sieve vacation: write to the .lda-dupes database without generating a vacation response.

[Stephan Bosch]

Op 4/19/2016 om 8:01 PM schreef Bradley M. Kuhn:
> I'm using Dovecot's sieve extensions quite happily, they are very good!
> Thanks for all who worked on them.  I have a question that maybe is
> appropriate for a sieve-specific discussion list, so if there is one I
> should post to instead, please let me know:
>
>
> I've poked through the sieve vacation RFC and all the documentation I
> can find and I cannot figure out how to do this.  It's more-or-less not
> the intent of sieve's vacation, so perhaps it's more of a "you can't get
> there from here" situation, but maybe folks here have an idea:
>
> I am (ab)?using sieve vacation to send an automated response at all
> times to all senders who put me in the To line, every 90 days, which
> explains my lack of responsiveness and to explain who else might be
> better contact. (I have hundreds of emails sent to me to which I will
> never have time to respond, and probably should have been routed to
> someone else at my organization anyway.)
>
> However, I *don't* want my regular correspondents to receive this
> autoreply.  I'd thus like to seed the database with known individuals
> I'm corresponding with to pretend they've already received the
> autoresponder.
>
> Since I bcc an archive address on all emails, my original thought was to
> detect people in the To and Cc line of outgoing emails and record them
> in the .lda-dupes database, as they received a vacation email.  I can't
> figure out how to do this; there is no option on the sieve vacation
> directive that I can find to do something like this (i.e., I'm looking
> for a a "do the usual, but *don't* actually send the the email" option
> on the sieve vacation directive).
>
> I do have various other solutions that help in this regard, for example,
> I never send a vacation email to messages that match:
>      header :contains "In-Reply-To"  "@example.org"
> (where example.org is my domain).
>
> This helps, but obviously doesn't handle the situation where the
> correspondent doesn't reply to one of my emails, or had a stupid MUA.
>
> Furthermore, I'd like to implement as many methods as possible for my
> regular corespondents to limit their receipt of the autoresponder.

You could use the "duplicate" extension: https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc7352

I haven't thought this through much, but on first glance it should -
together with your Bcc archiving - be flexible enough allow you remember
responding to certain individuals.

Just read the RFC and play with the "duplicate" test a bit and get back
here if you have any questions.

Regards,

Stephan.