SLUG Mailing List Archives
[SLUG] Secondary MXes [Was: Virus scanning bounce strategy]
- To: slug@xxxxxxxxxxx
- Subject: [SLUG] Secondary MXes [Was: Virus scanning bounce strategy]
- From: Jeff Waugh <jdub@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sun, 1 Feb 2004 16:30:23 +1100
- User-agent: Mutt/188.8.131.52+cvs20040105i
<quote who="David Kempe">
> I have been steadily disabling secondary MXes for some time now. Its just
> a great way to attract spam - not an option when you net connection is not
> stable/permanent, but aside from that secondary MX just seems to be spam
Random hints for interested thread-readers:
1) If you don't control the secondary MX, it is barely better than
2) If your primary mail server goes down often enough or long enough that
you think you need a secondary MX, you really need to fix your primary,
build a cluster or outsource.
3) If your primary mail server is on a dynamic IP address, no matter how
"stable" you think it is, you are doomed with a capital F.
4) It is one million times  more important to have stable DNS than it
is to have a secondary MX. If your DNS server goes down, you're toast. If
your primary mail server goes down, clients will keep the mail queued for
a reasonable period of time. If your primary mail server goes down for
long enough that clients will start dumping mail, see (2).
 The figure sounds outrageous, but I can prove it. 
 LSD required.
GVADEC 2004: Kristiansand, Norway http://2004.guadec.org/
Grind'n'wink. That is all.