Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!usc!orion.oac.uci.edu!ucivax!gateway
From: usenet@gapos.bt.co.uk (Usenet login)
Newsgroups: comp.protocols.iso.x400
Subject: Re: Numeric OR Address fields (was: O/R name component ordering)
Message-ID: <21671.9106240845@paddy.gapos.bt.co.uk>
Date: 25 Jun 91 23:02:28 GMT
References: <6034.677564475@nma.com>
Organization: British Telecom Customer Systems.
Lines: 25
Approved: usenet@ics.uci.edu
x-attn: jns
X-Previously-To: comp-protocols-iso-x400@uunet.uu.net
ReSent-From: Re-sent but not originated by Jerry Sweet <mhsnews-request@ics.uci.edu>
Original-Sender: usenet@uk.co.bt.gapos (Usenet login)
ReSent-To: mhsnews@ics.uci.edu


In <6034.677564475@nma.com> Stef@ics.uci.edu (Einar Stefferud) writes:

>While I am in here -- Does anyone have any idea as to how much use
>will be made of the Terminal Identifier and the User Agent Numeric
>Indentifier atributes of the ORADdress?


My own experience indicates that these "numeric" fields are very
popoular with government and military networks. This is for two
reasons:

	1) Compatibilty with existing messaging systems
	   e.g. Telex (The military have lots of these).

	2) Security; a numeric identifier gives away nothing about
	   a recipients function or location.

They are not commonly used in commercial or academic spheres.

So the implementor of a UA must look at his potential market when
decidng what prominence should be allocated to these attributes.


BobW