Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!usc!orion.oac.uci.edu!ucivax!gateway
From: JPALME@qz.qz.se (Jacob Palme QZ)
Newsgroups: comp.protocols.iso.x400
Subject: Need Comparison Of X.400 And SMTP
Message-ID: <670434*@MHS>
Date: 25 Mar 91 03:54:10 GMT
Lines: 15
Approved: usenet@ICS.UCI.EDU
X400-Originator: MHSnews.distribution@uninett.no
Content-Identifier: 670434
In-Reply-To: <9103201255.1.21150@cup.portal.com>
Autoforwarded: TRUE
X400-Received: by mta pilot.cs.wisc.edu in /PRMD=Internet/ADMD= /C=us/; Relayed;
               Sun, 24 Mar 1991 21:47:49 +0000
X400-Received: by /PRMD=uninett/ADMD= /C=no/; Relayed;
               Sun, 24 Mar 1991 09:20:07 +0000
X400-Content-Type: P2-1984 (2)
Conversion: Prohibited
X400-MTS-Identifier: [/PRMD=uninett/ADMD= /C=no/;910324162007]

This is in reply to the question on what are the advantages
with X.400 as compared to SMTP.

In my opinion the main advantages with X.400 are:

(1) There are standardized formats for delivery and
non-delivery notifications.

(2) Tracing och loop control is more fully standardized.

(3) In addition to ordinary text, also other body part
types are allowed, to send e.g. graphics and in the 1992
version of X.400 also any type of file, e.g. a binary file.

(4) Standardized handling of distribution lists.