[Dovecot] Can we know when a user read our email?
Hi.
I have seen some emails servers that if I send a email to other person I can see if that person have read our emails and with a option to delete the email if the person hasn't read our email.
Does dovecot have some like this feature?
Thanks!!!
On Mon, May 14, 2012 at 6:56 PM, Beto Moreno pamrtj@gmail.com wrote:
Hi.
I have seen some emails servers that if I send a email to other person I can see if that person have read our emails and with a option to delete the email if the person hasn't read our email.
Does dovecot have some like this feature?
Thanks!!!
Here?? Hmm, you are in the wrong planet. Not in this side of the universe. You need to cross over to the Redmond constellation.
-- Best regards, Odhiambo WASHINGTON, Nairobi,KE +254733744121/+254722743223
I can't hear you -- I'm using the scrambler.
On Mon, 2012-05-14 at 08:56 -0700, Beto Moreno wrote:
I have seen some emails servers that if I send a email to other person I can see if that person have read our emails and with a option to delete the email if the person hasn't read our email.
Does dovecot have some like this feature?
This doesn't really work with IMAP/POP3 protocols. It requires Exchange or something else.
What would be possible is to check if a user has _downloaded_ your message, but many clients download messages immediately when they arrive so it might not be very useful. And in any case Dovecot has no such feature.
On 14/05/2012 17:38, Timo Sirainen wrote:
On Mon, 2012-05-14 at 08:56 -0700, Beto Moreno wrote:
I have seen some emails servers that if I send a email to other person I can see if that person have read our emails and with a option to delete the email if the person hasn't read our email.
Does dovecot have some like this feature? This doesn't really work with IMAP/POP3 protocols. It requires Exchange or something else.
What would be possible is to check if a user has _downloaded_ your message, but many clients download messages immediately when they arrive so it might not be very useful. And in any case Dovecot has no such feature.
Just to register interest, but at some point I will need to consider writing a plugin or similar to achieve exactly this.
Situation is that several of our competitors offer such a feature, ie known pool of users on dialup or intermittently connected systems, provide an alert back to the sender when your email has been "accessed/downloaded" by the remote user.
Personally I don't think it's a great feature and my competitor's implementations often cause mail loops and other nasties. However, bottom line is that you can't win the bid if you can't offer the feature...
Feels like a plugin rather than core functionality, but would be cool if someone wanted to produce something...
Cheers
Ed W
Am 02.06.2012 11:53, schrieb Ed W:
On 14/05/2012 17:38, Timo Sirainen wrote:
On Mon, 2012-05-14 at 08:56 -0700, Beto Moreno wrote:
I have seen some emails servers that if I send a email to other person I can see if that person have read our emails and with a option to delete the email if the person hasn't read our email.
Does dovecot have some like this feature? This doesn't really work with IMAP/POP3 protocols. It requires Exchange or something else.
What would be possible is to check if a user has _downloaded_ your message, but many clients download messages immediately when they arrive so it might not be very useful. And in any case Dovecot has no such feature.
Situation is that several of our competitors offer such a feature
others doing something stupid is not a good argument
provide an alert back to the sender when your email has been "accessed/downloaded" by the remote user.
you realize that this is only possible if the RCPT is on your own server and not remote mails?
Personally I don't think it's a great feature and my competitor's implementations often cause mail loops and other nasties
which should be enough for argumentation why such things are making more damage as they solve problems and they are only working for non-relay mails
However, bottom line is that you can't win the bid if you can't offer the feature...
surely YOU can win, you must learn to sell quality and explain why you are not doing anything someone wishes if you are sure that it is a bd idea
why would i want a customer which enforces me to impelement a solution where i am sure that it is stupid - if he does not understand my argumentation he better is not my customer
On Sat, Jun 2, 2012 at 8:02 PM, Reindl Harald h.reindl@thelounge.netwrote:
Am 02.06.2012 11:53, schrieb Ed W:
On 14/05/2012 17:38, Timo Sirainen wrote:
On Mon, 2012-05-14 at 08:56 -0700, Beto Moreno wrote:
I have seen some emails servers that if I send a email to other person I can see if that person have read our emails and with a option to delete the email if the person hasn't read our email.
Does dovecot have some like this feature? This doesn't really work with IMAP/POP3 protocols. It requires Exchange or something else.
What would be possible is to check if a user has _downloaded_ your message, but many clients download messages immediately when they arrive so it might not be very useful. And in any case Dovecot has no such feature.
As general thoughts..
