RE: To Great Cthulhu Jones
Ray, Are you trying to destroy the world :-), now Repeat after me 'you do not say the Cth word' ANYTIME, (calling his name is just like that is asking for trouble), and I just like to say, I like the way everyone avoided the middle name as if it didn't exist ;-). Cheers Paul Standards are like toothbrushes, everyone wants one but not yours -Original Message- From: Great Cthulhu Jones [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 05 September 2002 02:55 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: To Great Cthulhu Jones You can always initiate a self-punishment session at any time. And, yes, it's pronounced the way it's spelled. It sounds like a universe being sucked backwards through a flexi-straw into a tailpipe somehow capable of saying Jones at the end, with a slight Welsh accent. (:= -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Lentz, Wayne Sent: Wednesday, September 04, 2002 1:06 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: To Great Cthulhu Jones ..And I always pronounced it as hoe-neez. Like cahones without the ca. Must I wait for direct order before whipping myself with frayed cat5 cabling, or do I start now? -Original Message- From: Dale Geoffrey Edwards [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, September 04, 2002 12:35 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: To Great Cthulhu Jones It's pronounced JONES, like cones, but with a J. Geoff... -Original Message- From: Ray Beckwith [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, September 04, 2002 1:29 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: To Great Cthulhu Jones Pardon me for the confusion, I meant the last name... Thanks...Ray Quote of the day: When a person can no longer laugh at himself, it is time for others to laugh at him. -- Thomas Szasz -Original Message- From: Schwartz, Jim [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, September 04, 2002 10:26 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: To Great Cthulhu Jones You pronounce it the same way it is spelled. Kind of sounds like spitting out a watermelon seed. [1] [1] Begging forgiveness from Kimmie for stealing her line. -Original Message- From: Ray Beckwith [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, September 04, 2002 1:14 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: OT: To Great Cthulhu Jones A humble question to the Great one. I am relatively new to the list (been monitoring and occasionally posting for about 2 years) and I have always wondered, what is the correct pronunciation of your name. I would hate to insult your greatness by mispronouncing it when paying homage. Thanks...Ray Quote of the day: When a person can no longer laugh at himself, it is time for others to laugh at him. -- Thomas Szasz _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] ** The information contained in this message or any of its attachments may be confidential and is intended for the exclusive use of the addressee(s). Any disclosure, reproduction, distribution or other dissemination or use of this communication is strictly prohibited without the express permission of the sender. The views expressed in this
File Locations
NT4 Sp6a , Ex 5.5 OL97 Scenario - When a user saves a message from OL it defaults to their home drive ... How / where can this be changed to default somewhere else (shared network drive) .. I have looked everywhere but found nowt. TIA Darren Ash IT SYSTEMS ADMINISTRATOR Coolchain LtdCoolchain Ltd London Road Henley Road Teynham Paddock Wood Kent Kent ME9 9PR TN12 6DN Tel: 01795 523200Tel: 01892 831400 Fax: 01795 523241Fax: 01892 831451 All business is conducted in accordance with the company's terms and conditions, a copy of which is available on request. For the avoidance of doubt, all orders initiated by ourselves must be signed by an authorised signatory of this company. _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: File Locations
http://www.swinc.com/resource/outlookdefpath.htm (Outlook97? EW!) William -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Darren Ash Sent: Thursday, September 05, 2002 2:30 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: File Locations NT4 Sp6a , Ex 5.5 OL97 Scenario - When a user saves a message from OL it defaults to their home drive ... How / where can this be changed to default somewhere else (shared network drive) .. I have looked everywhere but found nowt. TIA Darren Ash IT SYSTEMS ADMINISTRATOR Coolchain LtdCoolchain Ltd London Road Henley Road Teynham Paddock Wood Kent Kent ME9 9PR TN12 6DN Tel: 01795 523200Tel: 01892 831400 Fax: 01795 523241Fax: 01892 831451 _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Ex5.5 IMS connector in ex2000
Running Exchange in mixed mode, with final exchange 5.5 server ready to be removed. I have changed the site addressing to my new ex2000 server and recalculated routing, but, noticed that email is still going out via the IMS on the Ex5.5 server. Inbound mail comes in OK, just outgoing email goes out via the Ex5.5 IMS. I've stopped the services - but - guess that I actually need to remove the IMS from the ex5.5 server in-order to get mail routed outbound via ex2000. Do I need to setup a new smtp connector in ex2000 or is this automatic after I removed the ex5.5 IMS? Ron _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Desperate Newbie
Ouch, I've jest been classified as a desperate newbie. Have you been talking to my guitar instructor or something? -Original Message- From: Hurst, Paul [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, September 05, 2002 2:33 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Desperate Newbie Chris, If you are using Scanmail 3.5x and active update, have you applied the hot fix released in July 2002? it fixes memory leakage problem from the active updates. Cheers Paul Standards are like toothbrushes, everyone wants one but not yours -Original Message- From: Chris Scharff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 04 September 2002 16:28 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Desperate Newbie Uninstall the one of them which is Exchange aware and make sure the other is not scannign the Exchange directories... Any change? -Original Message- From: James Liddil [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, September 04, 2002 10:24 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Desperate Newbie Already tried that. Stop both the McAffee and Trend Micro. No effect. -Original Message- From: Dale Geoffrey Edwards [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, September 04, 2002 11:20 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Desperate Newbie You have AV software running on this machine? You might look the way of your AV software. Geoff... -Original Message- From: James Liddil [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, September 04, 2002 11:17 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Desperate Newbie W2K SP3,E2K SP3, AD. I noticed my store.exe using almost 500,000 K and the CPU pegged at 100%. This is a dual 866 processor box with 1 gig of RAM. I stopped and restarted the IS and this clear the memory usage problem. But the CPU is still pegged at 100%. I don't want to reboot as of yet. I am way to green to know where to look to figure out what is going on. I am unclear as to which perfmon indicators to look at. So I throw myself at the mercy of the listserv as the easy way out. Jim Liddil _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Desperate Newbie
