--On 4 June 2008 15:57:36 +0100 Tony Finch <dot@???> wrote:
> On Wed, 4 Jun 2008, Ian Eiloart wrote:
>> On 4 June 2008 12:23:54 +0100 Jethro R Binks <jethro.binks@???>
>> wrote:
>> >
>> > It is a while since I looked at what Exim did, but as I recall there
>> > were two main ways of generating an auto-reply. One was using the
>> > "vacation" command in a filter, whch by default uses $reply_address
>> > (== "From:", or "Reply-To").
>>
>> Yes, and there's no option here, which is unfortunate as the vacation
>> command includes lots of nice stuff, like not replying to lists and so
>> on.
>
> There's the "to" parameter.
> Not replying to lists is implemented by the "personal" condition, not the
> vacation command. (Perhaps you are thinking of Sieve's vacation command.)
I wasn't really thinking at all.
I think the problem was that the "to" parameter sets the message recipient
AND the "To:" header. What's required is that the recipient be the original
(perhaps batv'd) sender address, and the "To:" header be something that you
want a human to see - probably the original "From:" or "Reply-To:" header
address.
Using a batv address in a message header will undoubtedly cause all sorts
of confusion. In some cases, people will probably end up with batv
addresses in their address books.
> Tony.
> --
> <fanf@???> <dot@???> http://dotat.at/ ${sg{\N${sg{\
> N\}{([^N]*)(.)(.)(.*)}{\$1\$3\$2\$1\$3\n\$2\$3\$4\$3\n\$3\$2\$4}}\
> \N}{([^N]*)(.)(.)(.*)}{\$1\$3\$2\$1\$3\n\$2\$3\$4\$3\n\$3\$2\$4}}
--
Ian Eiloart
IT Services, University of Sussex
x3148