This sounds more like a workgroup collaboration functionality. It assumes that users in said workgroup all use the same outlook server (or they are in an equivalent security domain or trust).
Outlook only lets you retract an email if the user is on the same outlook server, and it has not been read/downloaded?. If the user is a different email server or the mail has been read/downloaded?, the retract will always fail.
So it would be no different in for dovecot. If the mail to be retracted was on the local mailer spool then in theory it could be removed.. but it is basically allowing a third party to delete things out of some other user's mail spool, with the precondition that they sent the original email AND the mail has not been read (downloaded) from the dovecot server. This would mean that dovecot would need to somehow securely tag when an email is authorized and delivered by dovecot, say from a the postfix lda, such that it could later match up a subsequent request to retract said email, to the user that sent it. Outlook is more like IMAP than POP, in that mail stays on the server but is locally cached / downloaded.
Outlook can do this as it is both a mail sending agent and a mail receiving agent, it unambiguously knows when a mail comes from an authenticated user, and that it is a locally destined mail. Dovecot may or may not be responsible for putting a mail from a user into the mail spool (in some configurations postfix/sendmail can do this) so it cannot absolutely relate who sent the email, to who wants to retract it.
So for this even to be possible, retractable messages would need be present, and dovecot to unambiguously be able to relate an email received by dovecot with it's original sender, which seems unlikely.
Even then there is a question of how you would provide the request for deletion for dovecot to perform. This implies that there would be a new command to POP/IMAP to trigger and authorize such a retraction also. Then this new command would need to be standards-track so mail user agents would know a server has such a feature to call it.
Sounds very difficult. I think outlook sends a specially crafted email, i doubt it is standards track as it is all happening within the same application in the case out outlook.
Cheers Brett
-- *The only thing that interferes with my learning is my education.* * Albert Einstein*
Ed W wrote:
Just to register interest, but at some point I will need to consider writing a plugin or similar to achieve exactly this.
Situation is that several of our competitors offer such a feature, ie known pool of users on dialup or intermittently connected systems, provide an alert back to the sender when your email has been "accessed/downloaded" by the remote user.
My dentist used a service that claimed to provide a read-notification.It was just an embedded web-bug in the email that I could choose to display or not ... if the client doesn't want to cooperate, you can't tell when the person read it. All you could do is tell when a client downloaded it from dovecot...which doesn't say much for clients that are left on 24/7...
On 03/06/2012 09:06, Linda Walsh wrote:
Ed W wrote:
Just to register interest, but at some point I will need to consider writing a plugin or similar to achieve exactly this.
Situation is that several of our competitors offer such a feature, ie known pool of users on dialup or intermittently connected systems, provide an alert back to the sender when your email has been "accessed/downloaded" by the remote user.
My dentist used a service that claimed to provide a read-notification.
It was just an embedded web-bug in the email that I could choose to display or not ... if the client doesn't want to cooperate, you can't tell when the person read it. All you could do is tell when a client downloaded it from dovecot...which doesn't say much for clients that are left on 24/7...
Please folks - don't argue with me - I'm the wrong person! The recipient who is receiving these emails, ie the person being "bugged" is demanding that they are "buggable". If they demand it and it's a requirement for providing them service then I have to give it to them if I want the business.
The users are on satellite dialup and barely have enough bandwidth to download a few KB of emails, they certainly can't trigger web bugs to trigger read receipts.
Look, I can argue against the idea easily, personally my objection is
mail loops, but the point is that the customer demands it, and at
present that prevents me bidding for certain types of business...
Basically the customer just wants to repro what they got with Exchange
Cheers for ideas though!
Ed W
Am 03.06.2012 10:43, schrieb Ed W:
Please folks - don't argue with me - I'm the wrong person! The recipient who is receiving these emails, ie the person being "bugged" is demanding that they are "buggable". If they demand it and it's a requirement for providing them service then I have to give it to them if I want the business.
The users are on satellite dialup and barely have enough bandwidth to download a few KB of emails, they certainly can't trigger web bugs to trigger read receipts.
Look, I can argue against the idea easily, personally my objection is mail loops, but the point is that the customer demands it, and at present that prevents me bidding for certain types of business... Basically the customer just wants to repro what they got with Exchange
kiss him goodbye with exchange
what do you expect? only some idiots are using such "features"
even if you find a opensource solution yiu can imagine how well tested it would be and how many troubles you will have after the setup
"if I want the business" -> do you need this business to survive? if no -> kiss him goodbye, if yes -> i doubt you will not survive
Am 03.06.2012 10:43, schrieb Ed W:
On 03/06/2012 09:06, Linda Walsh wrote:
Ed W wrote:
Just to register interest, but at some point I will need to consider writing a plugin or similar to achieve exactly this.
