Re: postmaster doc.

Tony Genovese <genovese@ophelia.nersc.gov> Fri, 01 October 1993 22:07 UTC

X400-Received: by mta mhs-relay.cs.wisc.edu in /PRMD=XNREN/ADMD= /C=US/; Relayed; Fri, 1 Oct 1993 16:51:44 +0000
Date: Fri, 1 Oct 1993 16:51:44 +0000
X400-Originator: ietf-osi-x400ops-req@cs.wisc.edu
X400-Recipients: non-disclosure:;
X400-MTS-Identifier: [/PRMD=XNREN/ADMD= /C=US/; mhs-relay..107:01.09.93.21.51.44]
Priority: Non-Urgent
DL-Expansion-History: ietf-osi-x400ops@cs.wisc.edu ; Fri, 1 Oct 1993 16:51:42 +0000;
Sender: ietf-archive-request@IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US
From: Tony Genovese <genovese@ophelia.nersc.gov>
Message-ID: <9310012151.AA29789@ophelia.nersc.gov>
To: ietf-osi-x400ops@cs.wisc.edu
Subject: Re: postmaster doc.

--------
>
>>From another perspective I do not see that writing anything in an RFC
>is going to have much influence on what X.400 MDs do or what X.400
>software providers make their software capable of.  If this view is
>accepted then I would suggest that there is not point in including
>material that will just get ignored.

    I like Haralds comments on just do postmaster!  As for them
ignoring it - that may be a point but, for the CXII effort we 
could use this document as part of the Commercial providers
requirement for connecting to the Internet.

Tony...

postmaster doc. ALLOCCHIO
Re: postmaster doc. Allan Cargille
Re: postmaster doc. Erik Lawaetz
Re: postmaster doc. Allan Cargille
Re: postmaster doc. Peter Sylvester
Re: postmaster doc. Harald T. Alvestrand
Re: postmaster doc. Alan.Young
Re: postmaster doc. Tony Genovese
Re: postmaster doc. Einar Stefferud