Ned Slider wrote: > Bowie Bailey wrote: > >> Joseph L. Casale wrote: >> >>> 2. I use backup mx's, my current solution probably could work in this scenario but >>> the support mechanism behind it is *very* weak and I can't get a perfect setup >>> working. Spam hits the primary for a domain, gets blocked and then tries my secondary >>> which sometimes accepts it, after which the primary always accepts from the secondary. >>> >>> >> If you have a secondary mx, it MUST have the same (if not more >> aggressive) spam prevention as your primary for this exact reason. You >> also need to make sure that the secondary can reject mail for >> non-existent users so you don't send backscatter when the primary >> rejects the mail. >> >> > > Personally I'd just drop the secondary mx completely and let the sending > smtp server queue the mail whenever you're offline. Makes life a lot > simpler. > I agree. That's why I started with "IF you have a secondary..." :) -- Bowie