Scott Haneda wrote: > On Dec 18, 2009, at 2:16 PM, Melvin <[email protected]> wrote: > >>> 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. > > Exactly what I usually do. Some DNS checkers run full MTA tests > against both MX's. I > Don't like those DNS checkers :) I run 2 clustered servers anyway so they show up correctly, but I know the feeling. Trying to explain the difference between a warning and an error to a customer is treacherous at best and deadly at worst.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 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
