[log in to unmask],Net writes:
>Interesting isn't it? Cornwall and Scilly need prior approval to allow
>email in - and Somerset won't answer!
It is even cleverer than that!
AFAIK the threat by Somerset was not that they would not answer - in
that NHS Net we are told receives messages from the outside world
adequately well..... through the gateway.
But rather that they would not _send_ any messages to the pariahs who
used the same system as the rest of the world.
I rather think it comes from the same disinformation source as the
story about X400 being the lingua franca for Internet mail handling
among the Unix backbones and what-have-you....
However, the Cornwall and Scilly approach is one that I have some sligh
sympathy with, as long as they combine it with an effective
intelligence and dissemination operation so that once they get an
e-mail address for somebody who _might_ have a need to send them
something, they program it into their gatekeeper.
The beauty of this approach is that they thus create a virtual private
e-mail system, and thus remove one more of the major arguments for
having a special network for the NHS - if one can control message
reception to members of the workgroup, then the size of the internet
becomes irrelevant (it always was of course, but could be made to
appear a factor).
I have a feeling that it is frowned upon to corrupt the RFC 822 rules
by pretending that somebody does not exist and generating RFC 822
messages off the servers back to the originator, but it is quite fair
game to send back an auto reply along the lines of "You are not on
[log in to unmask] 's approved list and your message is returned, ring
1234 567 890 to request a form on which to apply for permission to
message the selfsame panjandrum".
Of course, if C&S HA did that to one of their MPs they might then have
cause to reconsider their approach. Just a thought<g>
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|