Re: Postini
Yes but you'll configure routing within GoogleApps\Users Organizations\groups. Very easy. On Wed, May 11, 2011 at 10:39 AM, KevinM kev...@wlkmmas.org wrote: I have never worked with Postini and I am prepping for a customer consolidation where Postini is involved – My question – Can I do per user email routing with Postini? Example b...@bob.com is routed to mail.bob.com f...@bob.com is routed to mail.fredco.com sa...@bob.com is routed to coolserver.bob.com --- To manage subscriptions click here: http://lyris.sunbelt-software.com/read/my_forums/ or send an email to listmana...@lyris.sunbeltsoftware.com with the body: unsubscribe exchangelist --- To manage subscriptions click here: http://lyris.sunbelt-software.com/read/my_forums/ or send an email to listmana...@lyris.sunbeltsoftware.com with the body: unsubscribe exchangelist
Re: Exchange is history?: Moved two clients to GoogleApps this week.
+1 On Sun, Aug 22, 2010 at 1:15 PM, John Hornbuckle john.hornbuc...@taylor.k12.fl.us wrote: Is there some evidence to indicate that if one uses Google to host their data, they’re agreeing to allow Google to use their data? We use Google/Postini to archive our e-mail, and I saw nothing in our contract that would make the mining of our data by Google acceptable. And while I’m reasonably confident that our network is secure, I’ll readily admit that Google’s is very likely more secure than ours. In all honesty, our data is likely safer within their infrastructure than within our own. John Hornbuckle MIS Department Taylor County School District www.taylor.k12.fl.us *From:* Matt Moore [mailto:mattmoore...@hotmail.com] *Sent:* Sunday, August 22, 2010 12:48 PM *To:* MS-Exchange Admin Issues *Subject:* RE: Exchange is history?: Moved two clients to GoogleApps this week. Oh yes! And not to just anyone, the biggest data miners in the world. *From:* Hank . [mailto:hgedr...@gmail.com] *Sent:* Sunday, August 22, 2010 4:50 AM *To:* MS-Exchange Admin Issues *Subject:* Re: Exchange is history?: Moved two clients to GoogleApps this week. But you forgot to mention that you get to give all of your data to someone else. Remember one of the most basic of about security is that you maintain physical control of your data. On Sat, Aug 21, 2010 at 12:32 PM, Stephan Barr stephanbarr.li...@gmail.com wrote: Goggle Apps cost $50 per seat, per email address, per year. There are no other costs. For the $50 here's a short list of what you get: - Vanity email address / your.n...@yourdomainname.com - SSL - AntiSpam, AntiVirus - Postini - 25GB of storage per email address On Sat, Aug 21, 2010 at 3:48 AM, Dave Wade dave.w...@stockport.gov.uk wrote: Paul, I am a Radio Ham and one of the guys I chat to works in a small (about 25 staff) organization, and has just upgraded his system to Windows/2008r2 and Exchange 2010. When I expressed suprise that he wasn't out sourcing to Google apps or some thing of that ilk he said when costed over 4 years it looked very expensive, especially given the uncertainty in pricing given we work in Sterling... *Dave Wade* *0161 474 5456* -- *From:* Paul Hutchings *Sent:* Fri 20/08/2010 17:13 *To:* MS-Exchange Admin Issues *Subject:* RE: Exchange is history?: Moved two clients to GoogleApps this week. I've never really seen it as Google vs. Exchange tbh, I think both do different things and suit different needs. Office with half a dozen people and no real IT need or infrastructure and I think I'd find it hard to see past Google Apps or Hosted Exchange, even scaled up to a couple dozen staff and a single server I'm not sure Exchange would be first choice simply because if nothing else you do need to back it up and someone needs to ensure that happens. On the other hand, if you have a few dozen or a few hundred users and have even a modest investment in things like a SAN or vmware and decent connectivity and someone with IT knowledge then I'm not sure it's so easy a decision. -Original Message- From: Jason Gurtz [mailto:jasongu...@npumail.com] Sent: 20 August 2010 13:23 To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Exchange is history?: Moved two clients to GoogleApps this week. Would definitely be interested in some details as far as client size, feature usage (shared calendars, contacts, etc...), and the technical level of the users. It seems from past things I've read, the service is better suited to companies with a greater proportion of more savvy users. Jason -Original Message- From: Stephan Barr [mailto:stephanbarr.li...@gmail.com] Sent: Thursday, August 19, 2010 19:14 To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: Re: Exchange is history?: Moved two clients to GoogleApps this week. Maybe you haven't used it recently. Groups do not count as email addresses and meet the need of distribution lists and shared boxes. definitely different cost model. Per each client they will save thousands per year. On Thu, Aug 19, 2010 at 5:25 PM, Duncan Turnbull dun...@e-simple.co.nz wrote: There is a different cost model here, and some limitations but various upsides One big issue I see is if you have lots of shared mailboxes e.g. for client projects or other reasons then you have to pay for all of those as a license, as always it will be horses for courses What about Microsoft Live Cheers Duncan On 20/08/2010, at 9:59 AM, Stephan Barr wrote: Super easy. Customers love it. -- MIRA Ltd Watling Street, Nuneaton, Warwickshire, CV10 0TU, England. Registered in England and Wales No. 402570 VAT Registration GB 114 5409 96 The contents
Re: Exchange is history?: Moved two clients to GoogleApps this week.
My customers are (always) looking for ways to save money on IT and this qualifies. On Sun, Aug 22, 2010 at 1:25 PM, Stephan Barr stephanbarr.li...@gmail.comwrote: +1 On Sun, Aug 22, 2010 at 1:15 PM, John Hornbuckle john.hornbuc...@taylor.k12.fl.us wrote: Is there some evidence to indicate that if one uses Google to host their data, they’re agreeing to allow Google to use their data? We use Google/Postini to archive our e-mail, and I saw nothing in our contract that would make the mining of our data by Google acceptable. And while I’m reasonably confident that our network is secure, I’ll readily admit that Google’s is very likely more secure than ours. In all honesty, our data is likely safer within their infrastructure than within our own. John Hornbuckle MIS Department Taylor County School District www.taylor.k12.fl.us *From:* Matt Moore [mailto:mattmoore...@hotmail.com] *Sent:* Sunday, August 22, 2010 12:48 PM *To:* MS-Exchange Admin Issues *Subject:* RE: Exchange is history?: Moved two clients to GoogleApps this week. Oh yes! And not to just anyone, the biggest data miners in the world. *From:* Hank . [mailto:hgedr...@gmail.com] *Sent:* Sunday, August 22, 2010 4:50 AM *To:* MS-Exchange Admin Issues *Subject:* Re: Exchange is history?: Moved two clients to GoogleApps this week. But you forgot to mention that you get to give all of your data to someone else. Remember one of the most basic of about security is that you maintain physical control of your data. On Sat, Aug 21, 2010 at 12:32 PM, Stephan Barr stephanbarr.li...@gmail.com wrote: Goggle Apps cost $50 per seat, per email address, per year. There are no other costs. For the $50 here's a short list of what you get: - Vanity email address / your.n...@yourdomainname.com - SSL - AntiSpam, AntiVirus - Postini - 25GB of storage per email address On Sat, Aug 21, 2010 at 3:48 AM, Dave Wade dave.w...@stockport.gov.uk wrote: Paul, I am a Radio Ham and one of the guys I chat to works in a small (about 25 staff) organization, and has just upgraded his system to Windows/2008r2 and Exchange 2010. When I expressed suprise that he wasn't out sourcing to Google apps or some thing of that ilk he said when costed over 4 years it looked very expensive, especially given the uncertainty in pricing given we work in Sterling... *Dave Wade* *0161 474 5456* -- *From:* Paul Hutchings *Sent:* Fri 20/08/2010 17:13 *To:* MS-Exchange Admin Issues *Subject:* RE: Exchange is history?: Moved two clients to GoogleApps this week. I've never really seen it as Google vs. Exchange tbh, I think both do different things and suit different needs. Office with half a dozen people and no real IT need or infrastructure and I think I'd find it hard to see past Google Apps or Hosted Exchange, even scaled up to a couple dozen staff and a single server I'm not sure Exchange would be first choice simply because if nothing else you do need to back it up and someone needs to ensure that happens. On the other hand, if you have a few dozen or a few hundred users and have even a modest investment in things like a SAN or vmware and decent connectivity and someone with IT knowledge then I'm not sure it's so easy a decision. -Original Message- From: Jason Gurtz [mailto:jasongu...@npumail.com] Sent: 20 August 2010 13:23 To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Exchange is history?: Moved two clients to GoogleApps this week. Would definitely be interested in some details as far as client size, feature usage (shared calendars, contacts, etc...), and the technical level of the users. It seems from past things I've read, the service is better suited to companies with a greater proportion of more savvy users. Jason -Original Message- From: Stephan Barr [mailto:stephanbarr.li...@gmail.com] Sent: Thursday, August 19, 2010 19:14 To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: Re: Exchange is history?: Moved two clients to GoogleApps this week. Maybe you haven't used it recently. Groups do not count as email addresses and meet the need of distribution lists and shared boxes. definitely different cost model. Per each client they will save thousands per year. On Thu, Aug 19, 2010 at 5:25 PM, Duncan Turnbull dun...@e-simple.co.nz wrote: There is a different cost model here, and some limitations but various upsides One big issue I see is if you have lots of shared mailboxes e.g. for client projects or other reasons then you have to pay for all of those as a license, as always it will be horses for courses What about Microsoft Live Cheers Duncan On 20/08/2010, at 9:59 AM, Stephan Barr wrote: Super easy. Customers love it. -- MIRA
Re: Exchange is history?: Moved two clients to GoogleApps this week.
