Message-Id: <3.0.3.32.19970930154842.006a7ea4@ng.netgate.net>
Date: Tue, 30 Sep 1997 15:48:42 -0400
To: "Eric S. Raymond" <esr@snark.thyrsus.com>
From: Dave Crocker <dcrocker@brandenburg.com>
Subject: Re: Reply-To (was Re: Issues from the past few weeks)
Cc: kre@munnari.OZ.AU (Robert Elz), jwz@netscape.com, drums@cs.utk.edu
In-Reply-To: <199709272254.SAA04316@snark.thyrsus.com>
References: <10921.875397442@munnari.OZ.AU>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

At 06:54 PM 9/27/97 -0400, Eric S. Raymond wrote:
>       o   If the "Reply-To" field exists, then the reply  should
...
>       o   If the "Reply-To" field exists, then it overrides the "From"
...
>This proposal simply expresses Dave Crocker's stated intention in
>modern language.  My understanding is that the DRUMS charter would

	For what it's worth, I think that the wording in the suggested new text
does, in fact, state the original intentions of RFC822 quite correctly.
(And, yes, much better than was done by the original author, errr... editor.)

	Contrary to the opinions expressed by some, I think that that original
intent is still entirely valid today and is used for that purpose, today.
The fact that additional uses have been overloaded onto that should not
cause us to miss the continuing validity of the original use and meaning.

d/
--------------------
Dave Crocker                                          +1 408 246 8253
Brandenburg Consulting                           fax: +1 408 249 6205  
675 Spruce Dr.                               dcrocker@brandenburg.com
Sunnyvale, CA 94086 USA                    http://www.brandenburg.com

Internet Mail Consortium             info@imc.org, http://www.imc.org