Mapping between X. 400 (1984/1988) and Mail
Contents
1. RFC 1405 Mail 11 Mapping January 1993 identify uniquely within the X 400 MHS the gateway performing the conversion The following defaults also apply if node is missing and we are mapping the Mail 11 originator From then node defaults to the DECnet node name of the gateway gwnode if node is missing and we are mapping the Mail 11 recipient To Cc then node defaults to the DECnet node name of the From address if DD Dnet net is missing then it defaults to a value defined locally by the gateway if the gateway is connected to one DECnet network only then net will be the name of this unique network if the gateway is connected to more than one DECnet network then the gateway will establish a first choice DECnet network and net will default to this value In case local part contains x400 text address s also section 6 4 3 In case local part contains RFC822 address s also section 6 434 5 2 1 Examples Let us suppose that the DECnet network name net is HEP the DECnet node name of the gateway gwnode is X4TDEC the Country Code of the gateway is IT and its ADMD is garr and these two fields are enough to identify uniquely the gateway within the X 400 MHS USER47 C it ADMD garr DD Dnet HE2. route node localpart DD Dnet net is networks it is described into connected to section 5 4 apply C xx ADMD yyy DD Mail 11 rout PRMD www nod DD Dnet net localpart maps into gwnode gwe C xx ADMD yyy PRMD www DD Dnet net DD Mail 11l route node localpart Examples Let us suppose that DD Dnet POOO net uuu net NOT known to the gateway as one of the DECnet In this case the mapping rule the DECnet network name net is HEP the DECnet node name of the gateway gwnode is X4TDEC the Country Code of the gateway is IT and its ADMD is garr and these two fields are enough to identify uniquel occhio y the gateway Page 9 RFC 1405 Mail 11 Mapping January 1993 within the X 400 MHS C it ADMD garr DD Dnet HEP DD Mail 11 X4TDEC MRGATE q C ab A dsa P qwty OU mie S Cly q MRGATE C ab A dsa P qwty OU mie S Cly G it ADMD garr DD Dnet EASYNET DD Mail 11 ROM01 CARLO X4TDEC gw C it ADMD garr DD Dnet EASYNET DD Mail 11 ROM0O1 CARLO in the abov xamp 1 EASYNET is supposed to be not connected to our gateway located on X4TDEC DECnet node 5 4 X 400 gt Mail 11 The mapping of an X 400 O R address into Mail 11 is done encoding the various attributes into the X400 text
3. about the fact that the message was a BCC the new message is delivered separately a note is added to the message delivered to TO and CC recipients informing them about the fact that there were some BCC recipients too Any other X 400 service element support is done accordingly to RFC1327 including the mapped element into the RFC822 like header into Mail 11 body part Chapter 3 Basic Mappings The basic mappings indicated in RFC1327 and its updates should be fully used Chapter 4 Addressing 4 1 Mail 11 addressing Mail 11 addressing can vary from a very simple case up to complex ones if there are other Mail 11 to something else gateways involved In any case a Mail 1l address is an ASCII string composed of different elements Allocchio Page 4 RFC 1405 Mail 11 Mapping January 1993 4 2 X 400 addressing On the other hand An X 400 O R address is a collection of attributes which can anyway be presented as an IA5 textual representation as defined in chapter 4 of RFC1327 4 3 Mail 1l address components Let us start defining the different parts composing a Mail 11l address We can consider any Mail 11 address as composed by 3 parts route node local part where route and node are optional and only local part is compulsory Here comes a strict definition of these elements node ALPHA DIGIT DIGIT DIGIT DIGIT route node i1
