There are two ways around a mail loop. Each way is an exception you choose in the rules wizard when building the rule in Outlook. I would prefer the second option, for obvious reasons:
1. "Except if the subject or body contain specific words", then add RE: and FW: to the words list 2. "Except if it as an automatic reply" On Nov 9, 2014 2:57 AM, "Steven Peck" <[email protected]> wrote: > Will this do mail loops if an auto-reply to a rule triggers this? It > seems it would but I figured I would ask. > > > > *From:* Kurt Buff <[email protected]> > *Sent:* Thursday, November 6, 2014 5:13 PM > *To:* [email protected] > > Excellent - this works. > > Learn something new every day... > > Kurt > > On Wed, Nov 5, 2014 at 1:52 PM, ccollins9 <[email protected]> wrote: > > Actually, there is a way to create the rule in Outlook AND not have to > leave > > Outlook running. In Outlook, create a new rule and choose "have server > > reply using a specific message". Then you can close Outlook and be > fine. I > > just tested this. So I would append my earlier suggestion and not use > Out of > > Office but say to open Outlook as the customer service account, create > the > > rule, then close it. > > > > > > > > > > On Wed, Nov 5, 2014 at 3:22 PM, Kennedy, Jim < > [email protected]> > > wrote: > >> > >> That type of a rule is client side only.. You could do it a Transport > Rule > >> with a bounce message. > >> > >> > >> > >> From: [email protected] > >> [mailto:[email protected] <[email protected]>] > On Behalf Of J- P > >> Sent: Wednesday, November 5, 2014 3:18 PM > >> To: [email protected] > >> Subject: RE: [Exchange] Autoresponder for Customer Service > >> > >> > >> > >> But can't you just create a server side rule instead of an OoO ? > >> > >> Rule > >> For all messages , reply with "bla bla bla" > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > Date: Wed, 5 Nov 2014 11:02:17 -0800 > >> > Subject: Re: [Exchange] Autoresponder for Customer Service > >> > From: [email protected] > >> > To: [email protected] > >> > > >> > Oh, wait... > >> > > >> > OoO only responds once per customer during the period while it's > >> > configured. We'd have to turn if off and on again on a regular basis > >> > (daily, weekly), and that's not going to work... > >> > > >> > Kurt > >> > > >> > On Wed, Nov 5, 2014 at 10:38 AM, ccollins9 <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> > > The best thing you could do, if able, would be to get a ticketing > >> > > system > >> > > that "checks" the inbox of a designated account and generate tickets > >> > > based > >> > > on email sitting in there, then it will auto-reply to those messages > >> > > explaining a ticket was created and generate an ID for the user. > >> > > Footprints > >> > > and Track-It are products i've used to do this. Maybe since the > >> > > "important" > >> > > folks want you all do make these improvements they would be willing > to > >> > > pony > >> > > up some dough so you all can take the customer service to the next > >> > > level. > >> > > > >> > > But short of that, > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > Here's what I would do: > >> > > > >> > > 1. Delete the Distribution List--so you can reuse the SMTP address > >> > > that it > >> > > has > >> > > > >> > > 2. Create a new user mailbox using the same SMTP address of the > >> > > deleted DL > >> > > > >> > > 3. There is no need to "have it logged in somewhere forever". You > can > >> > > simply go into https://OWAAddress/ECP, manage another user, then > setup > >> > > an > >> > > out of office auto-reply with no ending date. This is done from the > >> > > server > >> > > side and "outside" of Outlook, so there is no need to have Outlook > >> > > running, > >> > > ever. The only down side to this would be that the user would only > get > >> > > the > >> > > out of office reply once. Exchange knows when a sender has already > >> > > received > >> > > and out of office message from a recipient--this is to prevent the > >> > > bounce > >> > > loop. > >> > > > >> > > 4. Then I would decide exactly how I want email flow to work. For > >> > > example, > >> > > If I want any messages sent to this new address to also get sent to > >> > > all my > >> > > technicians I would do this: > >> > > > >> > > Create a new DL containing all the technicians. Go into the EMC and > >> > > bring > >> > > up the account properties of the new mailbox created in step 2, > under > >> > > "Delivery Options" enable forwarding, then check the option to > >> > > "deliver > >> > > message to both forwarding address and mailbox". Checking this will > >> > > ensure > >> > > that the message is both forwarded to your technician's DL address > AND > >> > > the > >> > > out of office reply is generated and sent. > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > On Wed, Nov 5, 2014 at 12:29 PM, Kurt Buff <[email protected]> > >> > > wrote: > >> > >> > >> > >> All, > >> > >> > >> > >> We currently have a DL for customer service/technical support, and > >> > >> some (important) folks would like to set up an autoresponder for > the > >> > >> address. > >> > >> > >> > >> We are running Exchange 2010, and transitioning from Outlook 2010 > to > >> > >> 2013. > >> > >> > >> > >> I've pointed out that you can't put up an autoresponder on a DL, > and > >> > >> that there are basically three options (AFAICT - please correct me > if > >> > >> I'm wrong!): > >> > >> > >> > >> o- Move the SMTP address to a mailbox with a rule and have it > logged > >> > >> in somewhere forever > >> > >> > >> > >> o- Move the SMTP address to a PF and set an autoresponder on it > >> > >> > >> > >> o- Use a third-party product. > >> > >> > >> > >> I've pointed out the risk of a bounce war, and they don't seem to > >> > >> care... > >> > >> > >> > >> Also, AFAICS, a transport rule will only generate a bounce message > >> > >> that looks weird and has only limited characters. > >> > >> > >> > >> Can you folks recommend a (fairly cheap) third party autoresponder > >> > >> for > >> > >> this kind of thing? > >> > >> > >> > >> Thanks, > >> > >> > >> > >> Kurt > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > > > >> > > >> > > > > > > > >
