Received: from localhost by CS.UTK.EDU with SMTP (cf v2.9s-UTK)
	id RAA17855; Mon, 18 Sep 1995 17:32:38 -0400
X-Resent-To: drums@CS.UTK.EDU ; Mon, 18 Sep 1995 17:32:37 EDT
Errors-to: owner-drums@CS.UTK.EDU
Received: from wilma.cs.utk.edu by CS.UTK.EDU with ESMTP (cf v2.9s-UTK)
	id RAA17849; Mon, 18 Sep 1995 17:32:36 -0400
Received: from localhost by wilma.cs.utk.edu with SMTP (cf v2.11c-UTK)
          id RAA05551; Mon, 18 Sep 1995 17:32:35 -0400
Message-Id: <199509182132.RAA05551@wilma.cs.utk.edu>
X-URI: http://www.cs.utk.edu/~moore/
From: Keith Moore <moore@CS.UTK.EDU>
To: ietf-drums <drums@CS.UTK.EDU>
Subject: Call for documentation: theory and practice of Resent-*
Date: Mon, 18 Sep 1995 17:32:28 -0400
Sender: moore@CS.UTK.EDU

Okay, rather than arguing about whose users or UAs are broken, let's
simply try to document:

a) (for those who were there at the time) the original intent of 
   the Resent-* headers

I don't want to reopen 15-year old debates, but I would like to have
some historical context.  Let's keep it to one statement from each
party who was there at the time.

b) the various uses of Resent-* in present-day mail UAs and/or MTAs.

...whether they can be justified by the language in 822 or not.

thanks,

Keith