Re: X.400 on the Internet? (was 'Interent') (fwd)

[Paul Robinson <[e-mail]>]

On the advice of Claudio Alocchio, I am forwarding the following item:


---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Fri, 12 Aug 1994 07:52:40 -0400 (EDT)
From: Paul Robinson <[e-mail]>
To: Ned Freed <[e-mail]>, [e-mail], [e-mail],
    [e-mail], [e-mail], [e-mail],
    [e-mail], [e-mail], [e-mail],
    [e-mail], [e-mail], [e-mail],
    [e-mail], [e-mail], [e-mail],
    [e-mail], [e-mail], [e-mail], [e-mail],
    [e-mail], [e-mail], [e-mail],
    [e-mail], [e-mail], [e-mail],
    [e-mail],
    [e-mail],
    Paul Robinson <[e-mail]>, "Mark R. Horton" <[e-mail]>,
    Ietf Smtp <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: X.400 on the Internet? (was 'Interent')

From: Paul Robinson <[e-mail]>
Organization: Tansin A. Darcos & Company, Silver Spring, MD USA
-----
Note: the title of the message was originally spelled wrong.  Correcting 
it may break up the chain of messages, but...

Based on Information and Belief, on Sat Jul 30, 1994 11:31 am  EST,
Ned Freed <[e-mail]>, writes:

>> Is there any work to create an X.400 e-mail system on the Internet
>> similar to the existing SMTP system?  If so, are there any drafts
>> or summaries of what the plans are?
>
> Work has been underway to do exactly this for many years, and 
> there is a substantial pilot infrastructure in place at the 
> present time.

Based on what I've seen of X.400 and having used it to send messages, a 
big question is why anyone would _want_ to use it.  Maybe it's like some 
Catholics that get married, they didn't _want_ to, they _had_ to.  :)

> The groundwork for all this is defined by RFC1327, which 
> defines the basic formats for X.400 routing tables. This work 
> is being expanded by the MHSDS IETF Working Group, which has 
> defined mechanisms for storing X.400 routing information in 
> both X.500 and in the DNS. Various Internet Drafts are 
> available that cover this topic (ds.internet.net in the 
> internet-drafts directory, anything with the string "mhsds" in 
> its name).

Also, check out my two Internet Drafts:

  <draft-robinson-mail-summary-00.txt> 

which attempts to cover X.400 a little including headers (and I see I 
missed a few), and 

  <draft-robinson-newtelex-00.txt>

which attempts to list X.400 providers.  Comments and corrections to both 
of these as well as things to add or drop are solicited.

> The X400OPS group is also involved, in that they are 
> specifying operational requirements for X.400 usage on the 
> Internet. You'll find several of their documents available as 
> Internet Drafts as well, I believe.

Can someone get me the mailing address for the X.400 Ops group (if it
didn't get this), I'd like to alert them to my drafts and solicit 
comments; if someone wants to forward this message to them, please do. 
 
> A substantial number of RFCs have also been published in this 
> area. Here's a partial list:

1649, 1648, 1616, 1615, 1506, 1502, 1496, 1495, 1494, 1465, 1405,
1330, 1328, 1327.

I'll check and see if I have these in my document. [You may take a break 
for a moment, and I'll be right back.] :)

I'm back!

I have in my list:

1649, 1648, (missed 1616), 1615, 1506, 1502, 1496, 1495, 1494, 1465, 
1405, 1330, 1328, 1327,  1138, 1026

I'll add 1616 to my list.


---
Paul Robinson - [e-mail]
Voted "Largest Polluter of the (IETF) list" by Randy Bush <[e-mail]>
-----
The following Automatic Fortune Cookie was selected only for this message:

Mad, adj.:
	Affected with a high degree of intellectual independence ...
		-- Ambrose Bierce, "The Devil's Dictionary"