From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on inbox.vuxu.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.2 required=5.0 tests=DKIM_INVALID,DKIM_SIGNED autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 Received: (qmail 7578 invoked from network); 7 Aug 2020 17:41:28 -0000 Received: from lists1.math.uh.edu (129.7.128.208) by inbox.vuxu.org with ESMTPUTF8; 7 Aug 2020 17:41:28 -0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.math.uh.edu) by lists1.math.uh.edu with smtp (Exim 4.94) (envelope-from ) id 1k46MD-005uxF-Ha; Fri, 07 Aug 2020 12:40:41 -0500 Received: from mx2.math.uh.edu ([129.7.128.33]) by lists1.math.uh.edu with esmtps (TLS1.3) tls TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (Exim 4.94) (envelope-from ) id 1k46M9-005uvN-4e for ding@lists.math.uh.edu; Fri, 07 Aug 2020 12:40:37 -0500 Received: from quimby.gnus.org ([95.216.78.240]) by mx2.math.uh.edu with esmtps (TLS1.3) tls TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (Exim 4.94) (envelope-from ) id 1k46M7-004aZ6-2r for ding@lists.math.uh.edu; Fri, 07 Aug 2020 12:40:36 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gnus.org; s=20200322; h=Content-Type:MIME-Version:Message-ID:Date:References: In-Reply-To:Subject:To:From:Sender:Reply-To:Cc:Content-Transfer-Encoding: Content-ID:Content-Description:Resent-Date:Resent-From:Resent-Sender: Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID:List-Id:List-Help:List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe:List-Post:List-Owner:List-Archive; bh=iaOLmAYm55u4gYLdjNgmRIUBtzQV2uepPPFDkiW001M=; b=PGPvd7zJzuboM7qg8gvrMqA09w NWDthcCy0Gvw6DviVde2EA9WSPmH/p1Xau+2hwUcXOrFeWVi/IE8XQMMwgm1iKyae6FYK6a457v5K T2MeX0IWqETLgH6l7rK3sVju9G8K0XNnC+nuTU0GLjCpOYJ1/S6dUVPVZHNweCet7tKA=; Received: from haven.eyrie.org ([166.84.7.159]) by quimby with esmtps (TLS1.3:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1k46Lz-0001WH-1v for ding@gnus.org; Fri, 07 Aug 2020 19:40:30 +0200 Received: from lothlorien.eyrie.org (unknown [IPv6:2603:3024:160b:400:ae22:bff:fe50:db06]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by haven.eyrie.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3B29111888E for ; Fri, 7 Aug 2020 10:40:23 -0700 (PDT) Received: by lothlorien.eyrie.org (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 22AE9B4281E; Fri, 7 Aug 2020 10:40:22 -0700 (PDT) From: Russ Allbery To: ding@gnus.org Subject: Re: on downloading too much data when there's no news In-Reply-To: <868sermgqb.fsf@protonmail.com> (Wayne Harris's message of "Thu, 06 Aug 2020 21:39:40 -0300") Organization: The Eyrie References: <864kpfoo9u.fsf@protonmail.com> <878serd0a1.fsf@tullinup.koldfront.dk> <87h7tfh7n1.fsf@tullinup.koldfront.dk> <868sermgqb.fsf@protonmail.com> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/26.3 (gnu/linux) Date: Fri, 07 Aug 2020 10:40:21 -0700 Message-ID: <87h7te8id6.fsf@hope.eyrie.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain List-ID: Precedence: bulk Wayne Harris writes: > Now, I'm looking at > https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc3977#section-7.6.3 > and it seems news.fidonet.net is not violating it. The server does not > seem to advertise the READER capability. I'm not sure how to see all > capabilities. I suppose news.fidonet.fi just advertises what it says > when we connect and that's it. news.fidonet.fi doesn't support the CAPABILITIES command, so it's not in compliance with RFC 3977. It may predate the RFC, or it may not intend to comply. It's some NNTP implementation with which I was not previously familiar: 200 Welcome to SmapiNNTPd/Linux/IPv6 1.3 (posting may be allowed) It appears to be specific to file formats used by BBS systems and was originally written in 2003, which does indeed predate RFC 3977. https://github.com/ftnapps/smapinntpd That LIST ACTIVE behavior is unusual. I've not seen it before. It doesn't comply with RFC 2980 either, which documents existing practice prior to RFC 3977. It looks like it's ignoring the ACTIVE keyword and just returning an RFC 977 response to the LIST command, which is consistent with the HELP output showing that the author appears to be focused on RFC 977. -- Russ Allbery (eagle@eyrie.org)