I thought you played the flute? -Original Message- From: Chris Scharff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, September 05, 2002 9:31 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Desperate Newbie Ouch, I've jest been classified as a desperate newbie. Have you been talking to my guitar instructor or something? -Original Message- From: Hurst, Paul [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, September 05, 2002 2:33 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Desperate Newbie Chris, If you are using Scanmail 3.5x and active update, have you applied the hot fix released in July 2002? it fixes memory leakage problem from the active updates. Cheers Paul Standards are like toothbrushes, everyone wants one but not yours -Original Message- From: Chris Scharff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 04 September 2002 16:28 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Desperate Newbie Uninstall the one of them which is Exchange aware and make sure the other is not scannign the Exchange directories... Any change? -Original Message- From: James Liddil [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, September 04, 2002 10:24 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Desperate Newbie Already tried that. Stop both the McAffee and Trend Micro. No effect. -Original Message- From: Dale Geoffrey Edwards [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, September 04, 2002 11:20 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Desperate Newbie You have AV software running on this machine? You might look the way of your AV software. Geoff... -Original Message- From: James Liddil [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, September 04, 2002 11:17 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Desperate Newbie W2K SP3,E2K SP3, AD. I noticed my store.exe using almost 500,000 K and the CPU pegged at 100%. This is a dual 866 processor box with 1 gig of RAM. I stopped and restarted the IS and this clear the memory usage problem. But the CPU is still pegged at 100%. I don't want to reboot as of yet. I am way to green to know where to look to figure out what is going on. I am unclear as to which perfmon indicators to look at. So I throw myself at the mercy of the listserv as the easy way out. Jim Liddil _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] This e-mail and any files transmitted with it are confidential and are intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. If you are NOT the intended recipient or the person responsible for delivering the e-mail to the intended recipient, be advised that you have received this e-mail in error and that any use, dissemination, forwarding, printing, or copying of this e-mail is strictly prohibited. _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Desperate Newbie
SORRY I meant James. Please forgive me Chris :- -Original Message- From: Chris Scharff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 05 September 2002 15:31 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Desperate Newbie Ouch, I've jest been classified as a desperate newbie. Have you been talking to my guitar instructor or something? -Original Message- From: Hurst, Paul [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, September 05, 2002 2:33 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Desperate Newbie Chris, If you are using Scanmail 3.5x and active update, have you applied the hot fix released in July 2002? it fixes memory leakage problem from the active updates. Cheers Paul Standards are like toothbrushes, everyone wants one but not yours -Original Message- From: Chris Scharff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 04 September 2002 16:28 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Desperate Newbie Uninstall the one of them which is Exchange aware and make sure the other is not scannign the Exchange directories... Any change? -Original Message- From: James Liddil [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, September 04, 2002 10:24 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Desperate Newbie Already tried that. Stop both the McAffee and Trend Micro. No effect. -Original Message- From: Dale Geoffrey Edwards [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, September 04, 2002 11:20 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Desperate Newbie You have AV software running on this machine? You might look the way of your AV software. Geoff... -Original Message- From: James Liddil [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, September 04, 2002 11:17 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Desperate Newbie W2K SP3,E2K SP3, AD. I noticed my store.exe using almost 500,000 K and the CPU pegged at 100%. This is a dual 866 processor box with 1 gig of RAM. I stopped and restarted the IS and this clear the memory usage problem. But the CPU is still pegged at 100%. I don't want to reboot as of yet. I am way to green to know where to look to figure out what is going on. I am unclear as to which perfmon indicators to look at. So I throw myself at the mercy of the listserv as the easy way out. Jim Liddil _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] *** The information contained in this message or any of its attachments may be confidential and is intended for the exclusive use of the addressee(s). Any disclosure, reproduction, distribution or other dissemination or use of this communication is strictly prohibited without the express permission of the sender. The views expressed in this email are those of the individual and not necessarily those of Sony or Sony affiliated companies. Sony email is for business use only. This email and any response may be monitored by Sony United Kingdom Limited. (6) *** _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Comment on Notes and Exchange
Craig/David, I think that you may be confusing the Lotus Communications Server (LCS) with the Lotus Messaging Switch (LMS). The LCS was announced at cc:Mail Interchange '93, and was supposed to be the product that served as the Enterprise Messaging Backbone that would link X.400, SMTP/MIME, Notes and cc:Mail, and support gateways to fax, MHS, PROFS, etc. There were supposed to be versions for DOS, OS/2, UNIX (Sun, AIX, HP), NLM, and NT. It was meant to be the message transfer agent, not the message store. Lotus never shipped the product, and I assumed that it was because of technical reasons rather than internal politics, but possibly Mary is correct that it was political, because the technology eventually ended up in the Domino server. The LMS was developed by the Softswitch division of Lotus, and provided a UNIX based alternative to the mainframe based Softswitch Central. That product did ship in the mid-1990s (I forget the date). It served as a message transfer agent, and was not a message store, but it did support optional mail enabled applications such as library services and directory services. It's deja vu all over again. The same internal tensions that hurt the Lotus/cc:Mail relationship are appearing in the IBM/Lotus relationship. Russ Russell W. Chung 800.419.8726 +1/818.957.4925 fax: +1/818.951.5761 http://www.ameagle.com Dupler, Craig [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 09/04/02 02:03 PM Please respond to Exchange Discussions To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] cc: Subject:RE: Comment on Notes and Exchange I guess you bought the spin. What I said was correct. R1 did not do anything to which a gateway could be attached. Mary McCarthy gave lots of pitches wherein LMS was clearly described as a combination message store and MTA common to both Notes and cc:Mail, and it did not get built because the team was not assembled. Perhaps integration with AD is finally happening. That in no way contradicts what I said about their early resistance to the notion due to their multi-platform approach. Finally, just because I don't like many of the decisions that they have made along the way, you should not interpret that as not admiring much of what they accomplished. This isn't religion. criticism is not bashing. If it were I would have some real problems, since my strongest criticisms have been reserved for some of the things that the Exchange team has done, even though I think they still win out overall. -Original Message- From: David Weinstein [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, September 04, 2002 9:03 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Comment on Notes and Exchange The Technology that Notes is built on has allowed it to be resilient and morph it self to an ever changing market conditions. It was declared dead at the start of the Internet revolution but with the help of IBM was able to quickly deliver a decent HTTP server in R4 and native SMTP transport which was fine tuned in r4.5. Just a couple of corrections -Notes always had a messaging component even from the R1 days - its native workflow was built around its ability to do messaging. -LMS was actually was never intended to be a message store. It was product that Lotus developed to compete against third party tools to provide message exchange between disparate e-mail systems like PROFS, All-In-One, MS-Mail, cc:Mail, Notes and Exchange in addition to provide x.400 and SMTP transport. This was primary to assist corporations to exchange e-mail between the different systems they might have run. -Notes adaptability has allowed to continue its tight integration with NT/2000 and with the release R6 Domino, the word is, will tightly integrate AD and provide administrators a single spot to create users both for the Network and Notes. -Original Message- From: Dupler, Craig [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, September 03, 2002 5:13 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Comment on Notes and Exchange Some typo corrections - sorry. -Original Message- From: Dupler, Craig Sent: Tuesday, September 03, 2002 2:47 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Comment on Notes and Exchange I agree with much of what has been posted, especially about the cost of switching, Notes not being horrid, and Exchange being more about . . . well that's where I started to disagree, since the phrase that was used was e-mail system. So I thought I would throw in some basics that are very old, very boring for most, but perhaps informative for anyone that is currently involved in a Notes vs. Exchange battle/discussion. What is Notes? You have to answer that in context. In 1989 when version 1 first came out, it was a workgroup collaboration tool. It did not do e-mail. It could not connect to the Internet (most LAN e-mail systems couldn't) and it could not connect to X.400 service providers.
RE: Desperate Newbie
I thought I spelled fresh meat whenever you responded to anyone. -Original Message- From: Chris Scharff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, September 05, 2002 10:31 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Desperate Newbie Ouch, I've jest been classified as a desperate newbie. Have you been talking to my guitar instructor or something? -Original Message- From: Hurst, Paul [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, September 05, 2002 2:33 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Desperate Newbie Chris, If you are using Scanmail 3.5x and active update, have you applied the hot fix released in July 2002? it fixes memory leakage problem from the active updates. Cheers Paul Standards are like toothbrushes, everyone wants one but not yours -Original Message- From: Chris Scharff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 04 September 2002 16:28 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Desperate Newbie Uninstall the one of them which is Exchange aware and make sure the other is not scannign the Exchange directories... Any change? -Original Message- From: James Liddil [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, September 04, 2002 10:24 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Desperate Newbie Already tried that. Stop both the McAffee and Trend Micro. No effect. -Original Message- From: Dale Geoffrey Edwards [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, September 04, 2002 11:20 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Desperate Newbie You have AV software running on this machine? You might look the way of your AV software. Geoff... -Original Message- From: James Liddil [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, September 04, 2002 11:17 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Desperate Newbie W2K SP3,E2K SP3, AD. I noticed my store.exe using almost 500,000 K and the CPU pegged at 100%. This is a dual 866 processor box with 1 gig of RAM. I stopped and restarted the IS and this clear the memory usage problem. But the CPU is still pegged at 100%. I don't want to reboot as of yet. I am way to green to know where to look to figure out what is going on. I am unclear as to which perfmon indicators to look at. So I throw myself at the mercy of the listserv as the easy way out. Jim Liddil _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Merge all Mailboxes to a single PST using Exmerge
Fellow Admins. Is there away to run exmerge and put all of the selected mailboxes messages into a single PST. If not, is there a tool out there that will let you do that after you run Exmerge. I have looked hard and couldn't find anything in the latest Exmerge version's document. _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Must Decide; EX5.5 or EX2K
