Re: Yet another X.400 vs SMTP question

Erik Skovgaard <eskovgaa@cue.bc.ca> Thu, 03 June 1993 17:20 UTC

Received: from ietf.nri.reston.va.us by IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa06731; 3 Jun 93 13:20 EDT
Received: from CNRI.RESTON.VA.US by IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa06727; 3 Jun 93 13:20 EDT
Received: from haig.cs.ucl.ac.uk by CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa15609; 3 Jun 93 13:20 EDT
Received: from bells.cs.ucl.ac.uk by haig.cs.ucl.ac.uk with local SMTP id <g.03218-0@haig.cs.ucl.ac.uk>; Thu, 3 Jun 1993 17:02:51 +0100
Received: from cue.bc.ca by bells.cs.ucl.ac.uk with Internet SMTP id <g.09804-0@bells.cs.ucl.ac.uk>; Thu, 3 Jun 1993 17:02:38 +0100
Received: by cue.bc.ca (5.65/Ultrix2.4-C) id AA05188; Wed, 2 Jun 93 09:00:35 -0700
Date: Wed, 2 Jun 93 09:00:35 -0700
Sender: ietf-archive-request@IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US
From: Erik Skovgaard <eskovgaa@cue.bc.ca>
Message-Id: <9306021600.AA05188@cue.bc.ca>
To: S.Kille@isode.com
Subject: Re: Yet another X.400 vs SMTP question
Cc: osi-ds@cs.ucl.ac.uk

Steve,

Again, it was not my intent to belittle the effort that went into PP
and I also agree with you re. the "Mythical Man Month" statement.  In
fact, the first X.400 implementation that hit 100 man-years of developemnt
is still one of the worst!

All I was trying to relay was my perspective on X.400 products.
Granted, that may be limited, but I have evaluated various vendor's
products for the last fouur years.

Please do not take  my critique of PP (public) as a personal
one.  I know a lot of hard work went into the implementation and that
it has many good features..




Cheers,                     %hello