Henning Brauer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > On Tue, Oct 09, 2001 at 07:44:03PM +0200, Markus Stumpf wrote: > > If you need some indicator on a per address basis (e.g. from some .qmail > > files but not from others) I wouldn't add a new field but add > > "Precedence: bulk". > > I thought about this, too. The more I think about it the more I think it is > the best solution. A mail forwarded to more than one person can be > considered like a mailing list mail, and thus precendence: bulk makes really > sense. For qmail-ldap, adding this whenever there is more than one > mailForwardingAddress attribute should be fairly easy to implement.
To me, that doesn't reflect what "Precedence: bulk" intuitively means, although I wasn't able to find where it's meaning is defined (it's not in RFC2822). >From a "how it will work with regard to autoresponders" standpoint, in some situations this will do what you want, but in others it won't. In Andre's situation, it obviously does the right thing. On the other hand, if I set up an alias that goes to all the people I'm working on a project with, and I send out an important announcement, if one of those members is on vacation and doesn't get the message, I would want to be notified. In this case, setting "Precedence: bulk" does the wrong thing. I think this is a situation that should be handled in the autoresponder; see my previous post in this same thread for details on how Berkeley vacation(1) handles messages like this. Alternatively, an LDAP attribute which would cause the "Precedence: bulk" header to be included might be useful. Or, as others have suggested, for those situations where you want this header included, just put a small script in .qmail which adds it. ----ScottG.
