| T.R | Title | User | Personal
Name | Date | Lines |
|---|
| 69.1 | Only for Memo users | STKOFF::SPERSSON | Pas de Probleme | Wed Feb 06 1991 14:12 | 29 |
|
Didier,
Interesting that you mention this. If MEMO has an X.400 connection then
that's abviously something that's competing with MRX. If this is the
software that I've heard of then it's got one very important
restriction:
They cannot relay messages through a MEMO/Gateway to their X.400
gateway! This is probably because they haven't implemented anything
like our DDS.
The implication:
MEMO <-> MAILBUS <-> X.400 = OK
MAILBUS <-> MEMO <-> X.400 = NOT OK
===
If your customer buys the MEMO X.400 Gateway, then he would have to buy
MRX too to cater for his ALL-IN-1 or whatever users. However MRX takes
care of the MEMO users too.
I'm not 100% sure of the above, but if your customer is considering
X.400, then make sure that the facts are known!
Stefan
|
| 69.2 | Could be very strong competition | MUDIS3::RROSENBERGER | Rainer Rosenberger @MFR, PZ-SOGY | Thu Feb 07 1991 09:21 | 34 |
| Hi Stefan,
I want to specify your connection in .-1 a bit more in detail.
> MEMO <-> MAILBUS <-> X.400 = OK
>
> MAILBUS <-> MEMO <-> X.400 = NOT OK
means
MEMO <-> MR/MEMO <-> MR <-> MR/X <-> X.400 world OK
MR <-> MR/MEMO <-> MEMO <-> MEMO/X.400-MTA <-> X.400 world NOT OK
But what about the connection
MEMO <-> MEMO/X.400-MTA <-> X.400 world
^
|
v
MR <-> MR/X
and (at least in the customers mind) MEMO is the mail backbone. In
order to provide the service above they only have to implement ORGUNIT
routing (not all subscribers have to be registered anywhere). In
addition to this the customer will not need MR/MEMO any longer. What we
need is a solution with advantages against the X.400 connection, for
instance support of binary data or whatever. Otherwise nobody will
buy MR/MEMO any longer because MR/X V2.2 will be part of DECnet license.
Rainer
|
| 69.3 | Why use two X.400 gateways when you only need one? | STKOFF::SPERSSON | Pas de Probleme | Thu Feb 07 1991 13:47 | 29 |
|
> and (at least in the customers mind) MEMO is the mail backbone. In
> order to provide the service above they only have to implement ORGUNIT
> routing (not all subscribers have to be registered anywhere). In
> addition to this the customer will not need MR/MEMO any longer. What we
> need is a solution with advantages against the X.400 connection, for
> instance support of binary data or whatever. Otherwise nobody will
> buy MR/MEMO any longer because MR/X V2.2 will be part of DECnet license.
Correct, but it is then our mission to persuade the customer that he
only needs one X.400 connection (MRX, which they can get from Digital
for free, thus making MAILBUS the Mail backbone) instead of purchasing
Verimation's new expensive, not tried in the marketplace etc (yes I'm
using FUD here)
You are right that unique functionality would help, and I can't think
of any offhand, but I still consider our generic X.400 connectivity as
an advantage.
Or am I being naive?
There are ways of loading the MEMO users into DDS, the German synch
tool is one, the new Directory Synchronizer from Landover DCC is
another.
cheers,
Stefan
|
| 69.4 | Contact me if you want MEMO/MRX references | EEMELI::MITTS | back on the chain-gang,.. | Thu Feb 07 1991 14:29 | 48 |
|
We have a few customers here in Finland running MRMEMO and MRX to
supply MEMO users with X.400 functionality.
My experiences from these installations is that customers are very
happy with this connection now that the V2.1 modifications have
been made.
The main advantages are the addressing format with is very easy and
(don't laugh) user frienly as X.400 user interfaces go and the fact
that DEC has very good X.400 knowledge and we have been able to sort
out most X.400 snags (and there are quite a few places where you could
stumble).
Also, as of recenly we have X.400 accounting (two packages actually)
which should be a nice backrest when you talk to the accounting and
control oriented IBM IS managers!
If you want some X.400 ammo, you could use the Finnish PTT as a
reference. They are currently using our MEMO gateway to offer X.400
services to the major MEMO networks i Finland, with a potential
user community on more than 10000 users - its so big I don't even
know the exact figure. They have 5 MEMO systems online and it's
all done on a microVAX II! Don't ask me how many users are actually
online - I have not counted the DDS records.
(A nicety here, if you have access to X.400 and international
connections, send mail to :
INFO @ADMD=MAILNET @CO=FI with the subject MEMO and wait for the
answer)
How could we strenghten our poition??
Most problems seem to hinge on MRX, so I guess we'll have to hang
in there with what we have now until MRX V2.2 hits the streets.
What would be a real benefit was if we in the future could integrate
MEMO-PC file sending functionality with MRX binary transfer in case
support for the NIST way of sending PC files will be in MRX V2.2.
Also, remember that selling MAILbus into an account where IBM has a
strong presence is much helped by the fact that you can suggest a
wellbehaved MAILbus-compatible mail system for the IBM users that
gives you namebased addressing etc + all the benefits of X.400
without using all the "uglies" you get into with SNADS and PROFS!