You are already trusting your ISP and inherently their ISP and so on. but that's not the issue: The issue is cloud computing is cheaper,less complicated,arguably as secure,lighter,more portable and almost anyone can configure it. Do the math. On Sun, Aug 22, 2010 at 2:45 PM, Matt Moore mattmoore...@hotmail.comwrote: Would you trust the fox in the hen house? *From:* John Hornbuckle [mailto:john.hornbuc...@taylor.k12.fl.us] *Sent:* Sunday, August 22, 2010 11:16 AM *To:* MS-Exchange Admin Issues *Subject:* RE: Exchange is history?: Moved two clients to GoogleApps this week. Is there some evidence to indicate that if one uses Google to host their data, they’re agreeing to allow Google to use their data? We use Google/Postini to archive our e-mail, and I saw nothing in our contract that would make the mining of our data by Google acceptable. And while I’m reasonably confident that our network is secure, I’ll readily admit that Google’s is very likely more secure than ours. In all honesty, our data is likely safer within their infrastructure than within our own. John Hornbuckle MIS Department Taylor County School District www.taylor.k12.fl.us *From:* Matt Moore [mailto:mattmoore...@hotmail.com] *Sent:* Sunday, August 22, 2010 12:48 PM *To:* MS-Exchange Admin Issues *Subject:* RE: Exchange is history?: Moved two clients to GoogleApps this week. Oh yes! And not to just anyone, the biggest data miners in the world. *From:* Hank . [mailto:hgedr...@gmail.com] *Sent:* Sunday, August 22, 2010 4:50 AM *To:* MS-Exchange Admin Issues *Subject:* Re: Exchange is history?: Moved two clients to GoogleApps this week. But you forgot to mention that you get to give all of your data to someone else. Remember one of the most basic of about security is that you maintain physical control of your data. On Sat, Aug 21, 2010 at 12:32 PM, Stephan Barr stephanbarr.li...@gmail.com wrote: Goggle Apps cost $50 per seat, per email address, per year. There are no other costs. For the $50 here's a short list of what you get: - Vanity email address / your.n...@yourdomainname.com - SSL - AntiSpam, AntiVirus - Postini - 25GB of storage per email address On Sat, Aug 21, 2010 at 3:48 AM, Dave Wade dave.w...@stockport.gov.uk wrote: Paul, I am a Radio Ham and one of the guys I chat to works in a small (about 25 staff) organization, and has just upgraded his system to Windows/2008r2 and Exchange 2010. When I expressed suprise that he wasn't out sourcing to Google apps or some thing of that ilk he said when costed over 4 years it looked very expensive, especially given the uncertainty in pricing given we work in Sterling... *Dave Wade* *0161 474 5456* -- *From:* Paul Hutchings *Sent:* Fri 20/08/2010 17:13 *To:* MS-Exchange Admin Issues *Subject:* RE: Exchange is history?: Moved two clients to GoogleApps this week. I've never really seen it as Google vs. Exchange tbh, I think both do different things and suit different needs. Office with half a dozen people and no real IT need or infrastructure and I think I'd find it hard to see past Google Apps or Hosted Exchange, even scaled up to a couple dozen staff and a single server I'm not sure Exchange would be first choice simply because if nothing else you do need to back it up and someone needs to ensure that happens. On the other hand, if you have a few dozen or a few hundred users and have even a modest investment in things like a SAN or vmware and decent connectivity and someone with IT knowledge then I'm not sure it's so easy a decision. -Original Message- From: Jason Gurtz [mailto:jasongu...@npumail.com] Sent: 20 August 2010 13:23 To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Exchange is history?: Moved two clients to GoogleApps this week. Would definitely be interested in some details as far as client size, feature usage (shared calendars, contacts, etc...), and the technical level of the users. It seems from past things I've read, the service is better suited to companies with a greater proportion of more savvy users. Jason -Original Message- From: Stephan Barr [mailto:stephanbarr.li...@gmail.com] Sent: Thursday, August 19, 2010 19:14 To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: Re: Exchange is history?: Moved two clients to GoogleApps this week. Maybe you haven't used it recently. Groups do not count as email addresses and meet the need of distribution lists and shared boxes. definitely different cost model. Per each client they will save thousands per year. On Thu, Aug 19, 2010 at 5:25 PM, Duncan Turnbull dun...@e-simple.co.nz wrote: There is a different cost model here, and some limitations but various upsides One big issue I see is if you have lots of shared mailboxes e.g
Re: Exchange is history?: Moved two clients to GoogleApps this week.
Goggle Apps cost $50 per seat, per email address, per year. There are no other costs. For the $50 here's a short list of what you get: - Vanity email address / your.n...@yourdomainname.com - SSL - AntiSpam, AntiVirus - Postini - 25GB of storage per email address On Sat, Aug 21, 2010 at 3:48 AM, Dave Wade dave.w...@stockport.gov.ukwrote: Paul, I am a Radio Ham and one of the guys I chat to works in a small (about 25 staff) organization, and has just upgraded his system to Windows/2008r2 and Exchange 2010. When I expressed suprise that he wasn't out sourcing to Google apps or some thing of that ilk he said when costed over 4 years it looked very expensive, especially given the uncertainty in pricing given we work in Sterling... *Dave Wade* *0161 474 5456*** -- *From:* Paul Hutchings *Sent:* Fri 20/08/2010 17:13 *To:* MS-Exchange Admin Issues *Subject:* RE: Exchange is history?: Moved two clients to GoogleApps this week. I've never really seen it as Google vs. Exchange tbh, I think both do different things and suit different needs. Office with half a dozen people and no real IT need or infrastructure and I think I'd find it hard to see past Google Apps or Hosted Exchange, even scaled up to a couple dozen staff and a single server I'm not sure Exchange would be first choice simply because if nothing else you do need to back it up and someone needs to ensure that happens. On the other hand, if you have a few dozen or a few hundred users and have even a modest investment in things like a SAN or vmware and decent connectivity and someone with IT knowledge then I'm not sure it's so easy a decision. -Original Message- From: Jason Gurtz [mailto:jasongu...@npumail.com] Sent: 20 August 2010 13:23 To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Exchange is history?: Moved two clients to GoogleApps this week. Would definitely be interested in some details as far as client size, feature usage (shared calendars, contacts, etc...), and the technical level of the users. It seems from past things I've read, the service is better suited to companies with a greater proportion of more savvy users. Jason -Original Message- From: Stephan Barr [mailto:stephanbarr.li...@gmail.com] Sent: Thursday, August 19, 2010 19:14 To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: Re: Exchange is history?: Moved two clients to GoogleApps this week. Maybe you haven't used it recently. Groups do not count as email addresses and meet the need of distribution lists and shared boxes. definitely different cost model. Per each client they will save thousands per year. On Thu, Aug 19, 2010 at 5:25 PM, Duncan Turnbull dun...@e-simple.co.nz wrote: There is a different cost model here, and some limitations but various upsides One big issue I see is if you have lots of shared mailboxes e.g. for client projects or other reasons then you have to pay for all of those as a license, as always it will be horses for courses What about Microsoft Live Cheers Duncan On 20/08/2010, at 9:59 AM, Stephan Barr wrote: Super easy. Customers love it. -- MIRA Ltd Watling Street, Nuneaton, Warwickshire, CV10 0TU, England. Registered in England and Wales No. 402570 VAT Registration GB 114 5409 96 The contents of this e-mail are confidential and are solely for the use of the intended recipient. If you receive this e-mail in error, please delete it and notify us either by e-mail, telephone or fax. You should not copy, forward or otherwise disclose the content of the e-mail as this is prohibited. ** Stockport Council - providing over 600 different services to local people . More information on http://www.stockport.gov.uk/boost (free internet access is available at all Stockport libraries) This email, and any files transmitted with it, is confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. As a public body, the Council may be required to disclose this email, or any response to it, under the Freedom of Information Act 2000, unless the information in it is covered by one of the exemptions in the Act. If you receive this email in error please notify Stockport ICT, Business Services via email.qu...@stockport.gov.uk and then permanently remove it from your system. Thank you. http://www.stockport.gov.uk **
Re: Exchange is history?: Moved two clients to GoogleApps this week.
On Fri, Aug 20, 2010 at 8:14 AM, Richard Stovall rich...@gmail.com wrote: What about multiple domains? - You can add multiple domains as 'alias domains'. They behave similarly to multiple email domains in Exchange recipient policies. Just add the domain names and those email domains are available to anyone. I'd consider it for $dayjob, but we've got several users here with 4 or 5 email addresses in different domains from which they need to be able to send and receive independently of one another. I haven't dug too deeply, but on the surface it appears that those users would be charged 4 or 5 times the nominal per user fee. - In that case you would use 'groups'. Groups have email addresses but there are no charges for group email addresses. Add who ever you want to a group and the mail is routed. Does anyone know what Google Apps or the hosted Exchange services do in this situation. (I know I can add multiple domains in Google Apps, but I don't see how to isolate a user's a.com and b.com correspondence from one another without having different user accounts.) A year ago I set up Google Apps for the non-profit school where I volunteer, and it's been a huge success. There is only one email domain, and because it's K-12, it's totally free. If Google charged them $50 per user for it every year, they'd almost certainly be on SBS. On Thu, Aug 19, 2010 at 6:25 PM, Duncan Turnbull dun...@e-simple.co.nzwrote: There is a different cost model here, and some limitations but various upsides One big issue I see is if you have lots of shared mailboxes e.g. for client projects or other reasons then you have to pay for all of those as a license, as always it will be horses for courses What about Microsoft Live Cheers Duncan On 20/08/2010, at 9:59 AM, Stephan Barr wrote: Super easy. Customers love it.
Exchange is history?: Moved two clients to GoogleApps this week.
Super easy. Customers love it.
Re: Exchange is history?: Moved two clients to GoogleApps this week.
Maybe you haven't used it recently. Groups do not count as email addresses and meet the need of distribution lists and shared boxes. definitely different cost model. Per each client they will save thousands per year. On Thu, Aug 19, 2010 at 5:25 PM, Duncan Turnbull dun...@e-simple.co.nzwrote: There is a different cost model here, and some limitations but various upsides One big issue I see is if you have lots of shared mailboxes e.g. for client projects or other reasons then you have to pay for all of those as a license, as always it will be horses for courses What about Microsoft Live Cheers Duncan On 20/08/2010, at 9:59 AM, Stephan Barr wrote: Super easy. Customers love it.
Resolved: Exchange 2003 on non RAID 2 drive server. Exchange and store are on drive with bad sectors.
