ion could be made because the target machine actively refused
>
> >it.
> >
> >-Original Message-
> >From: Jim Brady [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> >Sent: Thursday, February 14, 2002 11:01 AM
> >To: Exchange Discussions
> >Subject: RE: open relay
If he owns a Jaz drive invite him in to copy the PST to a cartridge.
- Original Message -
From: "Drewski" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Exchange Discussions" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Thursday, February 14, 2002 4:37 PM
Subject: RE: Retiring Employess
> burn it to CD. I doubt he's under 10M
Given the shortened version of your first name I find that statement to be
just a tad ... suggestive.
- Original Message -
From: "Tener, Richard" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Exchange Discussions" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Thursday, February 14, 2002 5:13 PM
Subject: RE: IS = mailbox store
You did a disaster recovery, didn't you? Go through what you did, your
steps, and we'll see if we can't see where you got off-track.
- Original Message -
From: "Klaus Rapl" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Exchange Discussions" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Friday, February 15, 2002 1:09 AM
Subject:
?
- Original Message -
From: "Klaus Rapl" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Exchange Discussions" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: "'Daniel Chenault'" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Friday, February 15, 2002 1:20 AM
Subject: AW: Need Help !!!
Hi,
thanks a lot
TED]]
Sent: Thursday, February 14, 2002 11:01 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: open relay
Still an open relay at 10:59am
:(
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Daniel
Chenault
Sent: Thursday, February 14, 2002 9:25 AM
To: Exchange Dis
Looks pretty clear to me:
your PC tried to open a connection to 212.17.x.x to port 137 on the remote
host and the connection was denied.
- Original Message -
From: "Kim Schotanus" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Exchange Discussions" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Friday, February 15, 2002 8:00 A
Exchange cannot stand alone; Ex55 requires a domain, Ex2K requires AD.
Period.
- Original Message -
From: "Vincent Avallone" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Exchange Discussions" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Friday, February 15, 2002 2:19 PM
Subject: Moving out of a Domain
We are in the process o
The Received headers in the message will tell most of the story.
- Original Message -
From: "Warren Cundy" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Exchange Discussions" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Friday, February 15, 2002 11:55 AM
Subject: Delayed Email--Possible Reasons?
> Hi Guys,
>
> A user received
RE: Moving out of a Domain
I am Exchange.
Hear me roar.
-Original Message-
From: Daniel Chenault [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Friday, February 15, 2002 3:24 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: Re: Moving out of a Domain
Exchange cannot stand alone; Ex55 requires a domain, Ex2K re
Based on his English usage and the way he phrased his question I'd wager
that Mark is not in America. It's really difficult to make salary
comparisons across borders. Hell, it's hard to do it within borders - the
cost of living in San Francisco is demonstrably higher than, say, Tyler,
Texas. It wo
I'm not working.
- Original Message -
From: "Tony Hlabse" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Exchange Discussions" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Saturday, February 16, 2002 1:47 PM
Subject: Re: My Salary(exchange)
> Be happy your working
>
> - O
ED]>
Sent: Sunday, February 17, 2002 6:58 PM
Subject: Re: My Salary(exchange)
> But more importantly, are you happy?
>
> - Original Message -
> From: "Daniel Chenault" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: "Exchange Discussions" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sen
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Daniel Chenault
> Sent: Sunday, February 17, 2002 7:45 PM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: Re: My Salary(exchange)
>
>
> Ah... now there's the rub, is it not? Are we to seek and achieve a certain
> mileston
of a Domain
I could always make them the same machine
-Original Message-
From: Daniel Chenault [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Friday, February 15, 2002 3:24 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: Re: Moving out of a Domain
Exchange cannot stand alone; Ex55 requires a domain, Ex2K re
ary 15, 2002 3:25 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Moving out of a Domain
I am Exchange.
Hear me roar.
-Original Message-
From: Daniel Chenault [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Friday, February 15, 2002 3:24 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: Re: Moving out of a Domain
1, and holds true to that form right on through 5,5? Have you
ever
> considered creating an Ariel of your own?
