Subject: FW: Carol Bertolet/LIONVILLE/WEST is out of the office.

From: "[email-masked]" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 21 Feb 2002 12:32:15 -0500

ok, I'll bite. How did this wind up in my mailbox? NAT or fate??????
BLB

From: [email-masked]
To: [email-masked], 
Subject: FW: Carol Bertolet/LIONVILLE/WEST is out of the office.
Date: Thu, 21 Feb 2002 11:53:50 -0500

I will be out of the office starting  02/21/2002 and will not return
until
02/25/2002.

I will be out 1/2 day Thursday afternoon and all day Friday.  Please
contact MIS Customer Support for all computer issues.
Carol Bertolet

---

From: [email-masked]
Date: Thu, 21 Feb 2002 13:04:14 -0500

> ok, I'll bite. How did this wind up in my mailbox? NAT or fate??????

Some auto-out-of-office products from major vendors don't understand that
they shouldn't reply to mailing lists, even though the networking community
has known of several heuristics for many years that do quite well:

1) Don't reply if the SMTP MAIL FROM: (usually availabe in the Return-Path:
header if you're not doing SMTP directly in an MUA) is <> or contains
the 'owner-*@' or '*-request@' strings.

2) Don't reply if your mailbox isn't listed explicitly in the To: or cc:
headers.

(And no, let's not have another "breaking the RFCs" thread here, OK? ;)

-- 
				Valdis Kletnieks
				Computer Systems Senior Engineer
				Virginia Tech