| T.R | Title | User | Personal
Name | Date | Lines |
|---|
| 52.1 | They get along fine | STKHLM::OLSSON | Anders Olsson, SIP Sweden | Fri Oct 12 1990 16:52 | 84 |
| MRMEMO V2.1 has been tested with ALL-IN-1 MAIL EFT3. EFT3 should be
close enough to V1.0 to make the results apply to V1.0 too.
MRMEMO works very well with ALL-IN-1 MAIL. Since ALL-IN-1 MAIL is a
true X.400 user agent, it behaves very nicely from a MAILbus point of
view.
We are very happy with ALL-IN-1 MAIL since it is the first Digital
MAILbus user agent (that we have seen) that offers functionality that
resembles the features in MEMO such as Delivery Notifications and
Receipt Notifications. (That is - REAL notifications! - not the kind
of "notifications" produced by that other product with a name very
similar to ALL-IN-1 MAIL :-)
Thanks to ALL-IN-1 MAIL we can, at last, show customers that it is
possible to send messages from MEMO to a Digital user agent and get
"real" notifications back. That is - notifications that behave in the
way the MEMO users expect them to work - in the same way as when
messages are sent to MEMO users.
Here is a more detailed description about MEMO and ALL-IN-MAIL
interoperability:
Messages sent from MEMO to ALL-IN-1 MAIL:
Delivery Notifications
Delivery notifications returned from ALL-IN-1 MAIL correlates
correctly to the MEMO sender's distribution list, changing status
from EXCEPTION to SENT TO in the expanded message. The
REQUEST_NOTIFICATIONS option must be enabled in the MRMEMO server.
Receipt notifications
Receipt notifications returned from ALL-IN-1 MAIL correlates
correctly to the MEMO sender's distribution list, changing status
from SENT TO to SELECTED BY. Note that sending a receipt
notification from ALL-IN-1 MAIL is optional under control of the
recipient.
Messages sent from ALL-IN-1 MAIL to MEMO:
Delivery notifications
Delivery notifications returned from MEMO correlates to
the ALL-IN-1 MAIL sender's distribution list only if all the
following conditions are true:
o The ALL-IN-1 MAIL user requests a delivery notification
(DELIVERY_NOTIFICATION=FULL)
o The SEND_NOTIFICATIONS option is enabled in the MRMEMO server
o The CORRELATE option is set in the ALL-IN-1 MAIL user's profile
o The address sent to by the ALL-IN-1 MAIL user is the "raw" MHS
address (dgn.den@mbx@node). If any other format is used, the
correlation will not work and the ALL-IN-1 MAIL user will receive
a notification in the form of a text message. This address format
restriction is due to a bug in MRX that crashes if we add the
information needed for correlation (the extensionid attribute).
If MRX gets fixed, a future version of MRMEMO migh remove this
restriction.
Receipt notifications
Receipt notifications returned from MEMO correlates to the ALL-IN-1
MAIL sender's distribution list only if all the following conditions
are true:
o The ALL-IN-1 MAIL user requests a receipt notification
(RECEIPT_NOTIFICATION=FULL)
o The CORRELATE options is set in the ALL-IN-1 MAIL users's profile
o The address sent to by the ALL-IN-1 MAIL user is the "raw" MHS
address (dgn.den@mbx@node). If any other format is used, the
correlation will not work and the ALL-IN-1 MAIL user will receive
a notification in the form of a text message. This restriction
is more permanent than the problem with delivery notifications.
It will probably not work properly until we can exchange real X.400
addressing information with MEMO.
Anders
|
| 52.2 | Thanks a lot | KETJE::VANHOOSTE | Guide to Shadowland | Tue Oct 16 1990 12:36 | 14 |
| Thanks a bunch for this very complete explanation. I am about to sell
the first version of MRMEMO with ALL-IN-1 MAIL in Belgium.
Note that ALL-IN-1 IOS, V2.4, Classic, ... is supposed to generate
correctly Delivery Receipt requests ! It does not, however, generate
real Receipt notifications or requests for it.
As for ALL-IN-1 MAIL - we're selling this like candy.
About 1/2 day of presales acivity to sell ALL-In-1 MAIL, a VMS system,
MAILbus and a gateway...
Thanks, Marc VH.
|
| 52.3 | Let's talk about ALL-IN-1 IOS notifications | STKOFF::SPERSSON | Pas de Probleme | Tue Oct 16 1990 20:09 | 32 |
|
Marc,
> Note that ALL-IN-1 IOS, V2.4, Classic, ... is supposed to generate
> correctly Delivery Receipt requests ! It does not, however, generate
> real Receipt notifications or requests for it.
This statement is a bit ambiguous. What is a "Delivery Receipt
Request"?
The way I've understood it, ALL-IN-1 has so far used some internal
format flags to request Delivery Notifications and Receipt
Notifications (Read Receipts), respectively. MR TS (from V3.1 onwards)
is however friendly enough to check these flags and set the proper NBS
flags as appropriate. This means that, in some contradiction to what
you're saying, the receiving UA:s can indeed view ALL-IN-1's messages
as if they requested Delivery Notifications *and/or* Receipt Notifications.
I have been unaware of specific changes in this area from ALL-IN-1 V2.3
to V2.4, so which of the following do you really mean?
1) ALL-IN-1 V2.4 generates proper Delivery Notifications (that would be
significant improvement, and we should make sure we test against it)
2) ALL-IN-1 requests Delivery Notifications in the proper way by
setting PERRECFLG bit UA_CONFIRMED (this would mean nothing as far is
MRMEMO functionality is concerned, unless MR V3.0 is used at the
ALL-IN-1 end)
cheers,
Stefan
|
| 52.4 | Excuse me | KETJE::VANHOOSTE | Guide to Shadowland | Thu Oct 18 1990 12:50 | 19 |
| Ah yes,
Bon. Looking at the MRIF implementor's guide, it states that ALL-IN-1
does indeed NOT generate delivery notification according to MRIF
standards.
However, looking at real life situations, the gateways we have DO seem
to recognize the setting of a delivery notification.
So it must be as you say, namely that MR TS is kind enough to cope with
it. Or else black magic perhaps ?
As to Receipt notifications, it is clear that ALL-IN-1 does not
generate those.
It generates text messages...
Scandalous ! Oh well, perhaps it will be sorted out in the future...
Marc VH.
|
| 52.5 | What are theexact differences in delivery notif? | MUDIS3::RROSENBERGER | Rainer Rosenberger @MFR, PZ-SOGY | Wed Oct 31 1990 10:08 | 24 |
| Re: .1
> Messages sent from ALL-IN-1 MAIL to MEMO:
>
o The address sent to by the ALL-IN-1 MAIL user is the "raw" MHS
> address (dgn.den@mbx@node). If any other format is used, the
> correlation will not work and the ALL-IN-1 MAIL user will receive
> a notification in the form of a text message.
I've tested the same situation sending from ALL-IN-1 MAIL to
ALL-IN-1 MAIL and used also freeform addressing like
TO: surname givenname ( user@mbx@node )
The correlate did work correctly. The differences in the service messages
comming from MR/MEMO respectively ALL-IN-1 are that ALL-IN-1 MAIL is
sending back the Interpersonal Mesage ID (and I guess also the
EXTENSIONID and freeformname). It seems that the algorithm used in
ALL-IN-1 Mail is too restrictive. The freformname we can specify
normally has nothing to do with the address of the recipient.
Therefore they only should try to compare the message router addresses.
If a unique recipient is found then they could correlate the delivery
notification to this recipient.
Rainer
|