|
Content-Type: |
text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" |
Sender: |
|
Subject: |
|
From: |
|
Date: |
Wed, 16 Aug 2006 08:24:48 -0400 |
In-Reply-To: |
|
MIME-Version: |
1.0 |
Reply-To: |
|
Valdis Kletnieks <[log in to unmask]> wrote on 08/15/2006 04:21:51
PM:
> Eric Allman got this right in vacation.c well over 20 years ago, andmost
other
> packages have also managed to figure out how to *not* respond to
> mail sent from
> a list (hint - if the Return-Path: matches owner-* or *-request, you
probably
> don't want to OoO it).
Another pattern to *NOT* respond to would be any message with something in
square brackets like, oh say, [LISTSRV-L] in the subject. :) If it's not
a list, it's probably tagged as possible spam.
> For the N software writers out there, we've already gotten N-3 or so to
DTRT.
> There's only 1 vendor with any significant market share who can't seem
to get
> this one right. If you need a hint who - it's the same 800 pound
gorilla that
> doesn't seem to feel a need to comply with other RFCs either.
IBM/Lotus has the right idea. For each time you activate the the OoO
agent, Notes only responds once per sender. For all its other flaws as a
mail system, at least it won't start an message storm of out of office
messages.
As for the 800 lb gorilla, I just wish they would stop hiding actual error
messages, such as the text returned after a 4xx or 5xx response. Makes
troubleshooting delivery problems difficult.
|
|
|