No...no NTFS permissions changes. I'm the only Exchange admin in the company and the only person allowed to make changes to the configuration of the machine.
As far as the virii issue goes, I'd rather leave it the way it is. We are blocking almost everything in the MBLD (Martin Blackstone's List of Danger) and stop roughly 80-90% of our virii at the Linux mail gateway before they even reach the IMS. Besides, our mailbox servers are pretty beefy Compaq servers that are well up to the task of virus scanning...good suggestion though. I would LOVE to replace the IMS, but our contract here is in a state of flux and we won't be getting any new servers in and I'm not sure we have a workstation that could handle the load. -----Original Message----- From: Coleman, Hunter [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, June 04, 2003 7:35 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: IMS Corruption... Any chance the NTFS permissions got changed on the \exchsrvr\imcdata\ directories? Or that it's corruption of the filesystem, which is reflecting as corruption of the IMC mailbox? Can you appropriate another machine (workstation even) to build as a second IMC and take some, or all, of the load off of your existing IMC? Maybe it's time to retire the very old hardware. The vast majority of virii we get come from the internet, so if you can upgrade your IMC box enough to run AV on it, you'll save a lot of work on your mailbox servers. -----Original Message----- From: Blunt, James H (Jim) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, June 03, 2003 2:49 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: IMS Corruption... Actually, now that I stop and think about it, this seems even stranger... Our IMS and Bridgehead machines run on very old hardware. Because of that, we are not running AV on either machine, only on the mailbox servers. So with no AV on the box trying to scan messages and attachments as the come thru the IMS, why would they have started seeing corruption all of a sudden? Would an increased amount of Spam being processed by the IMS cause this on old hardware? Our company has seen a ten-fold increase since January, in the number of NDR's being processed by the IMS and a five-fold increase in both the quantity of Spam blocked at the IMS and the amount of Spam still getting through and being reported. -----Original Message----- From: Greg S [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, June 03, 2003 12:57 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Re: IMS Corruption... Thats kind of an old build of NAVMSE - see if you can get 2.18 from a recent Symantec AV distribution CD or from Symantec support. 2.18 bld 76 is the most recent i've seen. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Blunt, James H (Jim)" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Exchange Discussions" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Tuesday, June 03, 2003 12:13 PM Subject: IMS Corruption... > Exchange 5.5, SP4 > Win2k, SP2 > NAVME Version: 2.12 (Build 59) > > I have 6,949 of the following errors in my IMS Application event log, since > 4/9/03: > > Event Type: Warning > Event Source: MSExchangeIMC > Event Category: Internal Processing > Event ID: 3038 > Date: 6/3/2003 > Time: 8:43:03 AM > User: N/A > Computer: MAIL > Description: > An attempt to remove processed messages from the outbound store queue > has failed. The removal will be retried later. If the messages are not > removed before the service is shut down, the mail will be resent at > service startup > causing duplicate mail. > > This "Q" article is the exact message that I am getting and looks to > be a valid fix for my problem: Q296879 - XFOR: Sent Messages Appear in > the Internet Mail Service Queue and > Event ID 3038 Occurs > http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;en-us;296879 > > My question is this...The article says that this behavior has been observed > when running CA's PantyShield, version 4.0.4. However, I am not, > would not > nor would I ever consider running this product on my Exchange box. So...can > anyone tell me why this would happen? > > _________________________________________________________________ > List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm > Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchange&text_mode=&lang =english > To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Exchange List admin: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > _________________________________________________________________ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchange&text_mode=&lang =english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin: [EMAIL PROTECTED] _________________________________________________________________ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchange&text_mode=&lang =english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin: [EMAIL PROTECTED] _________________________________________________________________ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchange&text_mode=&lang =english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin: [EMAIL PROTECTED] _________________________________________________________________ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchange&text_mode=&lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
