On Tue, 2 May 2006 22:20:16 0200, Michael Monnerie wrote > On Dienstag, 2. Mai 2006 18:57 David Flanigan wrote: > > My secondary MX has only rudimentary anti-spam filtering, and I > > thought SA was assuming it was safe if passed by that server. > > It would be safer to turn it off completely. 2nd MX are only useful for > spammers. What happens when your primary MX fails? > > 1) If you don't have a 2nd MX, mails are spooled sender side. > 2) If you have a 2nd MX, mails are spooled there. > > In both cases, your clients/users cannot read their mail or at least not > send until the primary MX is up again. Before using weak spam > filtering, get rid of the 2nd and use your energy for the primary.
I run mail on the secondary server against 3 RBLs (the slightly slower response is the price they pay for going to the secondary), which things things out, but running a second implementation of SA on the secondary is not something I really considered. Do most people run SA or something similar on there secondary MX servers? If so how - I assume a Milter or something similar? --- Kind Regards, David http://www.flanigan.net
