Hi, On 23.07.21 19:44, Xavier Beaudouin via mailop wrote:
Well had another domain with 10 priority, same bloody behavior...Still don't understand why Microsoft does not implements RFC974 as it should... (well Microsoft and the mail has been a loooong way to break all RFCs.... but... in this case they are not good at all...).
Do you greylist or anything similar on the lower preference machine?I have seen servers switch over to a higher preference MX for all kinds of reasons so fast it looked like they were tried first in the logs.
Regarding RFC974 If the list of MX RRs is not empty, the mailer SHOULD try to deliver the message to the MXs in order (lowest preference value tried first). The mailer IS REQUIRED to attempt delivery to the lowest valued MX. Implementors are ENCOURAGED to write mailers so that they try the MXs in order until one of the MXs accepts the message, or all the MXs have been tried.It's been a while since I looked at this, but isn't "SHOULD" a recommendation? I understand this collides with the next "IS REQUIRED", but...?
Regards, Thomas Walter -- Thomas Walter Datenverarbeitungszentrale FH Münster - University of Applied Sciences - Corrensstr. 25, Raum B 112 48149 Münster Tel: +49 251 83 64 908 Fax: +49 251 83 64 910 www.fh-muenster.de/dvz/
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
_______________________________________________ mailop mailing list mailop@mailop.org https://list.mailop.org/listinfo/mailop
