Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!sun-barr!olivea!samsung!uakari.primate.wisc.edu!sdd.hp.com!usc!orion.oac.uci.edu!ucivax!gateway
From: Alf.Hansen@pilot.cs.wisc.edu (Alf Hansen)
Newsgroups: comp.protocols.iso.x400
Subject: Re: 2nd Newsletter from the Internet X.400 Project.
Message-ID: <910522160848*/G=Alf/S=Hansen/OU=cs/O=uw-madison/PRMD=xnren/C=us/@MHS>
Date: 22 May 91 21:11:07 GMT
References: <1991May22.030158.15389@mel.dit.csiro.au>
Lines: 66
Approved: usenet@ics.uci.edu
X400-Originator: Alf.Hansen@pilot.cs.wisc.edu
Content-Identifier: 910522160848
In-Reply-To: <1991May22.030158.15389@mel.dit.csiro.au >
X400-Received: by mta pilot.cs.wisc.edu in /PRMD=xnren/ADMD= /C=us/; Relayed;
               Wed, 22 May 1991 16:09:06 +0000
X400-Received: by /PRMD=xnren/ADMD= /C=us/; Relayed;
               Wed, 22 May 1991 16:08:51 +0000
X400-Content-Type: P2-1984 (2)
X400-MTS-Identifier: [/PRMD=xnren/ADMD= /C=us/;hansen674946531.8hermit.cs.uw]

Bob Smart writes:

> >
> >          Alf.Hansen@cs.wisc.edu
> >
> >and then my X.400 address looks exactly as the good old RFC-822 addresses
> >SEEN FROM THE RFC-822 world.
>
> But doesn't this mean that if someone in the X.400 world sends to
>
> 	C=us; ADMD=  ; PRMD=Internet; dd.rfc-822=Alf.Hansen(a)cs.wisc.edu
>
> then the mail will go quite unnecessarily into rfc-822 format, then
> get converted back to X.400 format to get delivered to you in your
> X.400 UA. Not only is it unnecessary but it will result in lose of
> information at the gateway crossings.

I would say that if an X.400 user uses the X.400 address above to reach me,
he is not using my correct address. May be the message will come through
anyway, I have not tested it, but that is just accidental. My correct
X.400 address is

      C=us; ADMD= ; PRMD=xnren; O=UW-Madison; OU=cs; S=Hansen; G=Alf

seen from the RFC-822 world as:

      Alf.Hansen@pilot.cs.wisc.edu

> I maintain that it is _possible_ to devise an address format for
> the use of X.400 _internally_ in the Internet which is compatible
> with the rfc822-style-x400-address for the same person so that
> people can switch mail protocols without changing their external
> address in either realm.
>
> Now it is probably true that the dd.rfc-822 style is not ideal
> for this purpose, but I think it could work.

You should come up with a concrete proposal and present it to the
ietf-osi-x400ops@pilot.cs.wisc.edu   distribution list.

> >By doing this, people can move from their RFC-822 mailboxes into a new
> >and hopefully better X.400 address space, but seen from their friends
> >in the RFC-822 world, the address will still look the same.
>
> But the address by which you reach them from the X.400 side will
> change and people who use the old address will cause messages to
> go through 2 gateways and lose information. Also we are very dependant
> on static tables. And the question remains: is it really necessary
> for us to have these problems which are going to make transition
> much harder?

You are right that people will change addresses, at least seen from X.400,
when they move to an X.400 mailbox. If people in the X.400 world start
to use the correct address, the messages will not pass gateways twice.
If they use the wrong address, you are right.

Your point is relevant, and has been discussed, and the conclusion was that
we want to build up a new address space for X.400 reflecting the actual
organizational structure in the X.400 address attributes. There may
be some transition problems, but since the X.400 user population at least
in the U.S. for the moment is very small, compared to the RFC-822 user
population, it was found more important to minimize the transition problems
seen from the RFC-822 world.

Best regards,
Alf H.