34 messages in net.sourceforge.lists.courier-usersRe: [courier-users] Re: MX lookup| From | Sent On | Attachments |
|---|---|---|
| Lukas Vesely | Jul 29, 2002 8:39 am | |
| Sam Varshavchik | Jul 29, 2002 2:20 pm | |
| Lukas Vesely | Jul 30, 2002 7:59 am | |
| Sam Varshavchik | Jul 30, 2002 2:30 pm | |
| Johannes Erdfelt | Jul 30, 2002 3:02 pm | |
| Juha Saarinen | Jul 30, 2002 3:20 pm | |
| Sam Varshavchik | Jul 30, 2002 3:21 pm | |
| Johannes Erdfelt | Jul 30, 2002 3:32 pm | |
| Sam Varshavchik | Jul 30, 2002 5:35 pm | |
| Juha Saarinen | Jul 30, 2002 6:03 pm | |
| Juha Saarinen | Jul 30, 2002 6:13 pm | |
| Johannes Erdfelt | Jul 30, 2002 6:20 pm | |
| Johannes Erdfelt | Jul 30, 2002 6:37 pm | |
| Sam Varshavchik | Jul 30, 2002 6:47 pm | |
| Johannes Erdfelt | Jul 30, 2002 7:20 pm | |
| Tabor J. Wells | Jul 30, 2002 7:31 pm | |
| Sam Varshavchik | Jul 30, 2002 7:46 pm | |
| Juha Saarinen | Jul 30, 2002 8:05 pm | |
| Bill Michell | Jul 31, 2002 1:30 am | |
| Lukas Vesely | Jul 31, 2002 6:51 am | |
| Johannes Erdfelt | Jul 31, 2002 8:43 am | |
| Johannes Erdfelt | Jul 31, 2002 8:48 am | |
| Ben Rosengart | Jul 31, 2002 9:23 am | |
| Moshe Gurvich | Jul 31, 2002 9:32 am | |
| Lukas Vesely | Jul 31, 2002 9:36 am | |
| Lukas Vesely | Jul 31, 2002 9:36 am | |
| Lukas Vesely | Jul 31, 2002 9:36 am | |
| Lukas Vesely | Jul 31, 2002 9:36 am | |
| Lukas Vesely | Jul 31, 2002 10:12 am | |
| Anand Buddhdev | Jul 31, 2002 10:17 am | |
| Johannes Erdfelt | Jul 31, 2002 10:31 am | |
| Sam Varshavchik | Jul 31, 2002 2:41 pm | |
| Lukas Vesely | Aug 1, 2002 10:16 am | |
| Luc Brouard | Aug 6, 2002 12:34 pm |
| Subject: | Re: [courier-users] Re: MX lookup | |
|---|---|---|
| From: | Juha Saarinen (ju...@saarinen.org) | |
| Date: | Jul 30, 2002 6:03:40 pm | |
| List: | net.sourceforge.lists.courier-users | |
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?
All you get in either case is a very crude form of loadbalancing. It's not like you'll see: "MX A is quite busy now, try MX B" and so forth all the way down the chain. All RFC 1123 stipulates is that the sending MTA should pick an MX at random, if you have multiple MX RRs with the same preference. So, your MTA might hit busy ones more times than not.
If you want to do that sort of thing, it would probably make more sense to have e.g. four MX with the same preference, and use Round Robin DNS load balancing with A records for the MX'es.
That said, you would've thought that a big, wealthy organisation like Hotmail would be able to use a proper load balancing front-end to their MXes, like UU.NET does.
-- Juha Saarinen