On 11/24/2009 6:27 AM, Charles Marcus wrote:
On 11/23/2009, Patrick Nagel (patrick.na...@star-group.net) wrote:
Yes, that was my first proposal, but that was also rejected harshly by
the other project managers. They wanted to have some "transit time" in
which the replacement guy would still access the leaving guy's mailbox.
They felt that just deactivating the mailbox and rejecting mails would
be "rude".
1. Add an alias to the x-managers account that forwards all incoming
mail to his replacement, or
2. Add the x-managers account to your replacements email client, so they
can check it as well as theirs.
3. (slightly different) Have the vacation auto-reply set and also use
the sieve redirect method after the vacation message gets processed?
redirect :copy "newmana...@example.com";
New manager gets the email, clients get a "hey, I retired but these
folks over here will also get a copy of your message and will help you"
message.
90% sure you can do that (vacation is supposed to be compatible with
redirect)... I'll have to try it the next time that someone retires
around here.
Eventually (30-90 days), we turned off the redirect and changed the
vacation message.
You'll want a very good server-side spam filter with aggressive
quarantine levels for that user if you're going to have a long-running
vacation reply in place. That'll avoid the vacation script replying to
every joe-jobbed message that makes it into the mailbox.
The sooner that you can start returning 5xx codes for the old address
the better (IMHO).
(Still doesn't address the issue of more then one per day, but you'd
have to complain about that to the folks who wrote RFC 5230 who specify
that :days has to be greater then zero.)
