View Issue Details
| ID | Project | Category | View Status | Date Submitted | Last Update |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0001515 | unreal | ircd | public | 2004-02-01 15:07 | 2004-02-04 23:18 |
| Reporter | asdasdasd | Assigned To | |||
| Priority | normal | Severity | feature | Reproducibility | always |
| Status | closed | Resolution | open | ||
| Product Version | 3.2-beta17 | ||||
| Summary | 0001515: Error Replie 404 error | ||||
| Description | <- :kenny.chatspike.net 404 [T]harry [T]harry :You need voice (+v) (#norwegianmafia) | ||||
| Additional Information | rfc1459 -> 6.1 Error Replies.: 404 ERR_CANNOTSENDTOCHAN "<channel name> :Cannot send to channel" - Sent to a user who is either (a) not on a channel which is mode +n or (b) not a chanop (or mode +v) on a channel which has mode +m set and is trying to send a PRIVMSG message to that channel. UnrealIRCD does'nt follow standards in several fields like this one is an example to. | ||||
| 3rd party modules | |||||
|
|
I think you are right. To compare; at undernet it uses this: :Ede.NL.EU.UnderNet.Org 404 fdhsfdhds #vcheck :Cannot send to channel which seems better because then the 'cannot send' message is sent to the current channel instead of to the status window (like on unreal). |
|
|
First off, there is no need to attach RFC1459, we're quite familiar with the document. Second, RFC1459 does NOT define an internet standard. It is NOT a standards-track RFC. Therefore saying the fact that Unreal doesn't follow RFC1459 is an example of Unreal not following standards is simply false. Third, Unreal (and most other IRCds) break RFC1459 in dozens of ways. Forth, in my opinion our way is much better. RFC1459 doesn't give the user the ability to know why the message was blocked, which is bad. Was it because they are -v or some other reason? Secondly you'll notice that it only mentions -v and +n as reasons to send that message. IRC has evolved since RFC1459. There are many more reasons why a message send could fail (+b, +R, +M, +c, +G, etc.) therefore it makes it even more confusing since the user has no idea why the message failed. I doubt this will be implemented in Unreal, there is no reason, it introduces ambiguities that will only serve to confuse the user. I've talked with numerous IRC client coders in the past, not one of them has ever mentioned to me that the way Unreal sends 404 causes them problems. Therefore I see no reason to change it. |
|
|
Oh what I ment btw was: 404 <nick> <nick> :blabla changing to 404 <nick> <chan> :blabla I do indeed agree our comment field should stay the same/similar because it's much better :). |
|
|
fixed in CVS (numeric 404, that is.. I don't think I'm very interrested in changing others). |
| Date Modified | Username | Field | Change |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2004-02-01 15:07 | asdasdasd | New Issue | |
| 2004-02-01 15:07 | asdasdasd | File Added: rfc1459.txt | |
| 2004-02-01 17:11 | syzop | Note Added: 0004840 | |
| 2004-02-01 17:37 |
|
File Deleted: rfc1459.txt | |
| 2004-02-01 17:47 |
|
Note Added: 0004841 | |
| 2004-02-01 18:25 | syzop | Note Added: 0004844 | |
| 2004-02-04 23:18 | syzop | Status | new => closed |
| 2004-02-04 23:18 | syzop | Note Added: 0004877 |
