Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!utgpu!water!watmath!clyde!rutgers!husc6!cmcl2!beta!unm-la!unmvax!hi!jedi!sundc!hadron!cos!howard
From: howard@cos.UUCP
Newsgroups: comp.sources.wanted,comp.dcom.lans,comp.mail.misc
Subject: Re: X.400 Mail Package
Message-ID: <316@cos.COM>
Date: Fri, 12-Jun-87 11:50:25 EDT
Article-I.D.: cos.316
Posted: Fri Jun 12 11:50:25 1987
Date-Received: Sun, 14-Jun-87 22:02:59 EDT
References: <289@rabbit1.UUCP> <220@idacrd.UUCP> <493@rlgvax.UUCP>
Organization: Corporation for Open Systems, McLean, VA
Lines: 36
Xref: utgpu comp.sources.wanted:1180 comp.dcom.lans:480 comp.mail.misc:293
Summary: Standards are not for direct implementation

In article <493@rlgvax.UUCP>, dennis@rlgvax.UUCP (Dennis.Bednar) writes:
> 
> Recently I was tasked to write-up an internal memo that compared
> X.400 to our electronic mail system that we sell as part of our
> OA package (OfficePower).  Well, the X.400 series (8 of 'em) standards
> are *very* difficult to read casually.  When are those standards
> writers going to start writing documentation that is isn't so abstract,
> terse, and hard to understand?

Unfortunately for a newcomer to standards, there are underlying agendas
for them which tend to make them hard to read.  Standards are to some
extent political and anticipatory, and do not necessarily intend to be
directly implementable.

The X.400 standards are hard even for experts to read.  It is important
to realize, however, that there is an intermediate stage between standards
and products (at least in OSI):  the implementation agreements document,
and the functional profile defined for a specific environment.

Most implementation agreements are developed by the OSI Implementors'
Workshop sponsored by the National Bureau of Standards; specific options
to be used, even beyond the NBS agreements, are in profiles such as
the Corporation for Open Systems (COS) protocol stack for X.400 or
the European SPAG functional profile.

There are good tutorial introductions to X.400, such as that of Omnicom.
They cost a few hundred dollars and are worth it.

Incidentally, X.400 does not replace electronic mail systems, in that
it provides an intelligent messaging capability among multiple nodes
but does not prescribe the user interface.  Your task probably should
be to look at X.400 as an _enhancement_ to your own products.

Howard
howard@cos.com  [via hadron, seismo->hadron, usda-ai, sundc]
(703) 883-2812