BG> Whereas proper software accepts anything at all. BTW, there are
 BG> quite a few points with 4 numerals in their address (apart from
 BG> Alex and Rachel, /nnn.1701 comes immediately to mind).

  I can't accept "anything at all" or it'll take *any* set of numbers
and send netmail there!

 BL> and to make sure I've got a real address I set a limit of 999.
 BL> I could make it 9999 just as easily, because I still need 3
 BL> numbers and less than 4. 

 BG> Unless it's purely for personal consumption, I'd be inclined to
 BG> change that to allow 4 numbers then.

  Yair - I'll do that.

  My usual mistake typing addresses is the delimiters (";" for
":" or
"\" for "/"), so I don't identify them at all. This
means I have to be
able to recognise valid addresses. 

  Your comments have got me thinking again, and I think I'll change to
code to ignore the "To:" too... and just find the first address (not
in quotes) that fits the nnnnxnnnnxnnnn or nnnnxnnnnxnnnnxnnnn pattern
(n is an integer and x is anything else). It was a bit fancy sending
netmail from anyware, so I'll make it work *only* from netmail.

  The main protection is the names list. All netmail will be
checked against the names list. If there is no address, it will send
it to the name. If there is no name and no address, it will send the
netmail to yourself. If there is no name but a valid address, then
it will send it to the address. If the name and address do not match,
it will send the netmail to yourself, adding "NO MATCH" to the
message so you can work out what went wrong, and update the data file.

  What do you reckon?

Regards,
Bob
    
___ Blue Wave/QWK v2.12
@EOT:

---