Situation is that several of our competitors offer such a feature, ie known pool of users on dialup or intermittently connected systems, provide an alert back to the sender when your email has been "accessed/downloaded" by the remote user.
My dentist used a service that claimed to provide a read-notification.
It was just an embedded web-bug in the email that I could choose to display or not ... if the client doesn't want to cooperate, you can't tell when the person read it. All you could do is tell when a client downloaded it from dovecot...which doesn't say much for clients that are left on 24/7...
Please folks - don't argue with me - I'm the wrong person! The recipient who is receiving these emails, ie the person being "bugged" is demanding that they are "buggable". If they demand it and it's a requirement for providing them service then I have to give it to them if I want the business.
The users are on satellite dialup and barely have enough bandwidth to download a few KB of emails, they certainly can't trigger web bugs to trigger read receipts.
Look, I can argue against the idea easily, personally my objection is mail loops, but the point is that the customer demands it, and at present that prevents me bidding for certain types of business... Basically the customer just wants to repro what they got with Exchange
Cheers for ideas though!
Ed W
Hi Ed, you can have dsn http://www.postfix.org/DSN_README.html
you can have mdn http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Return_receipt
so this is internet (smtp ) standards and has nearly nothing to do with imap/dovecot
also whatever solution you use there is no way to find out if a user has read a mail unless you asked him in person ( and then you might find out if the recipient has understood what he had read *g)
the maximum you may reach is get notice if a mail has tec side reached the recipient, the user must not accept your wish to notice you if he opens the mail ( which also would not mean he has read the mail )
this is with internet mail, by intranet mail systems ( which means the recipient is on the same mail system and storage) typical for company mail sites with exchange and/or notes etc you have a dediacted client i.e outlook for exchange , so here its possible to implement inside actions whatever tec of this system is able to do.
But as soon as you mail to internet, this features may get useless , cause you never know what tec is used on the recipient side so nobody may invest time in create useless internet standards
however youre free to code or pay someone to code for you what you want specially for your wanted feature. But i see no real relate to dovecot, cause mail is recent sent via smtp
Dont compare mail systems this way, they are totally different however they do imap/pop3/smtp specially with echange some stuff will only work with outlook and active directory
-- Best Regards
MfG Robert Schetterer
Germany/Munich/Bavaria
On 2012-06-03 4:43 AM, Ed W lists@wildgooses.com wrote:
Look, I can argue against the idea easily, personally my objection is mail loops, but the point is that the customer demands it, and at present that prevents me bidding for certain types of business... Basically the customer just wants to repro what they got with Exchange
Then tell them their only option is to buy Exchange Server and Outlook for everyone - but explain that this 'feature' *still* will not work for recipients that are outside of your control (ie, it will only work for local recipients - and I *think* it is possible to set up Trusts with other external Exchange Servers, but not sure, and if it does, it requires the explicit cooperation of the other systems admin).
Bottom line: do NOT promise the impossible to a client just to win the business. It is a losing proposition, as you are beginning to see...
--
Best regards,
Charles
On 03/06/2012 14:46, Charles Marcus wrote:
On 2012-06-03 4:43 AM, Ed W lists@wildgooses.com wrote:
Look, I can argue against the idea easily, personally my objection is mail loops, but the point is that the customer demands it, and at present that prevents me bidding for certain types of business... Basically the customer just wants to repro what they got with Exchange
Then tell them their only option is to buy Exchange Server and Outlook for everyone - but explain that this 'feature' *still* will not work for recipients that are outside of your control (ie, it will only work for local recipients - and I *think* it is possible to set up Trusts with other external Exchange Servers, but not sure, and if it does, it requires the explicit cooperation of the other systems admin).
Bottom line: do NOT promise the impossible to a client just to win the business. It is a losing proposition, as you are beginning to see...
You have the situation backwards.
I think you know about the MailASail business. We run small ISP selling mail accounts to customers. *our customers* want to voluntarily tell senders when they have downloaded an email via POP. The basic requirement is when the message is accessed via POP, then the sender (presumably defined by the FROM address) is sent a notification.
