parse_address() and restricting SIEVE vacation replies
Derrick J Brashear
shadow at dementia.org
Fri Mar 25 16:21:05 EST 2005
On Fri, 25 Mar 2005, James Ralston wrote:
> Because of SpamCop's attitude towards autoresponders*, I wish to patch
> the implementation of the SIEVE vacation extension so that it will
> never respond to remote addresses.
Wow, that's pretty useless:
"Solution: Do not use these systems. Inform your normal corespondents of
your absence before you depart. Or let a co-worker answer your email in
your absence. Publish FAQ information on a web-site. If you wish to
dispense information via email, it's easy to reject a message while
referring the sender to a FAQ web-page. Using sendmail, this is done in
the access.db table like so:
to:oldaddress at example.com 550 Old address no longer valid, please see:
So according to them I should either let someone else read my mail, or
reject my mail... by giving users the ability to load addresses into
sendmail config files!
> From looking at sieve/bc_eval.c, this actually seems pretty
> straightforward to do; I can just add another test case to
> There's a comment fairly early in shouldRespond:
> /* Note: the domain-part of all addresses are canonicalized */
> Does this mean that parse_address() is always going to return an
> addr-spec, as per RFC2822 section 3.4.1?
As opposed to what?
Cyrus Home Page: http://asg.web.cmu.edu/cyrus
Cyrus Wiki/FAQ: http://cyruswiki.andrew.cmu.edu
List Archives/Info: http://asg.web.cmu.edu/cyrus/mailing-list.html
More information about the Info-cyrus