> I understand there's considerable animosity towards the "other"
> codebranch that the new rfc's were written against, especially since our
> input wasn't sought.
>
> That said, is there a big difference in specs? Would it be possible to
> bridge the gap in upcoming ircu releases (at least the non conflicting
> features)?
>
These RFC's don't mention any of the "features" that we use, and in many
many cases are contradictory with us. Features which networks have agreed
with (such as 005) are contradictory with this RFC. Clients that are coded
to this RFC won't work on undernet IIRC - things like number of modes we send
are too many (6 vs 3). The RFC's go as far as specifying a Server<->Server
protocol that (at least IMHO) is inferior to undernet's. (We have numeric
nicks which are considerably more useful).
What we are left with are features such as +e and +I that don't fit in with
the undernet model - on undernet you use X[1] and get an invite that way. If
you can point to specific features that this RFC suggests that would be
worthwhile for undernet to support, I'm all ears. Bonus points if you provide
a patch :)
I'm going with the idea that this RFC has absolutely no relevance to undernet,
if we commit to supporting parts of it, then we really should support all of
it, and this is rediculous. If we're going to only support parts of it, then
really what does it matter which parts we support? If anyone can provide a
list of things that we should support that we don't support already
(and good reasons why) then are we following their spec? or just borrowing
idea's from their network? If they haven't implemented it themselves then
really, you've got to ask yourself why. If they didn't have the decency to
even mention to us that they were planning on releasing their documentation,
then I really don't see any point in returning them any favours by conforming
to it. For all I care rfc1459 is the closest we have to an authoratative
specification, and it's old, and out of date.
[1]: Yes I know registration doesn't work yet, we're working on it :P[2]
[2]: No I don't know when it will be working again.[3]
[3]: Yes we *ARE* working on it, it will be soon.[4]
[4]: Yes we'll be sure to let you know when it's done.[5]
[5]: No we don't know NOW when it will be done.
