Am 01.04.2011 17:32, schrieb Vincent Lefevre: > On 2011-04-01 17:15:41 +0200, Reindl Harald wrote: >> Am 01.04.2011 17:07, schrieb Vincent Lefevre: >>> Perhaps in your case, but when sending mail directly (i.e. without >>> using SASL), I get a reject only once every few weeks. So, yes, >>> there is a reason for a fallback to direct SMTP to the destination. >> >> if you send mail directly you have to make >> sure a static-ip, ptr, matching HELO >> >> if this is not possible simply send not mails directly > > This is not (always) possible, and I have no choice to send mail > directly when the relay server is down.
when the server is down you can not send mails and you really will not die, if it would be so imortant you need redundancy on the relay-server (failover, clustering...) all the things are available and costs some money, but again - is it important you will bring back the money over the infrastructure or it's not important > Experience shows that most mail won't be dropped. and that is why so many spam is flying around would no host accept mails where PTR, A-Record, HELO not match, respect SPF and drop mails from dial-up ranges spam would dramatically go back > Still, the question holds: how do I use SASL, with direct SMTP > as a fallback? you can't >> use a relay server > I can't use it because it is down!!! so you must wait until is up, bring it up by your self or use any freemail-account if you need to send amil to solbe the problem
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
