QUIPU vs X.500 (was: A tool for...)

pays@faugeres.inria.fr Sat, 13 November 1993 18:31 UTC

X400-Received: by /PRMD=inria/ADMD=atlas/C=fr/; Relayed; 13 Nov 93 18:47:44+0100
Date: 13 Nov 93 18:47:44+0100
Sender: ietf-archive-request@IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US
From: pays@faugeres.inria.fr
To: S.Kille@cs.ucl.ac.uk, pays@faugeres.inria.fr
Subject: QUIPU vs X.500 (was: A tool for...)
cc: osi-ds@cs.ucl.ac.uk, wright@lbl.gov
Message-ID: <753212864.27322.0-faugeres.inria.fr*@MHS>

> 
> You are over-reacting.   We are VERY aware of the installed base, and will
> provide migration tools and techniques.   There is no need for panic at
> any QUIPU installation.
> 

 I take your word and don't doubt at all about your concern
 for Quipu sites though it seems to me a little bit difficult
 to understand how you will be able to have interworking
 between today QUIPU and anything else (including
 new QUIPU) as the semantics of what is in some PDUs
 will change.
 Anyhow I don't doubt you will find a solution, but that
 will probably have to be of the gateway type...

 Apart from QUIPU my main concern today is how to enable
 heterogeneity as soon as possible in Paradise. I don't
 consider realistic to mandate other implementations to adapt
 to current QUIPU, and I don't see any solution for these
 software to integrate smoothly Paradise (except maybe
 in the case of leaf DSA only which is very restrictive)

 Another view might be: are you in a position to give an
 estimate about release date for QUIPU versions which
 will allow good interop with other implementations?
 the french pilot which is not using a level-0 QUIPU dsa
 needs to know what to expect for the short and medium term.
 This also will certainly impact what is being prepared
 now for the continuation of the X.500 service, once the current
 Paradise transition phase will be over (middle of '94).


Regards,

-- PAP

QUIPU vs X.500 (was: A tool for...) pays
Re: QUIPU vs X.500 (was: A tool for...) Steve Kille
Re: QUIPU vs X.500 (was: A tool for...) pays