> 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?
For the most part, in a simple mail environment that is correct. > 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. OK.... so Exchange can do that out of the box. It can deliver mail to local recipients and route the mail for non-local recipients to another mail server. > 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? Well, honestly because your question is stupid. I assumed (and your answers are confirming) that bad design decisions have brought you to this point. The "best" solution is to fix the design. > 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). If virus scanning and spam filtering of mail delivered locally to the Exchange server is a requirement, it would be a best practice to have that done on the Exchange server itself. If you had 2 unix mail servers, would you really route all mail off of one server, through the other unix box and back? > The reply to address has to be changed for the same reason, so replies > won't > go directly to the exchange box. Your problem as stated can be resolved programmatically... but it'd be costly and inefficient. I think looking at the objectives which brought Exchange into your environment in the first place and developing an implementation strategy from there would be a better course of action. That's probably not the answer you were looking for, but based on my experience with messaging infrastructure I believe it to be the best one. _________________________________________________________________ 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]