4. address as defined in chapter 4 of RFC1327 and including this as f address A f pref and a the DECnet node name of the gateway Thus x400 text address will b ncoded lik gwnode gws x400 text address having spaces dividing attributes as optional 5 4 1 Example Let us suppose that the DECnet node name of the gateway gwnode is X4TD ea Q lt Thus C gb ADMD Gold 400 PRMD AC UK O ucl OU cs G Jim S Clay will b ncoded lik X4TDEC gw C gb A Gold 400 P AC UK O ucl OU cs G Jim S Clay or its equivalent with the notation X4TDEC gwS C gb ADMD Gold 400 PRMD AC UK O ucl OU cs G Jim S Clay Allocchio Page 10 RFC 1405 Mail 11 Mapping January 1993 5 5 Mail 11 encoding of X 400 gt X 400 It can happened that Mail 1l is used to relay messages between X 400 systems this will mean multiple X 400 Mail 11l gateway crossing and we will encounter Mail 11 addresses containing embedded X 400 informations In order to assure path reversibility we must then distinguish two cases th mbedded X 400 address belongs to a domain whose naming and routing rules are known to the global X 400 MHS In this case the mapping is trivial route gwnode gws x400 text address maps into x400 text address route and gwnode are mapped into X 400 Trace servic lements the encoded X 400 domain does not
5. belong to the global X 400 name space In this case the mapping rule described into section 5 2 apply route gwnode gwS x400 text address maps into C xx ADMD yyy DD Dnet net DD Mail 11l route gwnode gw p q x400 text address q The latter cas is deprecated and must be regarded as a possible temporary solution only while waiting to include into the global X 400 MHS also this domain 5 5 1 Examples Let us suppose that the DECnet network name net is HEP the DECnet node name of the gateway gwnode is X4TDEC the Country Code of the gateway is IT and its ADMD is garr and these two fields are enough to identify uniquely the gateway within the X 400 MHS X4TDEC gwS C fr ADMD atlas PRMD ifip O poly S Moreau C fr ADMD atlas PRMD ifip O poly S Moreau Allocchio Page 11 RFC 1405 Mail 11 Mapping January 1993 X4TDEC gwS C zz ADMD PRMD Botwa O Miner S Chiuaw C it ADMD garr DD Dnet HEP DD Mail 11 X4TDEC gw p q C zz ADMD PRMD Botwa O Miner S Chiuaw q in the abov xampl C zz is unknown to the global X 400 MHS Chapter 6 Complex mapping 6 1 The protocol triangle The bilateral mappings described in chapter 5 must be extended in order to cover also the case in which also RFC822 addressing is involved and the following triangular situation occurs x 400 fo N Mail 11 RFC82
6. gwl OU RELAY S BETTY p MYNODE where dnet gwl it is the domain of the machine running the Mail 11 to RFC822 gateway 6 4 3 X 400 gt Mail 11 gt RFC822 The X 400 address is stored into Mail 11 f address element as described in sections 5 3 and 5 4 then if the Mail 11 to RFC822 gateway is able to understand the presence of a x400 text address into the Mail 11 address then it applies RFC1327 to it and encodes header Otherwise it applies the rules described in 6 3 an example C gb ADMD Gold 400 PRMD AC UK O UCL OU cs G Jim S Clay will b ncoded lik X4TDEC gw C gb A Gold 400 P AC UK 0O UCL O0U cs G Jim S Clay If the Mail 11 to RFC822 gateway recognise the x400 text address then the address becomes accordingly to RFC1327 Jim Clay cs UCL AC UK Allocchio Page 14 RFC 1405 Mail 11 Mapping January 1993 and the following RFC822 header line is added Received from X4TDEC with DECnet Mail 11 on xx xxx xxxx Otherwise one of the dumb rules could produce gw C gb A Gold 400 P AC UK O UCL OU cs G Jim S Clay X4TDEC doms 6 4 4 RFC822 gt Mail 11 gt X 400 The RFC822 address is encoded in Mail 11 f address element as described in sect 6 2 then if the Mail 11 to X 400 gateway is able to understand the presence of an RFC822 address into the Mail 11 address then it applies RFC1327 to it and encodes route and applies the rules de
