AutoReply for setting a vacation message will be posted at sometime by the end of the day today. We were
concentrating on testing and the critical parts of the documentation
(specifically related to upgrade changes, spam identification, and virus
information). If there are other documents that you believe would be helpful
you can make the request through the "contact us" link from so
they can be recorded.


Scott G. Thomas
Division Mgr, Computing Services
408A Computer Center
Michigan State University
517-355-4500 x142

-----Original Message-----
From: MSU Network Administrators Group [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On
Behalf Of Chris Wolf
Sent: Wednesday, December 17, 2003 10:15 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Auto-reply

I agree--I hate autoreplies, but many users really, really want them.

The filter you suggest would be a good compromise, but I'm not sure it would
prevent auto-replies to all lists, and might not reply to messages CC'd or
BCC'd to you.

At 10:01 AM 12/17/2003, Dpk wrote:
>On Wed, Dec 17, 2003 at 09:55:45AM -0500, Chris Wolf wrote:
>    [snip]
>    Now that I look at it closely, I'm not quite sure what would be the
>    recommended filtering rule if you wanted an auto-reply to be used
>    for every incoming message, as you might for a "vacation" message.
>Seems like this would not be a good practice and something you might
>not really want.  i.e.  auto-responders about so-and-so being on
>vacation when you send to a list like MSUNAG is really annoying. I
>don't care that so-and-so is gone because I didn't contact them in the
>first place... I simply emailed the list. (Sorry, pet peeve!)
>On high-volume lists, such as those on, it will get
>you involuntarily unsubscribed.  I think a better solution would be a
>rule using "Addressed to", so when someone sends to you specifically,
>you let that person know you are not available.
>Hope this helps,