Yes, the second option is smarter.

Kurt

On Sun, Nov 9, 2014 at 5:34 PM, ccollins9 <[email protected]> wrote:
> 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
>> 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]] 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
>> >> > >>
>> >> > >>
>> >> > >
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >
>> >
>>
>>
>


Reply via email to