First.. apology for the length of the message.... Just a quick search at IMC came up with these... most only briefly mention the signature part of the message (all other signature references are for message encryption and verification methods - PGP, etc...) RFC1855 - Netiquette Guidelines http://www.imc.org/Searchable/rfc1855 RFC1274 - COSINE and Internet X.500 http://www.imc.org/Searchable/rfc1274 (This is the only one that seems to cover it in some depth.... 2-3 paragraphs is it.... and I didnt have time to see if it relates to a specific architecture/application or if they were being generic about it.... too long a document) RFC 1505 - Encoding Header Field http://www.imc.org/Searchable/rfc1505 Document: draft-ietf-acap-pers-01.txt - ACAP Email Personality Dataset Class http://www.imc.org/Searchable/draft-ietf-acap-pers and just out of curiosity and if you have the time to actually go look at them all to find what you want, try: http://www.imc.org/ids.html (these are the drafts.... ) Last but not least.... I dont know if these contacts are still valid but could be tried.... or even if the working group is still going.... though I suspect it is as the draft for updating 821 and 822 is still in the works... Keith Moore <[log in to unmask]> at least they might be able to point someone in the right direction to find out if personal signatures are covered by any RFC or draft... The goal of this working group is to develop and review revised versions of RFC 821 and RFC 822, incorporating the revisions in RFC 974, RFC 1123, and RFC 1651. In addition, the group will review other RFCs related to messaging, and determine the applicability of each of these to the future direction of the messaging in the Internet. The group may choose to incorporate, deprecate, or write applicability statements for such documents, as necessary to produce a clear statement of requirements for overall interoperability of Internet electronic mail. The documents produced by the working group are intended to be submitted to the IESG for consideration as Internet Standards. Items appropriate for inclusion in documents produced by the working group include corrections, clarifications, and amplifications to reflect existing practice or to address problems which have been identified through experience with Internet mail protocols. New functionality is expressly inappropriate. Just out of curiosity I contacted IMC as well to see if there are any RFC's or drafts or whatever that cover this area of the message body... if anyone is interested in the results you can contact me off-list if you like.... should have them within a few days.... Debra