>
> I think I'll sign this one: Sir John
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Daniel Chenault [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Sunday, February 17, 200
t me describe my scar, lest you
think
> I was not with thee. A round damned spot upon my southpaw wrist, where a
> great anguish was borne from the to tight bindings of a crippled wing . .
.
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Daniel Chenault [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent
Exchange will accept any message inbound but that doens't mean the message
will be relayed. Most likely Spam Cop is mistakenly assuming that accepting
the message means successful relaying. Contact them directly.
- Original Message -
From: +ACI-Etts, Russell+ACI- +ADw-retts+AEA-harman.com
; Phone: (501) 801-0457
> > Fax: (501) 801-0421
> > www.audiointl.com
> >
> >
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Andy David [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > Sent: Monday, February 18, 2002 7:38 PM
> > To: Exchange Discussions
> > Subject: R
Doesn't anyone know how to do research anymore? Putting in "icalendar" at
MS' website brought up multiple hits.
- Original Message -
From: "Allison Wittstock" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Exchange Discussions" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Wednesday, February 20, 2002 10:02 AM
Subject: RE: OT(?)
Are you sure it's export dropping the leading zeros? What are you using to
view the data?
- Original Message -
From: "Blunt, James H (Jim)" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Exchange Discussions" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Friday, February 22, 2002 3:18 PM
Subject: Directory Export
> Exchange 5.5
"Exchange Discussions" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Friday, February 22, 2002 4:46 PM
Subject: RE: Directory Export
> Daniel,
>
> 100% sure? No...
>
> I'm using Excel 2002, SP1
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Daniel Chenault [mailto:[EMAIL PR
ct: RE: Directory Export
> It's not Excel doing it...I opened it in Notepad and the leading zeroes
are
> still missing.
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Daniel Chenault [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Friday, February 22, 2002 2:50 PM
> To: Exchange Discussions
>
Take a trace and identify the inbound packet with the info in it then get
the IP address. I was getting some events and found that my ISP had some
customers who were not filtering their exposed interface. Lots of NT traffic
that shouldn't be there.
Of course, if the IP is in someplace like, say,
netdom.exe
- Original Message -
From: "John Q Jr." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Exchange Discussions" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Monday, February 25, 2002 3:43 PM
Subject: Re: Finding servers DC
> That will work for what I need but there is a command, maybe netdag, that
> will list the DC i
Exchange will not install into a workgroup.
- Original Message -
From: "Phil" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Exchange Discussions" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Wednesday, February 27, 2002 9:37 AM
Subject: Exchange Replication: Newbie question
> I am using Exchange 5.5 SP4.
>
> I have a single s
usually I answer them. ;)
single domain, running in mixed mode
one ex55 server, one ex2k server
ex55's service account is the domain admin account; password verified (yes,
I know. One thing at a time)
ex2K is standard and hit the 16G limit
task: upgrade the ex2K machine to enterprise
in
BCC is one possibility, forged headers is another.
Short answer: a message has two components: the P1, or envelope, and P2, the
body. For SMTP the addressing in the P1 does not have to match the
addressing in P2. P1 gets the message delivered, P2 is what populates the
message fields.
- Origi
ossible?
>
> ----- Original Message -
> From: "Daniel Chenault" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: "Exchange Discussions" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sent: Wednesday, February 27, 2002 10:43
> Subject: Re: Exchange Replication: Newbie question
>
>
> >
And no telecommuting. Being a native Texan moving to NJ is out of the
question.
- Original Message -
From: "Blunt, James H (Jim)" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Exchange Discussions" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Wednesday, February 27, 2002 4:19 PM
Subject: RE: Looking for 3rd level messaging engi
ay, February 27, 2002 4:29 PM
Subject: RE: Looking for 3rd level messaging engineer
I love this "no telecommuting" mentality. It's so 90's. What? Nobody
there knows how to push a switch if I call? What do you think I can't
do remotely? Pshaw. Pshaw, I say!
-
What does this have to do with Exchange, specifically?
The HTML is calling a local program. For this exploit to work there has to
be either a) a downloaded piece of malware to be called in this fashion or
b) the called program has to accept command-line strings.
For (a), there should be none on
You'll have to look at the headers to see which domain it came from and then
ask the postmaster at that domain for more information.
