On Wed, Oct 28, 2009 at 2:47 PM, Steffen Kaiser < skdovecot@smail.inf.fh-brs.de> wrote:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
On Wed, 28 Oct 2009, Timo Sirainen wrote:
But _why_ is BCC spurious? There are spurious BCC, but not in general.
If I BCC a message to somebody, I want to know an out-of-office state. Just like for any CC or TO recipient.
At least one problem is email lists created using aliases. Like everyone@company.com.
Even in this case, why not? I'm probably also not interested in the DSNs like "over quota" or something like that generated by the MTA. Actually, it would be nice if MTAs would pass through ESMTP RCPT's NOTIFY parameter (RFC 3461 sec 4.1), so the user could control the reply.
Bye,
- -- Steffen Kaiser -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)
iQEVAwUBSuiRw3WSIuGy1ktrAQIFxAgAqVSPhBB2wrAl42B+yi9e9Jz9vL9KbtPD +2dbvpyp+3iNeM+0DZoZ3rgUgIBZ/HMRrL6jb/SNmia7W0qyHDmMViw9+BMM2UTC WenPdz/k4VU80RtE/7glVPUl+v6+wiwpom115wUSaBxuV3YZeIfUL6KrHCb8a6vh zc5Ebby4noqnpIQamyLLHVPded9ib748sgFDnbRoD2CEqsyXiNwf4EzaGgrQ9zQ3 jQbJ9HSIx93U5n4YZoKL/blyD1/K2V8xQ5roW+/QOkxzBM1w8HIhvwEVBjiZqJZQ QLjyX+oQCHpIehyJPB3jwNgVh+i837RYI68G7x8REwGeMg65aNGJ6A== =2KrB -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
I realize this thread is a bit out of date, but I recently sent a patch to the list to achieve similar behavior with a vacation tag ":x_any_address". The "x" is because its a crazy extension, and because the letter X is cool.
There are a lot of cases where turning this behavior (responding regardless of the recipient) is bad behavior. E.g. everyone@company.com. But then it is up to the organization to have a policy of not using :x_any_address, just like it is up to them to not use :addresses ["everyone@company.com"]. I can pick a good default for my users, and unfortunately right now what they expect is :x_any_address.
The thing I like about my patch is that, for my users, it can ultimately be configurable to the most likely 3 cases:
- only send VAR for the proper account
- send VAR for a user specified list of accounts
- always send VAR regardless of recipient (but still following other recommendations in rfc 3834)
The thing I don't like about my patch is: Maintaining it! There might be a better name for this tag. The confusion of having both :x_any_address and :addresses <string list> turned on at the same time
Cheers