Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!usc!orion.oac.uci.edu!ucivax!gateway From: DAESCHLER@kulturwissenschaften.uni-tuebingen.dbp.de Newsgroups: comp.protocols.iso.x400 Subject: RE: Re: Smtp <---> X400 Message-ID: <910530172517*/S=DAESCHLER/OU=KULTURWISSENSCHAFTEN/PRMD=UNI-TUEBINGEN/ADMD=DBP/C=DE/@MHS> Date: 30 May 91 15:52:56 GMT Lines: 196 Approved: usenet@ics.uci.edu X400-Originator: MHSnews.distribution@uninett.no Content-Identifier: 910530172517 In-Reply-To: <910528112421*/G=Alf/S=Hansen/OU=cs/O=uw-madison/PRMD=xnren/C=us/@MHS> Autoforwarded: TRUE X400-Received: by mta pilot.cs.wisc.edu in /PRMD=xnren/ADMD= /C=us/; Relayed; Thu, 30 May 1991 10:51:24 +0000 X400-Received: by /PRMD=uninett/ADMD= /C=no/; Relayed; Thu, 30 May 1991 10:33:26 +0000 X400-Content-Type: P2-1984 (2) Conversion: Prohibited X400-MTS-Identifier: [/PRMD=uninett/ADMD= /C=no/;910530173326] Dear "Osis", this will give you a taste of German X.400 flair. This is the way mail is received with Ositel/400, the for the SUN/UNIX system favorized X.400 mailsoft of German Research Network (DFN). I am sure some of us like to analyze the traces, at least I do. > > - OSITEL/400 message - > >Abgesendet am: 28/05/91-18:43:31 >Empfangen am: 28/05/91-20:47:39 >Verursacher: C=us;A= ;P=xnren;O=uw-madison;OU=cs;S=Hansen;GI=Alf;FFN=Alf Hansen >Erstempfaenger: C=de;A= ;P=uni-tuebingen;O=zdv;OU=mailserv;S=agda001;FFN=R. Daeschler >Empfaenger von Kopien: C=no;A= ;P=edu;O=uci;OU=ics;S=mhsnews > C=us;A= ;P=xnren;O=uw-madison;OU=cs;S=ietf-osi-x400ops >Betreff: Re: Smtp <---> X400 >Als Antwort auf: "9105251734.AA28968(a)mailserv.zdv.uni-tuebingen.de " >Querverweise: "9105251734.AA28968(a)mailserv.zdv.uni-tuebingen.de" >Dringlichkeit: normal >Automatisch weitergeleitet: 1 > >RFC-822-Headers: >X400-Originator: Alf.Hansen@pilot.cs.wisc.edu >X400-Mts-Identifier: [/PRMD=xnren/ADMD= /C=us/;hansen675447864.35hermit.cs.uw] >X400-Content-Type: P2-1984 (2) >Content-Identifier: 910528112421 I will answer Alf Hansens's answer on my previous posting. I found there is not much disagreement between us. At the end, we all all want to improve x400 Mail-handling, but we have to clarify the up-to-date situation, since many problems are causes to the lack of knowledge about worldwide existing X400 message handling systems and misinterpreting of recommendation from the IETF X.400 OPS WG. >Some comments to your message: > >> an addressing like /c=us/adamd......./@X400net, Ch. Huitema >> suggested, already exists in form of the Spintmail/Telemail >> gateway: >> >> /pn=rainer.daeschler/o=testorg.ati/ADMD=ati/c=jp/@sprint.com >> >> ATI is a commercial X400 Mailservice belonging to Telemail/Sprintmail. >> >> This works fine with my smpt-mailer here, but some local mailers >> refuse to handle it. > >It is the recommenation from the IETF X.400 OPS WG not to use such >addresses, and if I remember Christian's comment correctly, he did not >suggest that this is the way to address X.400 users from the RFC-822 >world. He just said that we must be prepared to handle these addresses, >because they will be around for a while. > >Using your address example above, the recommendation from the IETF WG is >that authorities in Japan should define an address mapping between X.400 >and the RFC-822 world. A result could then be that the above address seen >from RFC-822 will look like this: > > rainer.daeschler@testorg.ati.ati.jp This would be a good solution, but there is the first source of possible errors. This sample has 4 domains, but the dot in "testorg.ati" is part of an organisational name. On the other hand, it is no problem to solve this problem with aliases at the topdomain-gateway, but for automatic remapping it may cause conflicts. So the use of "." should be omitted in names. >> It is impossible for any smtp-Mailer to handle for example >> "/ADMD=British Telecom". The British PTT was clever enough to accept >> also adresses like uk.british-telecom and uk.bt if they are addressed >> from outside. > >The address mapping definitions will handle this problem. The