H�kan
|
| 69.5 | Good arguments | MUDIS3::RROSENBERGER | Rainer Rosenberger @MFR, PZ-SOGY | Mon Feb 11 1991 12:59 | 7 |
| I think that the last two replies are giving very good arguments to
use MR/X instead of the MEMO X.400 MTA. They should be a good basis to
convict our customers.
Regards,
Rainer
|
| 69.6 | Price of OSI if IBM stuff used? | EEMELI::MITTS | back on the chain-gang,.. | Mon Feb 11 1991 14:29 | 16 |
|
Came to think of one more thing :
Could anybody check what the Verimation X.400 is using for OSI
transport etc. If they are using the IBM developed stuff (the
name now escapes me), be sure that customers realize the prize
and size penalty they take with these IBM products - or at least
that was the state of things last time I heard of them!
I know I've said things about MRX etc that are not exactly nice,
but they anyway fit into a reasonable amount of memory and now-
adays don't cost you an arm and a leg (just the leg :-)).
So I'd hope that we have a price advantage as well as a technical?
H�kan
|
| 69.7 | cost = 0 and answer from FI PTT | MUDIS3::RROSENBERGER | Rainer Rosenberger @MFR, PZ-SOGY | Wed Feb 13 1991 09:14 | 58 |
| Re .-1:
Additionally with MRX V2.2 the license will be part of DECnet.
Re .4:
I mailed from my standard ALL-IN-1 account to the Finish PTT and got
the results below. Obviously the application INFO sends back some infos
within DDAs (in the FROM address).
Rainer
I N T E R N E M I T T E I L U N G
Datum: 11.Feb.1991 13:14 CET
Von : INFO
6=INFO@*GRP\INF@*UFD\INF001@*SYS\12763@5=INF@2=MAILNET@1=FI
@MRX_HADRES@GYMRC@RTO
Abt. : INF
Tel. :
AN: ROSENBERGER ( RAINER ROSENBERGER@MFR )
Betr.: RE: MEMO
*** WARNING ***
This is X.400 mail, which might have originated outside your
organization. Keep this in mind if you answer this message.
SANOMIEN L[HETYS MEMOON
========================
Mist{ tahansa X.400 j{rjestelm{st{ voidaan l{hett{{ sanomia Memo s{hk|-
posteihin erityisen Memo Gatewayn kautta.
Osoite Memoon l{hetett{ess{ muodostuu seuraavasti:
PRMD=MEMOGW (Memo Gateway)
Organisaatio=Memo-organisaatio (MEM,KYMMENE, ym)
ADMD=MAILNET
C=FI
Lis{ksi annetaan Memo-k{ytt{j{n etu- ja sukunimi vastaaviin kenttiin.
Jos Memossa on k{yt|ss{ X.400-osoitus, t{ytyy l{hett{jan tiedot
olla memogw:ss{. Jos Memossa k{ytet{{n memon osoitusta, t{ytyy
sek{ l{hett{j{n ett{ vastaanottajan olla memogw:ss{ m{{riteltyn{.
|
| 69.8 | | EEMELI::MITTS | back on the chain-gang,.. | Thu Feb 14 1991 08:30 | 52 |
|
Hello Rainer :
> I mailed from my standard ALL-IN-1 account to the Finish PTT and got
> the results below. Obviously the application INFO sends back some infos
> within DDAs (in the FROM address).
> 6=INFO@*GRP\INF@*UFD\INF001@*SYS\12763@5=INF@2=MAILNET@1=FI
> @MRX_HADRES@GYMRC@RTO
The application that answers runs in the context of the Telebox
end user mail system which has the option on using DDA addressing.
The DDA elements are always included in the From - address. They carry
no other relevant info (as to MEMO addressing or the like)!
For those of you who don't read Finnish (there can't be anybody out
there can there??), here's a translation :
>SANOMIEN L[HETYS MEMOON
Sending messages to MEMO
>Mist{ tahansa X.400 j{rjestelm{st{ voidaan l{hett{{ sanomia Memo s{hk|-
>posteihin erityisen Memo Gatewayn kautta.
From any X-400 systen you can send messages to MEMO electronic
mail system thru a special MEMO gateway.
>Osoite Memoon l{hetett{ess{ muodostuu seuraavasti:
The address when sending to MEMO is composed as follows :
PRMD=MEMOGW (Memo Gateway)
>Organisaatio=Memo-organisaatio (MEM,KYMMENE, ym)
Organisation=org. using MEMO for instance (..)
ADMD=MAILNET
C=FI
>Lis{ksi annetaan Memo-k{ytt{j{n etu- ja sukunimi vastaaviin kenttiin.
In addition you give the recipient given and last names in the appropriate
fields.
>Jos Memossa on k{yt|ss{ X.400-osoitus, t{ytyy l{hett{jan tiedot
>olla memogw:ss{. Jos Memossa k{ytet{{n memon osoitusta, t{ytyy
>sek{ l{hett{j{n ett{ vastaanottajan olla memogw:ss{ m{{riteltyn{.
If X.400 addressing is used in MEMO, the (MEMO) sender information
have to be in the memo gateway. If MEMO-type addressing is used in MEMO,
both sender and reciepient must be defined in the MEMO gateway.
The fact that the funny characters (�� etc) are shown as { etc is
due to the fact the the Telebox mail system incorrectly places
finnish national characters in X.400 bodyparts tagged IA5.
|