Received: from localhost by CS.UTK.EDU with SMTP (cf v2.9s-UTK) id PAA16193; Tue, 19 Jan 1999 15:04:13 -0500 (EST) Received: by cs.cs.utk.edu (bulk_mailer v1.11); Tue, 19 Jan 1999 15:01:36 -0500 Received: by CS.UTK.EDU (cf v2.9s-UTK) id PAA16043; Tue, 19 Jan 1999 15:01:34 -0500 (EST) Received: from bluepeter.datcon.co.uk (bluepeter.datcon.co.uk [192.91.191.21]) by CS.UTK.EDU with ESMTP (cf v2.9s-UTK) id PAA16012; Tue, 19 Jan 1999 15:01:19 -0500 (EST) X400-Received: by/C=GB/A=TMAILUK/P=DCSMTP/;Relayed;19 Jan 1999 19:55:30 UT X400-Received: by/C=GB/A=TMAILUK/P=DCNET/;Relayed;19 Jan 1999 20:01:01 UT Date: 19 Jan 1999 20:01:01 UT X400-MTS-Identifier: [/C=GB/A=TMAILUK/P=DCNET/;SCOFFMAIL-990119200101Z-577] Priority: normal X400-Originator: Edward.Hibbert@datcon.co.uk Conversion: Allowed Conversion-With-Loss: Allowed Original-Encoded-Information-Types: (2)(6)(3)(4)(2) X400-Recipients: drums@cs.utk.edu From: "Edward Hibbert" To: "\"\"drums@cs.utk.edu\"\"" (Receipt Notification Requested) Subject: RFC 1845 Importance: Normal Message-ID: List-Unsubscribe: Can someone tell me the relationship between RFC 1845 (521 return code) and DRUMS? My impression is that they clash, but I imagine that there is a long and frenzied debate about this which I am ignorant of. Edward Hibbert DCL.