- Original Message -
From: "Pillai, Raj" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Exchange Discussions" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Thursday, February 28, 2002 11:33 AM
Subje
Perhaps you should take a look at Trend's website then.
- Original Message -
From: "Khalid Kamran" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Exchange Discussions" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Thursday, February 28, 2002 5:32 AM
Subject: Wrong version of Exchange Store.exe
> Hello everyone,
>
> My name is
Yes.
May I suggest any book appropraite to your version written by Tony Redmond
or Paul Robichaux.
- Original Message -
From: "Mike Tonazzi" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Exchange Discussions" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Thursday, February 28, 2002 3:17 PM
Subject: AW: Logfiles
Right now it's
actical issues :-)
Do you think of Tony Redmond, Microsoft Exchange Server for Windows
2000, ISBN 182249?
-Ursprüngliche Nachricht-
Von: Daniel Chenault [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Gesendet: Donnerstag, 28. Februar 2002 22:46
An: Exchange Discussions
Betreff: Re: Logfiles
Yes.
May I
I suspect GW too; it has a hook into the attachment table using the AVAPI.
Disable/uninstall GW and try the operation again. And have their support
number handy.
- Original Message -
From: "Masthanaiah Cheekavolu" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Exchange Discussions" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Th
I've got 180K experience. Guess that's too much, huh?
- Original Message -
From: "Tony Hlabse" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Exchange Discussions" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Friday, March 01, 2002 3:06 PM
Subject: Re: Looking for 3rd level messaging engineer
> That's OK. Here in Cleveland, OH
Before we go much farther, enable Message tracking. Store and MTA for both
servers (StandardUserA and CR) and store/mta/IMC on the IMC box. Let's find
out exactly where this message is going before we start doing coulda,
shoulda, woulda.
- Original Message -
From: "SecDoc" <[EMAIL PROTECT
And when you searched for the error on Technet, what did you come up with?
- Original Message -
From: "Tony Nguyen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Exchange Discussions" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Thursday, February 28, 2002 4:38 PM
Subject: Need help
> We are using Exchange5.5 and did not have
FAQ
- Original Message -
From: "Robert Williams" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Exchange Discussions" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Monday, March 04, 2002 3:59 PM
Subject: Open relay question
> I recently "closed" our open relay because we were blacklisted by
orbz...now
> my external pop3 clients
Uh... it's a log file, ya know? You, or someone else with permission, told
Exchange to create it (IMS Properties:Diagnostics logging). They exist
solely for human consumption; you can do whatever you want to with them.
- Original Message -
From: "Davinder Gupta" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "E
If I'm understanding you correctly it won't work. He should have brought the
new server in as a BDC and then promoted it to PDC. If he installed it
fresh, new SAM and everything, he did it wrong.
Short answer: no.
- Original Message -
From: "Ahmed Emran" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Exchange
Add the new IP to the adapter as a secondary IP address. Make the DNS change
and wait for/force propogation. Ping the name and see what IP comes back. If
it's the new one you're good to go. Give it a day and then remove the old IP
from the adapter. If things go kablooey put it back and start
troub
First off, don't ever hit the big red button until it is clear there are no
other options. The events you posted below are related to that hasty finger
and do not help at all in troubleshooting the immediate problem. Second, the
services database is locked until all services have started or failed
Read it again.
...content length... too long for the recipient...
- Original Message -
From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Exchange Discussions" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Thursday, March 07, 2002 6:21 AM
Subject: message limit
> Exch 5.5sp4 on Win2ksp2
>
> I have a user that is getting this
Use the BackupExec Exchange agent. This is covered in the docs.
- Original Message -
From: "Niki Blowfield" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Exchange Discussions" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Thursday, March 07, 2002 3:13 AM
Subject: Online backup of Exchange 5.5 with Veritas BE 8.5
> Dear All,
>
They are missing read/write permission to a local directory, I forget which
one. Use filemon to determine the folder to which OL is attempting to save
the form locally.
- Original Message -
From: "Derrick Stevenson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Exchange Discussions" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent:
I've seen this when two or more clients connect to a mailbox and the rules
get confused. Are you _positive_ no one is logging into this mailbox?