Complete. - Exchange 2003 fully patched on WIndows 2003 E fully patched installed on Dell SC1425 (1U 2 160GB SATA drives on SATA controller, No RAID) - Had a recent Acronis snapshot of the failing server - Deployed a virtual Exchange 2003 on HyperV 2008 - Moved all mailboxes to secondary server - Rehomed all folders to secondary - Pointed RUS to secondary and rebuilt - Modify DNS and firewall accordingly (SMTP, SSL, HTTP, OWA) - Made secondary the routing group master - Reissue SSL for secondary server - Replace drives in SC1425 and rebuild server with everything on c: and Acronis everything once daily to D: and to backup - Considering staying virual. No performance degradation but HyperV is a Dell 2950 III 32GB big dog. - Play Q2 then Q3 for about 10 minutes. - Wonders why any Congressperson would vote against the campaign disclosure bill. - Bah - Thanks for all the remarks, truly appreciated! On Wed, Jul 28, 2010 at 4:00 AM, Sobey, Richard A r.so...@imperial.ac.ukwrote: Well, the OP said “uninstall and reinstall Exchange”. If he uninstalls Exchange, the /DisasterRecovery switch will do no good at all. *From:* bounce-9034484-8066...@lyris.sunbelt-software.com [mailto: bounce-9034484-8066...@lyris.sunbelt-software.com] *On Behalf Of *Carl Houseman *Sent:* 27 July 2010 21:46 *To:* MS-Exchange Admin Issues *Subject:* RE: Exchange 2003 on non RAID 2 drive server. Exchange and store are on drive with bad sectors. Not if you re-install Exchange with the /DisasterRecovery switch. *From:* Sobey, Richard A [mailto:r.so...@imperial.ac.uk] *Sent:* Tuesday, July 27, 2010 4:24 AM *To:* MS-Exchange Admin Issues *Subject:* RE: Exchange 2003 on non RAID 2 drive server. Exchange and store are on drive with bad sectors. Won’t uninstalling Exchange completely invalidate any existing backups that you want to restore? Database GUID mismatches etc.. *From:* bounce-9032628-8066...@lyris.sunbelt-software.com [mailto: bounce-9032628-8066...@lyris.sunbelt-software.com] *On Behalf Of *Michael B. Smith *Sent:* 26 July 2010 22:17 *To:* MS-Exchange Admin Issues *Subject:* RE: Exchange 2003 on non RAID 2 drive server. Exchange and store are on drive with bad sectors. Sure, as long as it is a full/complete backup. Sent from my HTC Tilt™ 2, a Windows® phone from ATT -- *From: *Stephan Barr stephanbarr.li...@gmail.com *Sent: *Monday, July 26, 2010 4:09 PM *To: *MS-Exchange Admin Issues exchangelist@lyris.sunbelt-software.com *Subject: *Exchange 2003 on non RAID 2 drive server. Exchange and store are on drive with bad sectors. Server has two physical drives, OS on C: and Exchange on D:. D: is reporting bad sectors so can't image it. If I recall correctly, can't I get a backup of the stores then uninstall and reinstall Exchange on healthy drives and then restore the Information store?
Re: Resolved: Exchange 2003 on non RAID 2 drive server. Exchange and store are on drive with bad sectors.
Thanks but not the first time by far. Still virtual and running great. P2V'd a DC as well. I'm now dangerous. Cheers. On Wed, Jul 28, 2010 at 9:44 AM, Peter Johnson peter.john...@peterstow.comwrote: Cool!!! Well done or Bravo Zulu in Naval parlance. Did you leave it virtual or did you move everything back? Quite an experience the first time you do it right? Regards [image: Description: C:\Users\PeterTJ\AppData\Roaming\Microsoft\Signatures\peterstow logo2.jpg] Peter Johnson I.T Architect United Kingdom: +44 1285 658542 South Africa: +27 11 252 1100 Swaziland: +268 442 7000 Fax:+27 11 974 7130 Mobile: +2783 306 0019 peter.john...@peterstow.com *This email message (including attachments) contains information which may be confidential and/or legally privileged. Unless you are the intended recipient, you may not use, copy or disclose to anyone the message or any information contained in the message or from any attachments that were sent with this email, and If you have received this email message in error, please advise the sender by email, and delete the message. Unauthorised disclosure and/or use of information contained in this email may result in civil and criminal liability. Everything in this e-mail and attachments relating to the official business of Peterstow Aquapower is proprietary to the company. Caution should be observed in placing any reliance upon any information contained in this e-mail, which is not intended to be a representation or inducement to make any decision in relation to Peterstow Aquapower. Any decision taken based on the information provided in this e-mail, should only be made after consultation with appropriate legal, regulatory, tax, technical, business, investment, financial, and accounting advisors. Neither the sender of the e-mail, nor Peterstow Aquapower shall be liable to any party for any direct, indirect or consequential damages, including, without limitation, loss of profit, interruption of business or loss of information, data or software or otherwise. The e-mail address of the sender may not be used, copied, sold, disclosed or incorporated into any database or mailing list for spamming and/or other marketing purposes without the prior consent of Peterstow Aquapower. *** *No warranties are created or implied that an employee of Peterstow Aquapower and/or a contractor of Peterstow Aquapower is authorized to create and send this e-mail.** *** * **[image: Description: C:\Users\PeterTJ\AppData\Roaming\Microsoft\Signatures\environment2.jpg]* *From:* Stephan Barr [mailto:stephanbarr.li...@gmail.com] *Sent:* 28 July 2010 15:30 *To:* MS-Exchange Admin Issues *Subject:* Resolved: Exchange 2003 on non RAID 2 drive server. Exchange and store are on drive with bad sectors. Complete. - Exchange 2003 fully patched on WIndows 2003 E fully patched installed on Dell SC1425 (1U 2 160GB SATA drives on SATA controller, No RAID) - Had a recent Acronis snapshot of the failing server - Deployed a virtual Exchange 2003 on HyperV 2008 - Moved all mailboxes to secondary server - Rehomed all folders to secondary - Pointed RUS to secondary and rebuilt - Modify DNS and firewall accordingly (SMTP, SSL, HTTP, OWA) - Made secondary the routing group master - Reissue SSL for secondary server - Replace drives in SC1425 and rebuild server with everything on c: and Acronis everything once daily to D: and to backup - Considering staying virual. No performance degradation but HyperV is a Dell 2950 III 32GB big dog. - Play Q2 then Q3 for about 10 minutes. - Wonders why any Congressperson would vote against the campaign disclosure bill. - Bah - Thanks for all the remarks, truly appreciated! On Wed, Jul 28, 2010 at 4:00 AM, Sobey, Richard A r.so...@imperial.ac.uk wrote: Well, the OP said “uninstall and reinstall Exchange”. If he uninstalls Exchange, the /DisasterRecovery switch will do no good at all. *From:* bounce-9034484-8066...@lyris.sunbelt-software.com [mailto: bounce-9034484-8066...@lyris.sunbelt-software.com] *On Behalf Of *Carl Houseman *Sent:* 27 July 2010 21:46 *To:* MS-Exchange Admin Issues *Subject:* RE: Exchange 2003 on non RAID 2 drive server. Exchange and store are on drive with bad sectors. Not if you re-install Exchange with the /DisasterRecovery switch. *From:* Sobey, Richard A [mailto:r.so...@imperial.ac.uk] *Sent:* Tuesday, July 27, 2010 4:24 AM *To:* MS-Exchange Admin Issues *Subject:* RE: Exchange 2003 on non RAID 2 drive server. Exchange and store are on drive with bad sectors. Won’t uninstalling Exchange completely invalidate any existing backups that you want to restore? Database GUID mismatches etc.. *From:* bounce-9032628-8066...@lyris.sunbelt-software.com [mailto: bounce-9032628-8066...@lyris.sunbelt-software.com] *On Behalf Of *Michael B. Smith *Sent:* 26 July 2010 22:17 *To:* MS
Exchange 2003 on non RAID 2 drive server. Exchange and store are on drive with bad sectors.
Server has two physical drives, OS on C: and Exchange on D:. D: is reporting bad sectors so can't image it. If I recall correctly, can't I get a backup of the stores then uninstall and reinstall Exchange on healthy drives and then restore the Information store?
Re: Exchange 2003 OWA works for some domain users but not all. [Resolved]
ExMerged the mailbox, deleted the user and waited for replication, recreated the user and ExMerged contents into Mailbox and all is good with OWA workinig fine for that profile. Cheers. On Wed, Jul 21, 2010 at 8:59 AM, Ellis, John P. johnel...@wirral.gov.ukwrote: Maybe an issue with mailbox rights? Check to see if the user is mentioned in the Mailbox rights screen. john -- *From:* Stephan Barr [mailto:stephanbarr.li...@gmail.com] *Sent:* 21 July 2010 14:57 *To:* MS-Exchange Admin Issues *Subject:* Re: Exchange 2003 OWA works for some domain users but not all. Problem started about a week ago. On Wed, Jul 21, 2010 at 8:51 AM, Michael B. Smith mich...@smithcons.comwrote: Oh, and when did the problem start? Regards, Michael B. Smith Consultant and Exchange MVP http://TheEssentialExchange.com *From:* Stephan Barr [mailto:stephanbarr.li...@gmail.com] *Sent:* Wednesday, July 21, 2010 9:49 AM *To:* MS-Exchange Admin Issues *Subject:* Re: Exchange 2003 OWA works for some domain users but not all. Indeed they are all enabled. The error is ... Error: Access is Denied. In E8. No funkyness On Wed, Jul 21, 2010 at 8:44 AM, Richard Stovall rich...@gmail.com wrote: Outlook Web Access is Enabled on the Exchange Features tab for each individual user, right? Any funky permissions changes anywhere on the filesystem or in IIS? What exactly are you seeing? HTTP/1.1 401 Unauthorized after several logon attempts? On Wed, Jul 21, 2010 at 9:25 AM, Stephan Barr stephanbarr.li...@gmail.com wrote: Exchange 2003 Windows 2003 fully patched and functional level. Whether using https://mail.domainName.com/exchange/userName or implicit https://mail.DomainName.com/exchange and supplying netbiosName\userName and password works for most but not all users. Accounts are domain users in the same OU using IE8. MAPI/Outlook works fine for all. An idea or two please? Cheers. ** This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. If you have received this email in error please notify the system manager. This footnote also confirms that this email message has been swept by MIMEsweeper for the presence of computer viruses. www.clearswift.com **
Exchange 2003 OWA works for some domain users but not all.
Exchange 2003 Windows 2003 fully patched and functional level. Whether using https://mail.domainName.com/exchange/userName or implicit https://mail.DomainName.com/exchange and supplying netbiosName\userName and password works for most but not all users. Accounts are domain users in the same OU using IE8. MAPI/Outlook works fine for all. An idea or two please? Cheers.
Re: Exchange 2003 OWA works for some domain users but not all.
Indeed they are all enabled. The error is ... Error: Access is Denied. In E8. No funkyness On Wed, Jul 21, 2010 at 8:44 AM, Richard Stovall rich...@gmail.com wrote: Outlook Web Access is Enabled on the Exchange Features tab for each individual user, right? Any funky permissions changes anywhere on the filesystem or in IIS? What exactly are you seeing? HTTP/1.1 401 Unauthorized after several logon attempts? On Wed, Jul 21, 2010 at 9:25 AM, Stephan Barr stephanbarr.li...@gmail.com wrote: Exchange 2003 Windows 2003 fully patched and functional level. Whether using https://mail.domainName.com/exchange/userName or implicit https://mail.DomainName.com/exchange and supplying netbiosName\userName and password works for most but not all users. Accounts are domain users in the same OU using IE8. MAPI/Outlook works fine for all. An idea or two please? Cheers.
Re: Exchange 2003 OWA works for some domain users but not all.
