Thank you everyone for replying to my question.
First I think to work on the backup mx server (without any storage), as it was
suggested. And see how it goes.
Le mercredi 5 décembre 2018 à 10:31:35 UTC+1, Gilles Chehade
a écrit :
On Wed, Dec 05, 2018 at 10:21:13AM +0100, Aham
On Wed, Dec 05, 2018 at 10:21:13AM +0100, Aham Brahmasmi wrote:
> Hello Craig,
>
> > > But why? Just deliver it and be done. Can't see many drawbacks in
> > > that.
> > >
> >
> > Backup MX servers don't have any mail storage, nor IMAP/POP daemon.
> >
> > They are another hop along the delivery
Hello Craig,
> > But why? Just deliver it and be done. Can't see many drawbacks in
> > that.
> >
>
> Backup MX servers don't have any mail storage, nor IMAP/POP daemon.
>
> They are another hop along the delivery path to the primary MX servers.
>
>
>
> Backup MX machines are not the
This kind of mail has no place in a list with hundreds of subscribers.
Will only say this once:
I'm more than willing to ban people from sending to the list in order to
avoid the bulk from being spammed with this kind of exchanges.
Discussion closed.
On Thu, Nov 29, 2018 at 11:41:04AM +,
Thomas, you're a stupid, standards breaking, sack of shit.
STOP EMAILING ME PRIVATELY YOUR FUCKWIT CRAP!!!
MX records have a purpose. Read what they are for.
STOP SENDING ME YOUR FUCKWIT PRIVATE IDEAS ABOUT MX RECORDS
On Wed, 28 Nov 2018 13:06:03 Craig Skinner wrote:
> On Wed, 28 Nov
Hi Thomas,
On Sun, 25 Nov 2018 04:12:10 +0100 Thomas Bohl wrote:
> > smtp2 doesn't deliver the mail to an IMAP mail storage daemon.
> >
> > Instead, it spools it and waits
>
> But why? Just deliver it and be done. Can't see many drawbacks in
> that.
>
Backup MX servers don't have any mail
On Sat, Nov 24, 2018 at 06:52:00PM +, Craig Skinner wrote:
> Hi Peter,
>
> On Sat, 24 Nov 2018 08:21:46 +0100 "Peter J. Philipp" wrote:
>
> > ... the MX priority was all the same in DNS ...
>
> This is a vastly different scenario to Mik's question. Not the same...
>
>
> > backup MX's
Hi,
smtp2 doesn't deliver the mail to an IMAP mail storage daemon.
Instead, it spools it and waits
But why? Just deliver it and be done. Can't see many drawbacks in that.
--
You received this mail because you are subscribed to misc@opensmtpd.org
To unsubscribe, send a mail to:
Hi Peter,
On Sat, 24 Nov 2018 08:21:46 +0100 "Peter J. Philipp" wrote:
> ... the MX priority was all the same in DNS ...
This is a vastly different scenario to Mik's question. Not the same...
> backup MX's too I think with a higher priority field in DNS,
> ... all they did was queue the
Hi Mik
On Sat, 24 Nov 2018 00:15:33 + Mik J wrote:
> Let's say smtp1 is down, the internet client resolves the other mx
> with a lower priority and the mail goes to smtp2. Now smtp2 writes
> the message on the disk in order to store it.
smtp2 doesn't deliver the mail to an IMAP mail storage
If I only knew what others use when they do this successfully then all
my problems would be solved. Just kidding.
However here is a try. In 1998 I was a sysadmin and our setup was with
sendmail and postfix not smtpd. We had 3 Sun Ultra Sparc computers
connected with a small switch to a
Hello,
Now smtp2 writes the message on the disk in order to store it.
What do you people do in order to have a common storage for both smtp
which can be correct regardless whether a smtp goes up or down.
I'm afraid my answer has little to do with OpenSMTPD.
The common storage for my emails
12 matches
Mail list logo
