No, not really. Should I be overly concerned that I am seeing these errors
if all this turns out to be a a bandwidth issue? My concern is that this is
the beginning of a larger Exchange issue.

-----Original Message-----
From: Chris Scharff [mailto:chris_scharff@;messageone.com] 
Sent: Monday, November 04, 2002 5:54 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: X.400 issues


So, it continues to sound more like a bandwidth or network problem. Did we
ever determine what 'too long' of a delivery time meant?

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Bennett, Joshua [mailto:jbennett@;cotelligent.com]
> Sent: Monday, November 04, 2002 2:11 PM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> 
> I've adjusted the number of control blocks the MTA has available and 
> again, it did not correct the situation.
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Roger Seielstad [mailto:roger.seielstad@;inovis.com]
> Sent: Monday, November 04, 2002 1:47 PM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: RE: X.400 issues
> 
> 
> The previous suggestion about tuning the MTA stack is where I'd start. 
> The best reference is Managing Exchange 5.5 by Paul Robichaux, if you 
> have that handy. If not, the parameter I think you're looking for is 
> called control blocks.
> 
> ------------------------------------------------------
> Roger D. Seielstad - MCSE
> Sr. Systems Administrator
> Inovis - Formerly Harbinger and Extricity
> Atlanta, GA
> 
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Bennett, Joshua [mailto:jbennett@;cotelligent.com]
> > Sent: Monday, November 04, 2002 1:24 PM
> > To: Exchange Discussions
> > Subject: RE: X.400 issues
> >
> >
> > I use "supposed to be" due to the issue at hand that is driving me 
> > insane.
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Roger Seielstad [mailto:roger.seielstad@;inovis.com]
> > Sent: Monday, November 04, 2002 1:02 PM
> > To: Exchange Discussions
> > Subject: RE: X.400 issues
> >
> >
> > Replace "supposed to be" with "definitely are"
> >
> >
> > ------------------------------------------------------
> > Roger D. Seielstad - MCSE
> > Sr. Systems Administrator
> > Inovis - Formerly Harbinger and Extricity
> > Atlanta, GA
> >
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Bennett, Joshua [mailto:jbennett@;cotelligent.com]
> > > Sent: Monday, November 04, 2002 12:27 PM
> > > To: Exchange Discussions
> > > Subject: RE: X.400 issues
> > >
> > >
> > > These servers are all connected by WAN links and X.400
> > connectors are
> > > supposed to be more resilient to network interruptions.
> > >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Tony Hlabse [mailto:thlabse@;hotmail.com]
> > > Sent: Monday, November 04, 2002 11:19 AM
> > > To: Exchange Discussions
> > > Subject: Re: X.400 issues
> > >
> > >
> > > Curious as to why you are using X400 instead of Site Connectors. 
> > > Yes x400 are more efficient just curious.
> > >
> > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > From: "Darcy Adams" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > > To: "Exchange Discussions" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > > Sent: Monday, November 04, 2002 11:06 AM
> > > Subject: RE: X.400 issues
> > >
> > >
> > > > I'd think twice about that one - if you have a multi-site 
> > > > organization,
> > > any directory replication connectors that depend on those X400 
> > > connectors will have to be either pointed to another connector in 
> > > the same site, or deleted before you can delete the connector.
> > > >
> > > > And, if you delete the dirrep connector, be prepared to
> > rebuild any
> > > cross-site distribution lists after you recreate the connectors 
> > > (X400 and dirrep).
> > > >
> > > > Darcy
> > > >
> > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > From: Bennett, Joshua [mailto:jbennett@;cotelligent.com]
> > > > Sent: Monday, November 04, 2002 6:24 AM
> > > > To: Exchange Discussions
> > > > Subject: RE: X.400 issues
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > I have tried everything that you have described and to no avail. 
> > > > I
> > > received
> > > > a suggestion to remove the connectors and rebuild the TCP stack 
> > > > in
> > > Exchange
> > > > to clear this up.
> > > >
> > > > Any opinions on this idea...
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > From: Daniel Chenault [mailto:danielc@;dc-resources.net]
> > > > Sent: Saturday, November 02, 2002 10:02 PM
> > > > To: Exchange Discussions
> > > > Subject: RE: X.400 issues
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > 57: the other MTA has a limit on the number of available
> > connections
> > > > 289: because of that limit, a connection to that MTA could not 
> > > > be opened
> > > > 1290: somewhat a repeat of 289, but more info
> > > > 9202: low-level diagnostic on the connection failure
> > > >
> > > > In general this sequence of events can be ignored if mail
> > otherwise
> > > > flows. It's a temporary condition. If it keeps happening
> > > over and over
> > > > and the queue to that MTA keeps backing up then you'll need to 
> > > > actually
> > > troubleshoot
> > > > what is wrong (i.e. raise the number of connections on the
> > > other MTA
> > > > if
> > > you
> > > > have control over it).
> > > >
> > > > Precht, do you ever add anything of value?
> > > >
> > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > From: David N. Precht [mailto:discussions@;entrysecurity.com]
> > > > Sent: Saturday, November 02, 2002 1:45 PM
> > > > To: Exchange Discussions
> > > > Subject: RE: X.400 issues
