🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <1ga650EINNl1b@uni-erlangen.de>, unrza3@cd4680fs.rrze.uni-erlangen.de (Markus Kuhn) writes:
> ... X.400 isn't a finished complete standard at the moment.
> Several important aspects of the standard (routing, management of X.400,
> management using X.400, dial-up use, group communication (=news), ...) 
> are still under development, so don't settle down your opinion about the
> whole concept too early.
> 

That X.400 "isn't a finished complete standard" is at the same time false,
true, and shocking:

 * A number of regulatory instances, e.g. GOSIP and various regulators mandate
 the use of X.400, or more precisely the provision of X.400 interfaces by
 whoever provides a regulated mail service. They would certainly not do that
 if they thought that the standard is not complete...

 * Not only is X.400 complete. You can even get it in two different,
 incompatible, flavours: 1984 and 1988. It has thus been completed twice.

 * Indeed you are right. X.400 is not complete. It uses such a baroque
 addressing scheme and pays so little attention to implementation details that
 making it work requires undue efforts. And a "solution" based on X.500 is not
 likely to help much. X.500 does not work either, due to its brain damaged
 hierarchical organization...

What is really shocking is that it took 12 years between the start of the
initial study and the current state. Speak of efficiency in the
standardization process!

Christian Huitema