Original-* (was: I-D ACTION:draft-shafranovich-feedback-report-01.txt)

william(at)elan.net wrote:

> My view of it all is that Original-* header fields should
> really be defined as trace fields - that is really how they
> are used right now if the data is meant to go outside the
> system

I'm sure that Bruce and / or Keith have something to say about
your idea, but "it doesn't fly with 3864" would be a very weak
argument.  You could register one Original-xxx representative
found in another RfC (updated by your I-D) and then simply try
to register the complete "class" Original-:

RfC 2822 grabs VCHAR minus colon, so Original-: can never be a
header field name of its own.  IIRC you had something about not
adding Original- to any Original-xxx, therefore you could also
try to register the "class" Original-

Some flame wars later, if the IESG approves your idea, then I
doubt that IANA could or would veto it.  It's a hack, but the
registry shouldn't be abused aa a tool to throttle innovation.
If this innovation has merit.  If Graham doesn't shoot you :-)

                       Bye, Frank