Well it seems to do the job I wanted, which was to pass messages sent directly to this DL to myself and two others for moderation, unless they belong to the 'Approved' AD group. I'm just a bit narked now that it's only a matter of time before my precious users realise that cc'ing the DL lets them circumvent the moderation. Naturally, it's really important that the entire company receives an email explaining that a joiner is taking the afternoon off. Not that we have Outlook calendars or anything. I know that I could just threaten people with a call from HR if they consistently send crap to the DL, but that approach doesn't seem to work here. I'd sooner just keep the moderation if I could :-)
On 8 February 2010 15:03, Michael B. Smith <[email protected]> wrote: > Yeah, I kept looking into it after I sent that. > > What you are running into is that DL expansion is happening on the > transport server before the transport rules are applied. OTTOMH, I don't > know any way to change that. The fact that your current rule works is an > "artifact" or side-effect. Not sure I would trust it! > > Regards, > > Michael B. Smith > Consultant and Exchange MVP > http://TheEssentialExchange.com > > From: James Rankin [mailto:[email protected]] > Sent: Monday, February 08, 2010 9:54 AM > To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues > Subject: Re: Transport rule query > > OK, I just tested it, and it obviously reads all memberships, direct and > nested, because all of a sudden email was redirected to me by the boatload. > Now that I've resent all that mail, is there a way for me to intercept > messages cc'ed to a DL, rather than messages cc'ed to members of that DL? > > On 8 February 2010 14:41, Michael B. Smith <[email protected]> wrote: > Try it. :-P > > Regards, > > Michael B. Smith > Consultant and Exchange MVP > http://TheEssentialExchange.com > > From: James Rankin [mailto:[email protected]] > Sent: Monday, February 08, 2010 9:11 AM > To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues > Subject: Re: Transport rule query > > I'm not using any of those - I'm using the when a message header contains > specific words condition, with the SMTP address of the DL as the data. The > way I read it, when any of the recipients in the To field is a member of > distribution list condition would flag every mail sent, as every user is a > member of the All Staff DL. Or do I have the wrong understanding - do they > have to be a direct member, rather than a nested member? > > On 8 February 2010 14:02, Michael B. Smith <[email protected]> wrote: > Well, there are three relevant options for DL's, "when any of the > recipients in the To field is a member of distribution list", "when any of > the recipients in the Cc field is a member of distribution list", "when any > of the recipients in the To or Cc fields is a member of distribution list". > > Which do you have picked? > > Regards, > > Michael B. Smith > Consultant and Exchange MVP > http://TheEssentialExchange.com > > From: James Rankin [mailto:[email protected]] > Sent: Monday, February 08, 2010 6:08 AM > To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues > Subject: Transport rule query > > I have a transport rule to redirect messages sent to my All Staff DL to > certain recipients for moderation. I do this using the "when a message > header contains specific words" condition and entering the SMTP address of > the DL. This works very well. However, it seems to be avoided when anyone > cc's the All Staff DL. Is there any way I can modify this rule so I can also > snag the messages cc'ed to the DL? This is on Exchange 2007. > > TIA, > > > > JRR > > -- > "On two occasions...I have been asked, 'Pray, Mr Babbage, if you put into > the machine wrong figures, will the right answers come out?' I am not able > rightly to apprehend the kind of confusion of ideas that could provoke such > a question." > > > > > -- > "On two occasions...I have been asked, 'Pray, Mr Babbage, if you put into > the machine wrong figures, will the right answers come out?' I am not able > rightly to apprehend the kind of confusion of ideas that could provoke such > a question." > > > > > -- > "On two occasions...I have been asked, 'Pray, Mr Babbage, if you put into > the machine wrong figures, will the right answers come out?' I am not able > rightly to apprehend the kind of confusion of ideas that could provoke such > a question." > > > -- "On two occasions...I have been asked, 'Pray, Mr Babbage, if you put into the machine wrong figures, will the right answers come out?' I am not able rightly to apprehend the kind of confusion of ideas that could provoke such a question."
