> First, you should upgrade the forward  package to 1.7e right away if that
> is not the version you are running. There is no functional difference but
> older versions  may not work.  I don't  remember how many  versions there
> have been but the  ones I found on the CERN machines  dated from 1988 and
> kept crashing.
 
I have a version that shows 1.7d in the exec comments in
production. The version available from LISTSERV@SEARN as of today
still shows version 1.5o in LSV$FWDC. The other exec (LSV$FORW)
shows version 1.7e.
 
> There is no interface between the LISTSERV and LMail forwarding, they are
> two  different things.  LMail  can  only forward  what  it gets,  doesn't
> attempt to  grab CMS NOTE  or PROFS mail from  the reader of  people, and
> supports  source  routes  and  multiple  forwarding  addresses.  LISTSERV
> forwards  by polling,  doesn't support  source routes  (at least  I don't
> think it does, although it might  actually be tricked into doing so), and
> only supports  a single address.
 
> Running  both is not a  good idea; there
 
I'm not sure I agree with this statement. Given that NOTE and
PROFS-format mail are still officially acceptable (*I* don't
think so, but the NIC still won't declare either to be bogus) and
a lot of Vax sites still don't have or use a mailer, people end
up with mail sent directly to their reader. Linking the two
methods together generates a consistent behavior -- anything that
looks like mail gets forwarded properly. The inconsistency of
only having certain items forwarded because of stupid
configurations at other sites is a serious problem to the end
user.
 
Another reason to have both is to reduce the load on the LISTSERV
forwarding engine -- what never gets delivered to the user's
reader doesn't have to be processed twice, once by Lmail and once
by LISTSERV.
 
> Alternatively if CMS NOTE et al is  not a concern you can simply turn off
> the LISTSERV forwarding.
>   Eric
 
I'm afraid I can't do that -- too many important sites like Fermilab and
others still send stuff out directly. If I hack the code in
conditionally, based on a configuration variable, would you mind
incorporating the code in the release version? It's a pretty
simple mod, and you can *have* the rights to it.