Date: Tue, 20 Jan 2004 20:07:39 +0100 From: Pawel Malachowski <pawmal-posting@freebsd.lublin.pl> To: Mij <mij@bitchx.it> Cc: hubs@freebsd.org Subject: Re: mx vs ns Message-ID: <20040120190739.GA62180@shellma.zin.lublin.pl> In-Reply-To: <C16A59A6-4B77-11D8-BB67-000A95CCF092@bitchx.it> References: <93570F3C-4B56-11D8-9538-000A95CCF092@bitchx.it> <20040120153117.GL86062@isnic.is> <C16A59A6-4B77-11D8-BB67-000A95CCF092@bitchx.it>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Tue, Jan 20, 2004 at 07:37:52PM +0100, Mij wrote: > >I see nothing wrong with this setup as when a MX is down the > >mail gets queued at the sender server untill the MX is reachable > >again but NS requests don't queue up and people get impatient > >so multiple NS records are needed but not multiple MX. > > Technically, this is not completely wrong. Actually, it's right. > Anyway, this way you rely on sender's service for solving possible > problems on your side. This is not good. The maximum age Here, this is proper. > for a message in the queue, the tryouts and retry intervals > are not specified in any RFC. Anyone can push the queue maximum > size lower, or shorten the max life of message in it. It's also possible > me to run a mta without a "hard" queue, just suddendly reporting > an error to the sender on failures, although rare. That's Your problem then. > >Also, multiple MX servers makes more work for the postmaster > >in regard to filters and such in addition to be not needed. > > Yes, of course more complexity implies more work. > A backup mx does not require very much work anyway. I don't even know, what piece of software is running on mx1, but please note, that mx1 should accept every message from mx backup. This means, backup mx must hold identical anti-spam shield as mx1 does. > On a qmail server, for example, this would require seconds to be > set up, and probably no maintainance at all. I guess it provides advanced content filtering out of the box? *eg* -- Paweł Małachowski
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20040120190739.GA62180>