Hi,
Right now, I have a form with two email templates (working perfectly).
The issue at hand though, is that I'd like to add a separate ReplyTo header to one of the email templates, I just can't seem to find the correct setting or approach. As to make matters even more fun, value for the ReplyTo header should be taken from the submitted data. First thought was to look for something like "Dynamic ReplyTo" within the Toolbox of "Setup Emails", but couldn't find anything like that. I guess one possible approach would be to simply skip the ReplyTo header and just go for "Dynamic From" sender, but I'd rather not use that solution for various reasons.
As of now, I've stared too long at the control panel to actually see or think of anything, so just a hint on where I should focus my attention would be nice.
Cheers,
Fredrik
Right now, I have a form with two email templates (working perfectly).
The issue at hand though, is that I'd like to add a separate ReplyTo header to one of the email templates, I just can't seem to find the correct setting or approach. As to make matters even more fun, value for the ReplyTo header should be taken from the submitted data. First thought was to look for something like "Dynamic ReplyTo" within the Toolbox of "Setup Emails", but couldn't find anything like that. I guess one possible approach would be to simply skip the ReplyTo header and just go for "Dynamic From" sender, but I'd rather not use that solution for various reasons.
As of now, I've stared too long at the control panel to actually see or think of anything, so just a hint on where I should focus my attention would be nice.
Cheers,
Fredrik
Hi Fredrick,
What's a ReplyTo Header? Do you mean an email header like "X-Mailer: FrogMail (340864)"?
Bob
What's a ReplyTo Header? Do you mean an email header like "X-Mailer: FrogMail (340864)"?
Bob
Kind of, yes.. (without the X- prefix)
Basically used to tell the email client reading the mail that replies should be sent to an alternative address than the sender (From field), and is supported by most email clients out there. In this case, it is used for manual responses to submitted form data, to make sure the manager responding to the data sends it to the proper destination (hence the "workaround" of just using "Dynamic From").
In this case, it would be preferable to keep the domain of the website as the sender, yet redirecting any replies to the person submitting the data.
The below example is taken from the notification email I received for this thread:
Also, as I recall, replyto is directly supported by the JMail class, aswell as the JUtility::sendMail() method.
Basically used to tell the email client reading the mail that replies should be sent to an alternative address than the sender (From field), and is supported by most email clients out there. In this case, it is used for manual responses to submitted form data, to make sure the manager responding to the data sends it to the proper destination (hence the "workaround" of just using "Dynamic From").
In this case, it would be preferable to keep the domain of the website as the sender, yet redirecting any replies to the person submitting the data.
The below example is taken from the notification email I received for this thread:
X-PHP-Script: chronoengine.com/forums/cron.php for 90.1.148.241
From: <forums@chronoengine.com>
Reply-To: <forums@chronoengine.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Also, as I recall, replyto is directly supported by the JMail class, aswell as the JUtility::sendMail() method.
.. did alittle digging in the code myself, and it would seem the replyto-parameters for JUtility::sendMail() are hardcoded to NULL in v3.0
I guess i'll just have to get my fellow data managers to double-check where they're sending replies instead..
Still, thanks for a great component. Just love it (despite lacking ReplyTo support).
I guess i'll just have to get my fellow data managers to double-check where they're sending replies instead..
Still, thanks for a great component. Just love it (despite lacking ReplyTo support).
Hi Fredrick,
Based on the problems reported by the users all over the time (Chronoforms is more than 2 years old), the ReplyTo data existed until V2.5 then it has been removed, however it can be added easily because as you said its already in the JUtility::sendMail() method, are you aware with all the advantages and disadvantages of it, and the problems which may occur because of using it, and the cases when it happens at and how to "dodge" any problems ?
Regards,
Max
Based on the problems reported by the users all over the time (Chronoforms is more than 2 years old), the ReplyTo data existed until V2.5 then it has been removed, however it can be added easily because as you said its already in the JUtility::sendMail() method, are you aware with all the advantages and disadvantages of it, and the problems which may occur because of using it, and the cases when it happens at and how to "dodge" any problems ?
Regards,
Max
I am aware that not all email clients handle this header properly, or simply ignoring it altogether, as well as allowing users to simply bypass this.
I suppose some (poorly setup?) anti-spam solutions may respond ill to the presence of ReplyTo-fields not matching the origin of the email.
