On Tue, Apr 18, 2000 at 08:55:46AM -0600, Andy Bradford wrote:
> Thus said Gabriel Ambuehl on Tue, 18 Apr 2000 14:58:00 +0300:
>
> > Do you mean this seriously? I can't see a problem with a secondary
> > which is using exactly the same config (we normally clone our
> > systems as the first one except for the lack of the entries in local
> > or virtual... As long as your primary doesn't go any longer than
> > just a few minutes, you surely don't need a secondary, but if the
> > hardware fails, it's possible that it will be down such long
> > (depends highly on the admins, available spare system etc.) that
> > some mails bounce...
> Yes seriously. Most MTA's will queue email for at least 3 days, so
> unless your hardware failure lasts that long then you should be fine.
Secondary MX can come in handy when you lose routing to parts of the
world, but your secondary MX doesn't and can still talk to you. At one
point last year JaNET in the UK lost transatlantic bandwidth (we love
you Teleglobe, no really) but my main email address at the time
continued to receive mail as the secondary MX was outside JaNET but
within the UK.
On the other hand I'd be incredibly careful about who I trusted enough
to secondary MX a domain for me.
J.
--
] http://www.earth.li/~noodles/ [] "It only counts as a lie-in if you [
] PGP/GPG Key @ keys.pgp.net or [] don't get dressed before tea time." [
] finger [EMAIL PROTECTED] [] -- Steve Willison [
] PGP: 4DC4E7FD / GPG: 5B430367 [] [