A much improved OWA, for one - a steadily decreasing lack of support for another. Especially if you're starting from scratch, I recommend Exch2K. AD will not hurt you, and you need not switch to native mode, ever, unless you wish. David -Original Message- From: Eric Fors, II [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, August 12, 2002 1:51 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Must Decide; EX5.5 or EX2K I've recently come into the need to implement Exchange server for my new employer. I have been blissfully ignorant of all things related to Exchange for nearly a year and a half now, but alas that is at an end. I've had substantial experience with Exchange with my previous employer, but when I was hired on here they already had some other e-mail product and were not interested in switching to Exchange. Now they are and I am needing to catch up. My experience with Exchange goes back to the RC for Exchange 4.0 and runs up to EX55 SP3. EX2K was only just starting to be implemented widely by the more adventurous members of this list at the time I changed jobs. With that lengthy pre-amble, here's my question: I have seen some of the recent posts with scary stories about what to expect when upgrading EX55 to EX2K and read some other things about AD implementations gone awry. These cause me to wonder if it is worth it to install EX2K? We already own EX55 and our Windows networking is run strictly on a domains model, (no AD anywhere and none planned in the near future.) Our implementation will be rather small, one site, one server, about 50 users, and a handful of remote users. What if any advantages would there be to me to implement EX2K over EX55? Thanx, Eric Fors, II BTW - I'm glad to see that the Ed's and Missy K. are still on the list. Your posts in the archives have pulled my proverbial bacon out of the fire more than a few times. _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Ex5.5 IMS connector in ex2000
Did you change the cost on the 5.5 one? If they're all cost 1, then mail will continue to follow the route it knows. -Original Message- From: Pennell, Ronald B. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Posted At: Thursday, September 05, 2002 10:38 AM Posted To: List - Exchange Server List Conversation: Ex5.5 IMS connector in ex2000 Subject: Ex5.5 IMS connector in ex2000 Running Exchange in mixed mode, with final exchange 5.5 server ready to be removed. I have changed the site addressing to my new ex2000 server and recalculated routing, but, noticed that email is still going out via the IMS on the Ex5.5 server. Inbound mail comes in OK, just outgoing email goes out via the Ex5.5 IMS. I've stopped the services - but - guess that I actually need to remove the IMS from the ex5.5 server in-order to get mail routed outbound via ex2000. Do I need to setup a new smtp connector in ex2000 or is this automatic after I removed the ex5.5 IMS? Ron _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Merge all Mailboxes to a single PST using Exmerge
Just wondering. Why would you want to do this? -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of EXTERN Hlabse Tony (Tek Systems;RBNA/CIT1) Sent: Thursday, September 05, 2002 8:43 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Merge all Mailboxes to a single PST using Exmerge Fellow Admins. Is there away to run exmerge and put all of the selected mailboxes messages into a single PST. If not, is there a tool out there that will let you do that after you run Exmerge. I have looked hard and couldn't find anything in the latest Exmerge version's document. _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Comment on Notes and Exchange
Yes I would agree. One small quibble, which actually tends to confirm your observation. As it became clear that the original LMS was not going to be built, other folks at Lotus started rapidly changing the story. Within about a 12 moth period just before the sale to IBM, LMS went from a promised product (as I described it) to an architecture with a denial that there had been a promised product, and then when that registered a no sale, they did change the name to LCS, albeit with any reference to it having something to do with cc:Mail left out, which was probably OK, because the key players in Mountain View had departed by that time. The Softswitch purchase was also interesting. Unlike Jim Manzi, Mike Zisman was keenly interested in securing a management career within IBM. So he started changing the names of the former Softswitch products to feel good. Good discussion. It is reminiscent of some of the things that have happened in our industry. The DC-10 went through several models (-10, -30, -40 and so on), but when it got into a problem with its reputation, they changed the name to MD-10 and tried to do it retroactively. Then when we did the merger, a lot of people started referring to the F-15 as the Boeing F-15, which riled some folks for awhile, but since it was still in production, it sort of went over. But when references were made to things like a Boeing DC-3, lots of people said that was going too far. Like Lotus and IBM, we even have problems referring to products that never really existed, such as the A-12. Such is life. -Original Message- From: Russ Chung [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, September 05, 2002 8:07 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Comment on Notes and Exchange Craig/David, I think that you may be confusing the Lotus Communications Server (LCS) with the Lotus Messaging Switch (LMS). The LCS was announced at cc:Mail Interchange '93, and was supposed to be the product that served as the Enterprise Messaging Backbone that would link X.400, SMTP/MIME, Notes and cc:Mail, and support gateways to fax, MHS, PROFS, etc. There were supposed to be versions for DOS, OS/2, UNIX (Sun, AIX, HP), NLM, and NT. It was meant to be the message transfer agent, not the message store. Lotus never shipped the product, and I assumed that it was because of technical reasons rather than internal politics, but possibly Mary is correct that it was political, because the technology eventually ended up in the Domino server. The LMS was developed by the Softswitch division of Lotus, and provided a UNIX based alternative to the mainframe based Softswitch Central. That product did ship in the mid-1990s (I forget the date). It served as a message transfer agent, and was not a message store, but it did support optional mail enabled applications such as library services and directory services. It's deja vu all over again. The same internal tensions that hurt the Lotus/cc:Mail relationship are appearing in the IBM/Lotus relationship. Russ Russell W. Chung 800.419.8726 +1/818.957.4925 fax: +1/818.951.5761 http://www.ameagle.com Dupler, Craig [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 09/04/02 02:03 PM Please respond to Exchange Discussions To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] cc: Subject:RE: Comment on Notes and Exchange I guess you bought the spin. What I said was correct. R1 did not do anything to which a gateway could be attached. Mary McCarthy gave lots of pitches wherein LMS was clearly described as a combination message store and MTA common to both Notes and cc:Mail, and it did not get built because the team was not assembled. Perhaps integration with AD is finally happening. That in no way contradicts what I said about their early resistance to the notion due to their multi-platform approach. Finally, just because I don't like many of the decisions that they have made along the way, you should not interpret that as not admiring much of what they accomplished. This isn't religion. criticism is not bashing. If it were I would have some real problems, since my strongest criticisms have been reserved for some of the things that the Exchange team has done, even though I think they still win out overall. -Original Message- From: David Weinstein [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, September 04, 2002 9:03 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Comment on Notes and Exchange The Technology that Notes is built on has allowed it to be resilient and morph it self to an ever changing market conditions. It was declared dead at the start of the Internet revolution but with the help of IBM was able to quickly deliver a decent HTTP server in R4 and native SMTP transport which was fine tuned in r4.5. Just a couple of corrections -Notes always had a messaging component even from the R1 days - its native workflow was built around its ability to
