[IRCServices] Thoughts on 433 numeric?

[Ben Goldstein]

> >>About the only problem I've found with it is if I have kill set to quick
> >>and access the nick from a user at host not in the access list, services
> >>sends the numeric as soon as I connect... not a big problem, unless the
> >>IRC client is one that changes nicks automatically when it receives that
> >>numeric. :)
> >
> >     Do you think, say, 10 seconds before the kill/SVSNICK would be long
> >enough?  Otherwise I don't see a way to solve this without, say, creating
> >an all-new numeric or some such...

I've noticed services sends 433 on NickServ's initial warning.  What would
be ideal is if services sent the numeric 20 seconds or so before the
SVSNICK.  The pros to keeping numeric 433 is if the client is one that
changes nicks to avoid the collide. This is only good behavior if the
numeric is sent shortly before the collide, however.

>      To follow up on this--what would people think of taking a currently
> unused numeric, say 430, and using it for "nick registered/forbidden"?
> That way we get the advantage of keeping bots RFC-compliant without the
> problems of people getting confused by "nick in use" messages.

As long as the numeric is not sent initially, but shortly before the
kill/svsnick, this shouldn't be an issue.

-- Ben Goldstein