The error is ... Error: Access is Denied. In E8. On Wed, Jul 21, 2010 at 8:44 AM, Michael B. Smith mich...@smithcons.comwrote: What happens when it “doesn’t work”? Regards, Michael B. Smith Consultant and Exchange MVP http://TheEssentialExchange.com *From:* Stephan Barr [mailto:stephanbarr.li...@gmail.com] *Sent:* Wednesday, July 21, 2010 9:26 AM *To:* MS-Exchange Admin Issues *Subject:* Exchange 2003 OWA works for some domain users but not all. Exchange 2003 Windows 2003 fully patched and functional level. Whether using https://mail.domainName.com/exchange/userName or implicit https://mail.DomainName.com/exchange and supplying netbiosName\userName and password works for most but not all users. Accounts are domain users in the same OU using IE8. MAPI/Outlook works fine for all. An idea or two please? Cheers.
Re: Exchange 2003 OWA works for some domain users but not all.
All accounts are Domain Users and in same OU. All admin accounts work, most domain user accounts but 2 out of 60 or so. Additionally there is one account that after entering https://mail.DomainName.com/Exchange/UserName and then supplying netBIOSDOmainName\Userid and password fails. But clear the explicit UserName and hit enter on the remaining implicit address, OWA shows the correct users OWA. Weird eh? Using IE8 and cache is cleared between each userName try. On Wed, Jul 21, 2010 at 8:51 AM, Michael B. Smith mich...@smithcons.comwrote: Is this happening to special accounts? That is, domain admins, backup operators, etc.? Regards, Michael B. Smith Consultant and Exchange MVP http://TheEssentialExchange.com *From:* Stephan Barr [mailto:stephanbarr.li...@gmail.com] *Sent:* Wednesday, July 21, 2010 9:49 AM *To:* MS-Exchange Admin Issues *Subject:* Re: Exchange 2003 OWA works for some domain users but not all. Indeed they are all enabled. The error is ... Error: Access is Denied. In E8. No funkyness On Wed, Jul 21, 2010 at 8:44 AM, Richard Stovall rich...@gmail.com wrote: Outlook Web Access is Enabled on the Exchange Features tab for each individual user, right? Any funky permissions changes anywhere on the filesystem or in IIS? What exactly are you seeing? HTTP/1.1 401 Unauthorized after several logon attempts? On Wed, Jul 21, 2010 at 9:25 AM, Stephan Barr stephanbarr.li...@gmail.com wrote: Exchange 2003 Windows 2003 fully patched and functional level. Whether using https://mail.domainName.com/exchange/userName or implicit https://mail.DomainName.com/exchange and supplying netbiosName\userName and password works for most but not all users. Accounts are domain users in the same OU using IE8. MAPI/Outlook works fine for all. An idea or two please? Cheers.
Re: Exchange 2003 OWA works for some domain users but not all.
Problem started about a week ago. On Wed, Jul 21, 2010 at 8:51 AM, Michael B. Smith mich...@smithcons.comwrote: Oh, and when did the problem start? Regards, Michael B. Smith Consultant and Exchange MVP http://TheEssentialExchange.com *From:* Stephan Barr [mailto:stephanbarr.li...@gmail.com] *Sent:* Wednesday, July 21, 2010 9:49 AM *To:* MS-Exchange Admin Issues *Subject:* Re: Exchange 2003 OWA works for some domain users but not all. Indeed they are all enabled. The error is ... Error: Access is Denied. In E8. No funkyness On Wed, Jul 21, 2010 at 8:44 AM, Richard Stovall rich...@gmail.com wrote: Outlook Web Access is Enabled on the Exchange Features tab for each individual user, right? Any funky permissions changes anywhere on the filesystem or in IIS? What exactly are you seeing? HTTP/1.1 401 Unauthorized after several logon attempts? On Wed, Jul 21, 2010 at 9:25 AM, Stephan Barr stephanbarr.li...@gmail.com wrote: Exchange 2003 Windows 2003 fully patched and functional level. Whether using https://mail.domainName.com/exchange/userName or implicit https://mail.DomainName.com/exchange and supplying netbiosName\userName and password works for most but not all users. Accounts are domain users in the same OU using IE8. MAPI/Outlook works fine for all. An idea or two please? Cheers.
Exchange 2003 over VPN DNS host questions
WIndows 2003 AD functional level, Exchange 2003 fully patched. The company has AD/VPN endpoint sites in 3 locations around the country. For DNS purposes, routing, RDNS, OWA and such wIll the Exchange server need DNS entries that reflect it's own endpoint public IP or can/will it be addresed over VPN using a private IP?
Windows 2000 AD with Exchange 2003 server but no Windows 2003 DCs.
A Windows 2000 AD network with an Exchange 2003 server by definition has to already have Windows 2003 ADPREP run right? Client company has this network running but it has no Windows 2003 DCs. I'm I right in thinking that adding Windows 2003 DCs is safe since the Exchange 2003 Server is running fine with no AD errors as well? Thanks in advance.
Re: Windows 2000 AD with Exchange 2003 server but no Windows 2003 DCs.
Yes I'm aware of the InetOrg issue. The Exchage 2003 is running on Windows 2003. Just no WIndows 2003 DCs. As I recall it doesn't damage anything to run adprep and such multiple times. True? On Tue, May 4, 2010 at 9:18 PM, Michael B. Smith mich...@smithcons.comwrote: No, it does not. Exchange 2003 would run on Windows 2000, with somewhat limited functionality (for example, RPC/HTTP requires that Exchange run on Windows 2003). Exchange 2003 only required a mixed-mode AD (i.e., one directly upgraded from Windows NT). You could, in fact, run into schema collision issues around inetOrgPerson schema definitions. See http://support.microsoft.com/kb/314649 . Regards, Michael B. Smith Consultant and Exchange MVP http://TheEssentialExchange.com http://theessentialexchange.com/ *From:* Stephan Barr [mailto:stephanbarr.li...@gmail.com] *Sent:* Tuesday, May 04, 2010 10:10 PM *To:* MS-Exchange Admin Issues *Subject:* Windows 2000 AD with Exchange 2003 server but no Windows 2003 DCs. A Windows 2000 AD network with an Exchange 2003 server by definition has to already have Windows 2003 ADPREP run right? Client company has this network running but it has no Windows 2003 DCs. I'm I right in thinking that adding Windows 2003 DCs is safe since the Exchange 2003 Server is running fine with no AD errors as well? Thanks in advance.
Re: Windows 2000 AD with Exchange 2003 server but no Windows 2003 DCs.
And hey thanks or the response. On Tue, May 4, 2010 at 9:25 PM, Stephan Barr stephanbarr.li...@gmail.comwrote: Yes I'm aware of the InetOrg issue. The Exchage 2003 is running on Windows 2003. Just no WIndows 2003 DCs. As I recall it doesn't damage anything to run adprep and such multiple times. True? On Tue, May 4, 2010 at 9:18 PM, Michael B. Smith mich...@smithcons.comwrote: No, it does not. Exchange 2003 would run on Windows 2000, with somewhat limited functionality (for example, RPC/HTTP requires that Exchange run on Windows 2003). Exchange 2003 only required a mixed-mode AD (i.e., one directly upgraded from Windows NT). You could, in fact, run into schema collision issues around inetOrgPerson schema definitions. See http://support.microsoft.com/kb/314649 . Regards, Michael B. Smith Consultant and Exchange MVP http://TheEssentialExchange.com http://theessentialexchange.com/ *From:* Stephan Barr [mailto:stephanbarr.li...@gmail.com] *Sent:* Tuesday, May 04, 2010 10:10 PM *To:* MS-Exchange Admin Issues *Subject:* Windows 2000 AD with Exchange 2003 server but no Windows 2003 DCs. A Windows 2000 AD network with an Exchange 2003 server by definition has to already have Windows 2003 ADPREP run right? Client company has this network running but it has no Windows 2003 DCs. I'm I right in thinking that adding Windows 2003 DCs is safe since the Exchange 2003 Server is running fine with no AD errors as well? Thanks in advance.
Re: Windows 2000 AD with Exchange 2003 server but no Windows 2003 DCs.
Understood. I've made some of those changes w/PSS on the line so I know of which you speak. Cool well here goes. Cheers. On Tue, May 4, 2010 at 9:28 PM, Michael B. Smith mich...@smithcons.comwrote: It doesn’t hurt anything as long as no one has manually changed permissions (and something requires those changes). Regards, Michael B. Smith Consultant and Exchange MVP http://TheEssentialExchange.com http://theessentialexchange.com/ *From:* Stephan Barr [mailto:stephanbarr.li...@gmail.com] *Sent:* Tuesday, May 04, 2010 10:26 PM *To:* MS-Exchange Admin Issues *Subject:* Re: Windows 2000 AD with Exchange 2003 server but no Windows 2003 DCs. Yes I'm aware of the InetOrg issue. The Exchage 2003 is running on Windows 2003. Just no WIndows 2003 DCs. As I recall it doesn't damage anything to run adprep and such multiple times. True? On Tue, May 4, 2010 at 9:18 PM, Michael B. Smith mich...@smithcons.com wrote: No, it does not. Exchange 2003 would run on Windows 2000, with somewhat limited functionality (for example, RPC/HTTP requires that Exchange run on Windows 2003). Exchange 2003 only required a mixed-mode AD (i.e., one directly upgraded from Windows NT). You could, in fact, run into schema collision issues around inetOrgPerson schema definitions. See http://support.microsoft.com/kb/314649 . Regards, Michael B. Smith Consultant and Exchange MVP http://TheEssentialExchange.com http://theessentialexchange.com/ *From:* Stephan Barr [mailto:stephanbarr.li...@gmail.com] *Sent:* Tuesday, May 04, 2010 10:10 PM *To:* MS-Exchange Admin Issues *Subject:* Windows 2000 AD with Exchange 2003 server but no Windows 2003 DCs. A Windows 2000 AD network with an Exchange 2003 server by definition has to already have Windows 2003 ADPREP run right? Client company has this network running but it has no Windows 2003 DCs. I'm I right in thinking that adding Windows 2003 DCs is safe since the Exchange 2003 Server is running fine with no AD errors as well? Thanks in advance.
Re: Spam blocking and false positives
GFI Mail Essentials 14.1 utilizing the directory harvesting protection feature. After some considerable tweaking we have had no false positives in 4 months. About 10,000 emails per day. Cheers. On Tue, Dec 15, 2009 at 11:56 AM, Steve Hart sh...@wrightbg.com wrote: Would anyone be interested in sharing what anti-spam solution you're using and what the rate of false positives is?
