"Matus" == Matus UHLAR <- fantomas > writes:
Matus> is it not. To be precise:
Matus> SRS is to be used when you accept mail for one address and re-send to
Matus> another address (in different domain/on different server).
Matus> this is not the case for backup MX.
On 18.11.21 18:28, Togan
> "Viktor" == Viktor Dukhovni writes:
>> On 18 Nov 2021, at 12:28 pm, Togan Muftuoglu wrote:
>>
>> Thanks for the clarification. One more thing having the backup MX listed in
>> the SPF records of the domain and opendkim signing the relayed mails does
>> not break the validations in the
Viktor Dukhovni:
> > On 18 Nov 2021, at 12:28 pm, Togan Muftuoglu wrote:
> >
> > Thanks for the clarification. One more thing having the backup MX listed in
> > the SPF records of the domain and opendkim signing the relayed mails does
> > not
> > break the validations in the primary MX when it
> On 18 Nov 2021, at 12:28 pm, Togan Muftuoglu wrote:
>
> Thanks for the clarification. One more thing having the backup MX listed in
> the SPF records of the domain and opendkim signing the relayed mails does not
> break the validations in the primary MX when it receives mail from the backup,
>
> "Matus" == Matus UHLAR <- fantomas > writes:
Matus> is it not. To be precise:
Matus> SRS is to be used when you accept mail for one address and re-send to
Matus> another address (in different domain/on different server).
Matus> this is not the case for backup MX.
Thanks for the
On 18.11.21 17:10, Togan Muftuoglu wrote:
Should Sender Rewriting Scheme be enabled for a server acting as backup MX.
no, SRS is supposed to be implemented for outgoing. not incoming mail.
My understanding is SRS is needed if the mail server acts as forwarder. But
in the case of a backup MX
Hi,
Should Sender Rewriting Scheme be enabled for a server acting as backup MX.
Just to be specific I want one of my servers to solely act as a backup MX for
the domain.
My understanding is SRS is needed if the mail server acts as forwarder. But
in the case of a backup MX it is not a