RE: Messages sent to bogus domains like aol
Nahh, I am busy reading the temp files on my Imail servers. Imail leaves behind lots of fun stuff to read and look at. -Original Message- From: Great Cthulhu Jones [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, September 04, 2002 9:55 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Messages sent to bogus domains like aol Read them and see if any are usable for blackmailing. (:= -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Chris Scharff Sent: Wednesday, September 04, 2002 6:23 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Messages sent to bogus domains like aol Any other ideas? Ignore it. _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Disappearing SMTP in IIS MMC
File and Print sharing opens you up. How about if you get a second NIC with an internal IP address and bind File and Print sharing only to that NIC? -Original Message- From: Chris H [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, September 04, 2002 11:11 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Disappearing SMTP in IIS MMC AR Dang Hardening an IIS server book . .. You must have File and Printer Sharing on for the SMTP or NNTP modules to appear in the IIS MMC console and function properly. Thanks for any help that may have been under way!! Chris _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
need ammo
Hi all. I have this customer who is unhappy about 10MB message limit size on SMTP connectors in our shared Exchange environment. Does anyone have any scary stories about what happens when people try to send too many messages that are too large? What is a reasonable size for SMTP message? Our servers originally had higher limits but a few times large SMTP messages crashed the servers. I just need to convince this customer that it is not a good idea to send large messages. Thanks! Andrey Fyodorov _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Must Decide; EX5.5 or EX2K
If you have a decent box, you can start off with AD domain controller and X2K server on the same box. Then if performance starts degrading you can add another W2K server to be the domain controller. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, September 05, 2002 2:51 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Must Decide; EX5.5 or EX2K A much improved OWA, for one - a steadily decreasing lack of support for another. Especially if you're starting from scratch, I recommend Exch2K. AD will not hurt you, and you need not switch to native mode, ever, unless you wish. David -Original Message- From: Eric Fors, II [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, August 12, 2002 1:51 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Must Decide; EX5.5 or EX2K I've recently come into the need to implement Exchange server for my new employer. I have been blissfully ignorant of all things related to Exchange for nearly a year and a half now, but alas that is at an end. I've had substantial experience with Exchange with my previous employer, but when I was hired on here they already had some other e-mail product and were not interested in switching to Exchange. Now they are and I am needing to catch up. My experience with Exchange goes back to the RC for Exchange 4.0 and runs up to EX55 SP3. EX2K was only just starting to be implemented widely by the more adventurous members of this list at the time I changed jobs. With that lengthy pre-amble, here's my question: I have seen some of the recent posts with scary stories about what to expect when upgrading EX55 to EX2K and read some other things about AD implementations gone awry. These cause me to wonder if it is worth it to install EX2K? We already own EX55 and our Windows networking is run strictly on a domains model, (no AD anywhere and none planned in the near future.) Our implementation will be rather small, one site, one server, about 50 users, and a handful of remote users. What if any advantages would there be to me to implement EX2K over EX55? Thanx, Eric Fors, II BTW - I'm glad to see that the Ed's and Missy K. are still on the list. Your posts in the archives have pulled my proverbial bacon out of the fire more than a few times. _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Must Decide; EX5.5 or EX2K
well Exchange 5.5 needs Windows NT domain. So you still may need an additional server to be the domain controller. -Original Message- From: Sander Van Butzelaar [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, August 14, 2002 8:36 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Must Decide; EX5.5 or EX2K What about the aditional overhead (cost) of Windows 2000 server as he will need an AD. I would say rather stick with NT4.0 and Exchange 5.5 Sander -Original Message- From: Ragar, Russell [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 13 August 2002 05:27 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Must Decide; EX5.5 or EX2K Since you won't have to worry about the Exchange 5.5/2K coexistence phase, then by all means implement Exchange 2K. It's a much better product. It's more scaleable, more logical, has much better web interface, etc. Yes, there is a learning curve to learn the new administrative interfaces, but without an installed base of Exchange 5.5, the implementation of Exchange 2K is very straightforward. Russell Ragar, MCSE+I, CNE, CCNA Senior Network Engineer PowerTV, Inc. -Original Message- From: William Lefkovics [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Mon 8/12/2002 2:44 PM To: Exchange Discussions Cc: Subject: RE: Must Decide; EX5.5 or EX2K no AD anywhere and none planned in the near future. Then no Exchange2000. Looks like you'll be happy with 5.5 for awhile. William -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Eric Fors, II Sent: Monday, August 12, 2002 1:51 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Must Decide; EX5.5 or EX2K I've recently come into the need to implement Exchange server for my new employer. I have been blissfully ignorant of all things related to Exchange for nearly a year and a half now, but alas that is at an end. I've had substantial experience with Exchange with my previous employer, but when I was hired on here they already had some other e-mail product and were not interested in switching to Exchange. Now they are and I am needing to catch up. My experience with Exchange goes back to the RC for Exchange 4.0 and runs up to EX55 SP3. EX2K was only just starting to be implemented widely by the more adventurous members of this list at the time I changed jobs. With that lengthy pre-amble, here's my question: I have seen some of the recent posts with scary stories about what to expect when upgrading EX55 to EX2K and read some other things about AD implementations gone awry. These cause me to wonder if it is worth it to install EX2K? We already own EX55 and our Windows networking is run strictly on a domains model, (no AD anywhere and none planned in the near future.) Our implementation will be rather small, one site, one server, about 50 users, and a handful of remote users. What if any advantages would there be to me to implement EX2K over EX55? Thanx, Eric Fors, II BTW - I'm glad to see that the Ed's and Missy K. are still on the list. Your posts in the archives have pulled my proverbial bacon out of the fire more than a few times. _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] .rí½¶à³zrmyzruvi .+x ä¹)r뺷Ƚ˶ ÑzÇȱr:Þ˱m[yåz[)rÉvhÖ+iÙÌG .+-¦-xm¶ÿà ,Â)Ür¿ë(º· ýì\ öªÙÈb½ë!¶Úÿ 0³ §ÊþÈzÇȱæ«r¬¥:.˱Êâmé[hæ¯yì\ ©àz[,Ã)ärÅÈZËZvh§+-iÙ¢Ì2G(
