[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
FW: Returned mail: User unknown
Please remove tmanessi@email.usps.gov and praines@email.usps.gov from your mailing list. There are no such users in our corporate directory.
Thanks,
Michael Stucky
USPS National Network Service Center
stuckym@eagle.usps.gov
-----Original Message-----
From: Mail Delivery Subsystem [SMTP:Mailer-Daemon@loc201.tandem.com]
Sent: Wednesday, May 28, 1997 12:46 AM
To: MAILER-DAEMON@mailgatew.usps.gov
Subject: Returned mail: User unknown
----- Transcript of session follows -----
<<< HELO suntan.tandem.com
<<< MAIL From:<MAILER-DAEMON@mailgatew.usps.gov>
<<< RCPT To:<chandras@loc201.tandem.com>
550 <chandras@loc201.tandem.com>... User unknown
<<< DATA
<<< QUIT
----- Unsent message follows -----
Received: from suntan.tandem.com by adm.loc201.tandem.com (4.1/6main.940209)
id AA04327; Tue, 27 May 97 21:45:51 PDT
Received: from gk-west.usps.gov by suntan.tandem.com (8.6.12/suntan5.970212) for <chandras@loc201.tandem.com>
id VAA09910; Tue, 27 May 1997 21:45:50 -0700
Received: by gk-west.usps.gov; (5.65v3.2/1.3/10May95) id AA21230; Tue, 27 May 1997 21:45:49 -0700
Received: by mailgatew.usps.gov; (5.65v3.2/1.1.8.2/08May96-0605PM)
id AA14463; Thu, 29 May 1997 00:59:10 -0700
Date: Thu, 29 May 1997 00:59:10 -0700
From: Mail Delivery Subsystem <MAILER-DAEMON@mailgatew.usps.gov>
Subject: Returned mail: User unknown
Message-Id: <9705290759.AA14463@mailgatew.usps.gov>
To: chandras@loc201.tandem.com
----- Transcript of session follows -----
While talking to email.usps.gov:
>>> RCPT To:<tmanessi@email.usps.gov>
<<< 550 Permanent error: Error writing recipient to DAS
550 <tmanessi@email.usps.gov>... User unknown
>>> RCPT To:<praines@email.usps.gov>
<<< 550 Permanent error: Error writing recipient to DAS
550 <praines@email.usps.gov>... User unknown
----- Unsent message follows -----
Received: from gk-west.usps.gov by mailgatew.usps.gov; (5.65v3.2/1.1.8.2/08May96-0605PM)
id AA15517; Thu, 29 May 1997 00:59:10 -0700
Received: by gk-west.usps.gov; (5.65v3.2/1.3/10May95) id AA06549; Tue, 27 May 1997 21:45:43 -0700
Received: from suntan.tandem.com by gk-west.usps.gov (smtpxd); id XA32007
Received: by suntan.tandem.com (8.6.12/suntan5.970212) for ietf-pkix-relay
id UAA02432; Tue, 27 May 1997 20:13:06 -0700
Received: from almaden.ibm.com by suntan.tandem.com (8.6.12/suntan5.970212) for <ietf-pkix@tandem.com>
id UAA02428; Tue, 27 May 1997 20:13:05 -0700
Received: from ALMADEN by almaden.ibm.com (IBM VM SMTP V2R2) with BSMTP id 9136;
Tue, 27 May 97 20:12:56 PDT
Received: by ALMADEN (XAGENTA 4.0) id 1029; Tue, 27 May 1997 20:12:56 -0700
Received: by jupiter.almaden.ibm.com (AIX 4.1/UCB 5.64/4.03)
id AA24064; Tue, 27 May 1997 20:12:48 -0700
From: "Shyh-Wei Luan" <luan@almaden.ibm.com>
Message-Id: <>
Date: Tue, 27 May 1997 20:12:44 -0700
In-Reply-To: "Miklos, Sue A." <samiklo@missi.ncsc.mil>
"Re: X.509 certificate and its subject name field" (May 27, 8:37am)
References: <>
X-Mailer: Z-Mail (3.0.0 15dec93)
To: "Miklos, Sue A." <samiklo@missi.ncsc.mil>,
chandras <chandras@loc201.tandem.com>,
Charles Moore <cmoore@signet.org.au>, ietf-pkix <ietf-pkix@tandem.com>,
Shyh-Wei Luan <luan@almaden.ibm.com>, ssl-talk <ssl-talk@netscape.com>,
Warwick Ford <wford@verisign.com>
Subject: Re: X.509 certificate and its subject name field
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Mime-Version: 1.0
The focus of the discussion is draft-ietf-pkix-ipki-part1-04.txt, and it
does not assume the deployment of an X.500 directory system. However,
to my perception, since the spec is based on X509.v3, it is naturally X500
stuff.
I am also wondering if it is ever conceived to extend to applications that
are not based on the X500 naming.
Comments from the PKIX working group?
Shyh-Wei
On May 27, 8:37am, Miklos, Sue A. wrote:
> Subject: Re: X.509 certificate and its subject name field
>
> Forgive my ignorance, but doesn't a significant portion of the capability in
> these discussions rely on a hierarchical and structured naming
> convention/capability? Is this being designed into ediParty or DNS naming?
>
>
> Sandi
> ----------
> From: chandras
> To: Charles Moore; Shyh-Wei Luan; Warwick Ford; ietf-pkix; ssl-talk
> Subject: Re: X.509 certificate and its subject name field
> Date: Friday, May 23, 1997 4:25PM
>
> Charles,
> > >
>
> > > [Charles Moore] In summary, I agree your name should be your name and
> > > I would suggest that you qualify it
> > > using the standard DN attributes to achieve uniqueness ( and I don't
> > > believe we will run out of unique space here).
>
> Different CA may use different ways/attributes to achieve
> uniqueness and it is embedded in the Subject Name. It is confusing to both
> human and applications to carve out what they care/understand/use. Using
> a separate field would make it more organized and easier for human and
> applications in the long term.
>
> I'll have to shut down my machines now for a weekend site shutdown. I'll
> contine the discussions with you guys next Wed.
>
> Have a nice Memorial Day weekend,
>
> Shyh-Wei
>
>-- End of excerpt from Miklos, Sue A.