Randomly.
From: bounce-9487411-8066...@lyris.sunbelt-software.com
[mailto:bounce-9487411-8066...@lyris.sunbelt-software.com] On Behalf Of Shih,
Henry
Sent: 14 February 2012 17:30
To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues
Subject: Exchange 2010 database
What is the best practice or guideline when you
Perhaps we might want to argue the case a little? You need a different mindset
with Exchange 2010 and DAGs. You can no longer just take a database off-line
and run ESEUTIL/D on the database as this creates a new database any copies
in the Dag will need to be re-seeded. So I suggest that in
+1
--
Phil Randal
Infrastructure Engineer
Hoople Ltd | Thorn Office Centre | Hereford HR2 6JT
Tel: 01432 260415 | Email: phil.ran...@hoopleltd.co.uk
From: Dave Wade [mailto:dave.w...@stockport.gov.uk]
Sent: 15 February 2012 10:41
To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Exchange 2010 database
Like another poster said, it's entirely down to the organisation. We do ours
randomly because we have lots of different types of users. Having all our execs
or a certain department all go offline at the same time would be pretty
unacceptable - and I imagine we wouldn't be alone.
DAGs haven't
In Exchange 2003, we did it along the lines of
Store for surnames starting A-H. So we may have surnames A-H on server
1. This is for standard size mailboxes (upto 200mb) then we have on each
server a store for large mailbox users i.e over 200mb, for users with
surnames A-H
Server 2 will be I-N
It's a lovely circular argument which has changed over the years as the
underlying storage and management technologies behind Exchange changed. My rule
of thumb back in the Exchange 2003 days was do it by department rather than
management level. I would rather have an entire department and 1 or
But as SIS no longer applies in Exchange 2010, then bunching people together to
save space isn't going to work anymore. If that was a major strategy in
determining mailbox placement, it shouldn't be carried forward to an Exchange
2010 environment. Break up those stone tablets and carve some
I thought I could remember this, but not to worry, Google is at hand:
http://www.stevieg.org/2010/08/publishing-imap-pop-and-smtp-settings-via-exchange-2010-owa/
It's a bit rubbish when you want to use different SMTP server names than one of
your Exchange receive connectors, but is ok
Hi Steven,
This may help:
http://www.stevieg.org/2010/08/publishing-imap-pop-and-smtp-settings-via-exchange-2010-owa/
Steve
From: Steven Alfano [mailto:salf...@mail.rockefeller.edu]
Sent: 15 February 2012 16:02
To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues
Subject: Exchange 2010 Outlook Web App - configure
In
This is good ... Many thanks!!!
Steven Alfano
Sr. Systems Administrator
The Rockefeller University
1230 York Avenue
New York, NY 10065-6399
Voice 212.327.8937
Mobile 646.438.5160
fax 212.327.8712
salf...@rockefeller.edu
www.rockefeller.edu
From: Sobey, Richard A [mailto:r.so...@imperial.ac.uk]
Is there any tool (running at a single server and scan the PC remotely)
I can use to create a report of every user's Outlook setting at their
local PCs.
Our .pst files are everywhere and we want to find out where these files
are located and who are accessing these pst files when they open their
Did you look at PST Capture?
http://blogs.technet.com/b/exchange/archive/2012/01/30/pst-time-to-walk-the-plank.aspx
Chuck Robinson
___
Sr. Solutions Architect
Microsoft Certified Master: Exchange 2010
MCITP: EA Windows Server 2008
EMC Consulting
Mobile: 973-865-0394
Also this-
Outlook Tools: description of sample tools for managing PST files in your
Outlook Profile
http://support.microsoft.com/kb/221
From: Robinson, Chuck [mailto:chuck.robin...@emc.com]
Sent: Wednesday, February 15, 2012 1:08 PM
To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Collecting
Exchange 2010, SP1, RU6.
I've created a shared resource account and set a delegate for that account
using the ESM. I created a resource policy. I then designated one person (not
the delegate) who can book the resource automatically. Anyone can create an
in-policy request that is sent to the
Looks like it's working as designed.
An in-policy request is a request that the Resource can accept without needing
approval from a delegate.
-Original Message-
From: Rupprecht, James R [mailto:jimruppre...@ku.edu]
Sent: Wednesday, February 15, 2012 2:49 PM
To: MS-Exchange Admin
In this case 'AllBookInPolicy' is set to FALSE which means that the attendant
is supposed to look at the 'BookInPolicy' attribute. The behavior I am seeing
is what you would expect if 'AllBookInPolicy' was set to TRUE.
-jim
-Original Message-
From: Campbell, Rob
You're right. That doesn't look like it's recognizing the policy correctly.
Do any of these people have author or better delegate permissions to this
calendar?
-Original Message-
From: Rupprecht, James R [mailto:jimruppre...@ku.edu]
Sent: Wednesday, February 15, 2012 3:15 PM
To:
Nope. This is a clean calendar created just for testing.
-Original Message-
From: Campbell, Rob [mailto:rob_campb...@centraltechnology.net]
Sent: Wednesday, February 15, 2012 3:26 PM
To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues
Subject: RE: shared resource account
You're right. That doesn't look like
That is the default behavior through the Client servername receive
connector.
From: Robert Peterson [mailto:robert.peter...@prin.edu]
Sent: Wednesday, February 15, 2012 10:25 PM
To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues
Subject: Allow SMTP relay for authenticated account
Google'ing still seems to come up
Michael,
Are you saying the default Client servername receive connector should allow
already an authenticated user to use SMTP to relay to an external domain?
I do notice the settings within that connector, are set to offer Basic
Authentication only but only after starting TLS.
Thanks again,
Hi,
due to some changes we got our primary SMTP Address changed for our
majority users. now the original SMTP Address (a.domain.com) is showing
as secondary due to primary smtp address change, default email address
also changed. I have googled a vbs script modified it which will
search SMTP
21 matches
Mail list logo
