On Wed, 11 Dec 1996 pierre(_dot_)moret(_at_)ubs(_dot_)com wrote:
I saw the same kind of question in the archive of the mailing-list, but
couldn't find any complete answer... So please excuse me if I just missed it!
Go check the archives; I just sent mail to "fanchin" showing how to
solve the same problem.
> I currently have a procmail forwarding which looks like that:
>
> :0
> * ^TO_gonzo(_at_)me(_dot_)com
> ! realaddress(_at_)blah(_dot_)com
>
> :0
> * ^TO_alonzo(_at_)me(_dot_)com
> ! realalonzo(_at_)xxx(_dot_)com
>
> :0
> * ^TO_fozzie(_at_)me(_dot_)com
> ! realfozie(_at_)yyy(_dot_)com
The real answer is to use "c" for simple unidentified forwarding, or
build a list of destinations, and then forward to the list of
destinations, preferrably using "Resent-To:" and "Resent-Cc:"
as appropriate.
In either case, it is important to place more conditions on the
forwarding to avoid duplicate, unecessary remails and mail loops.
For example, what do you think will happen with a mail addressed
like this:
To: gonzo(_at_)me, realaddress(_at_)blah(_dot_)com
Cc: alonzo(_at_)me(_dot_)com, realalongzo(_at_)xxx(_dot_)com
Do not think that this won't happen. When I changed jobs, I received
mail from people who knew both my addresses, and used them both, just
to be "sure".
___________________________________________________________
Alan Stebbens <aks(_at_)sgi(_dot_)com> http://reality.sgi.com/aks