🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <910517112138*/G=Alf/S=Hansen/OU=cs/O=uw-madison/PRMD=xnren/C=us/@MHS> Alf.Hansen@pilot.cs.wisc.edu (Alf Hansen) writes:
>
>"  It was agreed that RFC822 addresses should be expressed using X.400
>   domain defined attributes.  Furthermore, a special PRMD named "Internet"
>   will be defined to facilitate the specification of RFC822 addresses.
>   For example, an X.400 user will address an RFC822 recipient by
>   constructing an X.400 address such as:
>
>     /c=us/admd= /prmd=Internet/dd.RFC-822=user(a)some.place.edu/

It is sensible to use c=us, but I hope x.400 mtas in other countries will
have the sense to deliver to a local Internet gateway.

A question: is it possible to use this address format as the X.400 address
of X.400 mail users within the Internet?

The reason I would like it done that way is that people would then have
exactly the same address (modulo syntactic isomorphism) for both X.400 and
rfc-822 mail. In fact I would like UAs in the Internet X.400 world to allow
the above address to be entered as "user@some.place.edu". If we could
switch to X.400 while keeping our familiar addresses then X.400 would have
a MUCH better chance of being accepted. And I can't see any reason why not:
it is not as if those cumbersome X.400 addresses were ever meant to be used
by X.400 users.

Bob Smart