Cannot get vacation message

Hi,

Are you really running 6.1? (./imsimta version)

With regards to vacation messages, there can be numerous reasons why it doesn't work.

Usually it comes down to a understanding/expectation issue e.g. they will only receive a vacation message if the TO:/CC: is addressed to the users mail:/mailalternateaddress: and they may not get _another_ vacation message for several days due to the mailAutoReplyTimeout: OR the vacation dates are not being matched ... and I can go on.

If you send an email to the account do you get a vacation message?

For the users LDIF entry, grep -i auto and grep -i vacation, what are these set to e.g.

# ldapsearch -b "o=isp" uid=user001 | grep -i auto

mailAutoReplySubject=Test vacation message : $SUBJECT

mailAutoReplyText=test external

mailAutoReplyTextInternal=Test internal

mailAutoReplyTimeout=0

mailDeliveryOption=autoreply

# ldapsearch -b "o=isp" uid=user001 | grep -i vacation

mailAutoReplySubject=Test vacation message : $SUBJECT

vacationEndDate=20070521140000Z

vacationStartDate=20070510140000Z

Regards,

Shane.

shane_hjortha at 2007-7-12 16:33:06 >

Hi,

> It is confirm that we are using the Sun Java(tm)

> System Messaging Server 6.2 (built Dec 2 2004)

You should definitely look at patching your messaging server. There are numerous bugs fixed between the latest 6.2 patch and this revision.

> mailAutoReplyTimeout=0

> mailDeliveryOption=autoreply

That's it? What interface did you use to enable the auto-reply vacation message?

> Is there any logs we can check for it?

You can turn on debug logging but it will be extensive and you need to know what to look for. Where you enable it will depend on whether you are running a back-end/front-end configuration or just a single-host configuration.

> We have set

> the alias for the user account. Will there be any

> issue related to this?

I don't understand what this mean. If you didn't have an alias set before, how did the email get to the user?

If you run the following, do you get the vacation message listed as one of the users filters?

./imsimta test -rewrite -debug -filter <users email address>

e.g.

./imsimta test -rewrite -debug -filter user001@domain1.com

<snip>

Filter: <user> name user:user001@domain1.com [addr user001@domain1.com] [owner user001@domain1.com] (0x000344e0) [0x0015e010] )0x0015d808( {0x001477b0}

header:2000115;0 3 1 :matches 1 "subject" 1 "*" if 9

; set:2000129;0 2 1 "subject" 1 "${1}" else 6 set:2000129;0

2 1 "subject" 1 "" ; header:2000115;0 3 1 :matches 1

"from" 1 "*" if 9 ; set:2000129;0 2 1 "from" 1 "${

1}" else 6 set:2000129;0 2 1 "from" 1 "" ; vacation:2000137;0

5 1 :hours 1 0 1 :subject 1 "Test vacation message :

${subject}" 1 "test external%0A"

Also is this the only user to have the problem or is this a problem for all users if you enable their vacation message?

Regards,

Shane.

shane_hjortha at 2007-7-12 16:33:06 >

Hi,

> We have developed an external web interface for

> modifying the LDAP attributes for the vacation

> message. We have modified the required LDAP

> attributes for vacation message. The same thing work

> for the language attribute but it fail for the

> vacation message.

I don't see how one relates to the other. You also failed to address any but the first of my earlier questions.

If you have indeed correctly set the users vacation attributes, then as I have already noted above, the "./imsimta test -rewrite -debug -filter <users email address>" command will show that the vacation sieve filter is being called.

If this is not present then you need to go back to square-one and re-evaluate your vacation message provisioning method.

Regards,

Shane.

shane_hjortha at 2007-7-12 16:33:06 >

Hi,

> I have tried to user the imsimta command for testing.

> However I didn't got the expected result. However I

> found the following message from the result.

Well I suggest that if this is the case, you start by enabling the users vacation message through the _supported_ interfaces (either UWC or Messenger Express), work out what needs to be changed to get it work, the reverse engineer from there.

Regards,

Shane.

shane_hjortha at 2007-7-12 16:33:06 >

Hi,

I get the same, yet my filter still works e.g.

14:27:04.43:Object class: nsManagedPerson

14:27:04.43:Object class didn't match

14:27:04.43:Object class: userPresenceProfile

14:27:04.43:Object class didn't match

14:27:04.43:Object class: inetMailUser

So I repeat, use one of the supported interfaces to create the vacation message, get it working this way, THEN reverse engineer that (i.e. compare the working user to the non-working user).

Regards,

Shane.

shane_hjortha at 2007-7-12 16:33:06 >

Hi,

It shouldn't be necessary to add that statement unless you have in someway overridden the default DELIVERY_OPTIONS value. Usually the only time you would do that is if you wanted to have autoreply resolved on an MTA relay rather then the store mailhost for the user.

There is a good writeup on all of this at:

http://docs.sun.com/app/docs/doc/819-4428/6n6j42645?a=view

In this particular forum thread, the author hasn't yet shown that autoreply is working/broken when autoreply is enabled for a user using the supported provisioning method (via ME/UWC interface). Once it has been determined that autoreply does work for user X, and it doesn't for the user who they provisioned themselves, then I would ask, what is different/missing between working user X and the custom provisioned user.

Regards,

Shane.

shane_hjortha at 2007-7-12 16:33:06 >