Ben Kennedy wrote:
Sam Varshavchik wrote at 9:02 am (-0400) on 21 6 2005:
So, until modern technology advances to such a point, the only logical thing
to do is attempt to deliver E-mail repeatedly, and follow the preferred
logic for making each delivery attempt: pick a primary MX at random, if you
can't connect it to it, pick a secondary MX at random, and so on.
I have to admit I am starting to come around to understanding Rodrigo's
viewpoint on this, however. What is the *downside* of having Courier
retry a different (same-priority if exists, or next lowest, as usual) MX
rather than the same *potentially*-broken one, after the usual interval?
Yes, that's precisely my point.
It won't be construed as a spam attempt, unless I guess you are of the
opinion that my sending two separate messages to you and happening to
have them connect to two different MX is also spammy behaviour (no, it
would just be coincidence).
That's my understanding also.
Rodrigo
-------------------------------------------------------
SF.Net email is sponsored by: Discover Easy Linux Migration Strategies
from IBM. Find simple to follow Roadmaps, straightforward articles,
informative Webcasts and more! Get everything you need to get up to
speed, fast. http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=7477&alloc_id=16492&op=click
_______________________________________________
courier-users mailing list
courier-users@lists.sourceforge.net
Unsubscribe: https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/courier-users