RE: To Great Cthulhu Jones
Slight Welsh accent? Les? Is that you? -Original Message- From: Great Cthulhu Jones [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 05 September 2002 02:55 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: To Great Cthulhu Jones You can always initiate a self-punishment session at any time. And, yes, it's pronounced the way it's spelled. It sounds like a universe being sucked backwards through a flexi-straw into a tailpipe somehow capable of saying Jones at the end, with a slight Welsh accent. (:= -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Lentz, Wayne Sent: Wednesday, September 04, 2002 1:06 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: To Great Cthulhu Jones ..And I always pronounced it as hoe-neez. Like cahones without the ca. Must I wait for direct order before whipping myself with frayed cat5 cabling, or do I start now? -Original Message- From: Dale Geoffrey Edwards [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, September 04, 2002 12:35 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: To Great Cthulhu Jones It's pronounced JONES, like cones, but with a J. Geoff... -Original Message- From: Ray Beckwith [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, September 04, 2002 1:29 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: To Great Cthulhu Jones Pardon me for the confusion, I meant the last name... Thanks...Ray Quote of the day: When a person can no longer laugh at himself, it is time for others to laugh at him. -- Thomas Szasz -Original Message- From: Schwartz, Jim [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, September 04, 2002 10:26 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: To Great Cthulhu Jones You pronounce it the same way it is spelled. Kind of sounds like spitting out a watermelon seed. [1] [1] Begging forgiveness from Kimmie for stealing her line. -Original Message- From: Ray Beckwith [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, September 04, 2002 1:14 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: OT: To Great Cthulhu Jones A humble question to the Great one. I am relatively new to the list (been monitoring and occasionally posting for about 2 years) and I have always wondered, what is the correct pronunciation of your name. I would hate to insult your greatness by mispronouncing it when paying homage. Thanks...Ray Quote of the day: When a person can no longer laugh at himself, it is time for others to laugh at him. -- Thomas Szasz _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Desperate Newbie
Nope. Your women. -Original Message- From: Chris Scharff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, September 05, 2002 7:31 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Desperate Newbie Ouch, I've jest been classified as a desperate newbie. Have you been talking to my guitar instructor or something? -Original Message- From: Hurst, Paul [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, September 05, 2002 2:33 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Desperate Newbie Chris, If you are using Scanmail 3.5x and active update, have you applied the hot fix released in July 2002? it fixes memory leakage problem from the active updates. Cheers Paul Standards are like toothbrushes, everyone wants one but not yours -Original Message- From: Chris Scharff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 04 September 2002 16:28 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Desperate Newbie Uninstall the one of them which is Exchange aware and make sure the other is not scannign the Exchange directories... Any change? -Original Message- From: James Liddil [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, September 04, 2002 10:24 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Desperate Newbie Already tried that. Stop both the McAffee and Trend Micro. No effect. -Original Message- From: Dale Geoffrey Edwards [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, September 04, 2002 11:20 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Desperate Newbie You have AV software running on this machine? You might look the way of your AV software. Geoff... -Original Message- From: James Liddil [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, September 04, 2002 11:17 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Desperate Newbie W2K SP3,E2K SP3, AD. I noticed my store.exe using almost 500,000 K and the CPU pegged at 100%. This is a dual 866 processor box with 1 gig of RAM. I stopped and restarted the IS and this clear the memory usage problem. But the CPU is still pegged at 100%. I don't want to reboot as of yet. I am way to green to know where to look to figure out what is going on. I am unclear as to which perfmon indicators to look at. So I throw myself at the mercy of the listserv as the easy way out. Jim Liddil _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: need ammo
You need to evaluate the size limit based on your business needs. If all you need to do is send Word docs, etc, 10 MB is probably fine. If you are working with graphics folks, etc, 10 MB wont be enough. If this customer has a legitimate business need, you probably need to bump the size. -Original Message- From: Andrey Fyodorov [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, September 05, 2002 2:17 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: need ammo Hi all. I have this customer who is unhappy about 10MB message limit size on SMTP connectors in our shared Exchange environment. Does anyone have any scary stories about what happens when people try to send too many messages that are too large? What is a reasonable size for SMTP message? Our servers originally had higher limits but a few times large SMTP messages crashed the servers. I just need to convince this customer that it is not a good idea to send large messages. Thanks! Andrey Fyodorov _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: need ammo
On behalf of everyone that hates waiting for large attachments, please just grab a baseball bat and hit him over the head for us -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Andrey Fyodorov Sent: Thursday, September 05, 2002 2:17 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: need ammo Hi all. I have this customer who is unhappy about 10MB message limit size on SMTP connectors in our shared Exchange environment. Does anyone have any scary stories about what happens when people try to send too many messages that are too large? What is a reasonable size for SMTP message? Our servers originally had higher limits but a few times large SMTP messages crashed the servers. I just need to convince this customer that it is not a good idea to send large messages. Thanks! Andrey Fyodorov _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: NT 2000 backup of Exchange.
