Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!sdd.hp.com!ucsd!orion.oac.uci.edu!ucivax!gateway From: jh@tut.fi (Juha Heinanen) Newsgroups: comp.protocols.iso.x400 Subject: Re: ADMD - Country combinations Message-ID: Date: 14 Sep 90 19:29:52 GMT References: <"90-09-14-13:59:46.12*GRZ027"@DBNGMD21.BITNET> Organization: Tampere Univ. of Technology, Finland. Lines: 30 Approved: usenet@ICS.UCI.EDU In-Reply-To: GRZ027%DBNGMD21.BITNET@cunyvm.cuny.edu's message of 14 Sep 90 12:38:36 GMT x-attn: jns ReSent-To: mhsnews@ICS.UCI.EDU In article <"90-09-14-13:59:46.12*GRZ027"@DBNGMD21.BITNET> GRZ027%DBNGMD21.BITNET@cunyvm.cuny.edu (Peter Sylvester +49 228 8199645) writes: Questions: Which combinations do you want: - the ones that are in use by the "research community" with or without proper authorization of the real admds, or - those from admds that actually perform x.400 service? I don't like this classification. First of all, noone at least in my country needs any authorization from anybody to set up a non-profit or commercial ADMD. Thus any ADMD is as real as any other provided that it seriously serves some customer base. How ADMDs make traffic agreements with each other is determined purely by business reasons, ie. does one ADMD think it benefitial for its own business. There is no politics involved. In c=FI we have at least three ADMD that seriously try to server their customers. Two of these are for-profit and are called ELISA and MAILNET. The third is non-profit managed by FUNET (Finnish University and Research Network) and is called FUMAIL. All three ADMD exchange messages with each other on peer-to-peer basis based on official written agreements. Is Germany still under a totalitarial rule that allows only the state monopoly to run a real ADMD? -- -- Juha Heinanen, Tampere Univ. of Technology, Finland jh@tut.fi (Internet), tut!jh (UUCP), jh@tut (Bitnet)