I didn�t understood very well all the mess with the MX that you posted.
People send the mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], they dont send it to
[EMAIL PROTECTED] or [EMAIL PROTECTED], so my config would be
MX 10 nashville
MX 20 cairo
so all mail goes to nashville & if the user don�t exist there, via peer
nashville will send it to cairo, find the user in cairo & deliver, so
the cairo user will get the mail from cairo
If nashville cannot send the mail to cairo, it will retry until it can
deliver it OK
Len Conrad wrote:
>
> >Think the peer option is what you need
>
> Hey Ed,
>
> He said he can't get his Cairo users can't pick up their mail
> reliably at Nashville.
>
> With Imail peering and 2 peers, 50% of the incoming mail goes to the
> WRONG MAIL SERVER, ie, 50% of Nashville's mail goes to Cairo, and
> Cairo has to send it back to Nashville. Sending the mail twice over
> long, unreliable WAN.
>
> I think it's better to have Nashville's mail go explicitly/primarily
> to Nashville and Cairo's to Cairo, isolating Cairo's WAN pb's to
> Cairo's mail flow. Why spread the Cairo pain to Nashville?
>
> Len
>
> Please visit http://www.ipswitch.com/support/mailing-lists.html
> to be removed from this list.
>
> An Archive of this list is available at:
> http://www.mail-archive.com/imail_forum%40list.ipswitch.com/
Please visit http://www.ipswitch.com/support/mailing-lists.html
to be removed from this list.
An Archive of this list is available at:
http://www.mail-archive.com/imail_forum%40list.ipswitch.com/
