myrstad%vax.runit.unit.uninett@NAC.NO ("Bj|rn Myrstad") (08/21/89)
The 1988-version of the X.400 rec's comprize several service
elements for Physical Delivery. Before utilizing those services
I think some questions need good answers:
- What is the motivation for applying Physical Delivery?
Being able to send mail to my old aunt while I'm at the PC
anyway?
I don't know the recipient's O/R-address, but I have his
business address? (Negative Directory response)
Higlight the non-X.400 recipients who thereby might want to
be "one of us"?
Physical Delivery is less expensive than investing in a X.400
MTA/UA?
- Where to place the costs of applying Physical Delivery?
The originator pays? How - no service elements for such available,
must be a local implementation matter?
The recipient pays? How - by mutual agreement with the service
provider?
The service provider? At the originator end? At the PDAU service
point?
Anyone out there with arguments and/or answers good enough to initiate
research and/or implementation efforts on Physical Delivery?
------------------------------------------------------------
Name : Bjorn Myrstad
Title : Research Scientist
Organization : SINTEF (The Foundation for Industrial and Scientific
Research at the Norwegian Institute of Technology (NTH))
Org. Unit : ELAB-RUNIT
Group : Data Communication Technology
E-mail address:
R&D MHS : myrstad@vax.runit.unit.uninett
Seen from ARPA: myrstad%vax.runit.unit.uninett@tor.nta.no
TELEPHONE: +47 7 592600 DIRECT LINE: +47 7 592974
TELEX : 55620 sintf n TELEFAX : +47 7 532586
MAIL : N-7034 Trondheim, Norway
------------------------------------------------------------Harald.Alvestrand%vax.runit.unit.uninett@NAC.NO (Harald Tveit Alvestrand) (08/21/89)
As a matter of fact, at least one physical delivery service with
electronic input is already working (in Canada; the name escapes me.
Possibly Envoypost or something.)
The main reasons for X400 access are:
- Universal connectivity of X.400: You can send one letter to everyone,
whether or not they already have X.400. This is a very common service
in U.S EDI systems, where a business sends all its bills by EDI, and
an EDI third party prints the bills for non-EDI customers and mails
them by "snail mail".
- Faster delivery than local mailing. For instance, a physical delivery
to Sydney, Australia from Norway might be printed in a Sydney post
office and sent locally, instead of taking umpteen days from Norway.
The combined service might also be cheaper, but this depends totally
on the PTT/post tariff structures......
As a manager, not a researcher, my main worry is that I cannot see any
way to get the bills paid by the right people in our current, access-
charge based environment. Research suggestions are welcome!
Harald Tveit Alvestrand
postmaster@vax.runit.unit.uninetteskovgaa@uvcw.uvic.ca (Erik Skovgaard) (08/21/89)
ENVOYPost is not really based on X.400.
It is true, that ENVOY-100, one of the large Canadian public electronic
mail systems can be accessed using X.400, but it uses a Telemail~r
procedures internally and ENVOYPost was added before X.400.}i
In general, ENVOY does not seem to be pushing X.400.
That being said, A very large Physical Delivery service based on
X.400 is scheduled to be launched early next year. This one will
be based on the CCITT 1988 X.400 and F.400 series and will allow
access from private X.400 systems.
....Erik.JPALME@com.qz.se (08/25/89)
One advantage with physical delivery is when you are using distribution
lists or other multi-destination message tools. You need then
only write one message, sent to the distribution list, instead
of having to produce two versions of each message, one for e-mail
recipients and one for postal mail recipients.
sl@wimsey.bc.ca (Stuart Lynne) (08/25/89)
> One advantage with physical delivery is when you are using distribution > lists or other multi-destination message tools. You need then > only write one message, sent to the distribution list, instead > of having to produce two versions of each message, one for e-mail > recipients and one for postal mail recipients. This is certainly one of the strong selling points for computer generated fax! I like to view fax support in the context of another delivery mechanism in an electronic mail system. It should be possible to have a mailing list include recipients who have electronic addresses, physical addresses and a fax phone number. The same types of problems and benefits can be attributed to this type of delivery mechanism as physical delivery by mail. Who pays and addressing are two typical problems. Delivery in a remote area by a local and hopefully inexpensive call versus direct sending as a benefit. -- Stuart.Lynne@wimsey.bc.ca uunet!van-bc!sl 604-937-7532(voice) 604-939-4768(fax)
JOHANL@com.qz.se (08/27/89)
I do not understand this.
To me it is quite obvious that you would like to be able to reach
as many recipients as possible. With Physical Delivery you have
4 miljards potential recipients. That is quite a lot
Don't you think so.