Re: 5.7.1 smtp;550 5.7.1 Requested action not taken: message refused
Resolved. Turns out it was a FQDN instead of a NETBIOS domain name was used. Changed to NETBIOS domain name and worked fine. CHeers. On Tue, Sep 29, 2009 at 6:57 PM, Steve Szabo steve...@gmail.com wrote: Are you getting an NDR, or is the client just not receiving the message? Is the message leaving your device? Is it hung at your server? \\Steve// *From:* Stephan Barr [mailto:stephanbarr.li...@gmail.com] *Sent:* Tuesday, September 29, 2009 3:30 PM *To:* MS-Exchange Admin Issues *Subject:* 5.7.1 smtp;550 5.7.1 Requested action not taken: message refused Hey all. In the last few days I've been unable to send email, from my Verizon PDA (Motorola (9Q with Windows Mobile 6 Standard) to one of the clients I administer. The client has Windows 2003 AD with Exchange 2003 fully patched. I can send email from my domain and Outlook client just not my cell phone which of course is the same email address as my Outlook client. · IMF is configured · No connection filtering · no firewall denys Any ideas?
5.7.1 smtp;550 5.7.1 Requested action not taken: message refused
Hey all. In the last few days I've been unable to send email, from my Verizon PDA (Motorola (9Q with Windows Mobile 6 Standard) to one of the clients I administer. The client has Windows 2003 AD with Exchange 2003 fully patched. I can send email from my domain and Outlook client just not my cell phone which of course is the same email address as my Outlook client. - IMF is configured - No connection filtering - no firewall denys Any ideas?
Re: Exchange 2003 Server Hanging
Check the event logs If RAID review status of member drives Strongly consider updating drivers/firmware AFTER you have a full backup of information store. You may want to turn up/on diagnostic logging. What programs are active at shutdown. Sysinternals has great free tools for this... http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/sysinternals/bb842062.aspx Cheers. On Tue, Sep 1, 2009 at 7:01 PM, Harry Singh hbo...@gmail.com wrote: All- I'm getting reports from a client that recently, after about 3 days of operation, their exh2k3 server hangs and requires a manual reboot. Environment: Single exchange 2k3 SP1 sitting on Win2K SP4 OS. AD 2003 R2.. SDSF I noticed the controller firmware being outdated and plan on updating it tonight, any other gotcha's that I'm overlooking? I'm scanning FW logs checking for suspicious consecutive access attempts on 80/443 right now. Best, Harry -- Sent from my mobile device
ipSec.vbs
This is an example of the script I used... cscript ipSec.vbs -d 6GFHN41 -o a -r DENY -v 41.0.0.0 -m 255.0.0.0 The operation reported success but the IPs never show up on any servers SMTP server. I have several Exchange servers with each having only one SMTP server each. Any ideas?
Exchange 2000: IPsec.vbs program to export an SMTP deny/grant list
Hey all. Has anyone used this against an Exchange 2000 server? MS says it will work when the domain within which the Exchange 2000 server resides has been updated with Windows 2003 AD info. Here's the syntax I'm using... F:\ExIpSecuritycscript ipsec.vbs -s g336h11 -i 1 -o e -r deny -d 6gfhn41 f:\ExIpSecurity\DenyList.txt Says the list is empty which it is not. The old Exchange Server has several hundred deny entries that I would prefer to get programmatically instead of manual entry. Any help is appreciated. Cheers.
Re: Exchange 2000: IPsec.vbs program to export an SMTP deny/grant list
No! Tried installing and... Dialog box contents: Setup has detected that the service pack version of the system installed is newer that the update you are applying to it. You can only install this update on Service Pack 3. Exchange version = Exchange Version 6.0 (Build 6249.4: Service Pack 3) The Exchange server exists within a domain that has 2003 adprep and domainprep installed. On Thu, Aug 27, 2009 at 11:40 AM, Michael B. Smith mich...@owa.smithcons.com wrote: did you install the hotfix? http://support.microsoft.com/kb/810913 -- *From:* Stephan Barr [stephanbarr.li...@gmail.com] *Sent:* Thursday, August 27, 2009 12:27 PM *To:* MS-Exchange Admin Issues *Subject:* Exchange 2000: IPsec.vbs program to export an SMTP deny/grant list Hey all. Has anyone used this against an Exchange 2000 server? MS says it will work when the domain within which the Exchange 2000 server resides has been updated with Windows 2003 AD info. Here's the syntax I'm using... F:\ExIpSecuritycscript ipsec.vbs -s g336h11 -i 1 -o e -r deny -d 6gfhn41 f:\ExIpSecurity\DenyList.txt Says the list is empty which it is not. The old Exchange Server has several hundred deny entries that I would prefer to get programmatically instead of manual entry. Any help is appreciated. Cheers.
Re: Mail store issues
On Mon, Aug 17, 2009 at 9:57 AM, Doug Rooney d...@sonomatilemakers.comwrote: You guys crack me up, any way thanks for the heads up, I have a store size of about 23 GB and 124 GB free, so I think I am OK there. So, is there some clear concise instructions somewhere to do this, like does the store need to be off-line, which is what I am guessing. - Open ESM navigate to First Storage Group or whatever you named it. Right click on First Storage Group and chose New then Mailbox Store. Name it something and chose it's location via the Database tab. THe new store will mount in a few moments. Cheers. And any ballpark on how long it takes? Please bear with me, I was sent to a 2 day Exchange Server seminar and handed the job as Exchange Admin, so I am kinda green still. Thank You ~Doug Rooney Sonoma Tilemakers IT Manager 7750 Bell Rd. Windsor Ca, 95492 (707) 837-8177 X211 (707) 837-9472 FAX i...@sonomatilemakers.com *From:* Martin Blackstone [mailto:mblackst...@gmail.com] *Sent:* Friday, August 14, 2009 1:54 PM *To:* MS-Exchange Admin Issues *Subject:* RE: Mail store issues Your = you’re *From:* Martin Blackstone [mailto:mblackst...@gmail.com] *Sent:* Friday, August 14, 2009 11:20 AM *To:* MS-Exchange Admin Issues *Subject:* RE: Mail store issues If you have 100 GB mail on store A, your going have 100 GB on store B, plus 100 GB of logs. Generally speaking of course. You mileage may vary. *From:* Stefan Jafs [mailto:sj...@amico.com] *Sent:* Friday, August 14, 2009 11:14 AM *To:* MS-Exchange Admin Issues *Subject:* RE: Mail store issues Just realize that if you create it on the same server you’ll have double the store size until you delete the original one! Actually I think it actually triples until you have done a successful B/U! Correct me if I’m wrong, just make sure you have the disk space. *___* *Stefan Jafs* *From:* Stephan Barr [mailto:stephanbarr.li...@gmail.com] *Sent:* Friday, August 14, 2009 1:35 PM *To:* MS-Exchange Admin Issues *Subject:* Re: Mail store issues Yes. On the same machine. Not required though. If you have another Exchange 2003 server in the same site you can create the store there as well. Apparently it's the moving of mailboxes from one store to another effectively repairs. Cheers. On Fri, Aug 14, 2009 at 11:16 AM, Doug Rooney d...@sonomatilemakers.com wrote: I am currently trying to copy the error message, but when you say create a new store, is that on the same machine? Thank You ~Doug Rooney Sonoma Tilemakers IT Manager 7750 Bell Rd. Windsor Ca, 95492 (707) 837-8177 X211 (707) 837-9472 FAX i...@sonomatilemakers.com *From:* Stephan Barr [mailto:stephanbarr.li...@gmail.com] *Sent:* Friday, August 14, 2009 9:07 AM *To:* MS-Exchange Admin Issues *Subject:* Re: Mail store issues Try creating a new store. Move all the mailboxes to the new store and see if that clears up the corruption problem. Cheers. On Fri, Aug 14, 2009 at 9:42 AM, Doug Rooney d...@sonomatilemakers.com wrote: Hello, I am running Ex 2003 on box that only run AD and is the PDC. Since about 2 months ago, my backup have ÿÿ˜failedÿÿ™ but the byte counts is still good. The error says that there is corruption in the mail store. A re there utilities that I can run to clean this up? Thank You ~Doug Rooney Sonoma Tilemakers IT Manager 7750 Bell Rd. Windsor Ca, 95492 (707) 837-8177 X211 (707) 837-9472 FAX i...@sonomatilemakers.com This email and any attached files are confidential and intended solely for the intended recipient(s). If you are not the named recipient you should not read, distribute, copy or alter this email. Any views or opinions expressed in this email are those of the author and do not represent those of the Amico Corpoartion company. Warning: Although precautions have been taken to make sure no viruses are present in this email, the company cannot accept responsibility for any loss or damage that arise from the use of this email or attachments.
Re: Mail store issues
Try creating a new store. Move all the mailboxes to the new store and see if that clears up the corruption problem. Cheers. On Fri, Aug 14, 2009 at 9:42 AM, Doug Rooney d...@sonomatilemakers.comwrote: Hello, I am running Ex 2003 on box that only run AD and is the PDC. Since about 2 months ago, my backup have ÿÿ˜failedÿÿ™ but the byte counts is still good. The error says that there is corruption in the mail store. A re there utilities that I can run to clean this up? Thank You ~Doug Rooney Sonoma Tilemakers IT Manager 7750 Bell Rd. Windsor Ca, 95492 (707) 837-8177 X211 (707) 837-9472 FAX i...@sonomatilemakers.com
Re: Mail store issues
Yes. On the same machine. Not required though. If you have another Exchange 2003 server in the same site you can create the store there as well. Apparently it's the moving of mailboxes from one store to another effectively repairs. Cheers. On Fri, Aug 14, 2009 at 11:16 AM, Doug Rooney d...@sonomatilemakers.comwrote: I am currently trying to copy the error message, but when you say create a new store, is that on the same machine? Thank You ~Doug Rooney Sonoma Tilemakers IT Manager 7750 Bell Rd. Windsor Ca, 95492 (707) 837-8177 X211 (707) 837-9472 FAX i...@sonomatilemakers.com [image: avatar42879_11] *From:* Stephan Barr [mailto:stephanbarr.li...@gmail.com] *Sent:* Friday, August 14, 2009 9:07 AM *To:* MS-Exchange Admin Issues *Subject:* Re: Mail store issues Try creating a new store. Move all the mailboxes to the new store and see if that clears up the corruption problem. Cheers. On Fri, Aug 14, 2009 at 9:42 AM, Doug Rooney d...@sonomatilemakers.com wrote: Hello, I am running Ex 2003 on box that only run AD and is the PDC. Since about 2 months ago, my backup have ÿÿ˜failedÿÿ™ but the byte counts is still good. The error says that there is corruption in the mail store. A re there utilities that I can run to clean this up? Thank You ~Doug Rooney Sonoma Tilemakers IT Manager 7750 Bell Rd. Windsor Ca, 95492 (707) 837-8177 X211 (707) 837-9472 FAX i...@sonomatilemakers.com image003.jpg
Re: Quick Event Question
Consider having your firewall allow SMTP outbound from your Exchange server only. On Wed, Jul 29, 2009 at 10:56 AM, Chyka, Robert bch...@medaille.edu wrote: We are running Exchange 2003 on Windows Server 2003. We are fully patched etc. We are starting to get a slow growing amount of outbound SPAM trying to be sent out of our Exchange server and we are looking to stop it before it gets ugly. We are a verified closed relay host, but I am noticing a weird event for a specific user in the event log. It is EventId 1708 and the Source is MSExchange Transport The text is: SMTP Authentication was performed successfully with client [127.0.0.1]. The authentication method was NTLM and the username was xxx” I didn’t know if the 127.0.0.1 was an issue? Never saw it before. Thanks!!!
