From owner-freebsd-isp Mon Feb 19 19:57:53 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-isp@freebsd.org Received: from corey.datafast.net.au (corey.datafast.net.au [203.123.67.4]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 7DD9D37B4EC for ; Mon, 19 Feb 2001 19:57:50 -0800 (PST) Received: (qmail 31742 invoked by uid 1000); 20 Feb 2001 03:58:57 -0000 From: "Corey Ralph" Date: Tue, 20 Feb 2001 14:58:57 +1100 To: Tom Samplonius Cc: freebsd-isp@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Dedicated smtp relay box Message-ID: <20010220145857.C91585@corey.datafast.net.au> References: <20010220142734.B91585@corey.datafast.net.au> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5i In-Reply-To: ; from tom@sdf.com on Mon, Feb 19, 2001 at 06:46:43PM -0800 Sender: owner-freebsd-isp@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org On Mon, Feb 19, 2001 at 06:46:43PM -0800, Tom Samplonius wrote: > > It is never a good idea to do that. It limits your scalability. Use a > "mail-in" host for the MX record, and a "pop" host for inbound mail and a > "mail" host for outbound mail. Almost unlimited scalability. Thanks for the tip, I wish I could do something like that. But it was like this long before I started here, and there is nothing I can do about it. Management wouldn't let me make a change that would require all of our customers to make such a change. > I thought the issue was that it was overloaded and you had to get > another box anyhow? Also, the above scheme allows you to add as many > scanner systems as required. I was hoping that just relaying smtp wouldn't need a large system, so I could use a spare box I already have. I have a couple decent systems, p3's with 512MB, but nothing like that one, 8x18GB + one hot spare, dual p3 800, 1.7GB ram. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-isp" in the body of the message