At 09:25 AM 3/4/99 -0600, Ingrid Shafer wrote: [snip] >>Reply-To: "\"ARCC (Association for the Rights of Catholics in the Church)\" >> <"<@_._:[log in to unmask]> >>Sender: "\"ARCC (Association for the Rights of Catholics in the Church)\" >> <"<@_._:[log in to unmask]> >>From: "\"Prof. Ingrid Shafer\" <"<@_._:[log in to unmask]> >>Subject: technical advice >>To: <@_._:[log in to unmask]> > >When now I push 'Reply', I get these to my mind redundant, and, when you >think of millions of e-mails, vastly wasteful extra "@_._:" and "\" signs. >I assure you, I am still plain "[log in to unmask]". The procmail-dev list comes out of cuci.nl, and lo and behold these @_._ things started showing up on that list too. To quote from a post on that list: >It looks like a problem at cuci.nl: when I bounce a message off there >via [log in to unmask] the header (but not envelope) addresses are >munged: > To: <@_._:[log in to unmask]> > Subject: kjsdhfjksd > Date: Thu, 04 Mar 1999 11:01:17 -0600 > From: "xxxxx xxxxxx <"<@_._:[log in to unmask]> (The x's are mine since I don't have his permission to post his name/address on this list). So, whatever it is does seem to be a cuci.nl problem. Cheers, Stan