RE: Stopped receiving from a single external domain.
I edited out the real address. Try this... [EMAIL PROTECTED] -Original Message- From: Kent, Larry CTR USA IMCOM [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, April 18, 2008 4:58 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Stopped receiving from a single external domain. I couldn't sent a test message to that address either. Here's what I get... Your message did not reach some or all of the intended recipients. Subject: test Sent: 4/18/2008 5:53 PM The following recipient(s) could not be reached: [EMAIL PROTECTED] on 4/18/2008 5:51 PM The e-mail system was unable to deliver the message, but did not report a specific reason. Check the address and try again. If it still fails, contact your system administrator. ddcoavsgwhub006.conus.army.mil #5.0.0 smtp; 5.1.0 - Unknown address error 550-'5.1.1 User unknown' (delivery attempts: 0) -Original Message- From: Stephan Barr [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, April 18, 2008 5:47 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: Stopped receiving from a single external domain. Windows 2003, Exchange 2003 current; Trend Micro Client Server Messaging Security for SMB. Suddenly, in the last few hours, an external customer cannot send mail to a specific email account. I've looked in Trend and on the Exchange server; (filtering, IMF, etc) and haven't found anything. The bounceback looks like this... Your message did not reach some or all of the intended recipients. Subject:RE: qwe Sent: 4/18/2008 4:42 PM The following recipient(s) could not be reached: userid on 4/18/2008 4:42 PM The e-mail account does not exist at the organization this message was sent to. Check the e-mail address, or contact the recipient directly to find out the correct address. mail.bdtechnology.org #5.1.1 5.1.1 is address doesn't exist but it does. The account has about ten SMTP address that all work except for the primary address. Any ideas...? Thanks! ~ Ninja Email Security with Cloudmark Spam Engine Gets Image Spam ~ ~ http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Ninja~ ~ Ninja Email Security with Cloudmark Spam Engine Gets Image Spam ~ ~ http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Ninja~ ~ Ninja Email Security with Cloudmark Spam Engine Gets Image Spam ~ ~ http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Ninja~
RE: Stopped receiving from a single external domain.
Hee! -Original Message- From: Kent, Larry CTR USA IMCOM [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, April 18, 2008 5:09 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Stopped receiving from a single external domain. Sure make me look stupid... :) need caffeine... I thought it was strange that the account would be 'userid'. -Original Message- From: Stephan Barr [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, April 18, 2008 6:01 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Stopped receiving from a single external domain. I edited out the real address. Try this... [EMAIL PROTECTED] -Original Message- From: Kent, Larry CTR USA IMCOM [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, April 18, 2008 4:58 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Stopped receiving from a single external domain. I couldn't sent a test message to that address either. Here's what I get... Your message did not reach some or all of the intended recipients. Subject: test Sent: 4/18/2008 5:53 PM The following recipient(s) could not be reached: [EMAIL PROTECTED] on 4/18/2008 5:51 PM The e-mail system was unable to deliver the message, but did not report a specific reason. Check the address and try again. If it still fails, contact your system administrator. ddcoavsgwhub006.conus.army.mil #5.0.0 smtp; 5.1.0 - Unknown address error 550-'5.1.1 User unknown' (delivery attempts: 0) -Original Message- From: Stephan Barr [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, April 18, 2008 5:47 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: Stopped receiving from a single external domain. Windows 2003, Exchange 2003 current; Trend Micro Client Server Messaging Security for SMB. Suddenly, in the last few hours, an external customer cannot send mail to a specific email account. I've looked in Trend and on the Exchange server; (filtering, IMF, etc) and haven't found anything. The bounceback looks like this... Your message did not reach some or all of the intended recipients. Subject:RE: qwe Sent: 4/18/2008 4:42 PM The following recipient(s) could not be reached: userid on 4/18/2008 4:42 PM The e-mail account does not exist at the organization this message was sent to. Check the e-mail address, or contact the recipient directly to find out the correct address. mail.bdtechnology.org #5.1.1 5.1.1 is address doesn't exist but it does. The account has about ten SMTP address that all work except for the primary address. Any ideas...? Thanks! ~ Ninja Email Security with Cloudmark Spam Engine Gets Image Spam ~ ~ http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Ninja~ ~ Ninja Email Security with Cloudmark Spam Engine Gets Image Spam ~ ~ http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Ninja~ ~ Ninja Email Security with Cloudmark Spam Engine Gets Image Spam ~ ~ http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Ninja~ ~ Ninja Email Security with Cloudmark Spam Engine Gets Image Spam ~ ~ http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Ninja~ ~ Ninja Email Security with Cloudmark Spam Engine Gets Image Spam ~ ~ http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Ninja~
RE: Interesting Exchange Event I Had This Week
Very nice work and thanks for sharing. Cheers. From: Sherry Abercrombie [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, March 28, 2008 2:23 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: Interesting Exchange Event I Had This Week ~ Ninja Email Security with Cloudmark Spam Engine Gets Image Spam ~ ~ http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Ninja~
RE: redimensioning OS and logs partitions
Lot's of options but check out Acronis. Fine stuff there. Cheers. -Original Message- From: Miguel Gonzalez [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues exchangelist@lyris.sunbelt-software.com Sent: 3/20/2008 5:33 PM Subject: redimensioning OS and logs partitions Hi, I have three partitions in my SBS 2003 server. C - OS D - Exchange databases (only) E - Exchange logs and AV C and E are partitions within the same RAID array (RAID 1+0). I want to shrink the E drive and expand the C drive. The partitions are basic (not dynamic) and I've read that diskpart could help me to shrink the E drive. However apparently it wouldn't of no help for the C drive. Is it possible to shrink the E drive partition so the unallocated space is left in the beginning of the E partition and not at the end? Any clarification that I need to know? Thanks, Miguel __ Enviado desde Correo Yahoo! Más formas de estar en contacto. http://es.docs.yahoo.com/mail/overview/index.html ~ Ninja Email Security with Cloudmark Spam Engine Gets Image Spam ~ ~ http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Ninja~ ~ Ninja Email Security with Cloudmark Spam Engine Gets Image Spam ~ ~ http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Ninja~
Exchange 2007 Smart host was an external vendor now gone.
Just inherited this and am new to Exchange 2007... Exchange 2007 with a smart host configured. The smart host resided with an external vendor. That vendor is now gone and of course outbound mail is failing. Can you point me to a solution that either removes the smart host entirely or configs a replacement smarthost? Thanks in advance. ~ Ninja Email Security with Cloudmark Spam Engine Gets Image Spam ~ ~ http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Ninja~
RE: Exchange 2007 Smart host was an external vendor now gone.
Disregard I figured it out. And I only received 21 OOOs. Cheers. -Original Message- From: Stephan Barr [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, March 01, 2008 7:24 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: Exchange 2007 Smart host was an external vendor now gone. Just inherited this and am new to Exchange 2007... Exchange 2007 with a smart host configured. The smart host resided with an external vendor. That vendor is now gone and of course outbound mail is failing. Can you point me to a solution that either removes the smart host entirely or configs a replacement smarthost? Thanks in advance. ~ Ninja Email Security with Cloudmark Spam Engine Gets Image Spam ~ ~ http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Ninja~ ~ Ninja Email Security with Cloudmark Spam Engine Gets Image Spam ~ ~ http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Ninja~
RE: From another list I read: Trend Issue
Coming in late to this but I'm wondering if normally excluded files and folders may have been added to scan locations. Is that possible Tom? Cheers. From: Stephan Barr Sent: Wednesday, February 13, 2008 8:59 AM To: 'MS-Exchange Admin Issues' Subject: RE: From another list I read: Trend Issue I didn't see that either. Been running Trend for the last 4 years . From: Andy David [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, February 13, 2008 8:38 AM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: From another list I read: Trend Issue Hmm. Didn't see that here. From: Tom Strader [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, February 13, 2008 9:37 AM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: From another list I read: Trend Issue Not when it kills 14 servers by quarantining the LSASS.EXE file last year. Not me!! From: Andy David [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, February 13, 2008 9:24 AM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: From another list I read: Trend Issue I'll take Trend over just about any other AV vendor any day. From: Tom Strader [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, February 13, 2008 9:00 AM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: From another list I read: Trend Issue This is not the FIRST time they did this. Hence the reason we went away from Trend. From: Michael B. Smith [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, February 12, 2008 4:28 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: OT: From another list I read: Trend Issue Just a quick FYI Trend sent out a bad DAT version 4.995 around 10AM EST today (2/12/08). If you are running Trend and have an issue you need to roll back to 4.993. Problems experienced include extremely high disk I/O load and network problems. Regards, Michael B. Smith MCSE/Exchange MVP http://TheEssentialExchange.com ~ Ninja Email Security with Cloudmark Spam Engine Gets Image Spam ~ ~ http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Ninja~
RE: From another list I read: Trend Issue
I didn't see that either. Been running Trend for the last 4 years . From: Andy David [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, February 13, 2008 8:38 AM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: From another list I read: Trend Issue Hmm. Didn't see that here. From: Tom Strader [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, February 13, 2008 9:37 AM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: From another list I read: Trend Issue Not when it kills 14 servers by quarantining the LSASS.EXE file last year. Not me!! From: Andy David [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, February 13, 2008 9:24 AM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: From another list I read: Trend Issue I'll take Trend over just about any other AV vendor any day. From: Tom Strader [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, February 13, 2008 9:00 AM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: From another list I read: Trend Issue This is not the FIRST time they did this. Hence the reason we went away from Trend. From: Michael B. Smith [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, February 12, 2008 4:28 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: OT: From another list I read: Trend Issue Just a quick FYI Trend sent out a bad DAT version 4.995 around 10AM EST today (2/12/08). If you are running Trend and have an issue you need to roll back to 4.993. Problems experienced include extremely high disk I/O load and network problems. Regards, Michael B. Smith MCSE/Exchange MVP http://TheEssentialExchange.com ~ Ninja Email Security with Cloudmark Spam Engine Gets Image Spam ~ ~ http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Ninja~
Moving from E2k7 to E2k3
I have a client that needs to move ( don't ask) from E2k7 to E2k3. Could this be as simple as installing E2k3 in the same site as the E2k7 server and moving the mailboxes? Make my day please. Cheers. ~ Ninja Email Security with Cloudmark Spam Engine Gets Image Spam ~ ~ http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Ninja~
RE: Moving from E2k7 to E2k3
Found it. This is from MsExchangeTeam... Both Exchange 2003 and Exchange 2007 mailboxes can be moved (in either direction) with the Exchange 2007 tools. Exchange 2003 move mailbox cannot be used to move mailboxes to or from Exchange 2007 mailbox server. From: Stephan Barr [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, February 07, 2008 5:05 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: Moving from E2k7 to E2k3 I have a client that needs to move ( don't ask) from E2k7 to E2k3. Could this be as simple as installing E2k3 in the same site as the E2k7 server and moving the mailboxes? Make my day please. Cheers. ~ Ninja Email Security with Cloudmark Spam Engine Gets Image Spam ~ ~ http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Ninja~
RE: Moving from E2k7 to E2k3
