YouGov :"POLL - Blunkett's proposals on internet privacy: for or against"

[Richard D G Cox]

On Fri, 14 Dec 2001 15:22:12 Ian G Batten <I.G.Batten@ftel.co.uk> wrote:

> Not quite.  The article numbers are only of significance within a group,
> and per-connection state has to be preserved to understand which group
> you are accessing.

Thanks for the correction/clarification ...

> group uk.misc
> 211 1062 748228 749290 uk.misc
> xhdr message-id 749289
> 221 message-id fields follow
> 749289 <kitkMnNR5gG8EwfA@otolith.demon.co.uk>
>  .
> article <kitkMnNR5gG8EwfA@otolith.demon.co.uk>
> 220 749289 article <kitkMnNR5gG8EwfA@otolith.demon.co.uk>
> Path: ftel.ftel.co.uk!warwick!univ-lyon1.fr!oleane.net!oleane!grolier!dispose.news.demon.net!news.demon.co.uk!demon!otolith.demon.co.uk!steve
> From: Steve Walker <steve@spam.spam.spam>
> [...]

> So yes, you can fetch individual without reference to groups if you
> know the message id, but it's hard to see how in NNTP-land you'll
> find message-ids without setting a group.

That was the scenario I was thinking about.  An NNTPclient can be set
to fetch the message-ids by group, and then download by reference to
Message-Id without setting the group. That approach would seem to be
less vulnerable to being RIPped off?

-- 
Richard D G Cox <Richard.Cox@mandarin.org>