Subject: multipart/mixed with checkgroups

From: Julien ÉLIE <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 5 Jun 2009 20:21:26 +0200

Hi,

If multipart/mixed is used with checkgroups, it breaks all existing
implementations because the body of the message should currently
consist only of newsgroups.

However, multipart/mixed can be used with newgroup messages.  And
application/news-groupinfo can lack the "For your newsgroups file:"
line.

Wouldn't it be useful to declare that multipart/mixed SHOULD NOT be
used with checkgroups but that an implementation SHOULD process
checkgroups control articles as MIME messages and search for
an application/news-checkgroups entity?

It would then allow to eventually have the possibility to send
multipart checkgroups and therefore provide a description
of the hierarchy within a text/plain entity in the checkgroups
message.
(That possibility could be added in xx years when a successor
to USEFOR is written...)

-- 
Julien ÉLIE

« Travailler dur n'a jamais tué personne,
  mais pourquoi prendre le risque ? » (Edgar Bergen)

---

From: Russ Allbery <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 05 Jun 2009 11:30:56 -0700

> an application/news-checkgroups entity?

Eh.  I'm not sure that human-readable bits in control messages is really
that important to support... but I guess it would be occasionally
useful.

-- 
Russ Allbery ([email-masked])             <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>

---

From: Harald Alvestrand <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 08 Jun 2009 15:54:45 +0200

> that important to support... but I guess it would be occasionally
Is existing deployed software compatible with such a SHOULD?
If not, I'd say "not worth a change at this time".

                 Harald

---

From: Russ Allbery <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 08 Jun 2009 10:42:52 -0700

>>> checkgroups control articles as MIME messages and search for an
>>> application/news-checkgroups entity?

>> Eh.  I'm not sure that human-readable bits in control messages is
>> really that important to support... but I guess it would be
>> occasionally useful.

> Is existing deployed software compatible with such a SHOULD?  If not,
> I'd say "not worth a change at this time".

No, basically all existing software will process the whole body as a
checkgroups.  I think Julien may have improved how INN now handles this,
but if so, that's probably the only server that might look at the MIME
type.

---

From: Julien ÉLIE <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 8 Jun 2009 20:09:38 +0200

Hi Russ,

> but if so, that's probably the only server that might look at the MIME

INN 2.5.0 seeks the last application/news-groupinfo entity, if any, in
a newgroup control article.

However, as for checkgroups, I do not see the point in seeking
application/news-checkgroups.  Indeed, multipart is not said to be possible
and we want to honour the checkgroups body, be it application/news-checkgroups
or not.
That's why I asked if it could be added in USEPRO that multipart/mixed
could be sent the same way application/news-groupinfo is used for newgroup
control articles.  Otherwise, there is not much to do with that new MIME
type...  This addition would prepare for a future version of the specification
because new implementations will try to look for an application/news-checkgroups
entity.

-- 
Julien ÉLIE

« Je suis adroit de la main gauche et je suis gauche de la main droite. »
  (Raymond Devos)

---

From: Russ Allbery <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 08 Jun 2009 12:03:14 -0700

Julien ÉLIE <[email-masked]> writes:

> application/news-checkgroups.  Indeed, multipart is not said to be
> possible and we want to honour the checkgroups body, be it
> application/news-checkgroups or not.  That's why I asked if it could
> be added in USEPRO that multipart/mixed could be sent the same way
> application/news-groupinfo is used for newgroup control articles.
> Otherwise, there is not much to do with that new MIME type...  This
> addition would prepare for a future version of the specification
> because new implementations will try to look for an
> application/news-checkgroups entity.

The point of specifying a MIME type from my perspective was that it let
us create special rules about the body syntax, which one is not really
supposed to do without a corresponding MIME type for the data.  I agree
that news server software, for backward compatibility, probably need to
treat checkgroups the same regardless of the MIME type of the body.
(Although if the MIME type is application/news-checkgroups, you can be
somewhat more confident that the generator isn't doing weird things that
aren't supported by the official syntax.)