Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!clyde.concordia.ca!uunet!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!mstar!mstar.morningstar.com!bob
From: bob@MorningStar.Com (Bob Sutterfield)
Newsgroups: comp.mail.misc
Subject: Re: Warning: flames on (was: Information on X.400 wanted)
Message-ID: <BOB.90Oct19120257@volitans.MorningStar.Com>
Date: 19 Oct 90 16:03:06 GMT
References: <16906@thorin.cs.unc.edu> <143921@sun.Eng.Sun.COM>
Sender: usenet@MorningStar.COM (USENET Administrator)
Reply-To: bob@MorningStar.Com (Bob Sutterfield)
Organization: Morning Star Technologies
Lines: 8
In-Reply-To: argv@turnpike.Eng.Sun.COM's message of 18 Oct 90 22:58:25 GMT

In article <143921@sun.Eng.Sun.COM> argv@turnpike.Eng.Sun.COM (Dan Heller) writes:
   If people have definite arguments in favor of X.400, please follow
   up and let's discuss them!

If you really want comments from X.400 partisans, you might want to
take this discussion to where the knowledgeable people hang out:
	comp.protocols.iso.x400
	comp.protocols.iso.x400.gateway