Path: utzoo!utgpu!watmath!att!rutgers!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!ucbvax!agate!helios.ee.lbl.gov!ncis.tis.llnl.gov!TIS.COM!galvin
From: galvin@TIS.COM (James M Galvin)
Newsgroups: comp.protocols.iso.x400
Subject: P7/P3 1988 X.400 related questions.
Message-ID: <4383.625157806@tis.com>
Date: 23 Oct 89 14:56:46 GMT
Sender: root@ncis.tis.llnl.gov
Reply-To: James M Galvin <galvin@tis.com>
Distribution: inet
Organization: The Internet
Lines: 38
Approved: post-x400@tis.llnl.gov

Would someone like to answer this?

------- Forwarded Message

Sender:   iso-relay@NIC.DDN.MIL
From:     zephyr.ens.tek.com!tektronix!sequent!arunm@uunet.uu.net  (Arun Mahesh
	  wari)
To:       iso@NIC.DDN.MIL
Date:     19 Oct 89 20:16:05 GMT
Subject:  P7/P3 1988 X.400 related questions.

I had trouble sending this the first time, so it may be replicated.
Sorry about this.

I don't have access to the 1988 X.400 MHS standards, and I need a
clarification wrt to P7 fetch operation.

The Omnicom course material for 1988 X.400 that I have says the following:
	If the fetch operation is performed successfully, the MS sends to
	the UA a ReturnResult APDU with the invoke identifier value from the
	Invoke (fetch) APDU, and a set containing the message as the return
	result.

My question: Is the message returned a P2 PDU? My current thinking is yes.
	     If not, what is it?

	     Is a message submitted by the remote UA also a P2 PDU?

My interest comes from trying to make sure that an arbitrary UA on a remote 
m/c, e.g., a PC, that implements P7 based on X.400 standards can talk with an 
MS/MTA that also implements P7 based on X.400 standards.

Also, in case MS is remote from the MTA - Is the message submitted by MS to MTA
or delivered to MS to MTA a P2 PDU?

Thanks in advance for your responses.

------- End of Forwarded Message