Redundant Mail System Suggestions

[Johnny Stork]

They will be in the same location, and connected to seperate UPS's but 
same office power connections to the wall

UxBoD wrote:
> 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.
>   

-- 
*Johnny Stork*
Business & Technology Consultant
stork at openenterprise.ca