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > www.eventid.net
> > > >
> > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > > [mailto:bounce-exchange-224131@;ls.swynk.com] On Behalf Of 
> > > > Bennett, Joshua
> > > > Sent: Friday, November 01, 2002 11:05
> > > > To: Exchange Discussions
> > > > Subject: RE: X.400 issues
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Event ID 57:  Source: MSExchangeMTA  Type: Warning
> > Category: X.400
> > > Service
> > > > The limit on the number of associations allowed to and from 
> > > > entity (X.400 address) has been reached. The limit is 9. [MTA 
> > > > XFER-IN 19
> > > > 34](12)
> > > >
> > > > Event ID 289:  Source: MSExchangeMTA  Type: Warning
> > Category: X.400
> > > Service
> > > > A connection to (X.400 address) could not be opened [MTA
> > XFER-IN 19
> > > > 26](12)
> > > >
> > > > Event ID 1290:  Source: MSExchagneMTA  Type: Warning
> > > Category: X.400
> > > > Service A locally initiated association to (X.400 address) was 
> > > > refused. The failure reason provider was 0 and the reason was 0. 
> > > > Control block index 6. Type 1. [PLATFORM KERNEL 25 130](12)
> > > >
> > > > Event ID 9202: Source: MSExchangeMTA  Type: Warning  Category: 
> > > > Operating System A sockets error 10061 on an accept[] call was 
> > > > detected. The MTA will attempt to recover the sockets 
> > > > connection. Control block index: /. [BASE IL TCP/IP DRVR 8 
> > > > 256](12)
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > These are the Event ID's that continually pop up on the one 
> > > > remote server with the same symptoms, the other server just
> > > produces the 289
> > > > event id only.
> > > >
> > > > Thanks,
> > > >
> > > > Josh
> > > >
> > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > From: Chris Scharff [mailto:chris_scharff@;messageone.com]
> > > > Sent: Friday, November 01, 2002 10:53 AM
> > > > To: Exchange Discussions
> > > > Subject: RE: X.400 issues
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Admission: I'm entirely too lazy to go look up the random
> > > odd event ID
> > > > or guestimate what "too long"[1] means. It there any
> > chance you (the
> > > collective
> > > > you) could include the Event ID source and description in
> > > addition to
> > > > the number? And that you could provide an example of
> > sent/ received
> > > > times
> > > which
> > > > constitute a "too long" delivery time.
> > > >
> > > > [1] When I worked at $vbc we initially had an MS Mail PO
> > > config which
> > > > routinely resulted in >8 hour delivery times of mail from
> > the US to
> > > > Indonesia. If a user called and said it'd been six hours
> > > and the mail
> > > wasn't
> > > > delivered, we didn't troubleshoot it.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > > From: Bennett, Joshua [mailto:jbennett@;cotelligent.com]
> > > > > Sent: Friday, November 01, 2002 8:55 AM
> > > > > To: Exchange Discussions
> > > > >
> > > > > Hello all,
> > > > >
> > > > > I have an incredibly annoying situation going on that I
> > > can't seem
> > > > > to get a grip on. I am not sure of the magnitude of the
> > > errors I am
> > > > > seeing due to the fact that mail is still flowing.
> > > > >
> > > > > Here is my setup:
> > > > >
> > > > >         I am running WNT4.0 SP6 / EX 5.5 EE SP4 all
> > > hotfixes on all
> > > > > these servers. I have a hub and spoke configuration within my 
> > > > > EX org. All my remote servers connect (through X.400
> > > connectors) to a
> > > > > central EX server that serves as my IMS to the internet. All 
> > > > > the spoke servers
> > > >
> > > > > are BDC's in NT domains. The hub server is a member server in 
> > > > > a central domain that all other domains have 2-way trusts
> > > to. All the
> > > > > remote servers (scattered across the US) are connected
> > to the hub
> > > > > server by full T1 lines.
> > > > >
> > > > > My issue is this:
> > > > >
> > > > >         The MTA on the hub server backs up and an Event
> > > ID: 289 is
> > > > > written to the App log then the queue flushes clear and
> > > all mail is
> > > > > delivered without incident. This seems to occur about every 10 
> > > > > minutes
> > > >
> > > > > or so during the day. There does not appear to be, at
> > > least on the
> > > > > surface, any connectivity issues. Should I just ignore
> > > these errors,
> > > > > as the mail is being delivered? Or is this just the
> > > beginning of a
> > > > > major issue about to explode in my lap?
> > > > >
> > > > > Please help, I have dug around MS site and Google and
> > > come up with
> > > > > little to no help.
> > > > >
> > > > > Thanks,
> > > > >
> > > > > Josh Bennett
> > > > > Exchange Admin\Systems Engineer
> > > > > Cotelligent, Inc.
> > > > > 401 Parkway Drive
> > > > > Broomall, PA. 19008
> > > > > 610-359-5929
> > > > > www.cotelligent.com
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > _________________________________________________________________
> > > > > List posting FAQ:
> > http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
> > > > > Archives:
> > http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp
> > > > > To unsubscribe:         mailto:leave-exchange@;ls.swynk.com
> > > > > Exchange List admin:    [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > >
> > > > _________________________________________________________________
> > > > List posting FAQ:       http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
> > > > Archives:               http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp
> > > > To unsubscribe:         mailto:leave-exchange@;ls.swynk.com
