> 1. WHY not just enter the ip's into each peer of all the peers?
That *is* what you're supposed to do.
> 2. But here's the High Tek solution
I like your solution, but it's quite obviously going to be harder work
for Ipswitch to implement. I think peering works just fine now without
any real management burden, DNS overhead or reserved hostnames
("peer").
The X1 is only required for peering because the peering feature is
unique to Imail servers--it's just a brand-protection measure. It's
not actually used anywhere in the peering architecture, other than for
platform validation (that's why why you can one-way peer with just
about any other mail server). If it were simply taken out of the
banner *and* taken out of the validation, everything would be
hunky-dory. Except the branding would be lost.
> The REAL WEAKNESS of Imail peering (and webmail) is not the
> X1-in-a-bad-spot monkey business, it's that Imail doesn't support
> true assymmetric peering/clustering of SMTP/POP/WEBMAIL services.
I agree, it would be great to extend the metaphor to other services.
Sandy
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 the Knowledge Base for answers to frequently asked
questions: http://www.ipswitch.com/support/IMail/
