Beware of the fact that many spammers now target low priority MX records on the assumption that they will be "backup" devices and perhaps doing less spam checking. Over the past 7 days, an average of 61% of all mail delivered to our secondary MX has been Spam compared to 39% of that to the 1y MX (and I suspect that the actual percentage of spam is higher - it's just not being picked up!) On the basis that nothing should be delivering to the 2y MX while the 1y is available, I've made sure that it's running ever fiercer spam catching rules in a bid to keep out the dross! Steve
________________________________ From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] on behalf of AdamT Sent: Mon 12/12/2005 18:13 To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [ActiveDir] [Way OT] DNS MX load balancing questions... On 12/11/05, Freddy HARTONO <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > That means it makes no sense to invest in having 1 backup MX of lower > priorities? > It makes perfect sense to have a backup MX of a lower priority. Most of your users may be located in New York, so you'd want most of your mail routed in that way, and would only want the mail server at your remote site in London to accept mail if NYC was down for some reason. Your London server might be sitting on a very slow connection to the outside world, or maybe it's a fairly old machine and not up to handling high loads, meaning you'd probably only want it to be used in an emergency. -- AdamT "Maidenhead is *not* in Kent" List info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx List archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir%40mail.activedir.org/
<<winmail.dat>>
