Redundancy with GWIA

We currently have the following environment:

1. Groupwise 2012 server #1 on one server, with GWIA, MTA, POA,
WebAccess on that server. Primary MX record points to this server. On
our dsl internet connection

2. Groupwise 2012 server #2, GWIA, MTA, on that server. Secondary MX
record points to this server. On our cable internet connection.

Currently, For incoming purposes, email normally comes in via the
primary MX record to server #1. If it is not responding, email incoming
traffic goes via the secondary MX record to server #2. m This is automatic.

However, I am not certain that the outgoing emails have automatic
redundancy. If the GWIA on server #1 cannot process outgoing mail
simply because the dsl internet connection it uses is down, does the
outgoing emails automatically get routed to server #2 to go out that
GWIA. Or does that automatic rerouting occur only if the GWIA on server
#1 is actually down.

I had read that the redundancy routing of the GWIA to server #2 did not
work on GW6, but did work on GW7. Is that the case and does it work
automatically for GW2012 in the instance where the GWIA on server #1 is
still up but is not able to connect to the internet because the internet
connection is down.

We want to have automatic outgoing GWIA redundancy in addition to the
incoming GWIA redundancy.

Cliff

Tags:

  • Hi.

    Am 07.01.2015 um 05:18 schrieb Clifford Wiernik:
    >
    > However, I am not certain that the outgoing emails have automatic
    > redundancy. If the GWIA on server #1 cannot process outgoing mail
    > simply because the dsl internet connection it uses is down, does the
    > outgoing emails automatically get routed to server #2 to go out that
    > GWIA. Or does that automatic rerouting occur only if the GWIA on server
    > #1 is actually down.


    The latter, but even that only when correctly configured. By default,
    there is no outbound redundancy whatsoever.

    > I had read that the redundancy routing of the GWIA to server #2 did not
    > work on GW6, but did work on GW7.


    I don't think that's true either. I'm not even sure if it was available
    in GW8, or just came in 2012.

    Full outbound redeundancy, as in the GWIA is up but it's internet line
    down is out of the scope of groupwise. This would better be done at the
    router level.

    CU,
    --
    Massimo Rosen
    Novell Knowledge Partner
    No emails please!
    http://www.cfc-it.de
  • On 1/7/2015 1:15 AM, Massimo Rosen wrote:
    > Hi.
    >
    > Am 07.01.2015 um 05:18 schrieb Clifford Wiernik:
    >>
    >> However, I am not certain that the outgoing emails have automatic
    >> redundancy. If the GWIA on server #1 cannot process outgoing mail
    >> simply because the dsl internet connection it uses is down, does the
    >> outgoing emails automatically get routed to server #2 to go out that
    >> GWIA. Or does that automatic rerouting occur only if the GWIA on server
    >> #1 is actually down.

    >
    > The latter, but even that only when correctly configured. By default,
    > there is no outbound redundancy whatsoever.
    >
    >> I had read that the redundancy routing of the GWIA to server #2 did not
    >> work on GW6, but did work on GW7.

    >
    > I don't think that's true either. I'm not even sure if it was available
    > in GW8, or just came in 2012.
    >
    > Full outbound redeundancy, as in the GWIA is up but it's internet line
    > down is out of the scope of groupwise. This would better be done at the
    > router level.
    >
    > CU,



    > The latter, but even that only when correctly configured. By default,
    > there is no outbound redundancy whatsoever.


    What would be the proper configuration to provide for this outbound
    redundancy if the GWIA itself is actually down?

  • Hello,

    Have a look at the following:

    https://www.novell.com/documentation/groupwise2012/gw2012_guide_admin/data/bx7k6hh.html

    Seems to imply that the MTA will automatically know that the primary is down and use the alternative ... not sure if that's the case.

    Hope this helps
  • In article <Fafrw.2609$Yv2.1515@novprvlin0913.provo.novell.com>,
    Clifford Wiernik wrote:
    > What would be the proper configuration to provide for this outbound
    > redundancy if the GWIA itself is actually down?


    The link dudeabends gave works great and I've used it at a few clients.
    To take it to the next step, you need some alerting mechanism to tell
    you when your primary GWIA isn't getting out. GroupWise Monitor can
    help on that front to tell you when messages start queuing up.
    https://www.novell.com/documentation/groupwise2012/gw2012_guide_admin/d
    ata/a7q51ga.html
    Basically you'd be watching for the 'deferred' queue to have more than
    a few messages as some are normal when destination servers are down,
    busy, or performing Grey Listing (Grey Listing is why you want your
    first entry for "Intervals to Retry a Deferred Message" to be a low
    number such a 5)


    Andy of
    http://KonecnyConsulting.ca in Toronto
    Knowledge Partner
    http://forums.novell.com/member.php/75037-konecnya
    If you find a post helpful and are logged in the Web interface, please
    show your appreciation by clicking on the star below. Thanks!

  • dudeabends wrote:

    > Seems to imply that the MTA will automatically know that the primary is down
    > and use the alternative ... not sure if that's the case.


    That is exactly correct. If you are talking "IP" to the GWIA rather than
    dumping messages into a directory, then the MTA knows that the GWIA is no longer
    listening and tries the next one. You can have many, many redundant GWIAs by
    saying GWIA1 rolls over to GWIA2; GWIA2 rolls over to GWIA3; GWIA3 rolls over to
    GWIA4.

    The MTA will just keep trying in order.

    --
    Danita
    Novell Knowledge Partner
    Are you a GroupWise Power Administrator? Join our site.
    http://www.caledonia.net/register

    If you find this post helpful and are logged into the web interface,
    show your appreciation and click on the star below...