7. local part username nickname for protocol username ALPHA DIGIT nickname lt printablestring lt and HTAB gt gt for protocol f pref f sep lt gt f address lt gt f pref ALPHA DIGIT f sep on 7 Ween f address printablestring RFC822 address X400 text address X400 text address lt textual representation of an X 400 O R addr gt Please note that in x text address both the notation and the notation are equivalent and allowed s xamples in different sect Allocchio Page 5 RFC 1405 Mail 11 Mapping January 1993 Some examples route node local part USER47 BETTY MARY 34 INS M P Tracy Dicdum cc edu UCLA13 MVAX93 MRGATE MBOX1 MBX34 MYC3 BOB G M I MYNODE BOSTON CLUS02 GOOFY1 MIAMI2 George Rosenthal CCUBVX VS3100 Jnet IAB3425 IBAX23L RGATE C xx A bbb P ppp S Joe MAINVX INS path1 path2 user dom GWX400 gw C xx ADMD aaa PRMD ppp S Lee GX409A x400 C xx A aaa P ppp S Lee smtpSs postmast nodeb bitnet MICKEY PRFGAT profs NANCY IBMB edu S HU427BDSCSUNIB abc acme edu Chapter 5 Mapping 5 1 Mapping scheme DECnet address field is somehow a flat land with some obliged routes to reach some hidden areas Thus a truly hierarchical mapping scheme using mapping tables as suitable for RFC822 is not the appropriate solution A fixed set of rules using DDA
8. number of de facto impl gateways is existing As said in the introduction RFC822 addresses in Mail 11 is accompli protocol syntax and is On the other hand Mail 11 addresses ar various ways Here are node user ga thus unique resulting in a common definition which uses lementations of Mail 11 RFC822 the mapping of lished using the foreign mail the most common ones teway address user node decn Qaa o user Snode gateway address t domains user Snode dnet gateway address Let s have a quick look to these different choices a This form simply encloses as quoted Left Hand Side string original Mail 11 address into the RFC822 address of the Mail 11 RFC822 gateway RFC822 syntax and the Mail 11 address is This method is full no encoding rules need to applied to it b As one will immediately notice indicating the address is a Mail 11 one indistinguishable from a similar encoding of RSCS BIT addresses used by some IBM VM Mailer systems It shoul deprecated c In this case a sort the address itself ly conformant wi left untouched this form has nothing in it this makes the encoding Tnet ld th ncoded in RFC822 syntax in the th thus us be of reserved word decnet mbedded into presence of a Mail 11 original identifies th address preceding it domains and extracting user The decoding i
9. 2 The X 400 RFC822 side is fully covered by RFC1327 and the previous chapters in this document cover the Mail 11 X 400 side Currently a number of implementations also perform the mapping along the Mail 11 RFC822 side The most important among these de facto standards are discussed in Appendix A jointly with a Mail 11 RFC822 mapping scheme which covers this side of the triangle 6 2 RFC822 mapped in Mail 11 The RFC822 address is usually included in local part as route gwnode gws rfc822 address an example NVXA23 SMTPGW inS M T Rose CS UCLA edu 6 3 Mail 11 mapped in RFC822 There are different styles in mapping a Mail 11 address in RFC822 let s have a short summary Mail 11 address encoded in Left Hand Side LHS of RFC822 address using syntax or syntax route node localpart Allocchio Page 12 RFC 1405 Mail 11 Mapping January 1993 maps to localpart node troute gw domains or route node localpart gw domains where gw domains identify uniquely the Mail 11 RFC822 gateway Mail 11 address maps partly to LHS and partly to domain part of RFC822 address node localpart maps to localpart node gw domains Mail 11 address is completely hidden by a mapping table directory and the resultant RFC822 address contains no trace at all of the original address As you could notice in any of the quoted cases the r