How can I tell if it's Greenfield? If it is use ExMerge to move them out of e2k7 and into e2k3? -Original Message- From: Andy David [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, February 07, 2008 5:09 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Moving from E2k7 to E2k3 You cant install E2003 into a greenfield E2007 org. If it was a 2003 org in the past, then you should be able to add a new e2003 server. From: Stephan Barr [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, February 07, 2008 6:05 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: Moving from E2k7 to E2k3 I have a client that needs to move ( don't ask) from E2k7 to E2k3. Could this be as simple as installing E2k3 in the same site as the E2k7 server and moving the mailboxes? Make my day please. Cheers. ~ Ninja Email Security with Cloudmark Spam Engine Gets Image Spam ~ ~ http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Ninja~ ~ Ninja Email Security with Cloudmark Spam Engine Gets Image Spam ~ ~ http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Ninja~
RE: Moving from E2k7 to E2k3
Really? 'splain please. Ah are you saying that will move the mailboxes but it will still be an Exchange 2007 environment? This is going to be ugly I can tell. -Original Message- From: Andy David [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, February 07, 2008 5:12 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Moving from E2k7 to E2k3 Not quite the same thing as what you want to do :) From: Stephan Barr [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, February 07, 2008 6:09 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Moving from E2k7 to E2k3 Found it. This is from MsExchangeTeam... Both Exchange 2003 and Exchange 2007 mailboxes can be moved (in either direction) with the Exchange 2007 tools. Exchange 2003 move mailbox cannot be used to move mailboxes to or from Exchange 2007 mailbox server. From: Stephan Barr [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, February 07, 2008 5:05 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: Moving from E2k7 to E2k3 I have a client that needs to move ( don't ask) from E2k7 to E2k3. Could this be as simple as installing E2k3 in the same site as the E2k7 server and moving the mailboxes? Make my day please. Cheers. ~ Ninja Email Security with Cloudmark Spam Engine Gets Image Spam ~ ~ http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Ninja~ ~ Ninja Email Security with Cloudmark Spam Engine Gets Image Spam ~ ~ http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Ninja~
RE: Moving from E2k7 to E2k3
That's what I figured. Only 30 users so no big deal. ExMerge still the tool of choice in e2k7? From: Troy Meyer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, February 07, 2008 5:17 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Moving from E2k7 to E2k3 If you are using a Greenfield install of 2007, time to look at export-mailbox. -troy From: Stephan Barr [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, February 07, 2008 3:05 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: Moving from E2k7 to E2k3 I have a client that needs to move ( don't ask) from E2k7 to E2k3. Could this be as simple as installing E2k3 in the same site as the E2k7 server and moving the mailboxes? Make my day please. Cheers. ~ Ninja Email Security with Cloudmark Spam Engine Gets Image Spam ~ ~ http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Ninja~
RE: Moving from E2k7 to E2k3
Cool. Going to give a whack in the next day or two. Thanks muchly. -Original Message- From: Troy Meyer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, February 07, 2008 5:21 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Moving from E2k7 to E2k3 So if you can/have a 2000/2003 environment installed, it's a brainless procedure from EMC or EMS. We have done it multiple times back and forth from 2000 - 2007. I believe the article was what you were looking to do (ie the mailbox will work fine when moved back to 2003, it isn't 'marked for death from 2007') Hope that helps troy -Original Message- From: Stephan Barr [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, February 07, 2008 3:17 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Moving from E2k7 to E2k3 Really? 'splain please. Ah are you saying that will move the mailboxes but it will still be an Exchange 2007 environment? This is going to be ugly I can tell. -Original Message- From: Andy David [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, February 07, 2008 5:12 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Moving from E2k7 to E2k3 Not quite the same thing as what you want to do :) From: Stephan Barr [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, February 07, 2008 6:09 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Moving from E2k7 to E2k3 Found it. This is from MsExchangeTeam... Both Exchange 2003 and Exchange 2007 mailboxes can be moved (in either direction) with the Exchange 2007 tools. Exchange 2003 move mailbox cannot be used to move mailboxes to or from Exchange 2007 mailbox server. From: Stephan Barr [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, February 07, 2008 5:05 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: Moving from E2k7 to E2k3 I have a client that needs to move ( don't ask) from E2k7 to E2k3. Could this be as simple as installing E2k3 in the same site as the E2k7 server and moving the mailboxes? Make my day please. Cheers. ~ Ninja Email Security with Cloudmark Spam Engine Gets Image Spam ~ ~ http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Ninja~ ~ Ninja Email Security with Cloudmark Spam Engine Gets Image Spam ~ ~ http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Ninja~ ~ Ninja Email Security with Cloudmark Spam Engine Gets Image Spam ~ ~ http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Ninja~ ~ Ninja Email Security with Cloudmark Spam Engine Gets Image Spam ~ ~ http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Ninja~
RE: Moving from E2k7 to E2k3
Makes sense. Thanks for that. Anyway to tell, other than asking the previous technicians whom are dangling at the end of proverbial rope. -Original Message- From: Michael B. Smith [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, February 07, 2008 5:23 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Moving from E2k7 to E2k3 Each version of Exchange makes modifications to active directory. Each one does it differently. Exchange 2007 uses A/D differently than Exchange 2003 did. It doesn't use some attributes that Exchange 2003 did. When Exchange 2007 was installed, it looked at A/D and determined whether it needed to update A/D, or whether it needed to start from scratch. If it started from scratch, then Exchange 2003 won't install, because: 1) it'll see that the schema versions don't match, and 2) security is wrong. Regards, Michael B. Smith MCSE/Exchange MVP http://TheEssentialExchange.com -Original Message- From: Stephan Barr [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, February 07, 2008 6:17 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Moving from E2k7 to E2k3 Really? 'splain please. Ah are you saying that will move the mailboxes but it will still be an Exchange 2007 environment? This is going to be ugly I can tell. -Original Message- From: Andy David [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, February 07, 2008 5:12 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Moving from E2k7 to E2k3 Not quite the same thing as what you want to do :) From: Stephan Barr [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, February 07, 2008 6:09 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Moving from E2k7 to E2k3 Found it. This is from MsExchangeTeam... Both Exchange 2003 and Exchange 2007 mailboxes can be moved (in either direction) with the Exchange 2007 tools. Exchange 2003 move mailbox cannot be used to move mailboxes to or from Exchange 2007 mailbox server. From: Stephan Barr [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, February 07, 2008 5:05 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: Moving from E2k7 to E2k3 I have a client that needs to move ( don't ask) from E2k7 to E2k3. Could this be as simple as installing E2k3 in the same site as the E2k7 server and moving the mailboxes? Make my day please. Cheers. ~ Ninja Email Security with Cloudmark Spam Engine Gets Image Spam ~ ~ http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Ninja~ ~ Ninja Email Security with Cloudmark Spam Engine Gets Image Spam ~ ~ http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Ninja~ ~ Ninja Email Security with Cloudmark Spam Engine Gets Image Spam ~ ~ http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Ninja~ ~ Ninja Email Security with Cloudmark Spam Engine Gets Image Spam ~ ~ http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Ninja~
RE: Could someone tell me where i can find this setting in exchange 2003
It's a Reverse DNS (RDNS) problem. I'm curious who is telling you your email server has to start with a three digit code. It doesn't have to of course unless some other service provider has that requirement. Do you have AV or AS filtering provided to you by third party? Anyway, Google RDNS and settle in for a long read. Cheers. -Original Message- From: Victor Rodriguez [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, January 28, 2008 2:54 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: Could someone tell me where i can find this setting in exchange 2003 WARNING: One or more of your mailservers is claiming to be a host other than what it really is (the SMTP greeting should be a 3-digit code, followed by a space or a dash, then the host name). If your mailserver sends out E-mail using this domain in its EHLO or HELO, your E-mail might get blocked by anti-spam software. This is also a technical violation of RFC821 4.3 (and RFC2821 4.3.1). Note that the hostname given in the SMTP greeting should have an A record pointing back to the same server. Note that this one test may use a cached DNS record. mx2.idfllc.com claims to be non-existent host idfmailprd01.idf.local: br / 220 idfmailprd01.idf.local ESMTP Service ready br / ~ Ninja Email Security with Cloudmark Spam Engine Gets Image Spam ~ ~ http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Ninja~ ~ Ninja Email Security with Cloudmark Spam Engine Gets Image Spam ~ ~ http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Ninja~
RE: Symantec Outlook Plugin and server load
Symantec has been heavy on the client and the server for quite a while. Avoid it if you can. It's particularly heinous on the server, IMHO. As far as policies, you build those so scheduling is up to you as to when etc. It's wise to disallow the user any actions against the client. Cheers. From: Boggis, Josh [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, January 28, 2008 2:16 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: Symantec Outlook Plugin and server load Anyone have Symantec installed out on users PC's with the outlook plugin? I am concerned about the load put on the server if a user does a manual scan of all their email. In my mind this is going to pull down all their attachments and go through them one by one. If some default policy is set to run a manual scan of machines at the same time, this could means thousands of users pulling down their mail all at the same time. I'm looking for anyone who has had any experience with this or had any issues. ~ Ninja Email Security with Cloudmark Spam Engine Gets Image Spam ~ ~ http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Ninja~
RE: Could someone tell me where i can find this setting in exchange 2003
Go to www.dnsstuff.com , find the MX record check section, put your email domain in there (mail.yerDomain.com) and check it out. That's the information to which they are referring, I'll bet. Cheers. -Original Message- From: Kennedy, Jim [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, January 28, 2008 3:09 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Could someone tell me where i can find this setting in exchange 2003 We are not looking at an NDR. We are looking at the results of some outside testing. What looks like a testing website saying your server is not identifing itself upon connection properly. His server acknowledges the connection to incoming email with: 220 idfmailprd01.idf.local ESMTP Service ready -Original Message- From: Stephan Barr [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, January 28, 2008 4:03 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Could someone tell me where i can find this setting in exchange 2003 It's a Reverse DNS (RDNS) problem. I'm curious who is telling you your email server has to start with a three digit code. It doesn't have to of course unless some other service provider has that requirement. Do you have AV or AS filtering provided to you by third party? Anyway, Google RDNS and settle in for a long read. Cheers. -Original Message- From: Victor Rodriguez [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, January 28, 2008 2:54 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: Could someone tell me where i can find this setting in exchange 2003 WARNING: One or more of your mailservers is claiming to be a host other than what it really is (the SMTP greeting should be a 3-digit code, followed by a space or a dash, then the host name). If your mailserver sends out E-mail using this domain in its EHLO or HELO, your E-mail might get blocked by anti-spam software. This is also a technical violation of RFC821 4.3 (and RFC2821 4.3.1). Note that the hostname given in the SMTP greeting should have an A record pointing back to the same server. Note that this one test may use a cached DNS record. mx2.idfllc.com claims to be non-existent host idfmailprd01.idf.local: br / 220 idfmailprd01.idf.local ESMTP Service ready br / ~ Ninja Email Security with Cloudmark Spam Engine Gets Image Spam ~ ~ http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Ninja~ ~ Ninja Email Security with Cloudmark Spam Engine Gets Image Spam ~ ~ http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Ninja~ ~ Ninja Email Security with Cloudmark Spam Engine Gets Image Spam ~ ~ http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Ninja~ ~ Ninja Email Security with Cloudmark Spam Engine Gets Image Spam ~ ~ http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Ninja~
RE: Exchange 2000 OWA is open.
