[Gllug] How to handle spam bounces from secondary MX server

[Luke Dudney]

On 8/12/08 12:54, Alain Williams wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 08, 2008 at 12:43:44PM -0000, John Winters wrote:
>   
>> Interesting idea.  Isn't there (wasn't there?) a requirement to have a
>> secondary as well as a primary?
>>     
>
> Yes there is.
> It is a good idea because there are some crappy MTAs that bounce mail
> after a very short time if they can't get through -- which could happen if
> your main MX is offline for whatever reason.
>   

If there are any such MTAs, I don't think there's enough of them to 
warrant worrying.

There's no requirement to run a secondary MX -- I looked after a large 
ISP's MTA infrastructure for about eight years and we only ever had a 
single MX record. At the end of that period it was processing about 
seven million messages / day; of course, that single record responded to 
a farm of about half a dozen physical servers.

Secondaries are targetted by spammers for reasons including what the OP 
described.

Luke
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.lug.org.uk/pipermail/gllug/attachments/20081208/4597ac49/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
-- 
Gllug mailing list  -  Gllug at gllug.org.uk
http://lists.gllug.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/gllug