From: Charles Lindsey (chl@clw.cs.man.ac.uk)
Date: Tue Jan 23 2001 - 04:10:06 CST
In <20010122095719.D53504@demon.net> "Clive D.W. Feather" <clive@demon.net> writes:
>I've completely lost track what wording we're arguing about. Could someone
>please repost it, after which could Brad please post the changes that would
>make him happy ?
Officially, we are discussing what goes in the tail part of the Path, and
whether it should duplicate some information in the Injector-Info header.
Unofficially, we are (or rather one of us is) discussing the form of the
Injector-Infor header itself, which is a bit pointless for this thread.
But help is at hand! The Oughtification thread for Section 6 is now up for
debate and, guess what! The wording of Injector-Info is on topic there,
and I have even quoted the part of the wording where it is addressed. So I
suggest you look at the wording in that thread and see whether you think
it needs changing.
But IMHO it is fine as it is, because it is absolutely neutral on this
particular issue.
-- Charles H. Lindsey ---------At Home, doing my own thing------------------------ Email: chl@clw.cs.man.ac.uk Web: http://www.cs.man.ac.uk/~chl Voice/Fax: +44 161 436 6131 Snail: 5 Clerewood Ave, CHEADLE, SK8 3JU, U.K. PGP: 2C15F1A9 Fingerprint: 73 6D C2 51 93 A0 01 E7 65 E8 64 7E 14 A4 AB A5