[Search for users] [Overall Top Noters] [List of all Conferences] [Download this site]

Conference forty2::mailbus_400

Title:MAILBUS 400 User Forum
Notice:kits 100-109 - Infocenter //www.digital.com/info/messaging
Moderator:IOSG::MARSHALL
Created:Thu Jun 11 1992
Last Modified:Fri Jun 06 1997
Last Successful Update:Fri Jun 06 1997
Number of topics:3210
Total number of notes:9174

3182.0. "84 Encoding of text attachments" by SIOG::MCCORRY (Tenors get women by the score.) Thu May 01 1997 20:35

    A real quick question... (I know it's generic, but...)
    
    I've been reading through the various standards books, but I can't
    quickly find the answer to this question.
    
    When transferring a message across an '84 connection, should all
    attachments be encoded as BP14?
    
    I want to know if I send a text message with a text attachment, will it
    be encoded as an IA5 (depending on settings) bp and BP14 bp or two IA5
    bps.
    
    Or maybe this is a function of the UA?
    
    Thanks
    Kieran
T.RTitleUserPersonal
Name
DateLines
3182.1ua functionGIDDAY::DRANSFIELDMike Dransfield, Sydney RSSGTue May 06 1997 03:2610
    It's a function of the UA
    You can't send a BP15 across an 84 connection but there are a number
    of other bodyparts defined which you can, including BP14.
    
    If the message contains anything not defined in the 84 standard then
    the message needs to be downgraded, but apart from that, the MTA
    shouldn't really care.
    
    
    mike
3182.2ACISS2::LENNIGDave (N8JCX), MIG, @CYOTue May 06 1997 18:0340
    .1 is not entirely accurate.
    
    To start off with, the 84 standard (X420) only declares BP0-BP11,
    (and a number of these weren't actually defined). However, widely 
    accepted agreements have extended this in two differant directions.
    
    1) The X.400 Stable Implimentation Agreements state (7.5.3.6.2)
    "All Bodyparts with identifiers in the range 0 up to and including
    16K-1 are legal and should be relayed." So you CAN send a BP15 
    across an 84 connection if the MTA conforms to this agreement.
    Whether the receiving UA will understand it is a seperate matter.
    
    2) The Stable Implimentation Agreements extended the Red Book
    definitions to include Nationally Defined bodyparts (ie BP NN
    where NN=X.121 Country code - for example 310=USA 234=UK) and
    also declared "Recommended Practices" for "Binary Data Transfer"
    (aka BP14) and "Office Document Architecture Transfer" (aka BP12)
    [sections 7.12.7 and 7.12.8]
    
    re: .0
    
    X.400 doesn't define an "attachment"; the content of a IPmessage can
    contain a sequence of bodyparts (see above). If you want to have the 
    highest degree of interoperability across multiple vendors, you stick 
    with the lowest common denominator - ie IA5. If you want the highest 
    degree of functionality you use a richer set (including privately 
    defined bodyparts and/or extensions), but of course this can impact
    interoperability. (Witness the number of vendors we have tripped up
    through our usage of P1 extensions and ForwardIPMessage by ALL-IN-1
    and XMR, or our usage of USA310 for encapsulation by MRX and MB400,
    or conversely Microsoft [and others] through use of a particular type
    of BP15 known as the "file transfer bodypart" [IMHO a real hack]).
    
    Putting 'stuff' in a BP14 doesn't give the receiving agent even the
    slightest clue as to what the octets represent. So if you know that
    your "attachment" is text, and it can be represented using one of the
    'standard' text bodyparts (character set and formatting issues come
    into play here) then you enhance your interoperability by using them.
    
    Dave