⭐ 欢迎来到虫虫下载站! | 📦 资源下载 📁 资源专辑 ℹ️ 关于我们
⭐ 虫虫下载站

📄 rfc1327.txt

📁 著名的RFC文档,其中有一些文档是已经翻译成中文的的.
💻 TXT
📖 第 1 页 / 共 5 页
字号:
   Delivery-Date:   Discarded-X400-IPMS-Extensions:   Discarded-X400-MTS-Extensions:   DL-Expansion-History:   Deferred-Delivery:   Expiry-Date:   Importance:   Incomplete-Copy:   Language:   Latest-Delivery-Time:   Message-Type:   Obsoletes:   Original-Encoded-Information-Types:   Originator-Return-Address:   Priority:   Reply-By:   Requested-Delivery-Method:   Sensitivity:   X400-Content-Type:   X400-MTS-Identifier:Hardcastle-Kille                                               [Page 14]RFC 1327        Mapping between X.400(1988) and RFC 822         May 1992   X400-Originator:   X400-Received:   X400-Recipients:2.3.  X.4002.3.1.  Origination in X.400   When mapping services from X.400 to RFC 822 which are not supported   by RFC 822, new RFC 822 headers are defined.  It is intended that   these fields will be registered, and that co- operating RFC 822   systems may use them.  Where these new fields are used, and no system   action is implied, the service can be regarded as being partially   supported.  Chapter 5 describes how to map X.400 services onto these   new headers.  Other elements are provided, in part, by the gateway as   they cannot be provided by RFC 822.   Some service elements are marked N/A (not applicable).  There are   five cases, which are marked with different comments:   N/A (local)        These elements are only applicable to User Agent / Message        Transfer Agent interaction and so they cannot apply to RFC        822 recipients.   N/A (PDAU)        These service elements are only applicable where the        recipient is reached by use of a Physical Delivery Access        Unit (PDAU), and so do not need to be mapped by the gateway.   N/A (reception)        These services  are only applicable for reception.   N/A (prior)        If requested, this service must be performed prior to the        gateway.   N/A (MS)        These services are only applicable to Message Store (i.e., a        local service).   Finally, some service elements are not supported.  In particular, the   new security services are not mapped onto RFC 822.  Unless otherwise   indicated, the behaviour of service elements marked as not supported   will depend on the criticality marking supplied by the user.  If the   element is marked as critical for transfer or delivery, a non-Hardcastle-Kille                                               [Page 15]RFC 1327        Mapping between X.400(1988) and RFC 822         May 1992   delivery notification will be generated.  Otherwise, the service   request will be ignored.2.3.1.1.  Basic Interpersonal Messaging Service   These are the mandatory IPM services as listed in Section 19.8 of   X.400 / ISO/IEC 10021-1, listed here in the order given. Section 19.8   has cross references to short definitions of each service.   Access management        N/A (local).   Content Type Indication        Supported by a new RFC 822 header (Content-Type:).   Converted Indication        Supported by a new RFC 822 header (X400-Received:).   Delivery Time Stamp Indication        N/A (reception).   IP Message Identification        Supported.   Message Identification        Supported, by use of a new RFC 822 header        (X400-MTS-Identifier).  This new header is required, as        X.400 has two message-ids whereas RFC 822 has only one (see        previous service).   Non-delivery Notification        Not supported, although in general an RFC 822 system will        return error reports by use of IP messages.  In other        service elements, this pragmatic result can be treated as        effective support of this service element.   Original Encoded Information Types Indication        Supported as a new RFC 822 header        (Original-Encoded-Information-Types:).   Submission Time Stamp Indication        Supported.   Typed Body        Some types supported.  IA5 is fully supported.        ForwardedIPMessage is supported, with some loss of        information.  Other types get some measure of support,        dependent on X.400 facilities for conversion to IA5.  ThisHardcastle-Kille                                               [Page 16]RFC 1327        Mapping between X.400(1988) and RFC 822         May 1992        will only be done where content conversion is not        prohibited.   User Capabilities Registration        N/A (local).2.3.1.2.  IPM Service Optional User Facilities   This section describes support for the optional (user selectable) IPM   services as listed in Section 19.9 of X.400 / ISO/IEC 10021- 1,   listed here in the order given.  Section 19.9 has cross references to   short definitions of each service.   Additional Physical Rendition        N/A (PDAU).   Alternate Recipient Allowed        Not supported.  There is no RFC 822 service equivalent to        prohibition of alternate recipient assignment (e.g., an RFC        822 system may freely send an undeliverable message to a        local postmaster).  