From: Bruce Lilly (blilly@erols.com)
Date: Fri Feb 06 2004 - 19:39:24 CST
Usenet News Support wrote:
> On Tue, 3 Feb 2004, Russ Allbery wrote:
>
>
>>Charles Lindsey <chl@clerew.man.ac.uk> writes:
>>If we're going to change everything, why not just require it always be
>>present? Many servers are already generating NNTP-Posting-Date; we could
>>just use that header as-is or just rename it to something else.
>
>
> Why rename it?
Believe it or not, NNTP isn't the sole mechanism for transport and injection.
If the field's purpose is to record an injection timestamp, it should be
named accordingly. We're not writing an NNTP specification in Usefor, we're
writing a more generic protocol document.