- Original Message -
From: "Tony Hlabse" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Exchange Discussions" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Thursday, March 07, 2002 12:18
ch 07, 2002 12:29 PM
Subject: Re: Rules stop working?
> Yes we created the account so it's sole purpose was to do one thing. Reply
> back to a sender of a message to a single DL.
>
>
> - Original Message -
> From: "Daniel Chenault" <[EMAIL PROTECTED
Why not install a test Ex2K box and try it out?
- Original Message -
From: "Gary Graham" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Exchange Discussions" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Thursday, March 07, 2002 9:21 AM
Subject: Need info/help with converting code that works under CDO 1.2.1 Ex
change 5.5 to Excha
What's confusing about it? NAV generated a response back to the alleged
sender informing him his message had a virus in it. It's certainly not
surprising that the reply-to address is bogus.
- Original Message -
From: "Bill Kuhl" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Exchange Discussions" <[EMAIL PROTE
Read the headers of the message: it didn't come from Microsoft. Microsoft
never, ever, sends out hotfixes of any kind as a binary attachment.
- Original Message -
From: "Bill Kuhl" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Exchange Discussions" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Friday, March 08, 2002 7:58 AM
Subj
What you see in the message is the P2, or the contents. But routing is done
on the P1, or envelope. The envelope is not visible in the client; it's
discarded before delivery to the final destination.
- Original Message -
From: "James Lavoie" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Exchange Discussions"
1 AM
Subject: RE: The great smtp mystery
> Thanks. That would provide an explanation for how it happens. I can only
> guess as to what the motivation might be.
>
>
> -----Original Message-
> From: Daniel Chenault [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Friday, March 08, 2002
ich is:
Fred,
It was nice to talk to you today I will send the proposal tonight.
I'm blocking the sending domain because I don't like it but like yourself
I'm trying to chase it down.
Dave Cook
Exchange Administrator
Kutak Rock, LLP
402-231-8352
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
-Original
It's saying that the System Attendant cannot reach a GC in order to service
a client request. IOW: you need a functioning GC. Seems pretty clear to me.
- Original Message -
From: "Tea, Justin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Exchange Discussions" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Friday, March 08, 2002
ilure in the future. Has anyone experienced Q282446?
-Original Message-
From: Daniel Chenault [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Friday, March 08, 2002 9:31 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: Re: RFR Interface 9074
It's saying that the System Attendant cannot reach a GC in order to
serv
uration to avoid this single point of
failure in the future. Has anyone experienced Q282446?
-----Original Message-
From: Daniel Chenault [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Friday, March 08, 2002 9:31 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: Re: RFR Interface 9074
It's saying that the Syst
Where are the three users located, server-wise and network-wise?
- Original Message -
From: "John Q Jr." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Exchange Discussions" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Friday, March 08, 2002 3:18 PM
Subject: Re: Outlook XP Calendar
> I am attempting to figure out why a user ca
They're on different servers, aren't they?
- Original Message -
From: "John Q Jr." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Exchange Discussions" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Friday, March 08, 2002 3:25 PM
Subject: Re: Outlook XP Calendar
> Ohh man,
> What meant to say was UserA can not see UserB's Free /
-Original Message-
> > From: Martin Blackstone [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > Sent: Friday, March 08, 2002 5:06 PM
> > To: Exchange Discussions
> > Subject: RE: Outlook XP Calendar
> >
> >
> > Street-wise
> >
> > -Original Message--
The GWART files (there are two) exist solely for human consumption. Modify
them they'll be overwritten. Delete them they'll be recreated. If something
is wrong in the GWART its because the engine is getting incorrect
information.
- Original Message -
From: "Mahesh Bharatsingh" <[EMAIL PRO
1:08 AM
Subject: RE: Recalculate Routing for MTA doesn't work
> Is there a way to rebuild the mta routing table, without using recalculate
> route?
> I have some wrong information in there.
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Daniel Chenault [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
You don't move it. You create a second MX record in DNS pointing to the new
SMTP connector. Once you verify it is working properly remove the other MX
record and decommision the old connector. No downtime at all.
- Original Message -
From: "Ali Wilkes (IT)" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Exchan
Perhaps I dont' understand what you're asking but what is so hard about
running setup /domainprep?
