To LUGNET HomepageTo LUGNET News HomepageTo LUGNET Guide Homepage
 Help on Searching
 
Post new message to lugnet.admin.generalOpen lugnet.admin.general in your NNTP NewsreaderTo LUGNET News Traffic PageSign In (Members)
 Administrative / General / 4034
4033  |  4035
Subject: 
Re: Y2K problem with lugnet! (was Re: Help! My newsreader's downloading everything on lugnet!)
Newsgroups: 
lugnet.admin.general
Date: 
Sun, 2 Jan 2000 05:40:30 GMT
Viewed: 
1238 times
  
In lugnet.admin.general, Jasper Janssen writes:
On Sun, 2 Jan 2000 02:58:29 GMT, lehman@javanet.com (Todd Lehman)
wrote:

This'll fix the problem Tony Priestman discovered, but there still may be
other problems lurking around.  I'm pretty surprised actually that even
CNews had a Y2K bug.  I guess CNews is just *so* old (it goes back to the
1980's, I think), and the NNTP protocol itself is broken, as MattM pointed
out.

The NNTP protocol is _not_ Y2K broken going by the quoted bit of RFC,
though. Assuming Epoch for NNTP is the reasonable assumption, and the
RFC specifies what to do with that assumption - so NNTP isn't broken
for another 70 years (By which time Epoch will have been broken for a
while ;) ). At the very least, by the example given in the RFC, it 'll
be another 30 years before the assumption breaks.

Sorry, you're right, and I didn't mean to misquote Matthew.

Anyway, I didn't mean broken in the non-workable sense, I meant broken in
the poorly-designed sense[1].

The NNTP protocol shouldn't have to define that a two-digit year means
1900+xx for xx>=70 and 2000+xx for x<70.  It should just always have had 4
digits for the year[2], especially when it's not something that's stored in
zillions of places on a disk -- it's just a protocol line command, and what
it gets back as a respone typically dwarfs those time digits.

--Todd

[1] Similar to the way English is "broken" compared to, say, Latin or
something.  Or the way Mega-Bloks are "broken" compared to LEGO.  :)

[2] Err, why stop at 4, even?  It should just have been [0-9]+ followed by
a space, for darn tootin' sakes.  :)



Message has 1 Reply:
  Re: Y2K problem with lugnet! (was Re: Help! My newsreader's downloading everything on lugnet!)
 
(...) Oh, absolutely. (...) Yup. Maybe this was back when dates in Date: were also stored as two digits? (At least, ISTR that used to be the case). Ah well, on to Y10K. Jasper (25 years ago, 2-Jan-00, to lugnet.admin.general)

Message is in Reply To:
  Re: Y2K problem with lugnet! (was Re: Help! My newsreader's downloading everything on lugnet!)
 
(...) The NNTP protocol is _not_ Y2K broken going by the quoted bit of RFC, though. Assuming Epoch for NNTP is the reasonable assumption, and the RFC specifies what to do with that assumption - so NNTP isn't broken for another 70 years (By which (...) (25 years ago, 2-Jan-00, to lugnet.admin.general)

40 Messages in This Thread:












Entire Thread on One Page:
Nested:  All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:  All | Brief | Compact

This Message and its Replies on One Page:
Nested:  All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:  All | Brief | Compact
    

Custom Search

©2005 LUGNET. All rights reserved. - hosted by steinbruch.info GbR