 | Start a set with this search |
 | Include this search in one of my sets |
 | Exclude this search from one of my sets |
 | Permalink to these results Paste this link in email or IM: |
 | Atom feed for tracking future search results Paste this URL into your reader: |
16 messages in net.sourceforge.lists.courier-usersRe: [courier-users] Re: DNS lookups b...| From | Sent On | Attachments |
|---|---|---|
| Tim Hosking | Sep 6, 2001 6:55 am | |
| Sam Varshavchik | Sep 6, 2001 2:49 pm | |
| Tim Hosking | Sep 6, 2001 3:23 pm | |
| Sam Varshavchik | Sep 6, 2001 3:50 pm | |
| Tim Hosking | Sep 7, 2001 8:44 am | |
| Sam Varshavchik | Sep 7, 2001 5:43 pm | |
| Tim Hosking | Sep 10, 2001 6:56 am | |
| Sam Varshavchik | Sep 10, 2001 3:18 pm | |
| Tim Hosking | Sep 11, 2001 6:34 am | |
| Sam Varshavchik | Sep 11, 2001 10:51 am | |
| Tim Hosking | Sep 12, 2001 4:48 am | |
| Tim Hosking | Nov 15, 2001 10:31 am | |
| Sam Varshavchik | Nov 15, 2001 2:43 pm | |
| Tim Hosking | Nov 15, 2001 5:40 pm | |
| Sam Varshavchik | Nov 15, 2001 6:16 pm | |
| Tim Hosking | Nov 17, 2001 3:13 pm |
| Permalink for this message Paste this link in email or IM: |
| Permalink for this thread Paste this link in email or IM: |
| Atom feed for this thread Paste this URL into your reader: |
| Subject: | Re: [courier-users] Re: DNS lookups behaving strangely | Actions... |
|---|---|---|
| From: | Tim Hosking (ti...@trhosking.com) | |
| Date: | Sep 11, 2001 6:34:43 am | |
| List: | net.sourceforge.lists.courier-users | |
on 10/9/01 6:18 pm, Sam Varshavchik at mrs...@courier-mta.com wrote:
Tim Hosking writes:
on 7/9/01 8:43 pm, Sam Varshavchik at mrs...@courier-mta.com wrote:
But xyz.com does not come into it. The mail is being sent via the smpt server on mail.example.com from use...@example.com to use...@example.com. There is absolutely no need to look for the secondary MX on xyz.com when example.com is alive and well. It really does not make sense. I noticed the following posting from Roberto de Iriarte and it looks like it may be related:
I do see your point, but it's always easier to use real domains, instead of fake ones. It's less confusing.
The reason for the existing behavior is that there are a couple of settings which allow a specific mail relay to be blacklisted, banning any domain with an MX to that relay. This is useful when the given mail server is causing various problems; such as not accepting postmaster mail; or other similar kind of problems. This is why the domain must resolve fully, both MX and A records. Note that the mail is only deferred, it's not bounced. A 4xx is a temporary error, and the sender will try to redeliver later.
Fake domains? In our case the secondary DNS/MX machine is not 'fake'. It was simply offline for several days due to technical problems. As a result, the 'example.com' mail server was pretty much incapacitated in that it could not relay mail until the secondary server was fully functional.
This IMHO is inappropriate. The sole purpose of a backup server is to provide a fallover situation should the primary server be unavailable. Allowing an offline secondary server to drag the primary server down with it (i.e. defer the delivery of mail for several days) is unacceptable.
I don't claim to understand the 'various problems' you describe above, but I am pretty sure that we have not encountered them and don't expect we will, as the secondary MX is also entirely under our control. Would it be possible make the rather strict rule you are imposing on resolving the secondary MX a build option?
-- Tim Hosking Be consistent (but not all the time)