Xref: utzoo comp.misc:3161 comp.std.misc:49 comp.mail.misc:1190 Path: utzoo!utgpu!water!watmath!clyde!att!ucbvax!ucsd!sdcsvax!beowulf!mikulska From: mikulska@beowulf.ucsd.edu (Margaret Mikulska) Newsgroups: comp.misc,comp.std.misc,comp.mail.misc Subject: Re: Standardizing Email? Message-ID: <5236@sdcsvax.UCSD.EDU> Date: 21 Aug 88 01:54:44 GMT References: <788@vsi.UUCP> <1380@cloud9.UUCP> <3437@phri.UUCP> <3611@polya.Stanford.EDU> <8272@watdragon.waterloo.edu> <20063@tut.cis.ohio-state.edu> Sender: nobody@sdcsvax.UCSD.EDU Reply-To: mikulska@beowulf.UUCP (Margaret Mikulska) Organization: EE/CS Dept. U.C. San Diego Lines: 21 In article <20063@tut.cis.ohio-state.edu> karl@triceratops.cis.ohio-state.edu (Karl Kleinpaste) writes: > >How is that? RFC821 and RFC822 are dated August 1982, which predates >(I believe) X.400. Within the US, RFC822 is quoted as The Truth of >Mail Formats rather often, but it's being somewhat ignored (it seems) >by X.400 people. > Well, how about RFC 987 (and 1026, addendum to 987) which is entitled "Mapping between X.400 and RFC822" ? Margaret Mikulska Department of Computer Science and Engineering, C-014 Institute for Nonlinear Science, R-002 University of California | ARPA : mikulska@cs.ucsd.edu | mem@inls1.ucsd.edu at San Diego | UUCP : sdcsvax!mikulska | BITNET : mmikulska@ucsd.bitnet La Jolla, CA 92093 | voice : (619) 534-1452