Thus, the gateway cannot prevent        assignment of alternative recipients on the RFC 822 side.        This service really means giving the user control as to        whether or not an alternate recipient is allowed. This        specification requires transfer of messages to RFC 822        irrespective of this service request, and so this service is        not supported.   Authorising User's Indication        Supported.   Auto-forwarded Indication        Supported as new RFC 822 header (Auto-Forwarded:).   Basic Physical Rendition        N/A (PDAU).   Blind Copy Recipient Indication        Supported.   Body Part Encryption Indication        Supported by use of a new RFC 822 header        (Original-Encoded-Information-Types:), although in most        cases it will not be possible to map the body part in        question.   Content Confidentiality        Not supported.Hardcastle-Kille                                               [Page 17]RFC 1327        Mapping between X.400(1988) and RFC 822         May 1992   Content Integrity        Not supported.   Conversion Prohibition        Supported.  In this case, only messages with IA5 body parts,        other body parts which contain only IA5, and Forwarded IP        Messages (subject recursively to the same restrictions),        will be mapped.   Conversion Prohibition in Case of Loss of Information        Supported.   Counter Collection        N/A (PDAU).   Counter Collection with Advice        N/A (PDAU).   Cross Referencing Indication        Supported.   Deferred Delivery        N/A (prior).  This service should always be provided by the        MTS prior to the gateway.  A new RFC 822 header        Deferred-Delivery:) is provided to transfer information on        this service to the recipient.Deferred Delivery Cancellation      N/A (local).Delivery Notification      Supported.  This is performed at the gateway.  Thus, a      notification is sent by the gateway to the originator.  If      the 822-MTS protocol is JNT Mail, a notification may also be      sent by the recipient UA.Delivery via Bureaufax Service      N/A (PDAU).Designation of Recipient by Directory Name      N/A (local).Disclosure of Other Recipients      Supported by use of a new RFC 822 header (X400-Recipients:).      This is descriptive information for the RFC 822 recipient,      and is not reverse mappable.Hardcastle-Kille                                               [Page 18]RFC 1327        Mapping between X.400(1988) and RFC 822         May 1992DL Expansion History Indication      Supported by use of a new RFC 822 header      DL-Expansion-History:).DL Expansion Prohibited      Distribution List means MTS supported distribution list, in      the manner of X.400.  This service does not exist in the RFC      822 world.  RFC 822 distribution lists should be regarded as      an informal redistribution mechanism, beyond the scope of      this control.  Messages will be sent to RFC 822,      irrespective of whether this service is requested.      Theoretically therefore, this service is supported, although      in practice it may appear that it is not supported.Express Mail Service      N/A (PDAU).Expiry Date Indication      Supported as new RFC 822 header (Expiry-Date:).  In general,      no automatic action can be expected.Explicit Conversion      N/A (prior).Forwarded IP Message Indication      Supported, with some loss of information.  The message is      forwarded in an RFC 822 body, and so can only be interpreted      visually.Grade of Delivery Selection      N/A (PDAU)Importance Indication      Supported as new RFC 822 header (Importance:).Incomplete Copy Indication      Supported as new RFC 822 header (Incomplete-Copy:).Language Indication      Supported as new RFC 822 header (Language:).Latest Delivery Designation      Not supported.  A new RFC 822 header (Latest-Delivery-Time:)      is provided, which may be used by the recipient.Message Flow Confidentiality      Not supported.Hardcastle-Kille                                               [Page 19]RFC 1327        Mapping between X.400(1988) and RFC 822         May 1992Message Origin Authentication      N/A (reception).Message Security Labelling      Not supported.Message Sequence Integrity      Not supported.Multi-Destination Delivery      Supported.Multi-part Body      Supported, with some loss of information, in that the      structuring cannot be formalised in RFC 822.Non Receipt Notification Request      Not supported.Non Repudiation of Delivery      Not supported.Non Repudiation of Origin      N/A (reception).Non Repudiation of Submission      N/A (local).Obsoleting Indication      Supported as new RFC 822 header (Obsoletes:).Ordinary Mail      N/A (PDAU).Originator Indication      Supported.Originator Requested Alternate Recipient      Not supported, but is placed as comment next to address      X400-Recipients:).Physical Delivery Notification by MHS      N/A (PDAU).

⌨️ 快捷键说明

复制代码 Ctrl + C
搜索代码 Ctrl + F
全屏模式 F11
切换主题 Ctrl + Shift + D
显示快捷键 ?
增大字号 Ctrl + =
减小字号 Ctrl + -