FYI, Outlook with Exchange Server 2000, does the "right thing". Here's
the To lines on an outgoing message:
From: "Dan Kohn" <dan(_at_)dankohn(_dot_)com>
To: <dan(_at_)xkey(_dot_)com>
Cc: <dan(_at_)nixon(_dot_)xkey(_dot_)com>
- dan
--
Dan Kohn <mailto:dan(_at_)dankohn(_dot_)com>
<http://www.dankohn.com/> <tel:+1-650-327-2600>
-----Original Message-----
From: Keith Moore [mailto:moore(_at_)cs(_dot_)utk(_dot_)edu]
Sent: Tuesday, July 23, 2002 13:38
To: Terri Oda
Cc: Dan Wing; Keith Moore; Dan Kohn; Jay R. Ashworth;
mailman-developers(_at_)python(_dot_)org; ietf-822(_at_)imc(_dot_)org
Subject: Re: [Mailman-Developers]
[MAILER-DAEMON(_at_)mira(_dot_)linknet(_dot_)com(_dot_)au:Undeliverable Mail]
Actually, the offending client in this case is Sylpheed, much as I'd
like to
blame outlook. (goodness knows, I blame it for Klez.)
I take it Sylpheed is the one that generates bogus phrases?
I'd have to find someone with a copy of outlook to try it and be sure,
but I
think outlook does "user(_at_)domain(_dot_)com" <user(_at_)domain(_dot_)com>
which probably
wouldn't have been a problem.
it might be syntactically legal, but it's still utterly stupid.
Keith