On Mon, 25 Aug 2003, Jim Pazarena wrote:
> mail.qcislands.net is a stand-alone server
> qcislands.net has one MX record only, that of mail.qcislands.net
>
> now my web server (www.qcislands.net) is also a stand alone server
> it is however also named "qcislands.net"
> (without any machine designation)
> ALL MX records point to mail.qcislands.net _only_
>
> I invariably see email on my web server destined to my customers
> which actually reside on my mail server.
i would blindly reject these.
> What I have been considering recently is to set up my web server
> as a true secondary MX machine. However I don't want the complexity
> of mirroring user IDs. So I'm kinda stuck.
the concept of a secondary mx machine is not to have any local users
on it. it only acts as an intermediate store buffer as long as your
primary comes back. you don't need to mirror any users there. in fact,
if you do, that would not be a secondary (as in backup) mx, but...
hm.. hell broke loose?
> than an "unreachable" connection. (My mail server is on the island I
> reside on however my web server is on the mainland on the other side
> of my Telco T1 which does, occassionaly, go down).
>
> any suggestions?
>
> I suppose Greg's answer applies:
>
> > If you can't run your backup MX with the same (or more stringent)
> > policies than your main server then don't run a backup MX at all.
very much applies.
have your primary mx on the mainlands, then, and manualroute the
messages over to your mail server. granted, this adds the double
maintenance overhead, but to me it seems the only viable option.
--
[-]
... and the rest is silence.