Sorry for having it reposted. Spent the last 3 hours getting it automated and getting the tapes ready. The only thing we could not get to work was the Eject process. This is a LTO drive and when we tried the RSM.EXE eject PF BACKUP - 1 /astart we get the following error. Changer has not IE ports. Door Access Failed. This isn't a auto-changer and an LTO doesn't have a tab to flip to eject the tape like a DLT. TechNet hasn't been much help on this one either. It's not critical that it is automatically ejected, but would help since operations would see the tape is already ejected and would not have to press that button. -Original Message- From: Ken Cornetet [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, September 04, 2002 2:04 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: NT 2000 backup of Exchange. I just posted this a couple of days ago, but here it is again. It labels whatever tape is in the drive and does a backup to it. Use the GUI to create the backup selection file everything.bks. Obviously, you want this file to include your Exchange information stores. Change the BNCHMARK DLT1 SCSI Sequential Device to whatever the name of your tape drive is. See Q267574. This batch file needs grep, recode, and blat. Use your favorite search engine. rem * rem * rem * Perform fullback to whatever tape is in the drive and email rem * report rem * rem * Ken Cornetet - 06/10/2002 rem * rem * Revision History rem * rem * WhenWhoWhat rem * --- rem * 06/10/2002 Ken Cornetet Original Issue rem * 06/24/2002 Ken Cornetet Added RSM command per Q267574 rem * rem * set [EMAIL PROTECTED] set SMTP=ntserver1 set NAME=FULL BACKUP %DATE% %TIME% rem this is where NTBackup writes it's (unicode - blech) logs set LOGS=%USERPROFILE%\Local Settings\Application Data\Microsoft\Windows NT\NTBackup\data c: cd \backup rem Delete any extranious log files del %LOGS%\backup*.log rem rem * Have removable storage management look at tape in drive rem * (See Q267574 for details) rem start /wait rsm refresh /lfBNCHMARK DLT1 SCSI Sequential Device c:\bin\sleep 30 rem rem * Do Backup rem start /wait ntbackup backup @c:\backup\everything.bks /M normal /J %NAME% /P DLT /N %NAME% /l:s /HC:on /UM /D %NAME% rem rem * find newest (should be only) log file rem dir /s /b /o-d %LOGS%\backup*.log c:\backup\backup.tmp set /P FILE= c:\backup\backup.tmp rem rem * Make ASCII version of log file rem c:\bin\recode -f unicode..us %FILE% log.txt rem rem * Append list of open files to the report rem echo OPEN FILES log.txt net file log.txt rem rem * Set subject for email rem set SUBJ=Backup ran OK grep -v Error: You do not have permission log1.txt findstr /i error: log1.txt if not ERRORLEVEL 1 set SUBJ=Backup ran - FAILED rem rem * Send email rem c:\bin\blat log.txt -t %RECIPIENT% -subject %SUBJ% -server %SMTP% -f %RECIPIENT% rem rem * Move log file to our directory rem move /Y %FILE% c:\backup -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= -=-=-=-=-= -Original Message- From: Pfefferkorn, Pete (PFEFFEPE) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, September 04, 2002 11:24 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: NT 2000 backup of Exchange. Exchange 5.5 SP4 under NT 2000 SP2. Well we have our first 2000 server up running Exchange 5.5 SP3. I'm trying to get the backups to run similar to what I had with NT 4.0. With the 4.0 version I had the cmd set to initialize any tape in the drive, backup and eject and mail the logs for verification. With 2000 I used the wizard to create the backup but I can't seem to get it to grab any tape I have inserted. I tried adding multiple tapes to the media pool with the same name, but I always get The operation was not performed, no storage
E2K: OUTLOOK Can't open this item SP3 bug?
OS: Win2K, SP2, IIS Roll-up, (+most Critical Windows Update published hotfixes) E2K: Native, SP3, Trend 6.0 Scanmail Single Native Domain, Single Exchange Server, 1 SG, 4 Mailbox DBs, 1 PF DB Hello, Not sure if this is a new bug introduced with E2K SP3, or just my bad luck with E2K. Some users are unable to open/delete/move/reply/forward... some Messages with OUTLOOK (various versions) or E2K OWA. The error they get in OUTLOOK is: Can't open this item On the Server side an error is logged in the App log: === Event Type: Error Event Source: MSExchangeIS Event Category: Content Engine Event ID: 12002 Date: 9/4/2002 Time: 1:38:05 PM User: N/A Computer: EXCHANGE Description: Error 8004011B-8000 occurred while processing message from 'SearchStorage.com'. === Combing through the App log it looks like we've got at least 9 different Messages with this problem. I CAN access them with an IMAP client, view it, and delete it. It is then deleted on the Server side mailbox. Since this problem started I have run ISINTEG against all databases, and even compacted the databases (ya, ya, I know, but it is documented a compact will get rid of various DB problems Q314917, Q195856, and I had an Open maintenance window). This did not get rid of the problem, and a user has gotten a new message since then with this problem. The problem messages I have looked at are of type Content-Type: multipart/alternative and contain both a text/plain and text/html versions of the email. Guessing a content conversion problem with MAPI and SP3 ... but haven't heard anyone else complain of something similar. I have looked at Q232323 and Q296598, but they didn't seem to apply. Anyone else seeing this with SP3? Thanks, Brent _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: need ammo
We use a 2MB limit as a general rule - with plenty of exceptions, of course. Steve C. - Original Message - From: Andrey Fyodorov [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, September 05, 2002 4:17 PM Subject: need ammo Hi all. I have this customer who is unhappy about 10MB message limit size on SMTP connectors in our shared Exchange environment. Does anyone have any scary stories about what happens when people try to send too many messages that are too large? What is a reasonable size for SMTP message? Our servers originally had higher limits but a few times large SMTP messages crashed the servers. I just need to convince this customer that it is not a good idea to send large messages. Thanks! Andrey Fyodorov _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Full Text Indexing
