📄 rfc1327.txt
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 + -