Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!usc!orion.oac.uci.edu!uci-ics!gateway
From: Christian.Huitema@mirsa.inria.fr (Christian Huitema)
Newsgroups: comp.protocols.iso.x400
Subject: Re: Dutch names in X.400 and/or RFC 1148
Message-ID: <9006080903.AA26008@jerry.inria.fr>
Date: 8 Jun 90 10:01:06 GMT
Lines: 37
Approved: usenet@PARIS.ICS.UCI.EDU
In-Reply-To: Your message of 08 Jun 90 01:30:26 +0100.
             <9006072148.AA05704@polya.Eng.Sun.COM>
MMDF-Warning: Unable to confirm address in preceding line at PARIS.ICS.UCI.EDU

>  As far as I understand the state of the arts:
>>
>>  Jan van der Steen   ->    X.400: S=van der Steen;G=Jan;OU=...;C=nl
>>  		   <->   RFC822: Jan.van(b)der(b)Steen@somewhere.in.nl
>
>Actually, I think the 822 form should be (according to RFC 987/1148)
>
>     Jan.van_der_Steen@somewhere.in.nl
>
>Pete
Pete,

I do agree with you, and this is in fact what we have implemented in
our X.400 gateway (M.PLUS). Blanks are useless in RFC-822 adresses,
and the translation from "S=van der Steen" to "van_der_Steen", and
back, is very natural.

However, you are not quite correct when you state that
this transform is ``according to RFC 987/1148''; due to some bizarre
infuences (English influences, indeed), RFC-1148 states that
"van_der_Steen@somewhere.in.nl" should be converted back to
"S=van(u)der(u)Steen". The mapping between space and underline,
which was defined in the appendix A of RFC-987 has been removed from
RFC-1148...

If you were to completely follow RFC-1148 on
that point (which I dont recommend), the mapping of the X.400
address above would become:
	<"/S=van der Steen/G=Jan"@somewhere.in.nl>
Delightful, isn't it?

Christian Huitema
PS.
Note that <Jan.van(b)der(b)Steen@somewhere.in.nl> does not make any
sense in RFC-822. Anything between parenthesis is a comment, and is
striped off by the RFC-822 parser; (b) is the escape for a bang (!)
within an X.400 Printable string.