The VPNs are gateways but nothing stops them from putting the OWA address in a kiosk browser. -Original Message- From: Andy David [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, January 17, 2008 2:45 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Exchange 2000 OWA is open. What if I'm at an airport kiosk? If I have access to VPN, I'll probably want to use Outlook. -Original Message- From: Salvador Manzo [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, January 17, 2008 3:43 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: Re: Exchange 2000 OWA is open. Stephan, Require a VPN connection before allowing connection to OWA. OWA is just an application riding on top of a web server. So long as the web server is accessible, it _will_ get attacked. On 1/17/08 12:39, Andy David [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: If it's not ISA, its crap! No SSL? OY. I wouldn't bother with a deny list. -Original Message- From: Stephan Barr [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, January 17, 2008 3:35 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: Exchange 2000 OWA is open. I just picked up a client that has a Windows 2000 environment with Exchange 2000,everything fully patched and running well. 150 users, everything is behind Netgear FVS328s WAN wide, there are VPNs to five remote sites and the domain is WAN wide. Employees occasionally connect via HTTP to Exchange OWA using Windows Integrated Authentication; no SSL. There is evidence in the Exchange security log that unwanted folks are trying to gain access via OWA and they want it to stop. I've been reviewing the IIS log for foreign IPs and adding those to the deny list but that doesn't seem to do the trick. The customer does have a license for a second Exchange server. The IIS lockdown tool has not been executed on the Exchange server. What would you recommend to reduce/eliminate OWAs exposure? Cheers. - Salvador Manzo [ 620 W. 35th St - Los Angeles, CA 90089 e. [EMAIL PROTECTED] ] Auxiliary Services IT, Datacenter University of Southern California 818-612-5112 ~ Ninja Email Security with Cloudmark Spam Engine Gets Image Spam ~ ~ http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Ninja~ ~ Ninja Email Security with Cloudmark Spam Engine Gets Image Spam ~ ~ http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Ninja~ ~ Ninja Email Security with Cloudmark Spam Engine Gets Image Spam ~ ~ http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Ninja~
Exchange 2000 OWA is open.
I just picked up a client that has a Windows 2000 environment with Exchange 2000,everything fully patched and running well. 150 users, everything is behind Netgear FVS328s WAN wide, there are VPNs to five remote sites and the domain is WAN wide. Employees occasionally connect via HTTP to Exchange OWA using Windows Integrated Authentication; no SSL. There is evidence in the Exchange security log that unwanted folks are trying to gain access via OWA and they want it to stop. I've been reviewing the IIS log for foreign IPs and adding those to the deny list but that doesn't seem to do the trick. The customer does have a license for a second Exchange server. The IIS lockdown tool has not been executed on the Exchange server. What would you recommend to reduce/eliminate OWAs exposure? Cheers. ~ Ninja Email Security with Cloudmark Spam Engine Gets Image Spam ~ ~ http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Ninja~
RE: Exchange 2000 OWA is open.
Will ISA 2006 work in a Windows 2000 environment? -Original Message- From: Andy David [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, January 17, 2008 2:39 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Exchange 2000 OWA is open. If it's not ISA, its crap! No SSL? OY. I wouldn't bother with a deny list. -Original Message- From: Stephan Barr [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, January 17, 2008 3:35 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: Exchange 2000 OWA is open. I just picked up a client that has a Windows 2000 environment with Exchange 2000,everything fully patched and running well. 150 users, everything is behind Netgear FVS328s WAN wide, there are VPNs to five remote sites and the domain is WAN wide. Employees occasionally connect via HTTP to Exchange OWA using Windows Integrated Authentication; no SSL. There is evidence in the Exchange security log that unwanted folks are trying to gain access via OWA and they want it to stop. I've been reviewing the IIS log for foreign IPs and adding those to the deny list but that doesn't seem to do the trick. The customer does have a license for a second Exchange server. The IIS lockdown tool has not been executed on the Exchange server. What would you recommend to reduce/eliminate OWAs exposure? Cheers. ~ Ninja Email Security with Cloudmark Spam Engine Gets Image Spam ~ ~ http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Ninja~ ~ Ninja Email Security with Cloudmark Spam Engine Gets Image Spam ~ ~ http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Ninja~ ~ Ninja Email Security with Cloudmark Spam Engine Gets Image Spam ~ ~ http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Ninja~
RE: Exchange 2000 OWA is open.
ISA 2000, ISA 2004, ISA 2006. Newer is better? -Original Message- From: Tim Vander Kooi [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, January 17, 2008 3:04 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Exchange 2000 OWA is open. Donning Dr. Tom mask If it ain't ISA it sucks, but ISA is perfection on a shiny plastic platter! Removing Dr. Tom mask In all seriousness, ISA is your best solution for this situation. TVK -Original Message- From: Stephan Barr [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, January 17, 2008 2:35 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: Exchange 2000 OWA is open. I just picked up a client that has a Windows 2000 environment with Exchange 2000,everything fully patched and running well. 150 users, everything is behind Netgear FVS328s WAN wide, there are VPNs to five remote sites and the domain is WAN wide. Employees occasionally connect via HTTP to Exchange OWA using Windows Integrated Authentication; no SSL. There is evidence in the Exchange security log that unwanted folks are trying to gain access via OWA and they want it to stop. I've been reviewing the IIS log for foreign IPs and adding those to the deny list but that doesn't seem to do the trick. The customer does have a license for a second Exchange server. The IIS lockdown tool has not been executed on the Exchange server. What would you recommend to reduce/eliminate OWAs exposure? Cheers. ~ Ninja Email Security with Cloudmark Spam Engine Gets Image Spam ~ ~ http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Ninja~ ~ Ninja Email Security with Cloudmark Spam Engine Gets Image Spam ~ ~ http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Ninja~ ~ Ninja Email Security with Cloudmark Spam Engine Gets Image Spam ~ ~ http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Ninja~
RE: Exchange 2000 OWA is open.
Thanks for the replies you guys. Very much appreciated. Cheers. -Original Message- From: Salvador Manzo [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, January 17, 2008 2:43 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: Re: Exchange 2000 OWA is open. Stephan, Require a VPN connection before allowing connection to OWA. OWA is just an application riding on top of a web server. So long as the web server is accessible, it _will_ get attacked. On 1/17/08 12:39, Andy David [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: If it's not ISA, its crap! No SSL? OY. I wouldn't bother with a deny list. -Original Message- From: Stephan Barr [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, January 17, 2008 3:35 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: Exchange 2000 OWA is open. I just picked up a client that has a Windows 2000 environment with Exchange 2000,everything fully patched and running well. 150 users, everything is behind Netgear FVS328s WAN wide, there are VPNs to five remote sites and the domain is WAN wide. Employees occasionally connect via HTTP to Exchange OWA using Windows Integrated Authentication; no SSL. There is evidence in the Exchange security log that unwanted folks are trying to gain access via OWA and they want it to stop. I've been reviewing the IIS log for foreign IPs and adding those to the deny list but that doesn't seem to do the trick. The customer does have a license for a second Exchange server. The IIS lockdown tool has not been executed on the Exchange server. What would you recommend to reduce/eliminate OWAs exposure? Cheers. - Salvador Manzo [ 620 W. 35th St - Los Angeles, CA 90089 e. [EMAIL PROTECTED] ] Auxiliary Services IT, Datacenter University of Southern California 818-612-5112 ~ Ninja Email Security with Cloudmark Spam Engine Gets Image Spam ~ ~ http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Ninja~ ~ Ninja Email Security with Cloudmark Spam Engine Gets Image Spam ~ ~ http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Ninja~
RE: BUE Exchange Logs
Check that you have actually selected your Information Store. The Information Store must be backed up in order for the logs to be cleared. Cheers. From: Roger Wright [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, January 15, 2008 9:31 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: BUE Exchange Logs I've been playing with Backup Exec and it seems to be doing a good job, however, my Exchange logs are not getting flushed when I do a full backup of the server. Is this a simple configuration setting I missed somewhere? Roger Wright Network Administrator Evatone, Inc. 727.572.7076 x388 Neckties strangle clear thinking. --Lin Yutang ~ Ninja Email Security with Cloudmark Spam Engine Gets Image Spam ~ ~ http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Ninja~
RE: Monday Morning Funny
Well the good news is your wife has sex on her mind. Or sex change. Cheers. -Original Message- From: Troy Meyer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, January 14, 2008 11:22 AM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: Monday Morning Funny So this weekend I was working on my laptop and when I had set it down to use the restroom my wife came over and fired up internet explorer. When I came back she had an interesting question for me. My home page is www.msexchangeteam.com (the Microsoft Exchange Team blog site) She asked me why I was looking at m sex change team.com I guess I was caught in the act! -troy ~ Ninja Email Security with Cloudmark Spam Engine Gets Image Spam ~ ~ http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Ninja~ ~ Ninja Email Security with Cloudmark Spam Engine Gets Image Spam ~ ~ http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Ninja~
