Re: The need for two headers

At 1:01 PM +0100 2/7/04, Hadmut Danisch wrote:
>I'd propose to split the information which was stored
>in the RFC822 header into two, completely separate headers
>(maybe "header" isn't a good word anymore):

At 6:28 PM +0100 2/7/04, Hadmut Danisch wrote:
>So could you just explain a little bit what you like to focus
>on if not on such matters?

You proposed splitting the RFC822 headers in two. We are not dealing 
with RFC822 headers. We are dealing with a completely new set of 
protocols.

If you feel that there are requirements for what are headers in 
RFC822, state the requirement. We aren't talking about protocols yet, 
so assuming that a message is going to have one, two, or more 
"headers" is out of scope. What is in scope is what a message needs 
to have (and, of course, how it gets transported).

>Be a good mom and tell the kids what you expect instead of just
>beating them.

Ahem. "Beating them" in this case would be removing bad kids from the 
list, which I didn't do yet.

--Paul Hoffman, Director
--Internet Mail Consortium