reminds me of the RPL_INVITING, where rfc459 says the parameters nick
and channel, the wrong way around.
> It seems that an additional second-to-last parameter has been added, an "=".
> If the channel is mode s it is "@", and if the channel is mode p it is "*".
> Why was this change made?
> What is the purpose behind this evil?
This change was made long before ircu split off from efnet ircd. As fa
I was noticing today that the NAMES reply (numeric 353) does not match that specified
in RFC1459.
It seems that an additional second-to-last parameter has been added, an "=". If the
channel is mode s it is "@", and if the channel is mode p it is "*".
Why was this change made?
What is the purpose
