RE: [Asrg] CRI Header

["Eric D. Williams" <eric@infobro.com>]

On Thursday, June 05, 2003 10:57 AM, Yakov Shafranovich 
[SMTP:research@solidmatrix.com] wrote:
> At 11:15 PM 6/4/2003 -0400, Eric D. Williams wrote:
>
> >On Wednesday, June 04, 2003 3:54 PM, Eric Dean [SMTP:eric@purespeed.com]
> >wrote:
> >8<...>8
> > > ok..optional headers or do we introduce a new one?  There isn't an RFC
> > > 2822
> > > registration process that I am aware of.
> >
> >IMHO the question at this stage is 'optional headers or the introduction
> >of an
> >new one?  Would a comparable RFC 2822 header field be as effective?'
> >[..]
>
> Both an "X-CRI" and "CRI" headers should be defined. Until the standard
> gets approved, the "X-" headers will be used, once the standard is approved
> then both the "X-CRI" and "CRI" headers are used. This is similar to the
> HTTP protocol where both "gzip" and "x-gzip" are used to indicate gzip
> encoding (RFC 2616, section 3.5).

I understand that, thanks.  But the issue I was trying to interpose is that 
perhaps the consideration of which would be more effective for the proposal is 
the type of question that should be asked at this state.

-e
_______________________________________________
Asrg mailing list
Asrg@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg