Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!know!sdd.hp.com!ucsd!orion.oac.uci.edu!ucivax!gateway From: mac@dit.upm.es (Manuel Alvarez-Campana Fernandez-Corredor) Newsgroups: comp.protocols.iso.x400.gateway Subject: RFC-822 traces in X.400 Message-ID: Date: 17 Oct 90 18:49:54 GMT Distribution: comp Organization: Dept. Ingenieria de Sistemas Telematicos, UPM, Madrid, Spain. Lines: 27 Approved: usenet@ICS.UCI.EDU Posting-Front-End: GNU Emacs 18.41.36 of Wed Jun 15 1988 on greco (berkeley-unix) x-attn: jns X-Previously-To: comp-protocols-iso-x400-gateway@goya.dit.upm.es ReSent-To: ifip-gtwy@ICS.UCI.EDU I have some trouble understanding the way the RFC-822 traces (the Received: headers) are mapped into X.400 as described in RFC-987. I think that there is much loss of information with that mapping. Isn't it better if this information is just passed in the first body part (that containing "RFC-822-Headers:" )? On the other hand, I've never seen several of the extended headers defined in RFC-987 in any RFC-822 message that has crossed a X.400 <-> RFC-822 gateway. For example, "X400-Trace:", "Autoforwarded-From:", etc. Is there any reason for this? I'd appreciate any comment. Manuel -- .-----------------------------.--------------------------------. | Manuel Alvarez-Campana | EUnet: | | Dept. Ingenieria Telematica | mac@dit.upm.es | | ETSIT - UPM | X.400: | | Ciudad Universitaria s/n | C=es;ADMD= ;PRMD=iris;O=upm; | | 28040 - MADRID | OU=dit;OU=cactus;SUR=mac; | `--------------------------------------------------------------'