Please don't argue about the spam aspects, etc - we are all on the same page here. However, it's not an entirely foolish request - because the customer is on dialup MDN implemented by the mail client isnt really feasible, and DSN doesn't help us realise that the remote user has at least connected and accessed the mail. So they are kind of asking for a limited server side implementation of MDN. In fact this isn't that unreasonable, it's just problematic and unusual.
Ed W
Am 04.06.2012 15:36, schrieb Ed W:
Then tell them their only option is to buy Exchange Server and Outlook for everyone - but explain that this 'feature' *still* will not work for recipients that are outside of your control (ie, it will only work for local recipients - and I *think* it is possible to set up Trusts with other external Exchange Servers, but not sure, and if it does, it requires the explicit cooperation of the other systems admin).
Bottom line: do NOT promise the impossible to a client just to win the business. It is a losing proposition, as you are beginning to see...
We run small ISP selling mail accounts to customers. *our customers* want to voluntarily tell senders when they have downloaded an email via POP.
and the sender for sure wants this too for every single message? i doubt not
The basic requirement is when the message is accessed via POP, then the sender (presumably defined by the FROM address) is sent a notification.
have fun if ONE user has enabled "leave messages on server" and his machine crashs - the next time he will setup his account again he would self-DOS the mail-system
Please don't argue about the spam aspects, etc - we are all on the same page here
wait until one of the company get fired and leave you a little "present" with a lot of forged senders
However, it's not an entirely foolish request
it IS a entirely foolish request
each mail client in this world supports "acknowledgment of receipt" the sender has only to configure his account correctly and the rcpt can decide if his client should send confirmations
- always
- per confirm on each message
- alaways for specific senders
- or even not send this bullshit at all
such things has CLEARLY not to be implemented on the server side
if the users are too stupid to user their mail-client and the admins missing any knowledge to do this for the users solve this problem by educate them in e-mail baiscs
On 04/06/2012 15:14, Reindl Harald wrote:
Am 04.06.2012 15:36, schrieb Ed W:
Then tell them their only option is to buy Exchange Server and Outlook for everyone - but explain that this 'feature' *still* will not work for recipients that are outside of your control (ie, it will only work for local recipients - and I *think* it is possible to set up Trusts with other external Exchange Servers, but not sure, and if it does, it requires the explicit cooperation of the other systems admin).
Bottom line: do NOT promise the impossible to a client just to win the business. It is a losing proposition, as you are beginning to see...
We run small ISP selling mail accounts to customers. *our customers* want to voluntarily tell senders when they have downloaded an email via POP. and the sender for sure wants this too for every single message? i doubt not
I'm not sure why this is so hard to believe. There is literally a class of customers that have a specification which says that there must be a notification sent back to the sender whenever they download their emails. I cannot currently bid for their business.
A spec is a spec - either you can meet the spec or you can't bid for the business...
Ed W
Am 06.06.2012 23:59, schrieb Ed W:
I'm not sure why this is so hard to believe. There is literally a class of customers that have a specification which says that there must be a notification sent back to the sender whenever they download their emails. I cannot currently bid for their business.
A spec is a spec - either you can meet the spec or you can't bid for the business...
i'm not sure why it is so hard to believe that nobody should bid for such idiotic specs - techs should act professional and not like whores while try impossible and stupid things which can sovle each mail-client since > 10 years and is not the job of a mailserver
On Thu, 7 Jun 2012, Reindl Harald wrote:
Am 06.06.2012 23:59, schrieb Ed W:
I'm not sure why this is so hard to believe. There is literally a class of customers that have a specification which says that there must be a notification sent back to the sender whenever they download their emails. I cannot currently bid for their business.
A spec is a spec - either you can meet the spec or you can't bid for the business...
i'm not sure why it is so hard to believe that nobody should bid for such idiotic specs - techs should act professional and not like whores while try impossible and stupid things which can sovle each mail-client since > 10 years and is not the job of a mailserver
Does the spec say how to conform to it? I mean: does "the system" have to support the transmission of receipts? Most bidding rounds I've been part of only had very rough descriptions of what should be possible. Not exactly how. (Too detailed specs, pointing heavily in the direction of one type of solution provider, can be easily challenged!) So, even without Dovecot supporting DSN-stuff, it would be possible to bid for these types of clients. The system as a whole does support DSN's, when MUA is conforming to relevant specs. Most MUA's support some form of DSN of read notification. What's more: whatever choice you make, server side or client side, handling of these status messages (and ways to request them) heavily depend on the remote party's technology as well.
So, claiming you conform to the read-notification spec can be as easy as saying "yes, as long as you use a proper MUA".
