Re: Reply flags in RFC822 Subject headers

Hugh McIntyre <hughm@bristol.st.com> Mon, 20 November 1995 17:51 UTC

Received: from ietf.nri.reston.va.us by IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa17498; 20 Nov 95 12:51 EST
Received: from CNRI.Reston.VA.US by IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa17493; 20 Nov 95 12:51 EST
Received: from ietf.cnri.reston.va.us by CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa13733; 20 Nov 95 12:51 EST
Received: from ietf.nri.reston.va.us by IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa17480; 20 Nov 95 12:51 EST
Received: from CNRI.Reston.VA.US by IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa17440; 20 Nov 95 12:48 EST
Received: from venera.isi.edu by CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa13663; 20 Nov 95 12:48 EST
Received: from relay2.UU.NET by venera.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-22) id <AA10383>; Mon, 20 Nov 1995 09:48:12 -0800
Received: from daisy by relay2.UU.NET with SMTP id QQzqrv02010; Mon, 20 Nov 1995 12:47:52 -0500 (EST)
Received: by daisy id RAA06444; Mon, 20 Nov 1995 17:33:32 GMT
Received: by milkwort.inmos.co.uk.co.uk (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA22590; Mon, 20 Nov 95 17:27:00 GMT
To: info-ietf@uunet.uu.net
Path: marlon!hughm
X-Orig-Sender: ietf-request@IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US
Sender: ietf-archive-request@IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US
From: Hugh McIntyre <hughm@bristol.st.com>
Newsgroups: info.ietf
Subject: Re: Reply flags in RFC822 Subject headers
Date: Mon, 20 Nov 1995 17:26:58 +0000
Organization: SGS-Thomson Microelectronics Limited, Bristol, UK
Lines: 24
Distribution: world
Message-Id: <48qdp3$m1s@milkwort.inmos.co.uk>
References: <4883ue$dcd@milkwort.inmos.co.uk> <199511141352.AB22495@gateway.fedex.com>
Nntp-Posting-Host: marlon.inmos.co.uk

In article <199511141352.AB22495@gateway.fedex.com>, kajohnso@fedex.com (Keith Johnson) writes:
|> On 13 Nov 1995, Hugh McIntyre wrote:
|> > As for the general idea of some sort of standardisation, this seems a good
|> > idea, at least to say "this is what is preferred".  Presumably, this would
|> > be best tagged onto one of the other mail RFCs being worked on at present.
|>           ======================================================
|> 
|> Should this be a BCP?

Specifically, I was suggesting the following Internet draft:

    draft-ietf-mailext-mail-attributes-02.txt

[This is accessible as:
ftp://ds.internic.net/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-mailext-mail-attributes-02.txt
(amongst other places).]

Hugh.

-- 
| Hugh McIntyre                                      |     hughm@bristol.st.com
| SGS-Thomson Microelectronics Ltd, 1000 Aztec West, | or: hughm@inmos.co.uk
| Almondsbury, Bristol, BS12 4SQ, UK.                | or: hugh.mcintyre@st.com
| Tel: +44 (0)1454 611443,  FAX: +44 (0)1454 620688  |