Browse Prior Art Database

Writing X.400 O/R Names (RFC1685)

IP.com Disclosure Number: IPCOM000002523D
Original Publication Date: 1994-Aug-01
Included in the Prior Art Database: 2019-Feb-12
Document File: 11 page(s) / 14K

Publishing Venue

Internet Society Requests For Comment (RFCs)

Related People

H. Alvestrand: AUTHOR

Related Documents

10.17487/RFC1685: DOI

Abstract

There is a need for human beings who use X.400 systems to be able to write down O/R names in a uniform way. This memo is a discussion of this topic. This memo provides information for the Internet Community. It does not specify an Internet Standard of any kind.

This text was extracted from a PDF file.
This is the abbreviated version, containing approximately 17% of the total text.

Network Working Group H. Alvestrand Request for Comments: 1685 UNINETT RARE Technical Report: 12 August 1994 Category: Informational

Writing X.400 O/R Names

Status of this Memo

This memo provides information for the Internet Community. It does not specify an Internet Standard of any kind. Distribution of this memo is unlimited.

1. Introduction

There is a need for human beings who use X.400 systems to be able to write down O/R names in a uniform way.

There has been a preexisting recommendation on how to write O/R names for human consumption in the RARE community. Now that the ISO/ITU has adopted a recommendation on how to do this [1], RARE needs to update its recommendation on writing O/R names to take this standard into account.

2. Recommendations on writing O/R names

RARE recommends that the ISO standard be followed when writing O/R names. The ISO/ITU standard contains a number of options. RARE makes the following recommendations:

- The "main" abbreviations, G, I, S, O, OU1, OU2, P, A and C are used. They should be written using UPPER CASE.

- The separation character should be semicolon (;).

- The ADMD value "blank" is expressed by omitting the attribute. No other interpretation of a missing ADMD attribute is allowed.

- The recommended sequence is G=;I=;S=;O=;OU1=;OU2=;P=;A=;C=;

This means that the O, OU1 and so on will be in opposite order to the fields of an Internet domain name; the reason for choosing the ISO/ITU order is that this will be more common among users of X.400 services.

RARE Working Group on Mail and Messaging (WG-MSG) [Page 1]

RFC 1685 Writing X.400 O/R Names August 1994

3. Copy of the recommmendation

This is a COPY of a DRAFT of the relevant appendix. For the authoritative text, consult the ITU standard itself.

Final text for AMENDMENT, 7 February 1993

Annex to CCITT Rec. F.401 and ISO/IEC 10021-2/Am.1

Annex F

Representation of O/R addresses for human usage (This annex does not form an integral part of this Recommendation|International Standard)

F.1 Purpose

An O/R address (specified in clause 18) consists of a set of values of attributes taken from the list shown in Table F.1. In order to represent visually an address to a human user, and to enable the user to enter the address into a user interface, each attribute value needs to be associated with the correct attribute type. Many of the names of the attribute types shown in Table F.1 are too long for convenient usage on paper or a screen. There is a need for a format which allows attributes to be represented concisely, e.g., on a business card.

This annex specifies how addresses can be expressed concisely using labels to represent the attribute types. There are three categories of attributes: those standard mnemonic attributes which are most likely to be found in O/R addresses represented for human usage (e.g., on business cards), those used in physical delivery addresses, and other specialised attributes (including domain defined attributes). In order to provide a format...

Processing...
Loading...