[comp.protocols.iso.x400] Numeric OR Address fields

usenet@gapos.bt.co.uk (Usenet login) (06/26/91)

In <6034.677564475@nma.com> Stef@ics.uci.edu (Einar Stefferud) writes:

>While I am in here -- Does anyone have any idea as to how much use
>will be made of the Terminal Identifier and the User Agent Numeric
>Indentifier atributes of the ORADdress?


My own experience indicates that these "numeric" fields are very
popoular with government and military networks. This is for two
reasons:

	1) Compatibilty with existing messaging systems
	   e.g. Telex (The military have lots of these).

	2) Security; a numeric identifier gives away nothing about
	   a recipients function or location.

They are not commonly used in commercial or academic spheres.

So the implementor of a UA must look at his potential market when
decidng what prominence should be allocated to these attributes.


BobW

bobw@gapos.british-telecom.co.uk (Bob Whitehouse) (06/26/91)

In <6034.677564475@nma.com> Stef@ics.uci.edu (Einar Stefferud) writes:

|While I am in here -- Does anyone have any idea as to how much use
|will be made of the Terminal Identifier and the User Agent Numeric
|Indentifier atributes of the ORADdress?


My own experience indicates that these "numeric" fields are very
popoular with government and military networks. This is for two
reasons:

	1) Compatibilty with existing messaging systems
	   e.g. Telex (The military have lots of these).

	2) Security; a numeric identifier gives away nothing about
	   a recipients function or location.

They are not commonly used in commercial or academic spheres.

So the implementor of a UA must look at his potential market when
decidng what prominence should be allocated to these attributes.


BobW