Conference virke::mrmemo

    
    Hi Julio,
    
    Two problems
    
    	- MRMEMO talks to an DECnet/SNA Gateway. Thats not TCP/IP.
    
    	- MRMEMO talks on the other end to the Message Router. Thats not an
    	  ULTRIX application.
    
    You could implement a black box with
    
    	- VMS
    	- Message Router
    	- MRMEMO
    	- VMS/SNA
    	- DECnet/SNA Lu0 API
    	- Ultrix MAil Conection (UMC)
    	- A synchrone interface for SDLC
    
    And add other part of UMC on a ULTRIX machine. I think you have to have
    DECnet on that ULTRIX node, not sure.
    
    This will get you a SMTP - MEMO gateway environment.The addressess will
    not be funny.
    
    MEMO is just to implement X.400. In sommer, you will be able to sell
    them ULTRIX MTA as x.400 MTA and then Poste as User Agent. This asumes
    that X.400 will be installed at the MEMO side.
    
    			hope this didn't confused you
    
    				cheers Bj�rn

Hello,
    
>>    And add other part of UMC on a ULTRIX machine. I think you have to have
>>    DECnet on that ULTRIX node, not sure.

correct, DECnet-ULTRIX and (for installation) DECnet-ULTRIX Unsupported 
Software Subset.
  
>>    This will get you a SMTP - MEMO gateway environment.The addressess will
>>    not be funny.
    
ULTRIX -- MEMO
to: sn_u=memo_user@sn_l=memo_loc.memo_mbx.umc

MEMO -- ULTRIX
VAX.USER@umc<@node>

cheers
	Michael

    
    Michael,
    
    Are you sure about this syntax?
    
> ULTRIX -- MEMO
> to: sn_u=memo_user@sn_l=memo_loc.memo_mbx.umc

  What does UMC do with the SN_U and SN_L elements?
    
    cheers,
    
    	Stefan
    

Stefan,

    
>>    Are you sure about this syntax?
    
Yes, see Ultrix Mail User Guide, page 2-20

ULTRIX -- IBM SNADS User (that's similar to MRMEMO, right?)
to: sn_username=user@sn_location=node.mrs.mrs_node.umc

>>  What does UMC do with the SN_U and SN_L elements?
    
UMC passes the elements to the Message Router

cheers,
    Michael
    

	Well, actually you have a lot of addressing options...

	A customer has this setup, and there are a number of things you can
	do :

	From the ip (u*x) side :

	You can have at least three kinds of addresses.
	1) The one Micheal suggested (terrible in mu opinion)
	2) Using simple mailbus addressing (don't need DDS) : 
		[email protected]
	3) Personal name addressing (with DDS) :
		"Given Sur"@memo.umc

	Customer actually did a bit of fance sendmail.cf programming and have
	able to change the @memo.umc to just @memo (or actually adding the 
	domain name @memo.org.country)

	From MEMO side you have pretty much the same options :

	1) As per Michael 
	2) MEMO addressing (requires DDS)
		VAX.memotype
	3) Personal name addressing (with DDS) :
		VAX.given_sur

	Actually, most of the time VAX is a prettyu bad choice for the dgn to 
	point to mailbus....

	Also, for early versions of MEMO, if you had SEND_NOTIFICATION on you
	got del not messages that where forwarded as errouneous non-deliveries
	to u*x users, there's a patch for that (MEMO before 3.1.2).

	Finally, you should use (if possible) the -simple switch with umc,
	otherwise you get a lot of garbage (soory Stefan) from MEMO and if you
	use a mailer on u*x tat is only partly rfc 822 compliant (like mail)
	you won't be able to reply to mails.

	IRegs, H�kan

    
    Hello again,
    
> ULTRIX -- IBM SNADS User (that's similar to MRMEMO, right?)
> to: sn_username=user@sn_location=node.mrs.mrs_node.umc

    Yes, similar but not the same. MRMEMO does not recognize the
    SN_LOCATION and SN_USERNAME tags. Instead, it looks for tags 
    DGN (Distribution Group Name) and DEN (Distribution Element Name). 
    
    The corresponding MEMO address then, would be:
    
    to: den=user@dgn=node.memo.mrmemo_node.umc
    
    (But then again, *only* if the MRMEMO server has the option
    /DDS_VALIDATION=recipient=memo set. Otherwise, the adress is sent
    untouched to MEMO, where it will most certainly be rejected. As H�kan
    rightly points out, the syntax should be avoided, so we can end this
    particular discussion right here.)
    
    cheers,
    
    	Stefan

    Well Bjorn, I am a bit confused, nevertheless what I think I'm getting
    clear is that we better wait and let them start by logging to the
    mainframe with terminal emulation to run MEMO from their PC's.
    
    Then wait for what is comming, mainly X.400 mail, either your suggestion
    or (also possible in the summer, although not clear if it will support
    tcp) All-in-1 Mail for Ultrix ... of course, asumming X.400 support by
    MEMO.
    
    ... making sense?

>    Well Bjorn, I am a bit confused, nevertheless what I think I'm getting
>    clear is that we better wait and let them start by logging to the
>    mainframe with terminal emulation to run MEMO from their PC's.

	Well, I don't think there is really any reason to wait...
	In most configurations MRMEMO + other MAILbus products used together
	with what DDS support there is (quite a lot in both MEMO and UMC 
	actually), will certainly make for a very nice mail userinterface with
	namebased addressing etc and will certainly accustom the users to not
	having to log into other (very dissimilar) systems for their mail.

	Also you set up quite high expectations amongst the cutomers which are
	quite hard for other vendors to surpass!

	H�kan