On Wed, 9 Oct 2002 16:39:44 +0100
Angel Gabriel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Does a cached name server have to be on the exact same machine as
> mailman?
No, but you lose most of the benefits if its not.
> I think it's pretty obvious that postfix seems to be the MTA of
> choice...
Postfix a
On Wed, Oct 09, 2002 at 04:39:44PM +0100, Angel Gabriel wrote:
> Does a cached name server have to be on the exact same machine as mailman?
No.
> Or can I add it to another machine on my network? I'm thinking that if it's
> on the same subnet as my mailman machine would the performance increase
Does a cached name server have to be on the exact same machine as mailman?
Or can I add it to another machine on my network? I'm thinking that if it's
on the same subnet as my mailman machine would the performance increase be
negligable if I installed a cache nameserver on the same machine as
mail
