On Jun 10, 11:23pm, Eric Wieling wrote:
} Subject: Re: John Cathey is out of the office.
} When I was asked to place a vacation message on one of our
} salespeople's accounts I used 'vacation' which at least tries to keep
} from sending the vacation message over and over again to the same
} address.
Any decent vacation program is even smarter than that. Here's what
the man page from the SunOS 4.1.x vacation program sez:
No message is sent if the `To:' or the `Cc:' line does not
list the user to whom the original message was sent or one
of a number of aliases for them, if the initial From line
includes the string -REQUEST@, or if a `Precedence: bulk' or
`Precedence: junk' line is included in the header.
which would prevent vacation from replying even once to messages
forwarded from 99% of all mail lists.
This isn't exactly new or earthshaking technology. Whenever someone
re-invents the wheel, do they always have to repeat the same mistakes?
Hmn, I wonder what would happen if someone forged a message to
Mr. Cathey using his return address ;-)
--- Truck
|
|
