[ On Monday, August 14, 2000 at 10:46:47 (-0400), Dave C. wrote: ]
> Subject: Re: [Exim] Should vacation messages go to reply_address or return_path?
>
> Yikes! Talk about opening up a can of looping message worms.. The
> envelope sender of ANY automatically generated message should ALWAYS be
> <>. Now possibly, the From: header could (and should) be the actual
> mailbox address..
Sorry to report, but that can's pretty firmly sealed and embedded in
concrete. You'll have a very hard time actually opening it without
purposefully blowing it wide open with major explosives. I.e. that's
exactly what all variants of *BSD Vacation do, not to mention all the
wonky ones, such as Lotus, M$-Exchange, etc. Loops between vacation
programs are avoided by other means than just the "precedence:"
header.... I.e. there are fail-overs on the fall-backs and backups too
boot!
> Personally, I think the entire concept of 'vacation' messages is stupid
> anyway. Anyone important that has any idea how often you *normally*
> check your mail should probably already be seperately aware of the fact
> that you are 'on vacation'..
I don't disagree with you in general on that... I can't remember the
last time I personally used such a tool outside of testing. Of course I
can't really remember my last real vacation very well either! ;-)
You're not going to get the lid back on this one though! ;-)
--
Greg A. Woods
+1 416 218-0098 VE3TCP <gwoods@???> <robohack!woods>
Planix, Inc. <woods@???>; Secrets of the Weird <woods@???>