- Original Message -
From: "Christopher Hummert" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Exchange Discussions" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Monday, March 11, 2002 11:38 AM
Subject: RE: Service Pack 2 Problem
Since PSS has absolutely no input or administrative control over the
microsoft.com domain, including the Exchange servers, your lack of warm
fuzzies is ill-placed.
- Original Message -
From: "Michel, David" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Exchange Discussions" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Monday, M
u've misinterpreted a sarcastic jab at a company that millions enjoy
> mocking but, in my experience, provides a very reliable and stable product
> when administered with any amount of intelligence.
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Daniel Chenault [mailto:[EMAIL PROTE
Loop at MS?
You've misinterpreted a sarcastic jab at a company that millions enjoy
mocking but, in my experience, provides a very reliable and stable
product
when administered with any amount of intelligence.
-Original Message-
From: Daniel Chenault [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent:
e pretty specific about
what they'll fix on an issue. Generally if they have to transfer you to
another group, unless the problem is directly related, they'll not
really help you out. ymmv i suppose.
jeremy
-Original Message-
From: Daniel Chenault [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Monda
ued to work on the DS
issue. He specifically said he wouldn't help with the blue screen issue
unless it was another case. Maybe this guy was lazy, I dunno. By the
way, I'm not attacking PSS - I've had a number of terrific experiences
with them under stressful situations.
Jeremy
-
help with the blue screen issue
unless it was another case. Maybe this guy was lazy, I dunno. By the
way, I'm not attacking PSS - I've had a number of terrific experiences
with them under stressful situations. Jeremy
-Original Message-
From: Daniel Chenault [mailto:[EMAIL PRO
or) and continued to work on the DS
> issue. He specifically said he wouldn't help with the blue screen issue
> unless it was another case. Maybe this guy was lazy, I dunno. By the
> way, I'm not attacking PSS - I've had a number of terrific experiences
> with them under
to work on the DS
> issue. He specifically said he wouldn't help with the blue screen issue
> unless it was another case. Maybe this guy was lazy, I dunno. By the
> way, I'm not attacking PSS - I've had a number of terrific experiences
> with them under stressful situat
total of 9 people involved over
the period in question. I made an (erroneous in hindsight) assumption that
things were being tossed to people who could get a handle on what needed to
be done.
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Daniel Chenault [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Mon 03/1
r I
> had been working with closed the ticket (without actually asking me) and
> opened a new one because "the ticket had been open for so long". (that
> just added to the mess.)
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Daniel Chenault [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent:
Your server is not set to relay for this IMAP/POP user?
- Original Message -
From: "Blunt, James H (Jim)" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Exchange Discussions" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Tuesday, March 12, 2002 3:48 PM
Subject: 550 Error Message for our own domain?
> Sorry...wrong title earlier
It just so happens that MS has a paper or two on exactly this procedure. You
might check their website (which should have been your first option instead
of this list).
- Original Message -
From: "McCullar, Doug" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Exchange Discussions" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Mond
Historical humor; you had to be there.
- Original Message -
From: "Patrick" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Exchange Discussions" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Tuesday, March 12, 2002 2:12 PM
Subject: RE: Best way to restrict routign\relaying in Exchange 5.5 ( feedb a
ck please)
> Why I no answere
rch 12, 2002 4:15 PM
Subject: RE: 550 Error Message for our own domain?
> We don't use IMAP/POP...all straight SMTP thru Ex5.5, SP4
>
> Jim Blunt
> Network / E-mail Admin
> Network / Infrastructure Group
> Bechtel Hanford, Inc.
> 509-372-9188
>
> -Origin
Nice try, but outlook does not do verification of source routing while
creating a rule.
Elmer, how are you creating the rule? From scratch or do you have an example
message open and using that as a template?
- Original Message -
From: "Blunt, James H (Jim)" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Excha
nt: Tuesday, March 12, 2002 4:38 PM
Subject: RE: 550 Error Message for our own domain?
> Sorry Daniel...
>
> MAPI.
>
> Jim Blunt
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Daniel Chenault [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Tuesday, March 12, 2002 2:36 PM
> To: Exchange D
Did you check your DS settings?
