I think this should go to the whole list, too (look at the addresses!)

ALLOCCHIO@elettra-ts.infn.it Fri, 09 April 1993 08:21 UTC

Received: from ietf.nri.reston.va.us by IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa00766; 9 Apr 93 4:21 EDT
Received: from CNRI.RESTON.VA.US by IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa00762; 9 Apr 93 4:21 EDT
Received: from mhs-relay.cs.wisc.edu by CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa03257; 9 Apr 93 4:21 EDT
X400-Received: by mta mhs-relay.cs.wisc.edu in /PRMD=XNREN/ADMD= /C=US/; Relayed; Fri, 9 Apr 1993 03:02:16 +0000
Date: Fri, 09 Apr 1993 03:02:16 +0000
X400-Originator: cargille@cs.wisc.edu
X400-Recipients: non-disclosure:;
X400-MTS-Identifier: [/PRMD=XNREN/ADMD= /C=US/; mhs-relay..801:09.03.93.08.02.16]
Priority: Non-Urgent
DL-Expansion-History: ietf-osi-x400ops@cs.wisc.edu ; Fri, 9 Apr 1993 03:02:15 +0000;
Sender: ietf-archive-request@IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US
From: ALLOCCHIO@elettra-ts.infn.it
Message-ID: <"02100190403991/32639 INFN*"@MHS>
To: ietf-osi-x400ops@cs.wisc.edu
Subject: I think this should go to the whole list, too (look at the addresses!)

From:	FUNC: carleton
	NAME: ATG/S=Philpott/G=Anne/ </C=CA/ADMD=TELECOM CANADA/PRMD=GC+GTA ATG/S=Philpott/G=Anne/@OU=gemdes@O=carleton@P=cdn@A=telecom.canada@C=ca>
To:	NAME: ALLOCCHIO <ALLOCCHIO@OU=ELETTRA-TS@P=infn@A=garr@C=it>

Received: from gemdes.carleton.ca by INFGW2 (GIVEME server v6.0)
        with TCP/IP SMTP; Wed,  7 APR 93 22:29 GMT
Date:  Wed,  7 APR 93 22:52 GMT
From:  /C=CA/ADMD=TELECOM.CANADA/PRMD=GC+GTA.ATG/S=Philpott/G=Anne/@gemdes.carleton.ca
To:    ALLOCCHIO@ELETTRA-TS.INFN.IT
Received: by gemdes.carleton.ca (AIX 3.1/UCB 5.61/4.03)
          id AA10783; Wed, 7 Apr 93 16:26:30 -0400
X-Posting-Date: 7 Apr 93 16:28:47 -0400
Original_From: Anne Philpott </C=CA/ADMD=TELECOM.CANADA/PRMD=GC+GTA.ATG/S=Philpott/G=Anne/@gemdes.carleton.ca>
Original_To: Claudio Allocchio <ALLOCCHIO@ELETTRA-TS.INFN.IT> (Reply not requested),
        'Harald Tveit Alvestrand' <harald.t.alvestrand@delab.sintef.no> (Reply not requested)
Cc: Glenn Parsons </C=CA/ADMD=TELECOM.CANADA/PRMD=GC+GTA.ATG/S=Parsons/G=Glenn/> (Reply not requested),
        Kent Lancaster </C=CA/ADMD=TELECOM.CANADA/PRMD=GC+GTA.ATG/S=Lancaster/G=Kent/> (Reply not requested)
Subject: Non-conformant X.400/SMTP Gateway
X-Original-Id: <0001B84B.MAI*/C=CA/ADMD=TELECOM.CANADA/PRMD=GC+GTA.ATG/S=Philpott/G=Anne/>
                   
 
P2-Body: IA5
 
 
Harald and Claudio,
Thank-you for your interest in our gateway implementation.  Our gateway was 
installed and implemented in 1991 when RFC-987 was the standard for 
X..400/SMTP communications.  Since it communicated only with 1984 MTAs, 
there was no need to upgrade to RFC-1148 conformance.  We are now in a 
transition state whereby we will be replacing our existing test gateway with 
a fully-supported, operational gateway.   This RFC-1327 conformant gateway 
is targeted for a spring or summer, 93 implementation.  Considering our 
plans, It would be cost prohibitive to upgrade our pilot gateway for the 
interim.    It would be appreciated if you would tolerate our pilot gateway 
until we can implement the more acceptable solution.
Regards,
Anne Philpott
Telecommunications Engineer
Government Telecommunications Agency
Government of Canada
(613)990-2252