Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!csd4.milw.wisc.edu!bionet!agate!helios.ee.lbl.gov!ncis.tis.llnl.gov!MIRSA.INRIA.FR!Christian.Huitema From: Christian.Huitema@MIRSA.INRIA.FR (Christian Huitema) Newsgroups: comp.protocols.iso.x400.gateway Subject: Re: RFC 987 V 2.0 Message-ID: <8907180706.AA15420@jerry.inria.fr> Date: 18 Jul 89 07:06:47 GMT References: <8907171648.AA17818@polya.sun.com> Sender: news@ncis.tis.llnl.gov Distribution: inet Organization: The Internet Lines: 29 Approved: post-x400-gateway@tis.llnl.gov Pete, Don't misunderstand me. Our X-400 gateway would indeed swallow the "/..=../" forms: 220 X.400 gateway at jerry.inria.fr ready. HELO jerry 250 Hello jerry.inria.fr, pleased to meet you. MAIL From: 250 huitema@mirsa.inria.fr...sender Ok. RCPT To: 250 : recipient Ok. QUIT 221 Closing connection What I was pointing out is that a number of plain RFC-822 sites use various TCP-IP based softwares, e.g. sendmail ``IDA'' and its aliasing facilities, to handle addresses of the form "given_name.surname@domain". In Europe, there is very often a match between the "domain" and some combination of PRMD, ADMD, C, O and OU; the tokens "given_name" and "surname" get parsed into the X.400 personal name components. When the reply arrives to a gateway from X.400 to RFC-822, we should not leave to the gateway the option of printing it in the "/..=../" form, because the mail would simply fail! Christian Huitema PS. Your vocabulary about "local mailer" and "gateway mailer" refers to sendmail. Our gateway is not written as a "sendmail mailer", but rather as an autonomous MTA which can be accessed with two protocols: SMTP and X.400.