- Original Message -
From: "Bloom, Tom" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Exchange Discussions" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Tuesday, March 12, 2002 9:07 PM
Subject: 958 Routing Error
Our Exchange 2000 application logs show the following warning every hour.
Native mo
>
Sent: Tuesday, March 12, 2002 8:55 PM
Subject: RE: Exchange 2000 in 5.5 Site
> I did check that out but must be my mistake. I thought that was what this
list was for too.
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Daniel Chenault [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Tuesday, March
>
> Knowledge Consistency Check. It's under Directory Service, Server Level.
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Mahesh Bharatsingh [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Wednesday, March 13, 2002 7:48 AM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: RE: Recalculate Routing fo
t; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Exchange Discussions" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Wednesday, March 13, 2002 8:32 AM
Subject: RE: Exchange 2000 in 5.5 Site
> I have the article Q284148 on removing the last 5.5 server. All
attendees, all of the time.
>
> -Original Messa
I just ran into something like this very recently.
On the 5.5 box open the Services and get properties on each Exchange
service. Manually enter 'domain\username' and restart the services.
Yes, I know, sounds weird. But it works.
- Original Message -
From: "Alister" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
T
ED]>
To: "Exchange Discussions" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Wednesday, March 13, 2002 9:23 AM
Subject: RE: Exchange 2000 in 5.5 Site
> It is just blank where before you could see there busy times in blue.
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Daniel Chenault [mailto:[EMAIL P
con·cur·rent Pronunciation Key (kn-kûrnt, -kr-)
adj.
1.. Happening at the same time as something else. See Synonyms at
contemporary.
2.. Operating or acting in conjunction with another.
3.. Meeting or tending to meet at the same point; convergent.
4.. Being in accordance; harmonious.
So
>
> Ali
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Daniel Chenault
> Sent: 13 March 2002 15:54
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: Re: Exchange 2000 in 5.5 Site
>
>
> That would mean the F/B folder is not pop
l mails have the word unzustellbar or undeliverable in the
subject line. So probably this is a better approach. I will try.
Thank you for the help.
regards
Elmer
> -----Original Message-
> From: Daniel Chenault [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Tuesday, March 12, 2002 11:37 PM
>
Heck, if I'd known I would have bought them out of hock; good investment
(but a little eagle-eye on business practices might be in order).
- Original Message -
From: "Kenneth Walden" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Exchange Discussions" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Wednesday, March 13, 2002 4:43 PM
Give a man a fish, feed him for a day.
Teach a man to fish, feed him for his lifetime
Book of Hard Facts of Life
To be is to do: Plato
To do is to be: Voltaire
Do be do be do: Sinatra
;)
- Original Message -
From: "Sander Van Butzelaar" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Exchange Discussions" <[
Uh... relaying is turned off on the machine hosting domain2.com?
- Original Message -
From: "XCNG Daily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Exchange Discussions" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Thursday, March 14, 2002 2:14 AM
Subject: Relay more in detail
> Hi, due to no response to my mail some days
That's because you can't have two servers with the same name on the same
network. A restore server should be on it's own network with a copy of the
production domain's DC.
- Original Message -
From: "Seitz, Peter" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Exchange Discussions" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Th
OWA uses four ports total:
80 for inbound from the client
three dynamically-chosen (by the Exchange server) ports for communication on
the back-end.
Not sure if this helps since I don't know your configuration.
- Original Message -
From: "Mike Carlson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Exchange D
Assuming the client is using an OST, start up offline and delete the message
sitting in the outbox.
- Original Message -
From: "Ronny Pedersen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Exchange Discussions" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Thursday, March 14, 2002 4:05 AM
Subject: Client hanging
> HI !
>
Technet is your friend.
I encourage you to do a search and find the relevant article so you can
learn the mechanism. Basically, though, an OST can only be opened by the
profile that created it.
- Original Message -
From: "McCready, Robert" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Exchange Discussions" <
Yes. I'd be happy to craft a solution for you. For a price...
- Original Message -
From: "Irfan Malik" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Exchange Discussions" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Thursday, March 14, 2002 5:18 AM
Subject: Auto Responder
Dear List,
Our Publicity department wants that when e
401 - 500 of 835 matches
Mail list logo