-- Maarten
Am 04.06.2012 15:36, schrieb Ed W:
I think you know about the MailASail business. We run small ISP selling mail accounts to customers. *our customers* want to voluntarily tell senders when they have downloaded an email via POP. The basic requirement is when the message is accessed via POP, then the sender (presumably defined by the FROM address) is sent a notification.
this isnt what you asked in the subject
"Can we know when a user read our email?"
the best and true answer: "never"
---snip
as long all senders and users are on the same mailsystem/storage you might wrote i.e some watch daemon on your smtp mailsystem with if mail in storage with "Disposition-Notification-To" from "your sender" grepped by sasl header "Authenticated sender:" has gone from new to cur in "your recipients" storage maildir and subfolders
you may also try use complex smtp transport header_checks combis with i.e /(^Disposition-Notification-To:.*)/ REPLACE X-$1 to mark mail etc
and/or policy servers , milters etc perhaps with writings in dbs and comparing verbose dovecot logs etc
cause there are uni ways to setup smtp and dovecot servers you must find your way fitting your setup
as i said , i see only small relates to dovecot cause the only header which is standard in mail clients is Message Disposition Notification, so the sender has to use it anyway and you have to filter this mails by it additional only for "your senders" and "your recipients" then you have to find a way checking status of this mails in "your storage"
if you allready have amavis included, you might code it there somehow
or look at
policy server for ideas who you might goal
another way.....
perhaps you might include a sieve global filter rule with filtering Disposition-Notification-To only from "your sender domains" and doing a simple mail notify action about it was delivered, or using some no official sieve plugins for actions with external binaries ( procmail etc )
-- Best Regards
MfG Robert Schetterer
Germany/Munich/Bavaria
On 06/03/12 04:43, Ed W wrote:
Look, I can argue against the idea easily, personally my objection is mail loops, but the point is that the customer demands it, and at present that prevents me bidding for certain types of business...
Basically the customer just wants to repro what they got with Exchange
I for one think the plugin is a good idea.
I think read receipts are dumb, of course. But if the customer won't be persuaded, I would rather have them give their money to you than to the guy who thinks they're a great solution.
Plus, it will make Dovecot a little bit better as a side effect.
Am 03.06.2012 16:24, schrieb Michael Orlitzky:
On 06/03/12 04:43, Ed W wrote:
Look, I can argue against the idea easily, personally my objection is mail loops, but the point is that the customer demands it, and at present that prevents me bidding for certain types of business...
Basically the customer just wants to repro what they got with ExchangeI for one think the plugin is a good idea.
what the hell , should the plugin do and how ? there is smtp dsn, nothing more makes sense
looking to the thread subject , you need to have new internet standard called
"braindump over tcp"
this doesnt exist on exchange too
mail is smtp, dovecot is no smtp server
I think read receipts are dumb, of course. But if the customer won't be persuaded, I would rather have them give their money to you than to the guy who thinks they're a great solution.
Plus, it will make Dovecot a little bit better as a side effect.
-- Best Regards
MfG Robert Schetterer
Germany/Munich/Bavaria
On 06/03/12 12:06, Robert Schetterer wrote:
Am 03.06.2012 16:24, schrieb Michael Orlitzky:
I for one think the plugin is a good idea.
what the hell , should the plugin do and how ? there is smtp dsn, nothing more makes sense
looking to the thread subject , you need to have new internet standard called
"braindump over tcp"
this doesnt exist on exchange too
mail is smtp, dovecot is no smtp server
You could trigger on the 'seen' flag, and Dovecot is more than capable of generating messages, especially to mailboxes under its control (see: sieve).
But... who cares? The worst possible thing that can happen is that he writes it and makes his customers happy and you pretend it doesn't exist.
Am 03.06.2012 19:21, schrieb Michael Orlitzky:
On 06/03/12 12:06, Robert Schetterer wrote:
Am 03.06.2012 16:24, schrieb Michael Orlitzky:
I for one think the plugin is a good idea.
what the hell , should the plugin do and how ? there is smtp dsn, nothing more makes sense
looking to the thread subject , you need to have new internet standard called
"braindump over tcp"
this doesnt exist on exchange too
mail is smtp, dovecot is no smtp server
You could trigger on the 'seen' flag, and Dovecot is more than capable of generating messages, especially to mailboxes under its control (see: sieve)
and now tell us how you "connect" YOUR sent message over SMTP to any seen fleeg of another user?
But... who cares?
people which cares about reality?
