I also question your assertion that mailbox servers need more frequent reboots.
Ed Crowley MCSE+I MVP "Helping others with Exchange for over a twentieth of a century." -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Steve B Sent: Wednesday, July 09, 2003 9:37 AM To: Exchange Discussions I seem to be involved in a bit of philosophical debate and want to get opinions from the field on this. Basically, I have some "service mailboxes" that I would prefer not to run on regular mailbox servers. These particular mailboxes do not hold any email, they are simply needed for the cirictal operation of exchange dependant third party services (like a peice of monitoring software that needs its own mailbox). They pose no risk to any server and do not need special attention. I feel better if they reside on infrastructure servers such as bridgeheads or smtp gateways since these servers tend to have less problems than regular mailbox servers do (as far as is's stopping or mailbox servers needing to be rebooted more often and then large transaction logs replaying that contribute to a longer down time for these services that rely on the mailbox). What do you guys/gals feel about this? _________________________________________________________________ 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]
