At 14:37 +0000 on 06-10-1996, Rob Tweed wrote:
> >>If email is sent using the X400 protocol it should be possible view an
> >>"audit trail" of when the mail was sent and when it arrived at its
> >>destination.
> >
> >yes,but would that help if it had arrived at the wrong place? Is the
> >X400 protocol inherently more dependable than the present method?
> >Mary
>
> Theoretically X.400 is more reliable yes. But then again betamax was
> theoretically better than VHS (sorry to trot out my old chestnut
> analogy again !). IMHO it comes down to whether you are willing to
> put up with second best (SMTP mail) but accept it's cheap and readily
> available and everyone uses it and it works pretty well, or want the
> best (X.400) but accept it's expensive with not many products
> available.
>
> If SMTP wasn't very good, then gp-uk wouldn't work very well, would
> it?
>
> Hoping the message arrives...but without the time to plough through an
> audit trail if it doesn't (I'll just send it again)....
>
> Yours cheap and cheerfully
He is right.
X.400 is safer, etc, etc
But SMTP is very cheap, very available, very flexible.
Gerard Freriks,huisarts, MD
C. Sterrenburgstr 54
3151JG Hoek van Holland
the Netherlands (31) 174-384296/ Fax: -386249
ARS LONGA, VITA BREVIS
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|