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