|
On Fri, 11 May 2001, Greg Cope wrote:
> Joseph Mack wrote:
> >
> > Michael_E_Brown@xxxxxxxx wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > > Why would you want to use LVS for this? You can do load balancing against
> > > multiple mail servers without LVS. Use multiple MX records to load
> > > balance,
> >
> > do MTAs use MX records in random order, rather than the first one
> > in the list? (I assume DNS delivers the MX record to the MTA).
> > Wouldn't local caching of DNS records make the use of a particular
> > MX record persistent?
> >
>
> As far as I am aware DNS should respond with all MX records for a
> request. The MTA should then choose one at random from the same
> piority.
>
> A cache should return all MX records as per DNS.
<insert I did DNS/Mail for four years at different companies here> :-)
The above statement is correct.
>
> <insert I'm no expert at DNS disclaimer here>
>
> Greg
>
> > Joe
> >
> > --
> > Joseph Mack PhD, Senior Systems Engineer, Lockheed Martin
> > contractor to the National Environmental Supercomputer Center,
> > mailto:mack.joseph@xxxxxxx ph# 919-541-0007, RTP, NC, USA
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > LinuxVirtualServer.org mailing list - lvs-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > Send requests to lvs-users-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > or go to http://www.in-addr.de/mailman/listinfo/lvs-users
>
|
