Received: from localhost by CS.UTK.EDU with SMTP (cf v2.9s-UTK)
	id QAA22388; Wed, 31 May 1995 16:30:43 -0400
X-Resent-To: drums@CS.UTK.EDU ; Wed, 31 May 1995 16:30:37 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 QAA22356; Wed, 31 May 1995 16:30:34 -0400
Received: from LOCALHOST by wilma.cs.utk.edu with SMTP (cf v2.11c-UTK)
          id QAA12618; Wed, 31 May 1995 16:30:32 -0400
Message-Id: <199505312030.QAA12618@wilma.cs.utk.edu>
X-URI: http://www.cs.utk.edu/~moore/
From: Keith Moore <moore@CS.UTK.EDU>
To: perry@imsi.com
cc: Keith Moore <moore@CS.UTK.EDU>, drums@CS.UTK.EDU
Subject: Re: getting started 
In-reply-to: Your message of "Wed, 31 May 1995 15:51:16 EDT."
             <9505311951.AA20310@snark.imsi.com> 
Date: Wed, 31 May 1995 16:30:25 -0400
Sender: moore@CS.UTK.EDU

> Keith Moore writes:
> > > 3. What should be done with the current return-receipt-to mechanism?
> > 
> > I suggest: "MTAs MUST NOT honor the Return-Receipt-To header field".
> 
> Granted the mechanism should be replaced, but it has saved me many
> hours over the years in debugging problems. When its replaced and the
> replacement is universally deployed, I'll go along with what you've
> suggested, but lets not shoot the cow while we are still milking it,
> okay?

Point taken.  Return-receipt-to needs to be terminated, but perhaps
not with extreme prejudice.

Keith