On 2008-12-25 at 10:16 +0100, Renaud Allard wrote: > While I, like others, think it is a bad idea to defer mail from some > providers.
I agree. But then, I would. But "it's a bad idea" when talking to management who are requesting such "interesting" schemes doesn't tend to carry as much weight as "ooh, interesting legal implications, let's check with $legal_counsel". It's a matter of figuring out arguments that work for the people making the request, who might well not be technical. > An idea to not use others ressources and trigger > notifications would be to accept such mails, not defer them, but freeze > them in the queue. Then at the chosen hours, unfreeze them. This would > not consume others bandwidth and storage. An excellent suggestion. This has the added merit of letting the OP add up the cost of storage for implementing this and attach a price figure to the cost of implementing the policy (assuming a large enough organisation that this isn't just noise at the level of a few mails a day). And then if management do object, noting that the cost of the storage is a cost of implementing the policy and if they simply refuse to accept the mails until the right time then this is a minimum price figure to assume for the service being appropriated from others. -Phil -- ## List details at http://lists.exim.org/mailman/listinfo/exim-users ## Exim details at http://www.exim.org/ ## Please use the Wiki with this list - http://wiki.exim.org/
