Redundant Mail System Suggestions

UxBoD uxbod at splatnix.net
Tue Nov 27 18:45:04 GMT 2007


Good point Richard I had not considered that.  Also are the servers going to be in disperate locations or in the same data centre on different power phases.  When people say redundant solution they don't always consider what a power failure could do.

Regards,

--[ UxBoD ]--
// PGP Key: "curl -s https://www.splatnix.net/uxbod.asc | gpg --import"
// Fingerprint: C759 8F52 1D17 B3C5 5854  36BD 1FB1 B02F 5DB5 687B
// Keyserver: www.keyserver.net Key-ID: 0x5DB5687B
// Phone: +44 845 869 2749 SIP Phone: uxbod at sip.splatnix.net

----- Original Message -----
From: "Richard Frovarp" <richard.frovarp at sendit.nodak.edu>
To: "MailScanner discussion" <mailscanner at lists.mailscanner.info>
Sent: Tuesday, November 27, 2007 6:40:05 PM (GMT) Europe/London
Subject: Re: Redundant Mail System Suggestions

UxBoD wrote:
> Hey Johnny,
>
> Personal I would go with the primary and secondary MX record solution.  Multiple A records are find but IMHO are more used for load balancing than redundancy.

Or if the links and machines are equal, go with equal MX records. Some 
broken mailers won't fail down the MX chain.
-- 
MailScanner mailing list
mailscanner at lists.mailscanner.info
http://lists.mailscanner.info/mailman/listinfo/mailscanner

Before posting, read http://wiki.mailscanner.info/posting

Support MailScanner development - buy the book off the website! 

-- 
This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
believed to be clean.



-- 
This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
believed to be clean.



More information about the MailScanner mailing list