Hi! The policy in our university has long been to discourage using auto responders (two of the main reasons being, we don't want to end up forwarding spam to innocent third parties, and neither want to automatically confirm to a spammer that an address works - auto-answers to lists and other traditional pitfalls are more easy to avoid). So we don't support sieve vacation, either. Now I heard the people at MIT have reversed their policy on auto responders abt a year ago (haven't confirmed this, though). Apparently they're using sieve 07 (not confirmed this, either), which contains sieve-vacation-07, which appears to be more or less identical to sieve-vacation-04, which is implemented by Cyrus 2.3.x. And vacation-04 appears to implement the recommendations for auto responders rfc (rfc3834). Now I'd like to ask the people on this list about their experiences using the sieve vacation module. The risks of automatically responding to spam / automatically forwarding spam / ending up in sorceror's apprentice mode / ending up having our mail servers blacklisted as spam relays - would they be acceptably low? (It seems to me that MIT is at a lesser risk of ending up on permanent blacklists than a relatively unknown university from a remote country...) Thanks, --Janne Peltonen imap admin Univ. of Helsinki -- Janne Peltonen <janne.peltonen@xxxxxxxxxxx> ---- Cyrus Home Page: http://cyrusimap.web.cmu.edu/ Cyrus Wiki/FAQ: http://cyrusimap.web.cmu.edu/twiki List Archives/Info: http://asg.web.cmu.edu/cyrus/mailing-list.html
