nelson@sun.soe.clarkson.edu (Russ Nelson) (01/02/91)
Can someone explain to me why X.400's /KEYWORD=key/ form of addressing is better than domain addressing? They always seem to be at least twice as long as the equivalent domain address. I've also heard that X.400 will unite the world into one email standard. But as the recent articles about BT's refusal to talk to Sprint shows, the problems are not technical, but instead political. For example, CompuServe users can use domain addressing, even as CIS-to-CIS mail. They simply specify >inet:domain.address.here. It's even easier for the reverse direction, from the Internet to CompuServe: uuuuu.nnn@compuserve.com, where uuuuu.nnn is the CompuServe user ID, with a dot instead of a comma. So, it seems to me like X.400 is not solving a technical problem, but instead a political problem, that of domain addressing not being invented by the ISO. Perhaps there are technical advantages, but are they worth the cost in extra complexity? -- --russ (nelson@clutx [.bitnet | .clarkson.edu]) FAX 315-268-7600 It's better to get mugged than to live a life of fear -- Freeman Dyson I joined the League for Programming Freedom, and I hope you'll join too.