Re: Postmaster at ADMD and PRMD level? Helpdesk?

Russ Wright <wright@lbl.gov> Thu, 15 April 1993 18:36 UTC

Received: from ietf.nri.reston.va.us by IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa12804; 15 Apr 93 14:36 EDT
Received: from CNRI.RESTON.VA.US by IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa12798; 15 Apr 93 14:36 EDT
Received: from mhs-relay.cs.wisc.edu by CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa24587; 15 Apr 93 14:36 EDT
Received: from cs.wisc.edu by mhs-relay.cs.wisc.edu with SMTP (PP) id <12472-0@mhs-relay.cs.wisc.edu>; Thu, 15 Apr 1993 13:23:30 +0000
Received: from lbl.gov by cs.wisc.edu; Thu, 15 Apr 93 13:23:22 -0500
Received: from [131.243.64.68] (macruss.lbl.gov) by lbl.gov (4.1/1.39) id AA25427; Thu, 15 Apr 93 11:26:22 PDT
Message-Id: <9304151826.AA25427@lbl.gov>
Date: Thu, 15 Apr 1993 11:23:16 -0800
To: "Mary G. LaRoche" <maryl@tango.cos.com>
Sender: ietf-archive-request@IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US
From: Russ Wright <wright@lbl.gov>
X-Sender: wright@net.lbl.gov
Subject: Re: Postmaster at ADMD and PRMD level? Helpdesk?
Cc: ietf-osi-x400ops@cs.wisc.edu

At  1:29 PM 4/15/93 -0400, Mary G. LaRoche wrote:
>> 
>> I feel sorry for the poor user that has to figure out who can help- the
>> postmaster or the helpdesk.
>> 
>> The nice thing about having a postmaster is that you have a single place to
>> send e-mail to get help.  I don't see the benefit of adding another address
>> where one can get help and I do see the downside.
>> 
>> Russ
>> 
>> 
> I think the mail would probably go to the same person.  The point is to
> help the usr who may be familiar with only one of the two conventions.
>

Most of the time it probably would go to the same person.

I understand your point, but I'm not convinced that helpdesk is a
"standard" convention.  I do not want to recommend or mandate a name that
SOME ADMDs have implemented.

It is important to note that the document we are talking about is a
POSTMASTER document.  Much of the work in that document is trying to
justify that particular name (not helpdesk).  If the use of helpdesk is
widespread and/or found to be useful, someone should write another RFC
justifying the requirement of this name.  Let's keep this document as
simple as possible.

Russ