Sorry, shouldn't have sent so quickly that last letter. What I mean by specific route is that when you send an e-mail to any domain, it checks the MX record on the authoritative server & sends the message to that machine. If that machine isn't the final destination it does final delivery to the A record, right? That's how I understand it. When a machine is responsible for a mailbox it does not check the MX record, it just delivers it. right? That means the mail isn't going through the route it would if it wasn't responsible for the mailbox. Normally, with anyone's setup, this is fine, who cares, it's more efficient to not go through the MX record route. But in my setup I need it to check the MX record. i.e. I need the message to route off the machine. Regardless of if it is responsible for the local delivery or not. > Why would a mail server not deliver mail to a recipient it is responsible > for, but instead forward it to another mail server? exactly, it makes sense for efficency not to do that. But, it's not required functionality. It would work to send it to another mail server.
Yes, 5000+ being on the exchange server is a possibility, but not likely. So excuse the exaggeration of using the worst case scenario to make my point. Users will only have exchange accounts if they are going to be using it for a mail server. It won't be used as just a calender/etc. server by anyone. Mail for users without an exchange account will stay on the foreign system. You want the details of my system setup to prove to you that it's more efficient to forward the mail? Why? Even if it wasn't more efficient, does that matter to answering my question? It has to route through the unix box to get the virus/spam filtering (sorry, I did see on here that the exchange allows filtering based on user, address, & the such, but I'm just used to "filtering" meaning virus/spam. Sorry for the lack of clarity there). The reply to address has to be changed for the same reason, so replies won't go directly to the exchange box. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Chris Scharff" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Exchange Discussions" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Friday, August 09, 2002 12:52 PM Subject: RE: Help stopping local delivery > > Original question: > > > Does anyone know how to preempt local delivery? > > > If the server isn't authoratative for a domain I don't want it accepting > > > local deliver if there happens to be an smtp address defined for one of > > the > > > exchange user. > > > If the exchange server is authoritative for exch.mydomain.com, then, > > fine, > > > local delivery is ok. > > > If user Joe has an exch.mydomain.com and has a second smtp address > > defined > > > of [EMAIL PROTECTED], I want mail sent from user Fred on exch.mydomain.com to > > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] to actually route off the exchange server to the > > authoritative > > > server for joe.com (which is not the exchange server). Right now it > > does > > > local delivery by default. Even specifying a smart host doesn not > > preempt > > > this local delivery. > > > > > > ? Heelp pleeease... > > > > oh, see, I"m sorry, I thought that just telling you that they were logging > > on & sending mail from their exchange server would imply it is a mail > > server. My mistake if that wasn't so "obvious" to you. > > You'd be surprised the number of people who try to use Exchange for a > 'calendaring server' or 'groupware server' sans e-mail. I've seen it a > number of times in a number of different variants, in a number of forums. > Perhaps it would have been a bit more obvious if you'd adequately detailed > your use case. > > > All mail sent to "mydomain.com" goes a specific route. The MX records run > > it through a machine that does filtering before doing final delivery to > > the > > unix machine with the mailboxes. > > You've now restated this generality 3 times. It means no more to me now than > it did the other 2 times. All mail sent to my domain follows a "specific > route" too, but it doesn't require non-local delivery. What /specifically/ > does this unix machine do with regards to filtering? > > > There are 5000+ mailboxes here. Not all > > of them are going to be using exchange mail server, most will likely stay > > on > > this unix server. > > Ah, see your 5,000 users aren't using the Exchange server for mail. > Apparently that's not so obvious to you. > > >For those who opt to use the added functionality of > > exchange (serverside mail, owa, public folders, calendaring, etc) their > > mail > > will be forwarded from the unix machine to the exchange server. > > So, some of your users are on Exchange and some are on a foreign mail > system? Or all of your users have Exchange accounts and only some of them > use it for mail? > > >Reasons > > for > > this 1) ease of maintenance (believe it or not, yes, the forward, though > > inefficient under most circumstances is the most efficient way in ours) > > I'll choose not refrain from believing or not until you elaborate. > > >2) > > boss said so. > > Boss said so what? You still have not properly defined the problem and the > scope of the issue. If I decide to use Exchange and I send myself a mail > message, why does it need to route through the unix box before it arrives in > my inbox? > > > After some headaches I've got the reply to address changed, > > Why does it need to be changed? > > > > however, to do > > so I have to create alternate smtp addresses on the exchange server of > > mydomain.com. Mail sent to "mydomain.com" should go to the MX record & > > does > > for any address that doesn't have an associated address on the exchange > > server. If they do, it does local delivery. Which makes perfect sense, > > I'd > > have set it up that way as well, it's more efficient in general. However, > > it's not logically necessary for mail to be delivered locally, so I would > > think there is a way to override it. > > Why would a mail server not deliver mail to a recipient it is responsible > for, but instead forward it to another mail server? > > _________________________________________________________________ > List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm > Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp > To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Exchange List admin: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > _________________________________________________________________ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
