From: "Jaswant N. Arlekar" <ajn(--nospam--at)iitk.ac.in>
Date: Fri, 17 Aug 2001 23:42:58 +0530 (IST)
On Fri, 17 Aug 2001, Roger Turk wrote:
> Jaswant N. Arlekar's suggestion to add an invalid address to Outlook's
> address book is a curious way to stop relaying virii and worms. This
> suggestion implies that once Outlook encounters an invalid address, it stops
> sending mail to subsequent addresses. If this is true, and you are, say,
> broadcasting an erratum, one incorrect/invalid address would prevent the
> erratum from going to all subsequent addressees. I find it hard to believe
> that even Outlook would be this bad.
+++ This is how it works: when Outlook encounters a entry without a
valid address (such as 123(--nospam--at)abd.com), it alerts the user of the problem. So
if you are sending a mail yourself, then the alert is very much effective.
+++ Now, when Outlook tries to send e-mails on its own, and if the '!0000'
entry is included in the list of recipients, the mail will NOT be sent to
anyone in the list till such time that you remove the '!0000' entry from
+++ Also, Outlook does not have a problem in sending the mail when you hit
'Reply-All' if the addresses are of the form '123(--nospam--at)abc.com'. The problem
with '!0000' is that it does not have a valid e-mail address (the address
field is to be left blank).
* This email was sent to you via Structural Engineers
* Association of Southern California (SEAOSC) server. To
* subscribe (no fee) or UnSubscribe, please go to:
* Questions to seaint-ad(--nospam--at)seaint.org. Remember, any email you
* send to the list is public domain and may be re-posted
* without your permission. Make sure you visit our web
* site at: http://www.seaint.org