⭐ 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

📄 rfc1616.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:
      Dynamic routing from MTA to MTA, relieves the necessity to      maintain large routing tables, especially within a large PRMD, or      community of PRMDs (like the R&D MHS community).   - Address mapping between RFC 822 and X.400      The widespread use of X.500 or DNS for mapping, allows a reduction      of manpower for centrally co-ordinating globally consistent      X.400-to-RFC-822 mapping tables and distributes the responsibility      for updating the mapping rules. This should allow mapping rules to      change when needed and to be available immediately.   - UA capabilities registration      The use of the directory to register UA capabilities for      X.400(1988), X.400(1984) and RFC 822 / MIME / PEM systems is a      very desirable benefit for users in terms of speeding the      deployment of new messaging services (e.g., Multimedia Messaging).4.3. Messaging capabilities   Due to the problems of gatewaying within a multi-protocol messaging   environment, the great majority of R&D E-mail users are reduced to   using only InterPersonal Messaging (IPM) services based upon the   exchange of message body parts using CCITT character set IA5 (US   ASCII).   Within the R&D community recent work to meet user requirements for   non ASCII messaging services - as documented above - has resulted in   enhancements to the messaging services based upon RFC 822 protocols.   The enhancements provide Multimedia support via the Multipurpose   Internet Mail Extensions (MIME) and the prospect in the very near   future of secure messaging via Privacy Enhanced Mail (PEM).   Deployment of the MIME enhanced RFC 822 based services, via   distribution of software and the setting up of the needed   organisational structures, has commenced. The PEM enhancements are in   a large scale pilot phase e.g., VALUE PASSWORD project.   In the case of X.400(1984) the usage of non ASCII body parts is   mostly effected by bilateral agreement between recipient and   originator, through use of body part 14. In practice this restricts   the exchange of non ASCII body parts to those cases where the   recipient and the originator use the same bilateral agreement or else   the originator includes an ASCII message explaining the includedRARE WG-MSG Task Force 88                                      [Page 11]RFC 1616     X.400(88) for European Academics and Research      May 1994   content type. Besides IPM there is a growing usage of EDI on top of   X.400(1984).   With the above X.400(1984) deficiencies in mind, X.400(1988) has been   specified by the CCITT / ISO to meet new user demands.  X.400(1988)   provides support for various different body parts, enhanced security   features, international character set support capabilities and   support of X.500 Directory Services. Due to the technological   potential of these standards to satisfy user needs for new messaging   services, the R&D community has been experimenting and piloting   X.400(1988) and X.500(1988) services.  As there is a strong   dependency of X.400(1988) messaging upon X.500(1988) directory   services, the necessary precondition to supply these user demands is   a deployed and operational X.500(1988) directory service. Piloting   and deployment of the X.500(1988) directory service within the R&D   community has been successfully initiated and co-ordinated by the   COSINE and the VALUE PARADISE projects.   Similarly, secure messaging has been addressed by the VALUE PASSWORD   project and the RARE and IETF communities. Work to solve problems   related to directory support of X.400(1988) messaging has been   pursued within the IETF and RARE. The relevant RARE and IETF work   groups (e.g., RARE WG-MSG, IETF MHS-DS, etc.) have also worked to   produce any needed enhancements to the base X.400(1988) and   X.500(1988) standards.  Last but not least it should not be   overlooked that X.400(1988), as compared to X.400(1984), provides a   comprehensive basis for gatewaying to and from RFC 822 / MIME / PEM   and PC LAN messaging services. To that respect the IETF has defined   standards for gatewaying Multimedia mail between RFC 822 / MIME / PEM   and X.400(1988). As RFC 822 / MIME / PEM is now being deployed on the   Internet, deployment of X.400(1988) services is needed to assure   multimedia and secure messaging connectivity for the European R&D   community.5.  Possible solutions for providing globally pervasive messaging   As can be now seen, a correlation of the present situation to the   requirements of the user, shows that the current messaging services   do not match the needs of users. To try to meet these needs a number   of developments within various messaging technology areas are   occurring. The following messaging technological areas, due to the   present installed user base within the R&D community, are considered   relevant:      - PC LAN E-mail systems such as Lotus cc:Mail, Microsoft Mail        and Novell MHS      - RFC 822 / MIME / PEM E-mail services      - X.400(1988) messaging servicesRARE WG-MSG Task Force 88                                      [Page 12]RFC 1616     X.400(88) for European Academics and Research      May 1994   Ongoing developments within each of the above technological areas   provide new messaging options for the R&D community. The ability of   each technological area to provide solutions for user and service   provider requirements is summarised within this chapter.5.1. PC LAN E-mail systems   Currently the usage of PC LAN E-mail systems is mostly for internal   communication within an organisation. External connections, if   present at all, to public service providers or other organisations is   mostly through gateways to X.400(1984) or RFC 822. The use of a PC   LAN E-mail system in terms of an infrastructure for interconnecting   E-mail systems of different hues is not common within the Research   community.  Recent experience, from amongst others the Dutch Research   network - SURFnet - [14] and the Norwegian Directorate for Public   Management - Statskonsult - [18], has shown that a number of problems   (i.e., limited functionality, high operational management cost, etc.)   can be expected should these PC LAN E-mail systems be used as an E-   mail infrastructure. (The use of native X.400 protocols for PC LAN   E-mail systems would avoid the usage of gateways and would thus   alleviate many of these problems.) A summary of those problems and   some relevant issues follows:   -  Interconnecting heterogeneous PC LAN messaging systems      One very distinct benefit for E-mail users of all hues is the      potential to integrate heterogeneous PC LAN messaging systems with      a minimum loss of service (e.g., multimedia services) by      connecting them via X.400(1988) (or RFC 822/MIME/SMTP).      