I am not near a pc at the moment to check on this again, but I recall when I had looked at this same issue, I found that where CheckForAutoGenerated was called from was not always reacting how you'd expect. We ended up pre-filtering auto gen email in postfix... just had to be careful not to filter rt's own autoresponses :)
You can see on your headers that rt added an RT-DetectedAutoGenerated header, but still accepted it... So I'd look at that other code. On Feb 22, 2010 10:10 AM, <[email protected]> wrote: Hi Lem, Thanks for the reply. The headers of the auto reply emails that pass through to RT are as below --------------------- Received: XXXXXXX Received: YYYYYYY Received: ZZZZZZZ MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: SOME TITLE In-Reply-To: <[email protected]> Date: Wed, 17 Feb 2010 09:08:04 +0000 (GMT) Auto-Submitted: auto-replied (zimbra; vacation) Precedence: bulk Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at server.mydomain.com Message-ID: <464307537.2782761266397684254.javamail.r...@server> To: [email protected] Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: USER <[email protected]> X-RT-Original-Encoding: utf-8 RT-Squelch-Replies-To: [email protected] RT-DetectedAutoGenerated: true Content-Length: 196 [Message body] ----------------------------- Why would the function not detect -Precedence: bulk -Auto-Submitted: auto-replied in the header? Thanks Nik _______________________________________________ http://lists.bestpractical.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listi...
_______________________________________________ http://lists.bestpractical.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/rt-users Community help: http://wiki.bestpractical.com Commercial support: [email protected] 2010 RT Training Sessions! San Francisco, CA, USA - Feb 22 & 23 Dublin, Ireland - Mar 15 & 16 Boston, MA, USA - April 5 & 6 Washington DC, USA - Oct 25 & 26 Discover RT's hidden secrets with RT Essentials from O'Reilly Media. Buy a copy at http://rtbook.bestpractical.com