10. Network Working Group C Allocchio Request for Comments 1405 I N F N Italy January 1993 Mapping between X 400 1984 1988 and Mail 11 DECnet mail Status of this Memo This memo defines an Experimental Protocol for the Internet community Discussion and suggestions for improvement are requested Please refer to the current edition of the IAB Official Protocol S D tandards for the standardization state and status of this protocol istribution of this memo is unlimited Abstract This document describes a set of mappings which will enable inter working between systems operating the CCITT X 400 1984 1988 Recommendations on Message Handling Systems and systems running the Mail 11 also known as DECnet mail protocol The specifications are valid within DECnet Phase IV addressing and routing scheme The complete scenario of X 400 RFC822 Mail 11 is also considered in order to cover the possible complex cases arising in multiple gateway translations This document covers mainly the O R address to DECnet from to address mapping and vice versa other mappings are based on RFC 1327 and its eventual future updates This is a combined effort of COSINE S2 2 the RARE MSG Working Group and the IETF X 400 Ops Working Group Chapter 1 Introduction 1 1 X 400 The standard referred shortly into this document as X 400 relates to the CCITT 1984 and 1988 X 400 Series Recommen
11. P DD Mail 11 X4TDEC USER47 MYNODE BETTY C it ADMD garr DD Dnet HEP DD Mail 11 MYNODE BETTY BOSTON CLUSO02 GOOFY1 MARY34 C it ADMD garr DD Dnet HEP DD Mail 11 BOSTON GOOFY1 MARY34 UCLA13 MVAX93 MRGATE MBOX1 MBX34 MYC3 BOB C it ADMD garr DD Dnet HEP DD Mail 11 UCLA13 MVAX93 MRGATE q MBOX1 MBX34 MYC3 BOB q Allocchio Page 8 RFC 1405 MIAMI2 C i f F MRGATE C i DD a MAINVX C i me Mail 11 X4TDEC George Rosent ADMD garr 2 2 C xx A bbb ADMD garr DD 23M Ins pathl pat ADMD garr DD Dnet HI Dnet HI RGATE Mail 11 Mapping hal P ppp F a F a January 1993 P DD Mail 11 MIAMI2 George Rosenthal S Joe P q C xx A bbb P ppp S Joe q h2 user Sdom DD Dnet HI DD Mail 11 MAINVX In p q pat EP h1 b path2 b user p dom q 5 234 X 400 encoding of Mail 11 gt Mail 11 All In order to assure path reversibility in case of multiple Mail 13 11 X 400 gateway crossing we mus DD TE Dnet net is known to the ga is connected to distinguish two cases teway as one of the DECnet networks In this case the mapping is trivial C xx ADMD yyy DD Mail 11 rout PRMD z2zz nod O 000 OU uuu localpart see sect 5 2 for explication of xx yyy ZZZ maps into
12. dations covering the Message Oriented Text Interchange Service MOTIS This document covers the Inter Personal Messaging System IPMS only 1 2 Mail 11 Mail 11 also known as DECnet mail and often improperly referred as VMSmail is the proprietary protocol implemented by Digital Equipment Corporation DEC to establish a real time text messaging system Allocchio Page 1 RFC 1405 Mail 11 Mapping January 1993 among systems implementing the DECnet Phase IV networking protocols 1 3 RFC822 RFC822 was defined as a standard for personal messaging systems within the DARPA Internet and is now diffused on top of many different message transfer protocols like SMTP UUCP BITNET JNT Grey Book CSnet Its mapping with X 400 is fully described in RFC1327 In this document we will try to consider its relations with Mail 11 too 1 4 The user community The community using X 400 messaging system is currently growing in the whole world but there is still a number of very large communities using Mail 11 based messaging systems willing to communicate easily with X 400 based Message Handling Systems Among t P hese large DECnet based networks we can include the High Energy hysics network HEPnet and the Space Physics Analysis Network SPAN These DECnet communities will in the future possibly migrate to DECnet Phase V DECnet OSI protocols converting thus their messaging sys