The worst possible thing that can happen is that he writes it and makes his customers happy
if it is his business make people happy with lies, ok my business is make people happy by telling them the truth
On 06/03/12 13:26, Reindl Harald wrote:
and now tell us how you "connect" YOUR sent message over SMTP to any seen fleeg of another user?
Dovecot could write directly to their mailbox. Otherwise, it could do whatever the sieve vacation plugin does.
The worst possible thing that can happen is that he writes it and makes his customers happy
if it is his business make people happy with lies, ok my business is make people happy by telling them the truth
I don't think he plans to lie. I think he explained the limitations and they don't care.
People have different tastes. I wouldn't personally use ~100% of the things that I fix for other people.
Am 03.06.2012 20:11, schrieb Michael Orlitzky:
On 06/03/12 13:26, Reindl Harald wrote:
and now tell us how you "connect" YOUR sent message over SMTP to any seen fleeg of another user?
Dovecot could write directly to their mailbox. Otherwise, it could do whatever the sieve vacation plugin does.
oh yeah, explain this the customers MUA when he clicks on "sent mail"
it is naive to believe some weird solution which only works as long the sune shines is useable
The worst possible thing that can happen is that he writes it and makes his customers happy
if it is his business make people happy with lies, ok my business is make people happy by telling them the truth
I don't think he plans to lie. I think he explained the limitations and they don't care.
if they don't care i would refuse them as customer
i saw way too often people saying "i do not care" but later "oh but you did not explain THIS result exactly"
People have different tastes. I wouldn't personally use ~100% of the things that I fix for other people
people are mostly to stupid to realize what they are trying to accomplish and why it it a bad idea
this is why we professionals exist and if people refuse what you are explaining them kiss them goodbye - irt will be better for you over the long
On Sun, 03 Jun 2012 20:19:20 +0200 Reindl Harald articulated:
people are mostly to stupid to realize what they are trying to accomplish and why it it a bad idea
this is why we professionals exist and if people refuse what you are explaining them kiss them goodbye - irt will be better for you over the long
No offense, but considering your business attitude and disdain for potential clients and your opinion of them, it would be a far better thing if they steered clear of you all together. There are many considerate, intelligent, compassionate professionals out there who would be willing to take on the difficult client. Any "asshole" can service the routine, run of the mill, client. It takes a true professional to work with and service a difficult one.
-- Jerry ♔
Disclaimer: off-list followups get on-list replies or get ignored. Please do not ignore the Reply-To header.
Am 03.06.2012 20:54, schrieb Jerry:
On Sun, 03 Jun 2012 20:19:20 +0200 Reindl Harald articulated:
people are mostly to stupid to realize what they are trying to accomplish and why it it a bad idea
this is why we professionals exist and if people refuse what you are explaining them kiss them goodbye - irt will be better for you over the long
No offense, but considering your business attitude and disdain for potential clients and your opinion of them, it would be a far better thing if they steered clear of you all together.
by business attidue is perfectly OK
i do not offer things where i know they will not work i the real world
There are many considerate, intelligent, compassionate professionals out there who would be willing to take on the difficult client.
it is not intelligent to discuss about "can we know when a user read our email?" - tis question has only one answer: no, forget it
if a customer thinks he must have any half baken solution to make him happy i am fine he is the custoerm of someone which is not interested in quality at all because both are matching togehter
Any "asshole" can service the routine, run of the mill, client. It takes a true professional to work with and service a difficult one
you need not to tell me about routine, really not
i have written admin-backends for nearly all types of services including mail-backends (partly for options most people even do not know that they exist) in the last years and after that i know what is NOT possible in a acceptable service quality
often it is much more important to know and realize what you CAN NOT implement in acceptable quality as what you can
Am 03.06.2012 19:26, schrieb Reindl Harald:
Am 03.06.2012 19:21, schrieb Michael Orlitzky:
On 06/03/12 12:06, Robert Schetterer wrote:
Am 03.06.2012 16:24, schrieb Michael Orlitzky:
I for one think the plugin is a good idea.
what the hell , should the plugin do and how ? there is smtp dsn, nothing more makes sense
looking to the thread subject , you need to have new internet standard called
"braindump over tcp"
this doesnt exist on exchange too
mail is smtp, dovecot is no smtp server
You could trigger on the 'seen' flag, and Dovecot is more than capable of generating messages, especially to mailboxes under its control (see: sieve)
and now tell us how you "connect" YOUR sent message over SMTP to any seen fleeg of another user?
But... who cares?
people which cares about reality?
