Re: Secondary NS/MX required

<quote who="Ross Golder">

> OK, we've had two offers for slave nameservers which we'll follow up, but
> still no offers of a secondary MX.

Why do we need a secondary MX? I'd suggest that having a secondary MX is
more trouble than it's worth, and hosting a secondary MX for someone is
definitely more trouble than it's worth. Let's just avoid the damage by not
having one at all. The important thing, our DNS, is fine.

- Jeff

-- 2005: Canberra, Australia      
       "I think of the last year or two as being the biggest private
         investment in public works in decades." - Andrew Tridgell

[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]