13. esultant RFC822 address is not distinguishable from a genuine RFC822 address 6 4 Multiple conversions Let us now examine briefly the possible situations which involve multiple conversions having one protocol as a relay between th other two This summary suggest some possible enhanced solutions to avoid heavy and unduly mappings but the step by step approach considering blindly one conversion as disjointed to the other as described in the previous sections can always be used 6 4 1 X 400 gt RFC822 gt Mail 11 We apply the RFC1327 rules to the first step obtaining an RFC822 address which can be mapped in Mail 11 using the f address field as described in section 6 2 an example C gb ADMD Gold 400 PRMD AC UK O UCL OU cs G Jim S Clay maps accordingly to RFC1327 to Jim Clay cs UCL AC UK Allocchio Page 13 RFC 1405 Mail 11 Mapping January 1993 and finally becomes SMTPGW Ins Jim Clay cs UCL AC UK where SMTPGW is the DECnet node name of the machine running the RFC822 to Mail 1l gateway 6 4 2 Mail 11 gt RFC822 gt X 400 Some of the possible mapping described in section 6 3 apply to the Mail 11 address hiding completely its origin The RFC1327 apply on the last step an example RELAY MYNOD T BETTY could map into RFC822 as BETTYSMYNODE RELAY dnet gwl it and accordingly to RFC1327 C it A garr P doml O
14. garr DD Dnet HEP DD Mail 11 RELAY MYNODE BETTY and accordingly to RFC1327 C it A garr DD Dnet HEP DD Mail 11 RELAY MYNODE BETTY gw2 it where gw2 it is the domain of the machine running the RFC1327 gateway Appendix A Mail 11 RFC822 mapping A 1 Introduction The implementation of a Mail 11 RFC822 gateway was faced by many software developers independently and was included in many mail products which were running on both VAX VMS and UNIX systems As there was not a unique standard mapping way the implementations resulted into a number of possible variant methods to map a Mail 11 address into an RFC822 one Some of these products became then largely widespread starting to create a number of de facto mapping methods In this small appendix some sort of standardisation of the mapping problem is considered trying to be compatible with the existing installed software We must also remind that in some cases only simple Mail 11 addresses could be mapped into RFC822 having complex ones producing all sort of quite strange results Allocchio Page 16 RFC 1405 Mail 11 Mapping January 1993 On the other hand the mapping of an RFC822 address in Mail 11 was quite straightforward Mail 11 foreign mail protocol to design an RFC822 address node node Jprot S rfc 822 address or node node J rfc 822 address A 2 De facto implementations A considerable
15. mapping Mail 11 addresses into RFC822 and vice versa is feasible A suggestion is thus made to unify all existing and future implementations It should be noted however that there is no way to specify in these mappings the name of the decnet community owning the encoded address as it was done for X 400 thus the implementation of the intelligent gateway in this case is impossible Allocchio Page 18 RFC 1405 Acknowle Mail 11 Mapping January 1993 dgements I wish to thank all those people who read the first draft and contributed a lot with their useful suggestions to the revision of this document in particular RARE WG1 and IETF X 400 ops group members and S Hardcastle Kille References 1 COLLET Cer Recommendations X 400 X 430 Message Handling Systems Red Book October 1984 2 CCITT CEL Recommendations X 400 X 420 Message Handling Systems Blue Book November 1988 3 Crocker D Standard of the Format of ARPA Internet Text Messages STD 11 RFC 822 UDel August 1982 4 Kille S Mapping Between X 400 and RFC 822 UK Academic Community Report MG 19 RFC 987 June 1986 5 Kille S Mapping Between X 400 1988 ISO 10021 and RFC 822 RFC 1327 March 1992 6 Digital Equipment Corp VAX VMS Mail Utility 7 Joiner Associates Inc Jnet User s Manual 8 PMDF User s Guide Security Considerations Security issues are no
