Scott Haneda wrote: > On Dec 18, 2009, at 8:32 AM, Charles Marcus <cmar...@media- > Brokers.com> wrote: > > >> On 12/18/2009, Greybear ([email protected]) wrote: >> >>> What is the recommended way to handle this problem? Should I give >>> up the >>> secondary MX? I'd rather not... >>> >> Secondary MX's are way more trouble than they are worth unless you >> have >> a very, *very* good reason to have one. >> > > Could not agree more. Sans mx2 for 12 years now. Most mailers retry > for 12 hours. I can publish a secondary in DNS in under 12 hours if i > see it going that bad. > > I think my hardest argument is clients who "check my work" against any > of the broken DNS reporting tools that mark missing secodary MX as as > bad thing. > To which the solution is to simply add another DNS entry which ultimately points to the same machine/cluster/whatever and while you technically have multiple MX entries they go to the same target.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------ This SF.Net email is sponsored by the Verizon Developer Community Take advantage of Verizon's best-in-class app development support A streamlined, 14 day to market process makes app distribution fast and easy Join now and get one step closer to millions of Verizon customers http://p.sf.net/sfu/verizon-dev2dev _______________________________________________ Assp-user mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/assp-user
