Hello,
I've been getting frustrated e-mails from users having lots of aliases
for their mail account. They currently need to specify all these in the
:addresses list of the vacation action. One of the solutions I proposed
is querying the available (single-drop) aliases in the background,
requiring the implementation of a background alias lookup. Thus far, I
haven't gotten around to implementing this.
Today, however, I got an e-mail about an alternative 'solution' that
works out of the box, but somehow it doesn't feel right. The proposed
solution is the following:
require ["variables", "envelope", "vacation"];
if envelope :matches "to" "*" {
set "envto" "${1}";
vacation
:addresses ["${envto}"]
"vacation message here...";
}
This effectively circumvents the implicit delivery detection of the
vacation action (RFC 5230 - section 4.5), with all the possible
consequences. This is similar to the non-standard ' :addresses "*" '
proposal I got some time earlier.
The above raises the question whether it is a good idea to allow
variable substitutions in the :addresses argument of the vacation
action. I presume the :addresses argument is there for a good reason.
One of the nasty scenarios I can imagine is when recipients of a
multi-drop alias (an ad-hoc mailing list) use this solution. An
unfortunate sender could receive lots of redundant vacation replies if
the list members are collectively on vacation.
Regards,
Stephan.
_______________________________________________
sieve mailing list
sieve(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sieve