Hi,
Since I will soon be attempting to get this working on one of my
client's systems, I posed a question on the postfix list - since they
mostly dislike vacation messages - but *ardent haters* of badly
configured vacation message systems - as to the quality of the dovecot
vacation message function. The only response I got did seem to have a
few very good suggestions for additional conditions to test for, so I'm
posting the response here to see if they can be incorporated (I'm not a
coder or I'd attempt it myself).
The original text (prefixed by double quote characters) in the following
exchange is what I copied/pasted from the wiki, and the reply (prefixed
by one quote character) is the suggested change/enhancement (this reply
is from a trusted source on the postfix list):
>> Vacation auto-reply
>>
>> The vacation replies are sent to the envelope sender. Currently this
>> is taken from the Return-Path: header in the message.
> comment:
> or from the command line if this is supported.
>
> also, if the envelope sender is not available, no reply should be
> sent.
>> List of autoreplied senders is stored in .dovecot.lda-dupes file in
>> user's home directory. When you're testing the vacation feature,
it's >> easy to forget that the reply is sent only once in the number of
>> configured days. If you've problems getting the vacation reply, try
>> deleting this file. If that didn't help, make sure the problem isn't
>> related to sending mails in general by trying the "reject" Sieve
>> command.
> if you support extensions, you can test using a unique sender each
> time: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> The automatic replies aren't sent if any of the following is true:
>>
>> <snip>
>>
>> o begins with "owner-" (case-sensitive)
> replace with:
> o starts with "${token}-" (not case sensitive), where token
> is one of: owner, request, bounces
>
> It is safer to send nothing than send a risky one.
>> o contains the string "-request" anywhere within it
>> (case-sensitive)
> replace with:
> o contains "-${token}@" (not case sensitive), where token is
> one of: owner, request, bounces
>> * The envelope sender and envelope recipient are the same
>> * The envelope recipient is not found in the message To:, Cc: or
>> Bcc: fields.
> add:
> * There is a "Sender:" header containing one of the tokens listed
> above.
> * There is a List-Id or List-Post header
> * There is no header suggesting that this is possible spam
Unlike delivery, safety here is to not send a reply if the message
may be spam. so you don't rely on recipient preferences, and you
don't fear false positives too much (the guy who receives your
auto-rep may have a better filter, and besides annoying him, would
find you stupid to miss an obvious spam ;-p)
The envelope sender is taken from a Return-Path: header in the
message. The envelope recipient is taken from the recipient user
(-d parameter with virtual user setup). A bare username without a
domain gets canonicalised by the libsieve code to
"<username>@unspecified-domain", which means it is highly unlikely
to pass the last two tests in the list above.
> note:
the envelope recipient can also be retrieved in the Delivered-To
header if this is available ('D' flag).
Comments appreciated...
--
Best regards,
Charles
