Re: Access DB question

* Per Hedeland wrote:
In article <favdp2$6ib$1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> NPG
<nathan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
* Per Hedeland wrote:
First of all what is
the "anything"? - Will you blackhole the recipient address, the sender
address, the SMTP client, something in the message content, or something
else?
Maybe blackhole wasn't the best term to use. What I meant was that the
whole message would just disappear into our system.

After applying RFC 2821 to my brain, it appears that I have already hung
myself with that statement.

Well, these days no-one will claim that the RFCs are the "law" when it
comes to e-mail processing - however I think that from all perspectives,
it is an extremely important goal to not let the spam-fighting cause
legitimate mail to be completely *lost*. And of course we must try to
avoid backscatter...


Agreed.

Here is the scenario I was thinking of.

1 Say I am a backup MX for example.com.
2 Their primary MX goes down.
3 Their mail queues up on my server
4 Their primary MX comes back up.
5 My server starts sending them their mail.
6 Their MX rejects a recipient with 550.
7 My server drops the message.
8 My server does not send a bounce to the sender.

Which means that a typo'ed address on a legitimate message will cause
the message to go down a black hole(!:-) - not acceptable in my book.


Good point.

Bottom line, the *only* responsible way to have a backup MX in today's
email world is to have it closely track both the set of known users and
the spam policy of the primary.
What is irresponsible about my idea.

See above. Well, maybe "irresponsible" isn't the right word, I guess
you're in some sense responsible to the users of the system you admin,
and if those users think it's OK that mail from their correspondents
just disappears occasionally, I guess you're not being irresponsible...


:-)

If I was a backup for someone. It
is none of my business who their users are, or what their spam policy
is. All I am responsible for is handing them their mail. If they
reject it with a 550 there is no way I am going to be able to deliver it.
They are the primary MX. Once I have tried to deliver it, and they don't
want it, it is no longer my problem. At this point I could send a
bounce or drop it. Dropping it seems to be the right thing to do.

No. Bouncing it is wrong. Dropping it is wrong. Rejecting it in the SMTP
session where you (i.e. the MX) receive it is right. Which means that
you need to know whether the primary will reject it without asking at
that point.

I see, so
Bouncing it is wrong because I have already taken responsibility for it.
Dropping it is wrong because there is a chance that it might have been a
legitimate ( but misaddressed ) message.

I see, the receiver should Accept it, and then deliver it, or should
reject it.

Of course, I'm not saying that it's wrong for someone to
offer backup MX service of the form that you describe (provided you do
describe it) - but it's wrong to use it.


It is definitely not the nest solution.

great, but otherwise running your own off-site as
already suggested is the best bet
It would be nice if we could.

Co-located (virtual) server isn't economically feasible, or what?


Basically, yes.
We are a small company, not a backbone provider. :-)

- assuming that you really see any
advantage with having one at all, you still haven't explained why you
think so AFAICS.

Because I am the admin here and I want one. :-)

On the flip side you are the admin there and Bill is the admin over
there. You guys don't want them, and therefore don't have them.
Nothing I have to say would change your minds on the subject anyways.
To be honest I wouldn't even try. :-)
Seriously, its your site run it how you want.
As I said to Bill.
I respect your opinions, I just don't share this one.

Well, discussion can be useful even if no (participant) minds are
changed. I would really be interested in hearing a good motivation (or
*any* motivation) for having a backup MX of the form you expect, since I
can't see that it buys you anything other than a significantly increased
risk of losing mail when your primary is down.

All we would lose is what the primary wouldn't accept anyway.
Senders would lose their bounces if their mail went through the backup
MX. ( Their typo, their problem. )

Of course I will probably
try to shoot down your arguments, but you're free to not change your
mind because of that.:-)

:-)


--Per Hedeland
per@xxxxxxxxxxxx

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Access DB question
    ... address, the SMTP client, something in the message content, or something ... My server starts sending them their mail. ... My server does not send a bounce to the sender. ... Because I am the admin here and I want one. ...
    (comp.mail.sendmail)
  • Re: emails from some senders being rejected - why?
    ... sender when the message bounced. ... Also, if your server were ... have a backup MX server, but am purchasing that service from dyndns.org in ... Could the Host records and lack of a backup MX server be ...
    (microsoft.public.windows.server.sbs)
  • Re: Exchange email - hosting own email - Need solutions when server go
    ... I don't know if GoDaddy provides backup MX services or not. ... Technically speaking, if a foreign mail server is trying to deliver a message to your server and it is unable to connect to your server, the foreign server should retry sending the message for up to 48 hrs before it fails, gives up on the message and generates an NDR to the sender. ...
    (microsoft.public.windows.server.sbs)
  • Re: emails from some senders being rejected - why?
    ... sender when the message bounced. ... Also, if your server ... have a backup MX server, but am purchasing that service from dyndns.org ... Could the Host records and lack of a backup MX server ...
    (microsoft.public.windows.server.sbs)
  • RE: SBS Back up Failure
    ... attached the log and report from yesterday's backup also. ... One or more components of Small Business Server Backup failed. ... recommended that you review errors in the Event log related to the service. ... Notifications task in the Server Management Monitoring and Reporting taskpad. ...
    (microsoft.public.windows.server.sbs)
Loading