[ih] .UK vs .GB

• Subject: [ih] .UK vs .GB
• From: julf at julf.com (Johan Helsingius)
• Date: Wed, 18 Apr 2018 12:34:20 +0200
• In-reply-to: <[email protected]>
• References: <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <CA+CiqoUyGDkyZJrY=aeY_WXdco8g_Jcm=Zf694yPKPbELq8CQg@mail.gmail.com> <CA+CiqoU0=T9Hu=a1PqwYoKWhfTnyVV2toK2+dNPCEsJqf+UbjQ@mail.gmail.com> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]>

On 15-04-18 02:18, Olivier MJ Cr?pin-Leblond wrote:

> I know we're all laughing about this now, but back then it was no
> laughing matter. JANET was running no CCITT W series recommendations and
> the policy Europe-wide was to promote X.25 and of course move to X.400
> So all the way until the early nineties (1992?) we were told that the
> way forward was to get our house systems in order to send/receive X.400
> emails.

I am pretty sure Daniel Karrenberg still has a copy of the EUnet X.400
transition plan that he wrote, fully well knowing it would never be
used...

	Julf

• References:
  • [ih] .UK vs .GB
    • From: johnl at iecc.com (John Levine)
  • [ih] .UK vs .GB
    • From: paf at frobbit.se (Patrik Fältström)
  • [ih] .UK vs .GB
    • From: eric.gade at gmail.com (Eric Gade)
  • [ih] .UK vs .GB
    • From: eric.gade at gmail.com (Eric Gade)
  • [ih] .UK vs .GB
    • From: paf at frobbit.se (Patrik Fältström)
  • [ih] .UK vs .GB
    • From: brian.e.carpenter at gmail.com (Brian E Carpenter)
  • [ih] .UK vs .GB
    • From: ocl at gih.com (Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond)

• Prev by Date: [ih] .UK vs .GB
• Next by Date: [ih] Fwd: Bob Braden has passed away
• Previous by thread: [ih] .UK vs .GB
• Next by thread: [ih] .UK vs .GB
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread