From: Charles Lindsey (chl@clw.cs.man.ac.uk)
Date: Wed Sep 06 2000 - 04:19:48 CDT
In <yl7l8qebsv.fsf@windlord.stanford.edu> Russ Allbery <rra@stanford.edu> writes:
>I'm not arguing that we should cram everything into one parameter. I'm
>arguing that we should add an additional parameter which has the same
>semantics as NNTP-Posting-Host, namely "if we're choosing to provide any
>data that may be useful for filtering, this parameter will be present and
>you can use it as a black box of data to filter on." This is what we have
>with NNTP-Posting-Host now, and I think we should provide a parameter with
>the same semantics.
OK, but I thought my posting-host parameter DID have the same semantics as
NNTP-Posting-Host. The only difference I am aware of is that I have made
provision for either FQDN or IP number or Both. Is there anything in the
existing NNTP-Posting-Host I have not included?
OTOH, I make provision for further parameters, which may or may not
provide further filtering opportunities.
-- Charles H. Lindsey ---------At Home, doing my own thing------------------------ Email: chl@clw.cs.man.ac.uk Web: http://www.cs.man.ac.uk/~chl Voice/Fax: +44 161 437 4506 Snail: 5 Clerewood Ave, CHEADLE, SK8 3JU, U.K. PGP: 2C15F1A9 Fingerprint: 73 6D C2 51 93 A0 01 E7 65 E8 64 7E 14 A4 AB A5