The worst possible thing that can happen is that he writes it and makes his customers happy
if it is his business make people happy with lies, ok my business is make people happy by telling them the truth
the maximun with multi clients which "may" be goaled is a notice , if a mail was/has seen-flagged-opened/downloaded ( pop3), as long as sender and recipient are on the same server/storage/system
but seen-opened-flagged a mail is not "read the mail by the adressed human recipient" and human read a mail means not understand the content of the mail
nobody grant ever that is was the adressed recipient human in person that opened the mail and did set the seen flag
"seen-flagged" means opened for display as/from a tec process !!!
by the way this differnce seems not to care by customers who want this feature or may think its included elsewhere
i would recommand Mind melds over the wire like
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vulcan_%28Star_Trek%29#Mind_melds
as an ultimate solution for this problem *g
Best Regards
MfG Robert Schetterer
Germany/Munich/Bavaria
On 03/06/2012 18:26, Reindl Harald wrote:
Am 03.06.2012 19:21, schrieb Michael Orlitzky:
On 06/03/12 12:06, Robert Schetterer wrote:
I for one think the plugin is a good idea. what the hell , should the plugin do and how ?
Am 03.06.2012 16:24, schrieb Michael Orlitzky: there is smtp dsn, nothing more makes sense
looking to the thread subject , you need to have new internet standard called
"braindump over tcp"
this doesnt exist on exchange too
mail is smtp, dovecot is no smtp server
You could trigger on the 'seen' flag, and Dovecot is more than capable of generating messages, especially to mailboxes under its control (see: sieve) and now tell us how you "connect" YOUR sent message over SMTP to any seen fleeg of another user?
I think we are talking cross purposes about the design here
In my case I have a customer base on *dialup* who connect very infrequently. They kind of want MDN to work, however, at least my understanding is that this is typically implemented by first the MUA downloading all messages, then generating MDN responses which need to be sent out - however, in the case of dialup this may be very far after the fact.
Therefore they request a kind of server side MDN. So when the message is downloaded from the POP server, the POP server generates some form of MDN-a-like response on their behalf. There are clearly limitations here, but equally the limitations are quite clearly explained - all we learn is that the message was downloaded, but in the case of very infrequent dialup users, this at least teaches us the earliest time that the user could have read the message. Many of these users are corporate and have defined processes, so they may require the user to actually read and action all the emails which have been downloaded, hence it might be inferred that usually the message will be read soon after we learn it's downloaded - I don't think the goal is to get 100% knowledge of read time though, just an estimate and that it did actually arrive at this remote user is helpful
To put some meat on this type of user, we are talking about a group of users who might be mid-ocean or perhaps hanging around north/south pole or somewhere similarly remote. They would be using satellite dialup devices which have significant costs. So for example if we see the user dial in we learn: part of the link and is at least now close enough to the user we just
- They aren't dead...
- With some confidence that the message has crossed the most uncertain
need to hope they actually read it
- This type of user is typically only receiving a small handful of messages. At 2.4Kbit you are struggling to receive emails, it's not assume that this type of user is getting the kind of volumes that you or I get
This is a niche user, however, I think the basic feature is actually not entirely stupid. My competitors implement this feature quite crudely with just a generic message mailed out to the sender the first time the recipient (ie on our server) accesses and downloads and accesses the email. I don't see anyone trying to send MDN compatible receipts, they literally just send a "Your message was downloaded by the recipient" message
Cheers
Ed W
Am 14.05.2012 17:56, schrieb Beto Moreno:
Hi.
I have seen some emails servers that if I send a email to other person I can see if that person have read our emails and with a option to delete the email if the person hasn't read our email.
Does dovecot have some like this feature?
first dovecot is not a MTA, so no even if it would be a MTA think about how email works:
- you send a message via SMTP over your MTA
- your MTA dellivers the message to the target MX
- how will you bring back any mail after that?
On Mon, 2012-05-14 at 18:45 +0200, Reindl Harald wrote:
I have seen some emails servers that if I send a email to other person I can see if that person have read our emails and with a option to delete the email if the person hasn't read our email.
Does dovecot have some like this feature?
first dovecot is not a MTA, so no even if it would be a MTA think about how email works:
- you send a message via SMTP over your MTA
- your MTA dellivers the message to the target MX
- how will you bring back any mail after that?
This could work within a single email server, and could be useful in situations like "oops, I just sent an unfinished email to colleague".
