Re: [OT] Help needed ...
From: Andrey Tarasevich (andreytarasevich_at_hotmail.com)
Date: 05/20/04
- Next message: Stephen L.: "Re: fwrite() and free() bug"
- Previous message: Allin Cottrell: "Re: C Unleashed"
- In reply to: Dan Pop: "Re: Help needed ..."
- Next in thread: Dan Pop: "Re: [OT] Help needed ..."
- Reply: Dan Pop: "Re: [OT] Help needed ..."
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Date: Wed, 19 May 2004 18:15:53 -0700
Dan Pop wrote:
> In <c8g16m$mmu$1@oravannahka.helsinki.fi> Joona I Palaste <palaste@cc.helsinki.fi> writes:
>
>>If things like that can be done in WWW browsers, why not in NNTP
>>servers?
>
> Because you have the control over what WWW browser you use and can always
> choose one that plays by the rules, but your choice of an NNTP server is
> much more limited. Therefore, servers are supposed to adhere more
> strictly to the specs than user clients.
> ...
It has absolutely nothing to do with any NNTP specs.
As you were told before, this entry is supposed to control whether
existing Usenet archival service(s) store this article. Such service(s)
may offer absolutely arbitrary methods of control over this
functionality to outside user. These methods are not governed in any way
by NNTP protocol.
One of such services that immediately comes to mind is Google. As most
of us know, Google will not store an article with the aforementioned
entry in its header or its body.
-- Best regards, Andrey Tarasevich
- Next message: Stephen L.: "Re: fwrite() and free() bug"
- Previous message: Allin Cottrell: "Re: C Unleashed"
- In reply to: Dan Pop: "Re: Help needed ..."
- Next in thread: Dan Pop: "Re: [OT] Help needed ..."
- Reply: Dan Pop: "Re: [OT] Help needed ..."
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Relevant Pages
|
