🚀 go-pugleaf

ceh@leland.Stanford.EDU (Carey Heckman) writes:

>In article <kev.720757490@sol> kev@sol.acs.unt.edu (Kevin W. Mullet) writes:
>>I'm confused.
>>
>>Our electronic-mail analyst says that Netware MHS has absolutely nothing
>>to do with any kind of data communications protocol and is nothing more
>>that a set of subdirectories.  

>NetWare MHS is a set of software programs developed and marketed by 
>Novell which provide a message transport system implementing the NetWare
>SMF application program interface.  NetWare MHS runs on an IBM PC or
>compatible client on a NetWare network.  A standalone version of NetWare
>MHS is also available for use on IBM PC or compatibles accessing the
>DOS file system instead of NetWare's.

>NetWare MHS v2.0 (which should be shipping Real Soon Now) picks up
>and delivers messages, handles gateways, supports a multi-server
>directory service, and provides messaging system management tools.

>BTW, NetWare Global Messaging is a Novell NetWare Loadable Module
>product which also implements the NetWare SMF application program
>interface.

>Over 100 commercially-developed applications use the NetWare SMF
>interface and therefore depend on NetWare MHS to deliver and
>receive messages.

>>Someone else tells me that Netware MHS has essentially nothing to do
>>with CCITT X.400 MHS and that it would require some kind of gateway to
>>talk between the two.

>That's almost completely true.  NetWare MHS draws upon many of the
>CCITT X.400 concepts, but NetWare MHS is a practical implementation which
>has been in wide use for nearly five years.  Moving messages to and
>from NetWare MHS and CCITT X.400 MHS requires either a gateway or
>NetWare Global Messaging with the X.400 Protocol Access Module (also
>due for shipment Real Soon Now).

>>What's the scoop?  Is there any remote connection between these two MHSes?
>>How does one talk between the two? Is Netware MHS really "just a bunch of
>>that subdirectories?"  Did Greg really date Mrs. Brady? ...and what's 
>>whole "nutty polster" thing about anyway????

>Plenty of remote connections between the two are possible.  :-)

Actually, I don't know of *any* fully-implemented X.400 applications.  The
specs are *terribly* long and complex, like they were developed by a 
committee or something...  :-)

The "X.400" implementations I have seen (including those of the major
X.400 carriers, like MCI and GEIS), while they do cover all the important
features, still don't do everything in the X.400 spec.

============================================================================
Peter John Harrison           1522 Day Avenue, #A, San Mateo, CA  94403  USA
peterh@netcom.com             Home Phone: 415-358-0891