covert@castor.DEC (John Covert) (04/05/84)
The CCITT X.400 series recommendations are really interesting. The first ten
pages contain enough information to scare the daylights out of any user of
most current mail networks.
After the CCITT member nations begin to implement the Message Handling systems
described in X.400, we may see the end of the international nature of the UUCP
and USENET networks, as well as the end of the international networks operated
INTERNALLY by various major corporations.
The Message Handling System Model presents nothing terribly different than the
typical message systems everyone reading this message is familiar with. There
are User Agents used for the preparation and reading of messages and Message
Transfer Agents which deal with moving the messages from the originating User
Agent to the recipient User Agent.
The concept of domains in X.400 is what is troubling. I'm going to extract
almost verbatim for a moment here:
2.3.2.1 Message Handling Boundaries
The collection consisting of at least one MTA and zero or more UAs owned by
an Administration [this is a common carrier or PTT] or organization constitutes
a Management Domain (MD). The MD managed by an administration is called an
Administration Management Domain (ADMD). The MD managed by an organization is
called a Private Management Domain (PRMD). ...
An Administration may provide access for its subscribers to the ADMD at one or
more of the following boundaries, each of which is described below:
1. User to Administration supplied UA
2. Private UA to Administration MTA
3. Private MTA to Administration MTA
2.3.3.3 Administration supplied UA
... The subscriber has only an I/O device (for example, a teletypewriter or
telephone) and interacts with the Administration supplied UA via a man/machine
dialogue [MCI mail is an example of this]. In addition, an Administration may
choose to supply stand-alone terminals containing UA functionality (intelligent
terminals).
2.3.2.3 Private UA to Administration MTA
In this case the subscriber has a private stand-alone UA (for example, a
workstation or personal computer). The UA interacts with the Administration
supplied MTA using the submission and delivery procedures to obtain MT service.
If the subscriber wishes to be part of the InterPersonal Message community,
his UA must conform to that class of UA.
A private, stand-alone UA in not in a MD but is associated with an MD.
2.3.2.4 Private MTA to Administration MTA
An Administration's subscriber may have an MTA (or a number of MTAs) and one
or more User Agents. These subscriber UAs may be integrated into the same
system as one of its MTAs or may be associated stand-alone UAs. The
subscriber's MTA(s) and UA(s) form a Private Management Domain (PRMD) and
may interact with the Administration Management Domain (ADMD) on an MD-to-MD
(MTA-to-MTA) basis.
* * * N O W H E R E ' S T H E K I C K E R * * *
A Private MD is considered to exist entirely within one country. Within that
country, a PRMD may have access to one or more ADMDs. However, with respect
to a specific interaction between a PRMD and an ADMD (such as when a message
is transferred between MDs), the PRMD is considered to be associated only with
the single ADMD. A PRMD w i l l n o t a c t a s a r e l a y
b e t w e e n t w o ADMDs.
When an ADMD interacts with a PRMD, the ADMD takes responsibility for the
actions of the PRMD which are related to the interaction. In addition to
ensuring that the PRMD properly provides the Message Transfer Service, the
ADMD is responsible for ensuring that the accounting, logging, quality of
service, and other related operations of the PRMD are correctly performed.
-------------------
The document recognizes that the provision of support for private messaging
systems falls within the framework of national regulations. So, for example,
some countries may not permit PRMDs at all, or may only permit them to exist
within a building.
Enjoy the net while it lasts!
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Last week, one of our participants in Canada commented that the CCITT work is
in the form of recommendations. This may be true in Canada and the U.S., but
not necessarily true in other countries. The remainder of this article was
submitted last week, but I believe it got lost. If you've already seen it,
you can drop out now...
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Although some countries view the CCITT recommendations as just recommendations,
others view them as the ONLY way to do anything.
Germany, for example, takes the recommendations as standards which must be
followed.
I hope this does not happen, but it would not surprise me at all if, once
the CCITT X.400 series recommendations are complete, the German Post Office
offers a Computer Based Message Service as described in the CCITT X.400
recommendations and declares the use of UUCP mail, USENET messages, and
other message services within or to and from Germany to be totally illegal
unless transmitted by this service in adherance with the CCITT recommendations
(and enforce this declaration -- and they can and will enforce).
The primary basic concept in Germany is that no one may carry information for
a third party.
This forbids the relaying common in UUCP mail.
Direct connections would still be legal if they don't violate the second
basic concept: Circumvention of charges is illegal.
This means that if it's cheaper to use UUCP than to use the CBMS service,
charges have been circumvented.
The German Post Office is deadly serious about enforcing its total monopoly
on all forms of communications. They operate all broadcast television and
radio transmitters, all cable television distribution systems, the only
videotext service (yes, that, too is a communications system, since it
provides the communications path to and from the information providers),
and all data and voice communications.
Even where privately owned devices are permitted (such as computers or
radios and televisions) they must be approved. In order to connect your
personal computer to a Post Office provided modem (and there are no other
modems) you must provide the registration number of your PC.
The manufacturer obtained the registration number by submitting his product
in a working form to the Zentralamt fuer Zulassungen im Fernmeldewesen
(Central Office for Approvals in Telecommunications), who tests the product,
including the programs provided, for compliance with CCITT recommendations.
All radio and television receivers must be approved and licensed and you
must pay a monthly fee to operate them. This is enforced by vehicles with
antennae which drive around and look for emissions.
A notorious case occurred recently, where a blind couple had purchased
an audio only television receiver while travelling outside the country.
After they had used it for a while, the Post Office discovered that they
were using an unauthorized device (it did not have a registration number;
in Germany, since the CCITT recommendations for television don't discuss
audio only devices, it would probably not receive a registration number
even if the manufacturer applied for one).
The case went to court, the couple was fined (not an extremely high fine)
and the receiver was confiscated.
Things are very different outside North America.
John Covert ...!{ucbvax,decvax,allegra}!decwrl!rhea!castor!coverthaas@utah-cs.UUCP (Walt Haas) (04/09/84)
It will be interesting to see how the various PTTs react to the new technology. One of my clients runs a worldwide packet switching network entirely within their corporation. One of the applications of this network is their corporate electronic mail. So far they haven't mentioned any efforts by the local PTTs to put them out of the electronic mail business. Cheers -- Walt Haas