atom feed34 messages in net.sourceforge.lists.courier-usersRe: [courier-users] Re: MX lookup
FromSent OnAttachments
Lukas VeselyJul 29, 2002 8:39 am 
Sam VarshavchikJul 29, 2002 2:20 pm 
Lukas VeselyJul 30, 2002 7:59 am 
Sam VarshavchikJul 30, 2002 2:30 pm 
Johannes ErdfeltJul 30, 2002 3:02 pm 
Juha SaarinenJul 30, 2002 3:20 pm 
Sam VarshavchikJul 30, 2002 3:21 pm 
Johannes ErdfeltJul 30, 2002 3:32 pm 
Sam VarshavchikJul 30, 2002 5:35 pm 
Juha SaarinenJul 30, 2002 6:03 pm 
Juha SaarinenJul 30, 2002 6:13 pm 
Johannes ErdfeltJul 30, 2002 6:20 pm 
Johannes ErdfeltJul 30, 2002 6:37 pm 
Sam VarshavchikJul 30, 2002 6:47 pm 
Johannes ErdfeltJul 30, 2002 7:20 pm 
Tabor J. WellsJul 30, 2002 7:31 pm 
Sam VarshavchikJul 30, 2002 7:46 pm 
Juha SaarinenJul 30, 2002 8:05 pm 
Bill MichellJul 31, 2002 1:30 am 
Lukas VeselyJul 31, 2002 6:51 am 
Johannes ErdfeltJul 31, 2002 8:43 am 
Johannes ErdfeltJul 31, 2002 8:48 am 
Ben RosengartJul 31, 2002 9:23 am 
Moshe GurvichJul 31, 2002 9:32 am 
Lukas VeselyJul 31, 2002 9:36 am 
Lukas VeselyJul 31, 2002 9:36 am 
Lukas VeselyJul 31, 2002 9:36 am 
Lukas VeselyJul 31, 2002 9:36 am 
Lukas VeselyJul 31, 2002 10:12 am 
Anand BuddhdevJul 31, 2002 10:17 am 
Johannes ErdfeltJul 31, 2002 10:31 am 
Sam VarshavchikJul 31, 2002 2:41 pm 
Lukas VeselyAug 1, 2002 10:16 am 
Luc BrouardAug 6, 2002 12:34 pm 
Subject:Re: [courier-users] Re: MX lookup
From:Juha Saarinen (ju@saarinen.org)
Date:Jul 30, 2002 6:13:41 pm
List:net.sourceforge.lists.courier-users

On Wed, 31 Jul 2002, Juha Saarinen wrote:

On Tue, 30 Jul 2002, Johannes Erdfelt wrote:

I don't think it's that silly.

Multiple NS records, by design, are load balanced. Multiple A records are load balanced.

Why shouldn't multiple MX records be load balanced? What makes them so special to be treated differently?

Here's a better explanation than mine (forgot about cacheing):

http://hotwired.lycos.com/packet/garfinkel/97/07/index2a.html

-- Juha Saarinen