Re: [Exim] Stopping out-of-office auto-reply mail loops

Top Page

Reply to this message
Author: James P. Roberts
To: David Woodhouse, Exim Users' Mailing List
Subject: Re: [Exim] Stopping out-of-office auto-reply mail loops
----- Original Message -----
From: "David Woodhouse" <dwmw2@???>
To: "Exim Users' Mailing List" <exim-users@???>
> In this case, the SMTP reverse-path is (as usual) going to match the
> Sender: header. Delivery failure reports go correctly to Michael the
> secretary, as do reports of the mail being delayed and still on a queue
> somewhere. Reports of the mail being delayed because Mary is on vacation
> should _also_ be going to Michael -- not to John.
> --
> dwmw2

I respectfully submit that a vacation auto-reply is different from a delayed
or undelivered email notification. In the former case, the mail has actually
been delivered to the end-user's mailbox (i.e. the MTA's job w.r.t. this
message is complete). In the latter case, it has *not* been delivered. These
are very different things.

I do not have a position on who an auto-responder should reply to. I am
simply pointing out that these two types of messages are different; and
therefore, it is not necessarily logical to claim they should be handled the
same way. (It doesn't mean they shouldn't be treated the same, either! It
just doesn't follow that they must, that's all.)

Jim Roberts