Received: from localhost by CS.UTK.EDU with SMTP (cf v2.9s-UTK)
	id TAA17386; Wed, 16 Aug 1995 19:01:15 -0400
X-Resent-To: drums@CS.UTK.EDU ; Wed, 16 Aug 1995 19:01:14 EDT
Errors-to: owner-drums@CS.UTK.EDU
Received: from frankenstein.piermont.com by CS.UTK.EDU with ESMTP (cf v2.9s-UTK)
	id TAA17379; Wed, 16 Aug 1995 19:01:11 -0400
Received: from localhost (perry@localhost) by frankenstein.piermont.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with SMTP id TAA00272; Wed, 16 Aug 1995 19:00:34 -0400
Message-Id: <199508162300.TAA00272@frankenstein.piermont.com>
X-Authentication-Warning: frankenstein.piermont.com: Host localhost didn't use HELO protocol
To: Keith Moore <moore@CS.UTK.EDU>
cc: perry@piermont.com, Chris Newman <chrisn+@cmu.edu>, drums@CS.UTK.EDU
Subject: Re: "Reply-To" 
In-reply-to: Your message of "Wed, 16 Aug 1995 18:34:36 EDT."
             <199508162234.SAA25293@wilma.cs.utk.edu> 
Reply-To: perry@piermont.com
X-Reposting-Policy: redistribute only with permission
Date: Wed, 16 Aug 1995 19:00:33 -0400
From: "Perry E. Metzger" <perry@piermont.com>


Keith Moore writes:
> > Well, we don't need Authorized-by, since we already have "Sender",
> > right?
> 
> It's not quite the same thing.  If I authorize my secretary to send
> a note, *my* name goes in Authorized-by, but my secretary's name
> goes in Sender.  (in 822, my name would go in the From field).

Whats the advantage here over 822?

.pm