[CentOS] question regarding mx servers with same priority

fabian dacunha fabian at baladia.gov.kw
Wed Jul 16 07:42:33 UTC 2008

Thanks guys for the immediate reply..

anyway based on your nice sugeestions i feel that having a mail server
with different MX records would be definately better than having 2 servers
with the same MX since i was confused about which setup to be used

setting up 2 server with same MX
or one with higher n one with lower priority

thnks once again



> On Wed, Jul 16, 2008, fabian dacunha wrote:
>>Dear ALL
>>I have the following setup running good for quite sometime and i wd
>> really
>>apprecite if someone wd help or give some suggestions
>>centos 5.1
>>dns server
>>now recently our mail usage has increased considerably and moreover Mails
>>have become a utmost top priority
>>i have 2 options now
>>1) have a backup server with lower higher MX
>>i tested this setup n had some queries earlier n thanks to guys like
>> scott
>>for some prfect advise i did manage to check it out n it works beautiful
>>2) have another server with same value of MX so it cd load balance and
>>also doc says if one server is down or unavaliable the oher server would
>>receive mail
>>now my query is ... if i now configure a second mail server with same MX
>>priority .
> Having multiple servers with the same MX priority works fine (I prefer to
> think of this as distance as the lower ones have higher priority).
> There's
> no good reason to have multiple distances other than the shortest for
> final
> delivery and one or more with higher in case the primary is not available
> for some reason.
>>a) do i have to create all the existing user accounts on my existing
>> email
>>server to this new server
>>cause i already hav about 300+ email users already
> No, the secondary MX server(s) don't need any user accounts.  Using
> postfix, we do generate a virtual file for each secondary MX server
> containing all the valid addresses for the domain(s) served by the primary
> server, allowing the MX servers to reject invalid accounts without having
> real user accounts.
> There are some good arguments for having a single MX server rather than
> multiple MX servers as it prevents spammers from attempting to deliver
> mail
> through the higher distance MX servers which may well not have the same
> anti-spam rules.  At one of our regional ISP customers with about 10,000
> e-
> mail accounts, we use a single MX server to accept incoming messages,
> This
> server runs postfix, amavisd-new, and clamav to pre-screen incoming
> messages for worms (Windows is the Virus) and phishing messages, then it
> forwards clean messages to a cluster of systems that do spamassassin
> checking and message delivery to the user's Maildir message stores which
> are NFS mounted on a central server.
> The MX server in this case rejects about 2,000,000 messages a day using a
> variety of IP filters, and delivers about 250,000 messages a day.  It has
> a
> load average less than 1.00 except during the daily maintenance and
> security audits.
> It actually is the primary MX server for two distinct groups of domains,
> each with a separate user base.  Each machine that is home to the user's
> home directories updates its own section of the postfix virtual table,
> using rsync to update the MX server whenever anything changes with the
> users.  The MX server uses the postfix transport file to direct mail to
> the
> appropriate cluster servers to deliver mail.
> Bill
> --
> INTERNET:   bill at celestial.com  Bill Campbell; Celestial Software LLC
> URL: http://www.celestial.com/  PO Box 820; 6641 E. Mercer Way
> Voice:          (206) 236-1676  Mercer Island, WA 98040-0820
> Fax:            (206) 232-9186
> People from East Germany have found the West so confusing. It's so much
> easier when you have only one party. -- Linus Torvalde, Linux Expo Canada
> when asked about confusion over many Linux distributions.
> _______________________________________________
> CentOS mailing list
> CentOS at centos.org
> http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
> --
> This message has been scanned for viruses and
> dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
> believed to be clean.

This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
believed to be clean.

More information about the CentOS mailing list