Merit Network
Can't find what you're looking for? Search the Mail Archives.
  About Merit   Services   Network   Resources & Support   Network Research   News   Events   Home

Discussion Communities: Merit Network Email List Archives

North American Network Operators Group

Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical

RE: IETF SMTP Working Group Proposal at smtpng.org

  • From: Vivien M.
  • Date: Wed Aug 21 23:13:10 2002

> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-nanog@merit.edu [mailto:owner-nanog@merit.edu] On 
> Behalf Of Robert Blayzor
> Sent: August 21, 2002 10:53 PM
> To: 'Vivien M.'; nanog@nanog.org
> Subject: RE: IETF SMTP Working Group Proposal at smtpng.org
> 
> 
> Running a mail server off a dynamically assigned dialup *CAN* 
> work, but it really isn't the thing to do even if you put in 
> a low TTL on the A record.  Sure it works.  But what about 
> all the messages that will requeue on remote mail servers and 
> depending on the remote queueing strategy of the remote mail 
> server, it can take hours before mail could be re-attempted 
> for delivery.  A dynamically assigned MX box isn't really the 
> best thing to do.  If you want to do that then you should at 
> least have a lower preference backup MX that is on 24/7 that 
> will accept mail on your behalf, and when your server dynamic 
> SMTP server comes online it can simply do an ETRN to requeue 
> the mail on the backup MX.  
> 
> Having one MX on a dynamic DNS mail server is just rude to 
> remote mail servers that try to deliver mail.  Why should my 
> servers consume more resources to benefit your customers?

You're assuming that these people aren't permanently online. I expect
most of our users (I hesitate to call them customers, simply because a
lot of them haven't paid anything) are using 24/7 type connections.
Certainly, running your own mail server and being online two hours a day
is foolish.

However, this has NOTHING to do with IP allocation. A friend, years ago,
had a static IP dialup with an ISP that billed him for an X hour/month
package, where I think X was 120 or so. He could have run a mail server
that met your static IP standard of approval, and yet was (unless he
wanted to pay extra) only online 1/6th of the time. Now, most of our
users may not have static IPs, but they're most likely online 24/7 or
close enough. 

Which of the two uses more resources on your servers? I'm willing to bet
the static IP dialup person will, so there goes your argument.

Running mail servers on non-permanent dialup connections is foolish,
I'll grant you that any day, but that wasn't the point you were making.
Your point was that mail servers on dynamic IPs (and you never answered
my question on how you define dynamic) are bad, no matter the
circumstances surrounding them, and that's just plain not true.

Oh, and BTW, you're not benefiting our users by having your servers
queue mail for our users. You're benefitting YOUR customers who
presumably want to be able to send mail to our users, and who expect
your servers to queue mail.

Vivien
-- 
Vivien M.
vivienm@dyndns.org
Assistant System Administrator
Dynamic DNS Network Services
http://www.dyndns.org/ 





Discussion Communities


About Merit | Services | Network | Resources & Support | Network Research
News | Events | Contact | Site Map | Merit Network Home


Merit Network, Inc.