OT: Backup MX

[Glenn Steen]

On 13/09/06, Dennis Willson <taz at taz-mania.com> wrote:
>
> Actually running a backup MX is a good thing. You can multi-home the
> backup MX (I refer to this as a mail hub), This hub is setup as a
> lower priority MX, then it would be setup to forward all email for
> your domain(s) to the real server via the second interface. The hub
> should not have to know anything about users.
>
> I have a setup where I have two hubs that forward to the end user mail
> server. The end user mail server never directly receives email from
> the internet. All Spam filtering is done out at the hubs so the server
> the users deal with has all its CPU power to handle users requests and
> they see good response times from the server regardless of how much
> load the hubs are under due to Spam scanning/filtering.
>
> While a lot of people know this.... remember the DSL line will need a
> static IP address.
>
>
Just adding a tad to Dennis advice:
The hubs need be equal in one thing: Setup to fight spam etc. Meaning
that the relays will need know enough about the users (if running PF,
just hypothetically:-) to know which mails to accept for relay and
which not to accept. If one does as Dennis, and have hubs that are
equal in all sense except priority (and connectivity), one should be
able to cope by mirroring/rsyncing selected config directories... and
having bayes (and whatnot:) in sql.

-- 
-- Glenn
email: glenn < dot > steen < at > gmail < dot > com
work: glenn < dot > steen < at > ap1 < dot > se