Received: by taz.hyperreal.com (8.7.5/V2.0) id HAA16969;
 Wed, 2 Oct 1996 07:53:12 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from life.ai.mit.edu by taz.hyperreal.com (8.7.5/V2.0) with ESMTP id
 HAA16963; Wed, 2 Oct 1996 07:53:09 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from etna.ai.mit.edu (etna.ai.mit.edu [128.52.38.120]) by
 life.ai.mit.edu (8.7.5/8.7.5AI/life.ai.mit.edu:1.6) with SMTP id KAA05450 for
 <new-httpd@hyperreal.com>; Wed, 2 Oct 1996 10:53:06 -0400 (EDT)
Received: by etna.ai.mit.edu (5.65v3.2/1.1.10.5/13Aug96-1155PM)
	id AA18403; Wed, 2 Oct 1996 10:58:14 -0400
Date: Wed, 2 Oct 1996 10:58:14 -0400
From: "Robert S. Thau" <rst@ai.mit.edu>
Message-Id: <9610021458.AA18403@etna.ai.mit.edu>
To: new-httpd@hyperreal.com
Subject: Re: Possible bugs in current version
Sender: owner-new-httpd@apache.org
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: new-httpd@hyperreal.com

  Or, if you ask me, no and no. It's been a while, but I seem to recall
  the spec being changed somewhere around draft 03 so that this was no
  longer neccessary. I'm quite possibly just imagining things.

I believe you are; I'm not in my office right now, so I can't be *absolutely*
sure, but I'm 99.5% certain that the text I quoted was out of draft-05, and
in any case, Henrik confirms that it still is a requirement, even if the
phrasing has changed.

rst