R&D MHS >service providers in the UK, have in the new mapping tables to be >implemented June 1st, for example defined that ADMD=GOLD 400 is mapped to >gold-400.gb. The procedures for address mapping table coordination exist >already, and the procedures will be continuously improved. How far is this standarized? It would be a good idea if there is a general equatation like: (X.400:) xxxx yyyy = (smtp:) xxxx-yyy Gateways could be programmed to transfer even unknown addresse this way: >> My X400 address here is: >> >> c=de;a=dbp;p=uni-tuebingen;ou=kulturwissenschaften;s=daeschler >> >> while our Smtp-Mail gateway uses "/c=", in DFN (German Research >> Network) we have to use "c=XX;a=" > >If I understand you correctly, your gateway is not behaving as it should. >Ask your gateway manager to contact DFN to get advice. This is not what I want to say. I just want to point out, that one is confronted with different ways of writing even within the same network. I can see the /=xx style addresses in headers of smtp-mail passed by X400 gateway of German DFN. Imagine what happens if you find an address like that in a letter or businesscard: /G=Alf/S=Hansen/OU=cs/O=uw-madison/PRMD=xnren/C=us 1.) Ositel here doesn't accept this order. Addresses have to start with the country 2.) In DFN there must be an ADMD, even if it is blanked out. 3.) "/" is not regarded from Ositel as anything what has to do with X400 Mail 4.) The following address caused the message "unknown keyword": C=us;A= ;P=xnren;O=uw-madison;OU=cs;S=Hansen;G=Alf After I retraced the previous mail I found the problem: ....;OU=cs;S=Hansen;GI=Alf ^ I have to use GI instead of G >> daeschler@kulturwissenschaften.uni-tuebingen.dbp.de >> >> you don't have to care about this problem. > >I agree with you that to omit O in some cases and use O in some other >cases is not good for the end-users. This is just a poblem within DFN, another one is between the X400 networks in Europe: c=de;a=dbp;p=organisation (University, etc.) c=ch;a=arcom;p=switch;o=organisation (University, etc) c=us;a= ;p=xnren;o=organisation (Univeristy, etc.) The networks DFN (represented by dbp), SWITCH and XNREN are identifies completeley differently. If one sees all the X400 systems together, one can't tell when to skip ADMD or whether a network itself is identified by ADMD or PRMD. >The X.400 users, on >the other hand, need an easy description of how to address RFC-822 users. >The IETF X.400 OPS WG recommends as ageneral rule to use Domain Defined >Attributes (DDAs) of type RFC-822, but this is a separate issue... In DFN we have a solutions like: c=de;a=dbp;p=edu;o=wisc;ou=mac;ou=vms;s=userid It his hard to understand to send mail to the German PTT, to get it send to the USA. EAN converts this address automatically from the the smtp-syntax to X400-style and adds "c=de;a=dbp;" to it. So a user has simply to type in the domain addres thes way he sees it on a business-card and would not care about as long as it finds it way to its destination. Now our computer-center will stop operating the VAX here from next month on, and all X400 users must change to the UNIX-implementation, Ositel, what lacks of any converting intelligence. .... >Alf H >IETF X.400 Operations WG Chairman. ---------------------------------------------------- Thanks again Alf for your kind reply. Now I have 2 other questions. X400 can be a carrier for other communication protokols like fax and telex. (1) As far as I have heared, Switch, Sunet and the users of the commercial Sprintmail ans ATI can address fax recipents. I would like to know to which extend this is realized among the existing X.400 systems. To tell you beforehand, DFN-users have only email available. (2) I would like to know how my address is mapped in other X400 systems. Please cut & paste my address from the header into the mail-body and send it to me directly. I will post the summary to the list. The aim is to find out what variety of addressing-shemes actually exist. With best regards Rainer Dep. of Japanese Studies Tuebingen University / Germany