X.400(1988) is already being used, or under active development,      for connecting together PC LAN messaging systems in a number of      environments (e.g., Apple Macintoshes, DEC, Microsoft, Lotus,      etc.). This tendency to gateway PC LAN messaging systems via      X.400(1988) will increase and is one of the benefits that      X.400(1988) brings to global multiprotocol messaging.   - Multimedia and binary data support      The benefit of E-mail systems using these PC LAN systems is that      the user interfaces are usually well integrated in the users      standard working environment. Using a proprietary protocol these      systems allow not only text (ASCII) but also binary, word      processor, video, audio and other types of files to be      transported. To reap the benefits of this multimedia / binary data      transfer it would normally require that the same type of gateway      is used by sender and receiver. Transporting these same files to      another type of PC LAN E-mail system is not possible through theRARE WG-MSG Task Force 88                                      [Page 13]RFC 1616     X.400(88) for European Academics and Research      May 1994      current gateways without some information loss. In effect PC LAN      E-mail system's X.400 (or RFC 822) gateways from different vendors      perform acceptably only for text body parts.  True heterogeneous      multimedia PC LAN messaging needs gateways to X.400(1988)'s      service.   - Application Programming Interfaces      To help solve the problem of portability for Mail Enabled      Applications Microsoft, Lotus, Novell, XAPIA and X/OPEN have been      working on a number of standards for the Application Interface to      mail transport protocols (i.e., Mail Application Programming      Interface - MAPI, Vendor Independent Messaging - VIM, Common Mail      Calls - CMC). These efforts are structured independent of the      existing 'Wide-Area' or inter organisational E-mail protocols of      X.400(1984) and RFC 822. However the MAPI, VIM and CMC efforts,      due to their proposers (respectively Microsoft, Lotus and X/OPEN),      do look like they will provide the stimulant to various software      developers to develop more portable applications plus allow the      rich functionality of X.400(1988) to be accessed by these      applications thus reducing the need for gatewaying to X.400(1988).   - Security      As the PC LAN E-mail systems require gateways for connectivity,      they pose a problem with regard to encrypted messages.  Gatewaying      of secure messages is normally not possible. The gatewaying of      secure messages is a general problem of gatewaying from one mail      system to any other system and is not specific to PC LAN E-mail      systems.   - Directory Services      To date mostly proprietary directory services have been deployed      that do not match the needs of the users in terms of access      controls for data, distributed and decentralised across      organisations. X.500 based services promise solutions to such      needs. As a result various suppliers have announced support of      X.500 directory services for their E-mail products. However,      should these interfaces be delayed then support of an inter      organisational 'White Pages' services requires either,      - directory information exchange products (i.e., directory        gateways) deployed between a proprietary system and an X.500        directory systemRARE WG-MSG Task Force 88                                      [Page 14]RFC 1616     X.400(88) for European Academics and Research      May 1994      - gateways between de-facto market based proprietary        standards, such as Retix Directory Exchange (DX) or        Soft*switch's Directory Synchronisation (DS), and X.500        protocols      - duplicated directories i.e., one proprietary and one X.500        need to be operated.   It should be stressed that gatewaying mechanisms and products are   often problematic due to the lack of an open standard on the   proprietary messaging system and or directory system. (As an aside it   is thus essential to establish an operational X.500 infrastructure,   including E-mail user interfaces that can transparently access this   Directory Service, as soon as possible.)5.2. RFC 822, MIME and PEM services   RFC 822 messaging services are widely deployed within the R&D   community. There is ongoing work to extend RFC 822 to meet user   requirements. Some of these extensions are elaborated upon within   this chapter.   - Distribution lists      RFC 822 allows for the usage of DLs. Management of DLs is not      (yet) standardised.   - RFC 822 multimedia messaging via MIME      With the arrival of MIME, the RFC 822 service has an additional      protocol standard that addresses Multimedia messaging very      comprehensively. In terms of user needs, MIME now allows messaging      body parts to comprise multinational character sets and binary      data. Multi-body part messages are also supported.  One of MIME's      real strengths, in terms of deployment within the existing RFC 822      service, is that it achieves its goals by overlaying its services      over the existing RFC 822 service and thus mandating no changes to      the in place RFC 822 infrastructure. This greatly simplifies the      MIME deployment.   - RFC 822 secure messaging via PEM      Just as MIME has brought multimedia messaging to RFC 822 services,      Privacy Enhanced Mail (PEM) is bringing secure messaging to RFC      822 services. PEM also has used the same approach as MIME to      deploy secure messaging within RFC 822 services; overlay PEM      services over the existing RFC 822 services without requiring      changes to the RFC 822 infrastructure. PEM brings confidentialityRARE WG-MSG Task Force 88                                      [Page 15]RFC 1616     X.400(88) for European Academics and Research      May 1994      and integrity of messages to RFC 822 users. However a number of      problems with PEM, and X.400(1988) as well, still need to be      solved before secure messaging can be considered to be an      operational service.  These problems are independent of the secure      messaging protocol (i.e., PEM or X.400(1988)) and deal mainly with      distribution of secret keys to the end users. There is very active      work going on within the IETF to solve these problems.   - MIME and PEM

⌨️ 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 + -