Re: [Exim] one domain, multiple mailbox servers

Top Page
Delete this message
Reply to this message
Author: Rolf Habing
Date:  
To: exim-users
Subject: Re: [Exim] one domain, multiple mailbox servers
Peter,

Thanks for your thoughts. I agree that the virtual route would be best, but unfortunately that's not possible
at this moment for historical and political reasons. I'll look into the LDAP option. I like the idea of that.

For now, I'm wrestling with a couple of condition statements in the 'unknown_user' director that might
do the trick.

Thanks,

Rolf Habing
Systems and Networking/Postmaster
Canterbury Christ Church University College

Peter Radcliffe wrote:

> Rolf Habing <r.j.habing@???> probably said:
> > The problem I encounter is when people on server 2 want to mail server 1
> > people. The obvious thing to do is probably a table of which user is on
> > what server, and route accordingly. However, I'd like to get away from
> > large lists as much as possible and am looking for a listless solution.
> > (Each server hosts +10,000 users.)
> >
> > Introducing an unknown transport on server 2 back to server 1 would
> > create a mail loop.
>
> The problem with doing this without some kind of lookup is that if
> server 1 goes down, server 2 doesn't get any mail.
>
> The traditional way I solved this problam was to make the domain that
> was being shared a virtual domain, split the MX between machines (or
> preferably between a pair of relay hosts) so that if one machine
> goes down everything else can still get mail.
>
> Building the user lists can be automated and distributed fairly easily.
>
> If you really don't want to build users lists (which would be the
> fastest and most efficient way, IMO) you could implement some kind of
> lookup (perhaps LDAP) on each server to give a response over the
> network to the other machine if a user exists on the other machine,
> and call that lookup as part of the decision on where to send or
> rewrite that address.
>
> I've always found splitting a local domain delivery more hassle than
> it was worth, and it's ended up virtual and delivery on each machine
> as machineN.dom.ain pretty quickly - easier, more reliable and scales
> better IMO.
>
> P.
>
> --
> pir                  pir@???                    pir@???

>
> --
> ## List details at http://www.exim.org/mailman/listinfo/exim-users Exim details at http://www.exim.org/ ##