Re: Yet another X.400 vs SMTP question

Erik Skovgaard <> Fri, 28 May 1993 17:34 UTC

Received: from by IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa10203; 28 May 93 13:34 EDT
Received: from CNRI.RESTON.VA.US by IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa10199; 28 May 93 13:34 EDT
Received: from by CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa16721; 28 May 93 13:34 EDT
Received: from by with local SMTP id <>; Fri, 28 May 1993 17:10:55 +0100
Received: from by with Internet SMTP id <>; Fri, 28 May 1993 17:10:34 +0100
Received: by (5.65/Ultrix2.4-C) id AA27153; Thu, 27 May 93 09:10:42 -0700
Date: Thu, 27 May 93 09:10:42 -0700
Sender: ietf-archive-request@IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US
From: Erik Skovgaard <>
Message-Id: <>
Subject: Re: Yet another X.400 vs SMTP question


You must be kidding!

No wonder, you do not think much of X.400 when all you have used is PP.
Although the effort is appreciated, I must tell you that PP is not up to
par with commercial implementations.  The code is bulky, slow and has
not passed conformance testing.

I have used X.400 for many years (since 1984) and have not found any
RFC-822 mailer that is as good.  But I am even out of date.  Some of
the newver X.400 Remote UA products are very good.

So let's agree that it is a matter of taste and stop this rediculous
badmouthing of X.400 that some people on Internet seem to indulge in.
No matter how much people try, X.400 cannot be stopped since it
serves the need of many large organizations and governments - the
customers that *pay* for products and services.

BTW - if you are going to use the argument of the most users.  Take
note that IBM's PROFS is the email system used by most users (roughly
half as of last year).  Now, you would not suggest that we all switch

The Novell email system is called MHS - and it has nothing to do with
X.400.  It is just a transfer system.  User agents are written by
other vendors.

Any typos are to be blamed on line noise - a problem with connectionless

Cheers,                         ....Erik.