Received: from localhost by CS.UTK.EDU with SMTP (cf v2.9s-UTK)
	id LAA17470; Fri, 5 Jan 1996 11:47:29 -0500
Received: by CS.UTK.EDU (bulk_mailer v1.3); Fri, 5 Jan 1996 11:47:02 -0500
Received: from kitsune.swcp.com by CS.UTK.EDU with ESMTP (cf v2.9s-UTK)
	id LAA17335; Fri, 5 Jan 1996 11:46:59 -0500
Received: (from dmckeon@localhost) by kitsune.swcp.com (8.6.9/8.6.9) id JAA03004 for drums@cs.utk.edu; Fri, 5 Jan 1996 09:46:48 -0700
Message-Id: <199601051646.JAA03004@kitsune.swcp.com>
From: dmckeon@swcp.com (Denis McKeon)
Date: Fri, 5 Jan 1996 09:46:47 -0700
X-Mailer: Mail User's Shell (7.2.5 10/14/92)
To: drums@cs.utk.edu
Subject: Re: Name of RFC822

>	The modern view is that 822 is about headers and mime is about
>content.  I suggest that we enforce that distinction.  Some possibilities:
>
>		HIM (Headers for Internet Mail)
>		HAS (Headers for Addresses and Structure)
>		IMH (Internet Mail Headers)
>		SHIM (Simple Headers for Internet Mail)

Simple?  How about:

		SHIM (Standard Headers for Internet Messages)

("Messages" instead of "mail" to include any *future* RFC 1036 harmonization.)

and how about using a date tag, as with Fortran 77 (okay, and Win 95).
This would suggest future (infrequent!) revisions, and encourage
vendors to become conformant with the new standard.


-- 
Denis McKeon 
dmckeon@swcp.com
New Mexico Internet Service Providers List:
http://www.swcp.com/~dmckeon/nm-isp.html