[rt-users] Bounce messages create tickets

[Matt Disney]

One thing you could do is to put a nice procmail rule in between your
MTA and the rt-mailgate. I appreciate and understand the challenge of
RT handling bounces, but my philosophy on issues like this is to let
the software that has been written to address this problem...  address
this problem. That's opposed to RT being extended to handle it.

Also, having RT requests pass through a procmail rule isn't too
complicated a solution, either. You just have to make sure your rule is
good. :-)

Matt

"Yan Fitterer" writes:
>I didn't have a mail storm (this time - but had a rather nasty one a few month
>s ago where 
>the filesystem ran out of space...), merely a bewildered postmaster that found
> himself in 
>a ticket he didn't really want!
>
>The problem could potentially be painfull if we had loads of requests coming f
>rom outside 
>addresses, which we don't. But I would still like to be able to set RT to reco
>gnise 
>bounce messages, and treat them accordingly.
>
>Yan
>
>
>
>----  On 29 Jan 2002, at 7:46, matthew zeier wrote:  ----
>
>> I had this happen to me and within minutes had 50 new tickets.  My only fix
>> was change the rt incoming mail alias to myself for a bit.
>> 
>> Perhaps a throttle feature is needed?  More than x tickets in y seconds,
>> stop processing and email administrator ?
>> 
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: "Yan Fitterer" <y.fitterer at ram.ac.uk>
>> To: <rt-users at lists.fsck.com>
>> Sent: Tuesday, January 29, 2002 1:44 AM
>> Subject: [rt-users] Bounce messages create tickets
>> 
>> 
>> > Hi all,
>> >
>> > Just encountered a bit of an annoying behaviour:
>> >
>> > 1) A user sends a new request
>> > 2) RT sends an auto-responder
>> > 3) Autoresponder bounces (mailbox full for ex.)
>> > 4) Autoresponder is seen as a new request
>> > 5) Postmaster of some remote gateway gets autoresponder on ticket creation
>> >
>> > Has anybody had that problem before? If yes, is there a known fix?
>> >
>> > Really what would be best to do, would be to identify "bounce" messages
>> (the MAIL FROM in
>> > the eveloppe is blank in those), and treat them appropriately.
>> >
>> > Any other bright ideas on this one?
>> >
>> > Thanks
>> > Yan
>> > --
>> > Yan Fitterer
>> > IT Manager, Royal Academy of Music
>> > E-mail : y.fitterer at ram.ac.uk
>> > Marylebone Rd, London, NW1 5HT
>> > Phone (+44) 20 7873 7365 Fax (+44) 20 7873 7364
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > rt-users mailing list
>> > rt-users at lists.fsck.com
>> > http://lists.fsck.com/mailman/listinfo/rt-users
>> >
>> 
>
>
>-- 
>Yan Fitterer
>IT Manager, Royal Academy of Music
>E-mail : y.fitterer at ram.ac.uk
>Marylebone Rd, London, NW1 5HT
>Phone (+44) 20 7873 7365 Fax (+44) 20 7873 7364
>  
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>rt-users mailing list
>rt-users at lists.fsck.com
>http://lists.fsck.com/mailman/listinfo/rt-users
>