My web application sends email fairly often, and it sends 3 kinds of emails: initiated by user, in response to an event in the system, and in automatic response to an email
There is a RFC 3834 dedicated for automated email responses.
In short, it recommends:
Send auto-responses only to address contained in the Return-Path
header of an incoming message, if it is valid email address. Particularly "<>" (null address) in the Return-Path
of the message means that auto-responses must not be sent for this message.
When sending auto-response, MAIL FROM smtp command must contain "<>" (null address). This would lead to Return-Path:<> when message will be delivered.
Use Auto-Submitted header with value other than "no" to explicitly indicate automated response.
One note: it is not worth to explicitly set Return-Path header in outgoing message, as this header must be rewritten by envelop address (from MAIL FROM smtp command) during delivery.
How about configuring a white list on your email account?
I would assume that any email key words could get flagged by a junk filter.
The traditional way of dealing with this is to send the email with a null envelope-sender (traditionally written as <>). This prevents the autoresponder on the other end from responding because there's no sender to respond to.
You can set these headers:
Precedence: bulk
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
Source: http://www.redmine.org/projects/redmine/repository/revisions/2655/diff
RFC 2076 discourages the use of the precedence header. as you have noted, many clients will just filter that off (especially the precedence: junk variety). it may be better to use a null path to avoid auto responder wars:
Return-Path: <>
Ultimately you could use priority to try to get around this, but this seems like going against the spirit of the header. i'd suggest just using the return-path header for this, and avoiding precedence. in some cases you may have to write in some way to drop auto-responders in your application (to avoid getting into a responder war), but i can't remember a situation in which this happened using an appropriate return-path. (most auto responder wars i recall having to deal with were the result of very badly formed emails)
Note: the Return-Path
header is, in short, the destination for notifications (bounces, delay delivery, etc...), and is described in RFC 2821 -- because it's required by SMTP. It's also one method to drop bad mail (as theoretically all good mail will set an appropriate return-path).