james-server-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Vincenzo Gianferrari Pini" <vincenzo.gianferrarip...@praxis.it>
Subject RE: AbstractRedirect family: Reply-To handling
Date Wed, 03 Sep 2003 14:29:26 GMT
I just committed an update to AbstractRedirect, Redirect and Resend to handle a new "replyTo"
value that can be used in the <recipients> and <to> parameters (and/or returned
by getRecipients() and getTo() in subclasses. The behaviour is as specified in RFC 2822: Reply-To
defaulting to From defaulting to Sender. I made the extension of having Sender defaulting
to Return-Path instead of null.

A simple auto-responder behaviour can now be done using either Redirect or Resend.

I'm asking myself if NotifySender should be modified to notify to the Reply-To address.

Regarding a full auto-responder mailet, still to be done, I suggest the following subclassing:

	AbstractRedirect
		AutoResponder
			DynamicAutoResponder (or any other name)

The AutoResponder mailet would have a fixed "respond" message <message> and could be
activated using the RecipientIs matcher (or any other matching logic); the DynamicAutoResponder
mailet should instead be based on a table of user_name/message_text/activation_flag. A user
could then send a message to auto.responder@xyz.com with subject "on" or "off" and message
text containing the personal "respond" message.

IMO an important thing that should not be forgotten in the AutoResponder mailet is the following:
not any message should be replied to, but only those whose sender is "not impersonal". For
example, if I auto-respond to this list (server-dev@james.apache.org), my understanding is
that automatically the "list manager" would send a probe and, after another auto-respond,
I would be kicked off the list.

As this summer I had to set up a "manual" auto-respond mechanism in config.xml for some colleagues
in my company, I wrote a matcher ("IsImpersonallySent") that was trying to deal with that.
It had the following rules:

	A mail is personally sent to a recipient if 
		(i) has a non null reversePath and 
		(ii) has a non null From header and 
		(iii) the From header has only one address and 
		(iv) the From header address equals the reversePath and 
		(v) the ReplyTo header address (if any) equals the reversePath and 
		(vi) the sender is not the postmaster and 
		(vii) has a non null To header and 
		(viii) the recipient is listed in the To header and 
		(ix) the recipient != from the reversePath. 

I'm not sure at all about those rules, but we should discuss about this topic before writing
a "full" auto-responder mailet.

Vincenzo

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Noel J. Bergman [mailto:noel@devtech.com]
> Sent: giovedi 28 agosto 2003 10.15
> To: James-Dev Mailing List
> Subject: AbstractRedirect family: Reply-To handling
> 
> 
> For the getRecipients, the default behavior is documented by RFC (2)2822.
> It says that when sending a response, e.g., an auto-responder not 
> a bounce,
> the default behavior should be the Reply-To: header(s).  If they don't
> exist, the From: header(s) should be used.
> 
> See: RFC 822 section 4.4.4 and RFC 2822 section 3.6.2.
> 
> Vincenzo, do you have time to look at this?
> 
> 	--- Noel
> 
> 
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: server-dev-unsubscribe@james.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: server-dev-help@james.apache.org
> 


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: server-dev-unsubscribe@james.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: server-dev-help@james.apache.org


Mime
View raw message