Re: X.400 on the Internet? (was 'Interent') (fwd)
Paul Robinson <tdarcos@access.digex.net> Fri, 12 August 1994 15:52 UTC
Received: from ietf.nri.reston.va.us by IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa05370; 12 Aug 94 11:52 EDT
Received: from CNRI.RESTON.VA.US by IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa05366; 12 Aug 94 11:52 EDT
Received: from mhs-relay.cs.wisc.edu by CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa09879; 12 Aug 94 11:52 EDT
Received: from cs.wisc.edu by mhs-relay.cs.wisc.edu with SMTP (PP) id <03556-0@mhs-relay.cs.wisc.edu>; Fri, 12 Aug 1994 10:50:58 +0000
Received: from access1.digex.net by cs.wisc.edu; Fri, 12 Aug 94 10:50:53 -0500
Received: by access1.digex.net id AA01766 (5.67b8/IDA-1.5 for ietf-osi-x400ops@cs.wisc.edu); Fri, 12 Aug 1994 11:50:52 -0400
Date: Fri, 12 Aug 1994 11:50:51 -0400
Sender: ietf-archive-request@IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US
From: Paul Robinson <tdarcos@access.digex.net>
Subject: Re: X.400 on the Internet? (was 'Interent') (fwd)
To: ietf-osi-x400ops@cs.wisc.edu
Message-Id: <Pine.3.89.9408121131.A29142-0100000@access1.digex.net>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset="US-ASCII"
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 <PAUL@tdr.com> To: Ned Freed <NED@innosoft.com>, Alf.Hansen@uninett.no, hagens@ans.net, sjt@gateway.ssw.com, mrose@dbc.mtview.ca.us, rsm@spyder.ssw.com, S.Kille@ISODE.COM, cargille@cs.wisc.edu, romaguera@netconsult.ch, sjt@gateway.ssw.com, Eppenberger@switch.ch, wg-msg@rare.nl, tf-88@surfnet.nl, huizer@surfnet.nl, J.Craigie@jnt.ac.uk, getchell@es.net, genovese@es.net, sturtevant@es.net, houttuin@rare.nl, Claudio.Allocchio@elettra.trieste.it, wright@lbl.gov, lwinkler@anl.gov, ae_turner@pnl.gov, oberman1@llnl.gov, kippenhan@fnal.fnal.gov, Harald.Alvestrand@delab.sintef.no, Kevin.E.Jordan@mercury.oss.arh.cpg.cdc.com, Paul Robinson <paul@tdr.com>, "Mark R. Horton" <Mark.R.Horton@att.com>, Ietf Smtp <ietf-smtp@dimacs.rutgers.edu> Subject: Re: X.400 on the Internet? (was 'Interent') From: Paul Robinson <PAUL@TDR.COM> 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 <NED@innosoft.com>, 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 - Paul@TDR.COM Voted "Largest Polluter of the (IETF) list" by Randy Bush <randy@psg.com> ----- 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"
- Re: X.400 on the Internet? (was 'Interent') (fwd) Paul Robinson