From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Sep 27 18:39:11 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E8B1816A4CF for ; Mon, 27 Sep 2004 18:39:11 +0000 (GMT) Received: from post-22.mail.nl.demon.net (post-22.mail.nl.demon.net [194.159.73.192]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9A2E643D46 for ; Mon, 27 Sep 2004 18:39:11 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from nico.meijer@zonnet.nl) Received: from piweblw.demon.nl ([82.161.24.55]:21414 helo=[192.168.2.100]) by post-22.mail.nl.demon.net with esmtp (Exim 4.34) id 1CC0P0-000HHF-AN; Mon, 27 Sep 2004 18:39:10 +0000 Message-ID: <41585E4B.9040108@zonnet.nl> Date: Mon, 27 Sep 2004 20:39:07 +0200 From: Nico Meijer User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; FreeBSD i386; en-US; rv:1.7.2) Gecko/20040908 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Bill Moran References: <493F1EDF-0FE0-11D9-A586-000D9333E43C@secure-computing.net> <20040926143211.02d40949.wmoran@potentialtech.com> <4157A0F9.6010007@zonnet.nl> <20040927090142.1719d106.wmoran@potentialtech.com> In-Reply-To: <20040927090142.1719d106.wmoran@potentialtech.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Backup Mail Server Questions X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 27 Sep 2004 18:39:12 -0000 Hey Bill, Black mode is on, here. ;-) > Are you saying that it's better for users not to know that their mail > has been delayed? Unfortunately, yes. That is what I am saying. On a technical level, I totally disagree with myself. On a practical, day-to-day operations level I have to admit I'd rather not handle the calls. > It's better for them to assume that it arrived when > it really hasn't? Yes. Same restrictions apply. > If folks run around in a panic, then it's a training issue, not an > excuse for you to quell useful informational messages. As much as I hate to admit it: regular people don't want their mailservers to bitch at them *no matter what happens*, unless they are down (in which case they don't bitch either ;-) ). You know, the same people that shut their brain off when turning their computers on. Regular folks don't understand how mail works. They have no clue whatsoever. They don't _want_ to have a clue either. They are just behaving like consumers, again. Do you *really* want to know what's on your plate at dinner? ;-) I do, maybe you too, but most people don't. If I had a dime for every time I have had to discuss how mail delivery actually works to Joe Average or his Windows NT/2000 systems administrator... boy. > Again, I have many _very_ strong opinions on how email should be > managed, this is one of them. I happen to have a very strong opinion on the grim state of humanity in general and regular, everyday, Joe Average computer users in particular. I am therefore strongly biased. ;-) I disagree with you on the secondary DNS part (but I'm leaving that, I have work to do ;-) ), I technically agree with you on the MX part. I'll try to get out of black mode now :-) ... Nico