As I've just recently started using CF (maybe 6 months now), I can not say I'm aware of all different issues you've encountered so far, yet I am aware of the "proper" use of it.
As for this specific case, the objective is to let the email sent to data managers have a from-field matching the origin (website domain), yet allowing "easy" replies for the data managers.
As for the very specific implementation of JUtility::sendMail() in J!1.5, I can see issues arising from mismatched arrays of $replyto and $replytoname.
As to the issue of user submitting an invalid email address, that would just be as bad as using it with "dynamic sender", and in any such case, those data submissions would be considered invalid.
In any case, thank you for your input. It has been refreshing after spending some time trying to find that setting. Atleast now I know it has been intentionally removed, and am ready to consider other approaches.
Once again, thanks for a great component.
Regards,
Fredrik
PS. Btw, I didn't bother to list the numerous issues with replyto and email-lists, as I really don't think that applies here DS.
I suppose some (poorly setup?) anti-spam solutions may respond ill to the presence of ReplyTo-fields not matching the origin of the email.
As I've just recently started using CF (maybe 6 months now), I can not say I'm aware of all different issues you've encountered so far, yet I am aware of the "proper" use of it.
As for this specific case, the objective is to let the email sent to data managers have a from-field matching the origin (website domain), yet allowing "easy" replies for the data managers.
As for the very specific implementation of JUtility::sendMail() in J!1.5, I can see issues arising from mismatched arrays of $replyto and $replytoname.
As to the issue of user submitting an invalid email address, that would just be as bad as using it with "dynamic sender", and in any such case, those data submissions would be considered invalid.
In any case, thank you for your input. It has been refreshing after spending some time trying to find that setting. Atleast now I know it has been intentionally removed, and am ready to consider other approaches.
Once again, thanks for a great component.
Regards,
Fredrik
PS. Btw, I didn't bother to list the numerous issues with replyto and email-lists, as I really don't think that applies here DS.
Hi Fredrik,
Apologies, I was a bit slow late on a Saturday evening. We've had persistent user problems with Dynamic From Email and used to have with the equivalent ReplyTo setting that emails are lost. In many cases this seems to be because they are flagged for relaying when the From (or ReplyTo) domain doesn't match the site domain.
Bob
Apologies, I was a bit slow late on a Saturday evening. We've had persistent user problems with Dynamic From Email and used to have with the equivalent ReplyTo setting that emails are lost. In many cases this seems to be because they are flagged for relaying when the From (or ReplyTo) domain doesn't match the site domain.
Bob
Hehe, no worries, we all have those days every now and then.
My personal experiences, are that network admins in their efforts to stomp spam, restrict which domains (in From) may send email from a given ip-range.
Usually, this means that the From field controls whether the message should be delivered. Any decisions as to relaying should be solely decided on the To field.
This was the very reason why I was looking for a ReplyTo header rather than using "Dynamic From".
Unfortunately, a lot of spammers learned and adopted, sending from once-off hotmail.com addresses and such, with a ReplyTo-header to the real contact address.
As such, some spam-stompers these days have a negative score for the presence of ReplyTo - unfortunately flagging some "non-junk" mails as spam.
Technically speaking, an email server should not care for a field such as ReplyTo, yet spam-stompers disregard this and bad things happen.
Ah well, enough ramble from me for now..
Cheers,
Fredrik
My personal experiences, are that network admins in their efforts to stomp spam, restrict which domains (in From) may send email from a given ip-range.
Usually, this means that the From field controls whether the message should be delivered. Any decisions as to relaying should be solely decided on the To field.
This was the very reason why I was looking for a ReplyTo header rather than using "Dynamic From".
Unfortunately, a lot of spammers learned and adopted, sending from once-off hotmail.com addresses and such, with a ReplyTo-header to the real contact address.
As such, some spam-stompers these days have a negative score for the presence of ReplyTo - unfortunately flagging some "non-junk" mails as spam.
Technically speaking, an email server should not care for a field such as ReplyTo, yet spam-stompers disregard this and bad things happen.
Ah well, enough ramble from me for now..
Cheers,
Fredrik
Hi Fredrik,
Thank you very much for the info, I will make some research and tests too and may be I will add it back again in the coming release with a tooltip that it may make problems for some users!
Regards,
Max
Thank you very much for the info, I will make some research and tests too and may be I will add it back again in the coming release with a tooltip that it may make problems for some users!
Regards,
Max
This topic is locked and no more replies can be posted.
