[fetchmail]Fetchmail, Tobit, Postfix to name but a few.

[Ed Wilts]

On Wed, Feb 22, 2006 at 11:00:59AM -0500, Rob Funk wrote:
> 
> In my opinion, backup MXs are more trouble than they're worth, and you're 
> seeing one reason why.  Don't forget, senders are required by the mail 
> standards to retry for a few days if they are initially unable to reach 
> the receiving server.  (Of course, the backup MX question is a live 
> controversy, so others disagree with me.)

I'll be one person to disagree with you :-).  Alternate MX servers are
*great* solutions if they're not the final recipient of the emails.  For
example, we have a couple of MX servers (with equal priority) at work
that capture the external mail.  The servers have identical hardware
configurations.  The emails then go to a pair of internal servers
(again, equal MX).  They then hit the Brightmail servers (here they
differ in their priorities) before they hit Exchange.

If you have multiple mail servers that don't relay the mail - i.e. the
users are expected to fetch their emails from multiple servers - then
yes, it is a royal pain to try and manage.

        .../Ed

-- 
Ed Wilts, Mounds View, MN, USA
mailto:ewilts@ewilts.org