"The main goal of our negotiation draft is to identify connections that are more likely to be established. The second goal is to allow the clients to know exactly why a connection failed, instead of a silent failure"
I think this is great - DCC questions are constantly asked, and are hard to deal with due to the reasonably large number of problems that can interrupt DCC connections occuring. An advance on the information fed back to the clients on exactly why it fails would be a huge plus in my mind.
I haven't read into detail about this, however, they seem to be trying to improve file transferring to make it faster and better - basically, make it more advanced. Does this not go against the whole idea of the DCC protocol not being the best one for file transferring, and IRC not being the best medium for it? Or am I just being dumb and haven't read enough into it yet?
I know my views on file sharing via IRC are a little (ok, a lot) stronger than others....but that is my opinion and it's not going to change. I think if people are wanting to use IRC to swap files legitimately, then what there already is is fine, although as I said, I think error feedback advancement would be a nice idea.
In my view, advancing upon the file transferring abilities of the DCC protocol is unnecessary.
The whole thing is certainly something to keep an eye on though, and I'm with mIRC whatever decision is made..provided it's the one I agree with <G>
Regards,
