Good idea, but this would require a protocol change, or most scripts/clients already written to handle the way it currently works would most likely miss-interpret the replies they get.
the other way to handle it is to get the servers to reply with a numeric like no such nick, or a new numeric (or 2 considering this is about 2 commands) that would pretty much mean the same thing. you are however probably better to simply add a timeout in the script for how long to wait for a valid reply. This reply is simply stating how it is, nothing more, but i like the idea, and i hope this at least gets a discussion about it started. PS: Please do not send html formatted emails to this list -- xplora is wakco (Richard T Smith) yeehaa, doggy... b44w00f Technician, Media Design School Ltd. [EMAIL PROTECTED], Official CService Admin, Undernet Channel Service Committee, Undernet IRC Network. Note: Unless stated this email is from my own thoughts and opinions and does not represent Undernet, CService, or Media Design School Ltd. > From: "Alexander Maassen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Subject: USERHOST/ISON > Date: Wed, 2 Jan 2002 01:30:01 +0100 > > userhost could get a little improvement. Instead of returning a plain = > 302 without contents it should at least state the nick specified without = > inf so scripts would know wich nickname was requested within the = > userhost request. Same for ISON. >
