António Pedro Lima wrote:
> On Wed, 14 May 2008 20:58:43 +0200, Marc Rietman wrote:
>> Jake Vickers wrote:
>>> My reply was based on experiences with my own servers and those that
>>> I've worked on for other people/companies. The RFC is great and all
>>> but as you said there are no obligations. When it comes down to it,
>>> we follow the rules that the "biggies" such as AOL, Yahoo, Google,
>>> Microsoft, etc. set. I have a couple domains that have 3 MX records
>>> and I see mail delivered to all 3 machines regardless of priority or
>>> whether or not the others are answering. As far as I know that
>>> particular RFC has not been superceded but I'd say that roughly
>>> (without actually creating some boiled down metrics) 70%-80% of the
>>> servers that send me message actually follow that particular one. AOL
>>> has been seen delivering to all 3 of my MX records regardless of
>>> machine status. There's a couple other broadband companies that
>>> operate in the same manner that I've seen.
>>
>> Ok, that clears things up. It's obviously the usual 'standard' which we
>> 'all' follow...
>>
>> Thanks for the answer, Marc
>
> This is something that worries me...
> Setting a secondary mail server for backup purposes means that messages will
> be received in duplicate in many cases?
> I could handle that, but for many users would (for sure) complain about it :(
>
> Or am I confusing this matter?
Yes, you're confusing the matter. ;)
When there's a secondary server, the message will only be sent to one *or*
the other, not both. Once it is sent successfully to one or the other, the
sending server quits. At least it's supposed to. ;)
--
-Eric 'shubes'
---------------------------------------------------------------------
QmailToaster hosted by: VR Hosted <http://www.vr.org>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
