>Peering is set so that mail.domain.com has a peer of 10.1.1.2, the IP
>address of mail1.domain.com and mail1.domain.com has a peer of 10.1.1.1, the
>IP address of mail.domain.com. Peering is also set the same for the virtual
>hosts - the sub-domains. Hosts file for each server lists the IP address
>and host name (but not virtual host) of the other server.
>
>The DNS record for both points to one public IP address and our firewall
>does NAT to point it solely to the new server, ie mail1.domain.com receives
>all mail for both hosts and virtual hosts and forwards anything not for
>itself to the old server, mail.domain.com
>
>Works great for the real host but not for the virtual host. Any accounts on
>mail.sub.domain.com (on the old server) will not get external mail or mail
>from accounts on the new server. Any accounts on mail1.sub.domain.com (on
>the new server) will get both external mail and mail from the old server.
>It works one way and not the other.
>
>When I look at the logs it does the SMTP lookup on the account and sees that
>it exists but when it actually tries to send the message it's listed as
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] as opposed to [EMAIL PROTECTED] I guess
>because of this, the virtual host accounts will not get through, the sender
>receives an error saying "Invalid final delivery userid:
>[EMAIL PROTECTED]".
>
>Is there a painless way for me to get the new server to send mail to the old
>virtual host and not the old host?
>
>I know there's gonna be an easy way to do this and I've been missing it all
>along. Still my head hurts from banging it against the wall so I'm happy to
>look like an idiot.
>
>Just as an aside, because it is sending to the IP address, if I send mail to
>a host account but at the virtual host domain name it gets through. ie
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] it will get delivered to
>[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>All suggestions gratefully received.
hmm, I don't have my Imail pdf here and at 33.6 'on-holiday' analog modem,
I'm not going to DL it!! vbg
But in DNS, for every real and virtual mail domain you host, KISS:
anydomain.com IN MX 10 peer1.aliport.com
anydomain.com IN MX 10 peer2.aliport.com
That gets the incoming mail delivered to the peer group, with 50% chance of
error, so that on avg one peer wil have to relay the mail to the other. I
don't call this load balancing, I called it load doubling.
Why don't you just blow off peering and NT hosts and do like multiple MX's
and DNS were intended:
anydomain.com IN MX 10 mailone.aliport.com
anydomain.com IN MX 20 mailtwo.aliport.com
where anydomain.com accounts are really on MX 10, but if 10 is down, MX 20
is backup. You are heavily biasing the incoming mail to go to the real
target MX, so there's none of this post-delivery VRFY futzing around
between the two machines for 50% of the traffic.
ie, just point the darn mail where it's supposed to go, plus a secondary MX.
I've never been able to figure out the big attraction on Imail peering by
myself, maybe somebody can explain it.
Len
Please visit http://www.ipswitch.com/support/mailing-lists.html
to be removed from this list.
