On the CAS, and in the EMC, I looked at Server Configuration\Hub Transport, and see two RCs: "Client usmaildb01p" and "Default usmaildb01p"
The new manager, who is doing much of the work for this migration, has changed a few of the names of things, so fulfilling your request stumped me for a few minutes. It looks as if he also changed some of the defaults, which is why I'm having some difficulties with pointing the batch files to the new server. I looked at the GUI and saw much the same thing as on the AuthMechanism line. But, here you go: [PS] C:\Windows\system32>get-receiveconnector "USMAILDB01P\Default USMAILDB01P" | fl RunspaceId : df01cc12-5634-4aad-81ff-ac2951003160 AuthMechanism : Tls, Integrated, BasicAuth, BasicAuthRequireTLS, ExchangeServer Banner : BinaryMimeEnabled : True Bindings : {:::25, 0.0.0.0:25} ChunkingEnabled : True DefaultDomain : DeliveryStatusNotificationEnabled : True EightBitMimeEnabled : True BareLinefeedRejectionEnabled : False DomainSecureEnabled : False EnhancedStatusCodesEnabled : True LongAddressesEnabled : False OrarEnabled : False SuppressXAnonymousTls : False AdvertiseClientSettings : False Fqdn : USMailDB01p.example.org Comment : Enabled : True ConnectionTimeout : 00:10:00 ConnectionInactivityTimeout : 00:05:00 MessageRateLimit : unlimited MessageRateSource : IPAddress MaxInboundConnection : 5000 MaxInboundConnectionPerSource : unlimited MaxInboundConnectionPercentagePerSource : 100 MaxHeaderSize : 64 KB (65,536 bytes) MaxHopCount : 60 MaxLocalHopCount : 8 MaxLogonFailures : 3 MaxMessageSize : 10 MB (10,485,760 bytes) MaxProtocolErrors : 5 MaxRecipientsPerMessage : 5000 PermissionGroups : ExchangeUsers, ExchangeServers, ExchangeLegacyServers PipeliningEnabled : True ProtocolLoggingLevel : None RemoteIPRanges : {::-ffff:ffff:ffff:ffff:ffff:ffff:ffff:ffff, 0.0.0.0-255.255.255.255} RequireEHLODomain : False RequireTLS : False EnableAuthGSSAPI : False ExtendedProtectionPolicy : None LiveCredentialEnabled : False TlsDomainCapabilities : {} Server : USMAILDB01P SizeEnabled : EnabledWithoutValue TarpitInterval : 00:00:05 MaxAcknowledgementDelay : 00:00:30 AdminDisplayName : ExchangeVersion : 0.1 (8.0.535.0) Name : Default USMAILDB01P DistinguishedName : CN=Default USMAILDB01P,CN=SMTP Receive Connectors,CN=Protocols,CN=USMAILDB01P,CN=Servers,CN=Exchange Administrative Group (FYDIBOHF23SPDLT),CN=Administrative Groups,CN=EXAMPLE,CN=Microsoft Exchange,CN=Services,CN=Configuration,DC=EXAMPLE,DC=com Identity : USMAILDB01P\Default USMAILDB01P Guid : 1f2d1b85-ee22-4462-bafb-f187a6bf261a ObjectCategory : example.org/Configuration/Schema/ms-Exch-Smtp-Receive-Connector ObjectClass : {top, msExchSmtpReceiveConnector} WhenChanged : 2014-01-21 18:50:57 WhenCreated : 2014-01-21 15:57:24 WhenChangedUTC : 2014-01-22 02:50:57 WhenCreatedUTC : 2014-01-21 23:57:24 OrganizationId : OriginatingServer : USdc4.example.org IsValid : True On Thu, Mar 6, 2014 at 2:41 PM, Michael B. Smith <mich...@smithcons.com> wrote: > Have you changed any configuration of the Default receive connector? > > If not, then it also accepts Anonymous email addressed to anyone whose email > address is in one of your "accepted domains". > > To verify that, give me a "Get-ReceiveConnector Default | fl *" and post the > output. > > Exchange 2003 and Exchange 2010 are connecting via a Routing Group Connector > that was created for you magically when you installed the Exchange 2010 > server. > > VERY LIKELY - based on default configurations - you don't need to change > anything. What you want is the default configuration. > > If you want to do auth, then use the CLIENT connector to port 587. That will > allow you to do outgoing relay. Again, it's already configured in the default > configuration. > > Exchange 2010 and Exchange 2013 come configured ALMOST completely right > out-of-the-box for most people. You've got to create a Send connector and > install a certificate or two, and you are off to the races. > > -----Original Message----- > From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.com [mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com] > On Behalf Of Kurt Buff > Sent: Thursday, March 6, 2014 5:27 PM > To: exchange@lists.myitforum.com > Subject: [Exchange] Securing Exchange 2010 for local delivery only, with no > auth > > Looking for some validation - much appreciated if any of you point out > errors, or a better way of doing things. > > As part of our transition away from Exchange 2003, I have a two-server > Exchange 2010 setup. A CAS server and a Hub/DB server. > > It's fronted by a Barracuda spam filter, which is currently sending all > emails to the Exchagne 2003 server, and mail is then delivered to Exchange > 2010. That all works well. > > In addition, I have a large number of batchfiles on various machines that > send email via blat, etc. > > I now need to swing over the Barracuda and the batch files to the CAS machine. > > I see two Receive Connectors, Default and Client, on the CAS machine. > Both require auth, which the Barracuda doesn't seem to support - I've checked > the config, but haven't cofirmed with Barracuda, and don't really care to at > this point, as I also don't want to change all of my scripts, and worse, > require the engineers to change all of their scripts, to use auth of any sort > for email. > > I believe that the Default RC handles the email from our Exchange 2003 server. > > My thought is to narrow the range of accepted IP addresses for the Default RC > (only if necessary!) to just the US Exchange 2003 server, and create another > RC (perhaps called InternalSMTP) and set it to receive from my validated set > of internal addresses without auth - the Barracuda, my machines running > scripts, the engineers running scripts, etc. > > Is my assumption regarding the Default RC correct, and is this a reasonable > approach, or is there a better way of doing this? > > I should also note that there is an Exchange 2003 server in each of the two > overseas offices, and we're yet undecided as to whether to put Exchange 2010 > servers there, or to centralize everything here - because of bandwidth > issues. Also, we're at DFL/FFL 2003 Native, though the DCs here in the US are > 2008R2 Don't know if any of that makes a difference, but wanted to make sure > I don't leave anything out. > > > Thanks, > > Kurt > >