Victor Duchovni:
> On Thu, Nov 18, 2010 at 05:14:04PM +0100, Matteo Cazzador wrote:
>
> >
> >
> > Il 18/11/2010 17:08, Victor Duchovni ha scritto:
> >> On Thu, Nov 18, 2010 at 05:00:31PM +0100, Matteo Cazzador wrote:
> >>
> >>> Thank's a lot, but in this configuration i've only one node by MX dns
> >>> record?
> >> You could list both hosts for resiliency. Each will forward mail it
> >> does not own to the other.
> >>
> > Thank's so i can declare two dns mx record with the same priority?
> > Like:
> >
> > example.com MX host1.example.com 10
> > example.com MX host2.example.com 10
>
> You can figure this out for yourself.
>
> $ dig +noall +ans -t mx google.com
> google.com. 894 IN MX 400 google.com.s9b2.psmtp.com.
> google.com. 894 IN MX 100 google.com.s9a1.psmtp.com.
> google.com. 894 IN MX 300 google.com.s9b1.psmtp.com.
> google.com. 894 IN MX 200 google.com.s9a2.psmtp.com.
In a previous job I had several equal-preference MX hosts, and
they would all forward u...@win.tue.nl to u...@host.win.tue.nl.
This meant that with one host down, most people could still get
at their email.
Wietse