> > > > Exchange List admin:    [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > >
> > > > _________________________________________________________________
> > > > List posting FAQ:       http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
> > > > Archives:               http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp
> > > > To unsubscribe:         mailto:leave-exchange@;ls.swynk.com
> > > > Exchange List admin:    [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > _________________________________________________________________
> > > > List posting FAQ:       http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
> > > > Archives:               http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp
> > > > To unsubscribe:         mailto:leave-exchange@;ls.swynk.com
> > > > Exchange List admin:    [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > >
> > > > _________________________________________________________________
> > > > List posting FAQ:       http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
> > > > Archives:               http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp
> > > > To unsubscribe:         mailto:leave-exchange@;ls.swynk.com
> > > > Exchange List admin:    [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > >
> > > > _________________________________________________________________
> > > > List posting FAQ:       http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
> > > > Archives:               http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp
> > > > To unsubscribe:         mailto:leave-exchange@;ls.swynk.com
> > > > Exchange List admin:    [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > =======================================================
> > > > This email and its contents are confidential. If you are not the 
> > > > intended recipient, please do not disclose or use the 
> > > > information within this email or its
> > attachments. If you
> > > > have received this email in error, please delete it immediately. 
> > > > Thank you. 
> > > > =======================================================
> > > >
> > > > _________________________________________________________________
> > > > List posting FAQ:       http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
> > > > Archives:               http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp
> > > > To unsubscribe:         mailto:leave-exchange@;ls.swynk.com
> > > > Exchange List admin:    [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > >
> > >
> > > _________________________________________________________________
> > > List posting FAQ:       http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
> > > Archives:               http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp
> > > To unsubscribe:         mailto:leave-exchange@;ls.swynk.com
> > > Exchange List admin:    [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > >
> > > _________________________________________________________________
> > > List posting FAQ:       http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
> > > Archives:               http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp
> > > To unsubscribe:         mailto:leave-exchange@;ls.swynk.com
> > > Exchange List admin:    [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > >
> >
> > _________________________________________________________________
> > List posting FAQ:       http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
> > Archives:               http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp
> > To unsubscribe:         mailto:leave-exchange@;ls.swynk.com
> > Exchange List admin:    [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >
> > _________________________________________________________________
> > List posting FAQ:       http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
> > Archives:               http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp
> > To unsubscribe:         mailto:leave-exchange@;ls.swynk.com
> > Exchange List admin:    [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >
> 
> _________________________________________________________________
> List posting FAQ:       http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
> Archives:               http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp
> To unsubscribe:         mailto:leave-exchange@;ls.swynk.com
> Exchange List admin:    [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 
> _________________________________________________________________
> List posting FAQ:       http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
> Archives:               http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp
> To unsubscribe:         mailto:leave-exchange@;ls.swynk.com
> Exchange List admin:    [EMAIL PROTECTED]

_________________________________________________________________
List posting FAQ:       http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
Archives:               http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp
To unsubscribe:         mailto:leave-exchange@;ls.swynk.com
Exchange List admin:    [EMAIL PROTECTED]

_________________________________________________________________
List posting FAQ:       http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
Archives:               http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp
To unsubscribe:         mailto:leave-exchange@;ls.swynk.com
Exchange List admin:    [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Reply via email to