Gerfried Fuchs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > * Lee Maguire <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2008-07-03 19:49:58 CEST]:
>> Please add the header "Auto-Submitted: auto-generated" to mails >> generated by logcheck. This header should be supported by many email >> autoresponders and should prevent the need to set up logcheck specific >> rules for "vacation"-type autoresponders. > > "should be supported" - how many do so already? It's a proposed > standard, i.e. it's not one yet. "Proposed Standard" in IETF terminology is as far as 90% of the IETF standards ever get, including many protocols in very widespread use. Stanford's autoresponder supports it, at least. > Actually I'm not really aware of that header being out in the wild? What > happened to the good old Precedence header? The meaning of the Precedence header is horribly murky and no one can agree on what keywords to use. Auto-Submitted is a lot cleaner and tells you what you want to know rather than some vague metric of importance. > I'm not really convinced about what the gain of adding that header > will be. What tools have support for it already? What's the benefit of > adding it (besides that it looks fishy as actual proper header without > the X- prefix to me)? It's a standard, so it gets an actual proper header name. That should make it *less* fishy. :) There's basically no drawback to adding it, and you might get a few more autoresponders to not respond to the mail. And it's the correct thing to do according to the current mail standards. -- Russ Allbery ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/> _______________________________________________ Logcheck-devel mailing list Logcheck-devel@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/logcheck-devel
