FEATURE(dnsbl...... in sendmail

[Julian Field]

At 17:14 08/04/2002, you wrote:
>On 08 April 2002 12:17 +0100 Julian Field <jkf at ECS.SOTON.AC.UK> wrote:
>>But hopefully your primary and secondary MX hosts have the same
>>configuration!
>
>No, I don't have any control over the secondary - it's simply a relay.

In that case, aren't you better off without it? Mail will queue on the
sender's outgoing servers for a few days if your primary MX is out of
action. So as long as you can keep your primary MX up most of the time, and
can fix it fairly quickly, you don't need a secondary at all.

If possible, you should obviously have a secondary MX, but given the choice
between having one I couldn't configure properly, and not having one at
all, I would have to think quite hard which way to go. Personally I have 3
MX's, but I have complete control over all of them. If you are wondering
why 3, it provides us resilience against failures in the UK academic
network, our MAN, and our local campus network.
--
Julian Field                Teaching Systems Manager
jkf at ecs.soton.ac.uk         Dept. of Electronics & Computer Science
Tel. 023 8059 2817          University of Southampton
                             Southampton SO17 1BJ