Neohapsis is currently accepting applications for employment. For more information, please visit our website www.neohapsis.com or email email@example.com
From: Victor Duchovni (Victor.Duchovnimorganstanley.com)
Date: Thu Apr 24 2008 - 11:05:39 CDT
On Thu, Apr 24, 2008 at 09:00:44AM -0700, Harakiri wrote:
> --- Victor Duchovni
> <Victor.Duchovnimorganstanley.com> wrote:
> > No that's the correct solution. I use the
> > "localhost" zone for
> > ad-hoc MX records.
> > transport:
> > example.com smtp:example.com.localhost
> > /var/named/data/localhost:
> > $TTL 2D
> > IN SOA ...
> > IN NS localhost.
> > IN A 127.0.0.1
> > ;
> > example.com IN MX 0 mx1.example.com
> > example.com IN MX 0 mx2.example.com
> > mx1.example.com IN A 192.0.2.1
> > mx2.example.com IN A 192.0.2.2
> Well this is the correct "workaround" - the correct
> solution would be that postfix supports multiple
> entries in transport maps for each domain.
No, this is the correct solution. Multi-nexthop transports break
> You have to
> install a local DNS server on every postfix machine to
> achieve this instead of simply adding another IP to
> the transport map - it would greatly enhance postfix
> for firewall/relay scenarios if this would be
You should *always* have a local caching DNS server on a mail server.
With BIND, it is always also authoritative for "localhost.". With DJBDNS,
where caching and authoritative services are split, this may be more complex.
Disclaimer: off-list followups get on-list replies or get ignored.
Please do not ignore the "Reply-To" header.
To unsubscribe from the postfix-users list, visit
http://www.postfix.org/lists.html or click the link below:
If my response solves your problem, the best way to thank me is to not
send an "it worked, thanks" follow-up. If you must respond, please put
"It worked, thanks" in the "Subject" so I can delete these quickly.