In <20031001093314(_dot_)331c9581(_dot_)moore(_at_)cs(_dot_)utk(_dot_)edu>
Keith Moore <moore(_at_)cs(_dot_)utk(_dot_)edu>
writes:
RFC 2822 doesn't obsolete RFC 822 standards wise though, since RFC
2822 is merely a Proposed Standard.
As for things lacking in RFC 2822; I wish the X-* headers could be
discussed, at least to explicitly acknowledge that they are no longer
the recommended solution to introduce new headers.
they never were the recommended solution to introduce new header fields.
Graham Klyne's proposed Registry of header names addresses that problem
(in its 'provisional' classification).
BTW, what is progress on that front? Last I heard IESG were looking at it
with a view to RFC.
This is what the datatracker is for. I suggest you check out the state of
the document there.
Ned