16. orrespondent gateways must also be implemented to insure uniqueness of names A simple table coupling net and the gateway address is used in a syntax similar to the gate table used in RFC1327 An example HEPnet OUSCosine gw O PRMDSinfn ADMDSgarr CSIT SPAN OUSCosine gw O PRMDSinfn ADMDSgarr CS IT SPAN OSESRIN1 PRMDSesa ADMDSMaster400 CSit Ambiguous left entries are allowed Gateway implementations could simply choose among one of them or try them all in cyclic order to obtain better performances In order to keep the mapping rules very simple avoiding the need to analyse Mail 11 addresses to distinguish the route node and needed to cover the mapping problem 2 Mail 11 gt X 400 We define the following Domain Defined Attributes to map a Mail 11 address DD Dnet DD Mail 11 We thus define the mapping rule route node localpart maps into C xx ADMD yyy PRMD zzz O o00 OU uuu DD Dnet net DD Mail 1l1l route node localpart with XX country code of the gateway performing the conversion yyy Admd of the gateway performing the conversion zzz Prmd of the gateway performing the conversion ooo Organisation of the gateway performing the conversion uuu Org Unit s of the gateway performing the conversion net name of the DECnet network e g HEPnet SPAN zzz ooo uuu being used or dropped appropriately in order to Allocchio Page 7
17. s possible and node parts However complex dropping Mail 11 addresses cannot be mapped properly in this syntax and there is no specific rule for adding the domains address Allocchio part of the Page 17 RFC 1405 Mail 11 Mapping January 1993 d In this case again there is a reserved word dnet which make possible the identification of the original Mail 11 address gateway address points to the Mail 11 RFC822 gateway and node and user information can be easily drawn from the address However complex Mail 11 addresses cannot be embedded easily into this syntax A 3 Recommended mappings From th xamples seen in the previous paragraphs we can derive a canonical form for representing the mapping between Mail 11 and RFC822 A3 1 RFC822 mapped in Mail 11 The mapping of an RFC822 address in Mail 1l is straightforward using the Mail 11 foreign mail protocol syntax The two possible variants are node node Jprot S rfc 822 address or node node rfc 822 address A3 2 Mail 11 mapped in RFC822 RFC822 foresee a canonical form for representing non RFC822 addresses put the foreign address in local part Left Hand Side LHS is a form as similar as possible to its original syntax Thus the suggested mapping is Mail ll address gateway address This format assures also the return path via the appropriate gateway A 4 Conclusions A standard way of
18. s support is defined in order to define the mapping Another important aspect of the problem is the coexistence of many disjoint DECnet networks using the same DECnet address space i e common X 400 and or RFC822 mailing system acting as glue to connect different isolated Mail 11 islands Thus to identify uniquely each DECnet network we must also introduce the concept of DECnet network name which we will refer shortly as net from now onwards We define as net a unique ASCII string identifying the DECnet network we are connected to To be more specific the net element will identify the DECnet community being served i e it could also differ from the actual official network name Aliases are allowed for the net HEPnet the High Energy Physics DECnet network net SPAN the Space Physics Analysis Network net Enet the Digital Equipment Corporate Network The need of labelling each DECnet network with its name comes also from the requirement to implement the intelligent gateway i e the gateway which is able to understand its ability to connect Allocchio Page 6 RFC 1405 Mail 11 Mapping January 1993 directly to the specified DECnet network even if the O R address specify a path to a different gateway A more detailed discussion of the problem is in 5 3 and 5 5 A registry of net attributes and their c
