Path: utzoo!mnetor!tmsoft!torsqnt!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!sdd.hp.com!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!jarthur!ucivax!gateway
From: S.Kille@cs.ucl.ac.UK (Steve Kille)
Newsgroups: comp.protocols.iso.x400.gateway
Subject: Re: Coordination with SMTP extensions
Message-ID: <674.670067033@UK.AC.UCL.CS>
Date: 27 Mar 91 09:47:05 GMT
Lines: 32
Approved: usenet@ICS.UCI.EDU
In-reply-to: Your message of 27 Mar 91 06:48:55 +0000. <1991Mar26.091453.23602@ugle.unit.no>
Phone: +44-71-380-7294



 >From:  Harald Tveit Alvestrand <hta@no.sintef.er.isolde>
 >To:    ifip-gtwy@no.sintef.er.isolde
 >Subject: Coordination with SMTP extensions
 >Date:  27 Mar 91 06:48:55 GMT

 >Two questions:
 >1) What, if any, note will RFC-1148/bis be taking of the current work
 >   on SMTP extensions?
 >   (if the answer is "none", new question: How should we work on it?)

By reference.  I will be pointing at the output document of this group.
I believe that it will be an improvement on RFC 934.  I think that it is
important that 1148bis does not try to compete with this effort.  I would
ecnourage people with X.400 expertise to contribute to the IETF-SMTP effort.

 >2) When is RFC-1148/bis coming out for review?

As soon as I can make some time.  The slot I had allocated to do this was
passed.  I can't make any promises, but appreciate the importance of this.
I have a marked up copy (red ink on over half the pages), and "just" need to
do the typing.

 >--
 >                   Harald Tveit Alvestrand
 >Harald.Alvestrand@elab-runit.sintef.no
 >C=no;PRMD=uninett;O=sintef;OU=elab-runit;S=alvestrand;G=harald
 >+47 7 59 70 94


Steve