Path: utzoo!utgpu!watserv1!watmath!att!linac!pacific.mps.ohio-state.edu!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!usc!jarthur!ucivax!gateway From: nazgul@alfalfa.COM (Kee Hinckley) Newsgroups: comp.protocols.iso.x400 Subject: Re: Is X.400 good for international mail? Message-ID: <1991Jan7.191734.9458@alphalpha.com> Date: 8 Jan 91 03:00:14 GMT References: <1991Jan5.112335.13232@lth.se> <584410*JPALME@QZ.qz.se> Organization: asi Lines: 30 Approved: usenet@ICS.UCI.EDU x-attn: jns ReSent-From: Jerry Sweet ReSent-To: mhsnews@ICS.UCI.EDU In article <584410*JPALME@QZ.qz.se> JPALME@qz.qz.se (Jacob Palme QZ) writes: >The X.400 standard contains a number of pre-defined body types. >A user, user group or standards organization who needs some >additional body type can define it, and choose an object identifer >to identify it. Ah, you make it sound so easy. We have an X.400 mail product right now that allows you to mail arbitrary enclosures, and of course we want to define some standard ones (e.g. Frame documents, Lotus 123 files, GIF images, X bitmaps...). But finding someone who's dispensing object identifiers for such purposes (and it really wants to be a world-wide directory of them) is a bit difficult. Any ideas? >for a long time. With T.61, every country is expected to define >its own subset for national use, which can be handled by the >terminals used within that country. Who is doing this in the U.S.? (This stuff all seems so easy when you are talking about countries where the Post Office is the Phone Company is the sole provider of such services. It's not that neat here.) -kee -- Alfalfa Software, Inc. | motif-request@alfalfa.com nazgul@alfalfa.com |----------------------------------- 617/646-7703 (voice/fax) | Proline BBS: 617/641-3722 I'm not sure which upsets me more; that people are so unwilling to accept responsibility for their own actions, or that they are so eager to regulate everyone else's.