19. scribed in 5 2 and 5 5 an example Jim Clay cs UCL AC UK will b ncoded lik SMTPGW InS Jim Clay cs UCL AC UK If the Mail 11 to X 400 gateway recognise the RFC822 address then the address becomes accordingly to RFC1327 C gb ADMD Gold 400 PRMD AC UK O UCL OU cs G Jim S Clay and a trace record is added into the X 400 P1 data stating that a node named SMTPGW was crossed Otherwise dumb rule produces C it ADMD garr DD Dnet HEP DD Mail 11 SMTPGW In p q Jim Clay a cs UCL AC UK q 6 4 5 RFC822 gt X 400 gt Mail 11 We apply RFC1327 to the first conversion obtaining an X 400 address Then the rules described in sections 5 3 and 5 4 are used to store the X 400 address as x400 text address into the Mail 11 an example Jim Clay cs UCL AC UK maps accordingly to RFC1327 to Allocchio Page 15 RFC 1405 Mail 11 Mapping January 1993 C gb ADMD Gold 400 PRMD AC UK O UCL OU cs G Jim S Clay and finally becomes SMTPGW gw C gb A Gold 400 P AC UK O UCL 0U cs G Jim S Clay where SMTPGW is the DECnet node name of the machine running the X 400 to Mail 11 gateway 6 4 6 Mail 11 gt X 400 gt RFC822 The Mail 11 address is encoded as specified in sections 5 2 and 5 5 then RFC1327 is used to convert the address in RFC822 an example RELAY MYNOD T BETTY maps into X 400 as C it ADMD
20. t discussed in this memo Author s Address Claudio Allocchio Cosine S2 2 Sincrotrone Trieste Area di Ricerca Padriciano 99 I 34012 Trieste Italy Phone 39 40 3758523 Fax 39 40 226338 EMail Claudio Allocchio elettra Trieste it C it A garr P Trieste O Elettra S Allocchio G Claudio Allocchio Page 19
21. tems to OSI specifications i e merging into the X 400 MHS however the transition period could be long and there could always be some DECnet Phase IV communities around For these reasons a set of mapping rules covering conversion between Mail 11 and X 400 is described in this document This document also covers the case of Mail 1l systems implementing the foreign mail protocol allowing Mail 11 to interface other mail systems including RFC822 based system Chapter 2 Message Elements 2 1 Service Elements Mail 11 protocol offers a very restricted set of elements composing a Inter Personal Message IPM whereas X 400 specifications support a complex and large amount of service elements Considering the case where a message is relayed between two X 400 MHS via a DECnet network this could result in a nearly complete loss of information To minimise this inconvenience most of X 400 service elements will be mapped into Mail 11 text body parts To consider also the case when a message originates from a network implementing RFC822 protocols and is relayed via Mail 11 to and X 400 MHS the applied mapping from X 400 service elements into Mail 11 text body part the rules Allocchio Page 2 RFC 1405 Mail 11 Mapping January 1993 specified in RFC1327 and their updates will be used producing an RFC822 like header 2 2 Mail 11 servic lements All envelope P1 and header P2 Mail 11 ser
22. vic lements are supported in the conversion to X 400 Note that Mail 11 Pl is solely composed by Pl From and Pl To and any other Mail 11 element belongs to Mail 1l P2 Pl From maps to Pl Originator Paleo maps to P1l Primary Recipient P2 From maps to P2 Originator P2 To maps to P2 Primary Recipient ICE maps to P2 Copy Recipient Date maps to Submission Time Stamp Subj maps to Subject Any eventual RFC822 like text header in Mail 11 body part will be interpreted as specified into RFC1327 and its updates 2 3 X 400 service elements The following X 400 service elements are supported directly into Mail 11 conversion Pl Originator maps to Pl From Pl Primary Recipients maps to Pl To P2 Originator maps to P2 From Allocchio Page 3 RFC 1405 Mail 11 Mapping January 1993 P2 Primary Recipients maps to P2 To Copy Recipients maps to Cc Submission Time Stamp maps to date Subject maps to Subj The following X 400 service element is partially supported into Mail 11 conversion Blind Copy Recipient to ensure the required privacy when a message contains a BCC address the following actions occurs a new message is created containing the body parts a new envelope is added to the new message containing the originator and the BCC recipient addresses only a note is added to the message informing the BCC recipient
Download Pdf Manuals
Related Search