..."?
> The Newsgroups header's content specifies which newsgroup(s) the
> article is posted to. It is an inheritable header (see ...) which
> SHOULD be copied into the Newsgroups header of any followup, unless
> a Followup-To header is present to prescribe otherwise.
Same comment.
> Posters SHOULD use only the names of existing newsgroups in the
> Newsgroups header. However, it is legitimate to cross-post to
> newsgroup(s) which do not exist on the posting agent's host,
> provided that at least one of the newsgroups DOES exist there, and
> followup agents MUST accept this (posting agents MAY accept it, but
> SHOULD at least alert the poster to the situation and request
> confirmation).
Remind me why this is a MUST rather than a SHOULD?
> 5.6.2. Adding a path-identity to the Path header
[...]
> The path-identity added MUST be unique to that agent. To this end
> it SHOULD be one of:
I agree with other comments that a MUST would work here for me instead of
a SHOULD. We've fully enumerated the cases.
> 1. A fully qualified domain name (FQDN) associated (by the Internet
> DNS service [RFC 1034]) with an A record, which SHOULD identify
> the actual machine prepending this path-identity. Ideally, this
> FQDN should also be "mailable" in the sense that it enables the
> construction of a valid E-mail address of the form
> "usenet@<FQDN>" or "news@<FQDN>" [RFC 2142] whereby the
> administrators of that agent may be reached.
I'd support upgrading that "ideally" to a SHOULD, but don't feel strongly
enough about it to argue it at length.
> 5.6.5. Suggested Verification Methods
I still think this is a bit extended and better put into a companion
informational RFC for people writing news software, but I think I've said
more than my share on the topic and won't go into it again.
-- Russ Allbery (rra@stanford.edu) <URL:http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>