There is also an expired draft to make it work across multiple servers: http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-leiba-morg-message-recall-00
On Mon, 14 May 2012 19:55:16 +0300 Timo Sirainen articulated:
On Mon, 2012-05-14 at 18:45 +0200, Reindl Harald wrote:
I have seen some emails servers that if I send a email to other person I can see if that person have read our emails and with a option to delete the email if the person hasn't read our email.
Does dovecot have some like this feature?
first dovecot is not a MTA, so no even if it would be a MTA think about how email works:
- you send a message via SMTP over your MTA
- your MTA dellivers the message to the target MX
- how will you bring back any mail after that?
This could work within a single email server, and could be useful in situations like "oops, I just sent an unfinished email to colleague".
There is also an expired draft to make it work across multiple servers: http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-leiba-morg-message-recall-00
Thanks Timo, I was not aware that there was a draft addressing this. It certainly would be useful in certain environments.
-- Jerry ♔
Disclaimer: off-list followups get on-list replies or get ignored. Please do not ignore the Reply-To header.
On Mon, May 14, 2012 at 11:15 AM, Jerry jerry@seibercom.net wrote:
On Mon, 14 May 2012 19:55:16 +0300 Timo Sirainen articulated:
On Mon, 2012-05-14 at 18:45 +0200, Reindl Harald wrote:
I have seen some emails servers that if I send a email to other person I can see if that person have read our emails and with a option to delete the email if the person hasn't read our email.
Does dovecot have some like this feature?
first dovecot is not a MTA, so no even if it would be a MTA think about how email works:
- you send a message via SMTP over your MTA
- your MTA dellivers the message to the target MX
- how will you bring back any mail after that?
This could work within a single email server, and could be useful in situations like "oops, I just sent an unfinished email to colleague".
There is also an expired draft to make it work across multiple servers: http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-leiba-morg-message-recall-00
Thanks Timo, I was not aware that there was a draft addressing this. It certainly would be useful in certain environments.
-- Jerry ♔
Disclaimer: off-list followups get on-list replies or get ignored. Please do not ignore the Reply-To header.
This feature I'm speaking is users from the same domain not externals domains.
Maybe is a Exchange feature I don't know because I have seen the email client but just the client side and don't have any contact with the IT side.
Thanks!!!
On 5/14/2012 7:18 PM, Beto Moreno wrote:
This feature I'm speaking is users from the same domain not externals domains.
Maybe is a Exchange feature I don't know because I have seen the email client but just the client side and don't have any contact with the IT side.
I've only seen this feature in MS Exchange. It may also exist in Notes and GroupWise. These are the primary 3 corporate (i.e. PAID) groupware platforms. As they serve the office drone masses they apparently need such a feature. Consider this scenario:
Guys at the water cooler play a sick joke telling a gullible fellow drone that he's been fired. Drone believes it, emails an inflammatory letter of resignation to his boss before packing his things. Just after he hits send the guys tell him it was a joke...
This "unsend" feature was created to protect idiots from themselves, nothing more. Which is why the IETF draft went nowhere.
You can only "fix" some types of human stupidity with software. This is not one of them.
-- Stan
On Mon, May 14, 2012 at 5:54 PM, Stan Hoeppner stan@hardwarefreak.com wrote:
On 5/14/2012 7:18 PM, Beto Moreno wrote:
This feature I'm speaking is users from the same domain not externals domains.
Maybe is a Exchange feature I don't know because I have seen the email client but just the client side and don't have any contact with the IT side.
I've only seen this feature in MS Exchange. It may also exist in Notes and GroupWise. These are the primary 3 corporate (i.e. PAID) groupware platforms. As they serve the office drone masses they apparently need such a feature. Consider this scenario:
Guys at the water cooler play a sick joke telling a gullible fellow drone that he's been fired. Drone believes it, emails an inflammatory letter of resignation to his boss before packing his things. Just after he hits send the guys tell him it was a joke...
This "unsend" feature was created to protect idiots from themselves, nothing more. Which is why the IETF draft went nowhere.
You can only "fix" some types of human stupidity with software. This is not one of them.
-- Stan
hahahaha ok.
Thanks all of u guys for your input, I will forget this, thanks again!!!
participants (13)
-
Beto Moreno
-
Brett ＠Google
-
Charles Marcus
-
Ed W
-
Jerry
-
Linda Walsh
-
Maarten Bezemer
-
Michael Orlitzky
-
Odhiambo Washington
-
Reindl Harald
-
Robert Schetterer
-
Stan Hoeppner
-
Timo Sirainen