Clearing attributes on non-referenced material

Document Type Expired Internet-Draft (individual)
Author Alan Buxey 
Last updated 2006-01-24
Stream (None)
Intended RFC status (None)
Expired & archived
pdf htmlized (tools) htmlized bibtex
Stream Stream state (No stream defined)
Consensus Boilerplate Unknown
RFC Editor Note (None)
IESG IESG state Expired
Telechat date
Responsible AD (None)
Send notices to (None)

This Internet-Draft is no longer active. A copy of the expired Internet-Draft can be found at


RFC 822 [RFC0822] defines many headers which can be applied to email messages and RFC 2076 [RFC2076] provides a simple summary of the commonly occurring headers in headings of e-mail messages. Both of these RFCs define the 'In-Reply-To' and 'References' fields - which have since had their definitions improved in RFC 2822 [RFC2822] and RFC 1036 [RFC1036] respectively. These fields are used by 'thread capable' email clients to display messages grouped together in organised parent/child relationships that enable the reader to follow a train of thought or a process of information dissemination. However, if a reply to such a threaded message does not contain relevant follow-up information or is used as a platform to deliver a new message with new subject, then that reply is put within the already existing thread. This is known as 'Thread-Jacking'. This draft proposes a couple of techniques which can be undertaken to resolve this issue within the scope of email.


Alan Buxey (

(Note: The e-mail addresses provided for the authors of this Internet-Draft may no longer be valid.)