On Thu, 29 Nov 2007 15:29:44 EST, Hector Santos said:
This command does not affect any parameters or previously entered
commands. It specifies no action other than that the receiver send
an OK reply. Server SHOULD ignore the NOOP command by issueing a
I wish I had a dollar for every time I've seen programmers and designers read
a SHOULD in an RFC, gone back and looked at what RFC2119 actually says:
3. SHOULD This word, or the adjective "RECOMMENDED", mean that there
may exist valid reasons in particular circumstances to ignore a
particular item, but the full implications must be understood and
carefully weighed before choosing a different course.
and then proceeded to do otherwise because they were righteous in their
faith that they had valid reasons and understood the full implications.
Heck, I'd take two bits and a nickel for each time I've seen somebody treat
a MUST as a MAY.....
If you want to make sure you get a 250 back, you should change that SHOULD
to a MUST - but I totally fail to see why you think that *any* amount of
explanatory verbiage will help with programmers who think that syntax errors
should get a 421.. I think *those* guys are pretty well summed like this:
"What we have heah, is a failure to communicate. There are some
programmers you just.. cahn't.. reach."
I will try one more time.
If the specs say the string should be ignored, it can't be a condition
to negatively reject the NOOP.
Therefore, in lieu of a real system critical issue where a 421 may be
appropiate, there is only one other choice - 250.
But I am not saying it should be a MUST or anthing like that, and I
think it reall inappropriate to presume or insinuate or begin to just
'throw it out there' that I or "programmers" in general fail to
understand RFC 2119 or specifically the differences of SHOULD/MUST/MAY.
I really unfortunately when things go off in tangents that are
completely out of whack and has nothing to do what is being said. In a
way, it kinda sounds like you are the pipe yourself. :-)
Hector Santos, CTO