http://www.microsoft.com/exchange/techinfo/deployment/2000/BestIndexing.asp I did not see the option to add PDF in this document, perhaps some whitepaper from Adobe. Did not sound terribly hard to implement, I would be most interested in what the performance hits would be as you get into larger databases. Anyone out there using this solution, offering insites? -Original Message- From: Ryan Malayter [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, September 04, 2002 3:14 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Full Text Indexing Do you have to do something besides install the Adobe PDF Ifilter to add PDF files to that list? -Original Message- From: Tom Meunier [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Posted At: Wednesday, September 04, 2002 12:01 PM Posted To: Exchange List Conversation: Full Text Indexing Subject: RE: Full Text Indexing You are correct. The following file types, up to 16mb in size by default, change-able with a reg hack: .doc, .xls, .ppt, .html, .htm, .asp, .txt, and .eml -Original Message- From: Andrey Fyodorov [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Posted At: Wednesday, September 04, 2002 10:40 AM Posted To: MSExchange Mailing List Conversation: Full Text Indexing Subject: RE: Full Text Indexing My impression has been that Exchange 2000 indexing searches within attachments -Original Message- From: EXTERN Hlabse Tony (Tek Systems;RBNA/CIT1) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, September 04, 2002 11:09 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Full Text Indexing Err on earlier response. You would need 3rd party app. to search attachments. -Original Message- From: Allan Johnson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, September 04, 2002 9:57 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Full Text Indexing My email packrats (err users) have asked for the ability to do full text searches against mail messages and attachments. I would appreciate any feedback on available products, hopefully use/don't use. Slipstick has a number of options and I have also read Integrating Microsoft Site Server Search with Microsoft Exchange and Ex2000 Full indexing. Any advice or opinions are appreciated. Current environment Ex 5.5 SP4 on NT 4. Perhaps this is the Killer App to get management to let me upgrade :o). Thanks, Allan Johnson _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Merge all Mailboxes to a single PST using Exmerge
I dunno, I am just speaking out loud (maybe I should say typing out loud), but why oh why would you want to do this? Geoff... -Original Message- From: EXTERN Hlabse Tony (Tek Systems;RBNA/CIT1) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, September 05, 2002 11:43 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Merge all Mailboxes to a single PST using Exmerge Fellow Admins. Is there away to run exmerge and put all of the selected mailboxes messages into a single PST. If not, is there a tool out there that will let you do that after you run Exmerge. I have looked hard and couldn't find anything in the latest Exmerge version's document. _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: NT 2000 backup of Exchange.
I can tell you from first hand experience, like many others I'm sure, this is not true. Automating it, as Pete has found, is a whole new can of worms. Change your reading material to find out what the RSM is and how it works with regard to the 2k version of backup. My take is the RSM is Microsoft's feeble attemp at something like a system catalog (from my old MVS days). Regards, Trent Hancock Available Network/System/Exchange admin Austin TX, or Southeastern Coastal US -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Couch, Nate Sent: Wednesday, September 04, 2002 11:59 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: NT 2000 backup of Exchange. From what I have been reading the Windows NT 2000 version of ntbackup.exe is not Exchange aware. I know they tell you to to use the Exchange 2000 version for MS Exchange 2000 Server. Admittedly, I don't recall anything about using it with MS Exchange 5.5. Nate Couch EDS Messaging -- From: Pfefferkorn, Pete (PFEFFEPE) Reply To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, September 4, 2002 11:23 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: NT 2000 backup of Exchange. Exchange 5.5 SP4 under NT 2000 SP2. Well we have our first 2000 server up running Exchange 5.5 SP3. I'm trying to get the backups to run similar to what I had with NT 4.0. With the 4.0 version I had the cmd set to initialize any tape in the drive, backup and eject and mail the logs for verification. With 2000 I used the wizard to create the backup but I can't seem to get it to grab any tape I have inserted. I tried adding multiple tapes to the media pool with the same name, but I always get The operation was not performed, no storage media was specified message on the report. What am I missing? There must be a simple way to say any tape in there grab it and use it for a backup. Pete Pfefferkorn Senior Systems Engineer/Mail Administrator University of Cincinnati 51 Goodman Street Cincinnati, OH 45221 Phone - (513) 556-9076 Fax - (513) 556-2042 _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: To Great Cthulhu Jones
Did you hear Sheep in the Back ground? --Kevinm M, WLKMMAS, UCC+WCA, And Beyond What are you on about mate? -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Hanna, Keith Sent: Thursday, September 05, 2002 3:04 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: To Great Cthulhu Jones Slight Welsh accent? Les? Is that you? -Original Message- From: Great Cthulhu Jones [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 05 September 2002 02:55 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: To Great Cthulhu Jones You can always initiate a self-punishment session at any time. And, yes, it's pronounced the way it's spelled. It sounds like a universe being sucked backwards through a flexi-straw into a tailpipe somehow capable of saying Jones at the end, with a slight Welsh accent. (:= -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Lentz, Wayne Sent: Wednesday, September 04, 2002 1:06 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: To Great Cthulhu Jones ..And I always pronounced it as hoe-neez. Like cahones without the ca. Must I wait for direct order before whipping myself with frayed cat5 cabling, or do I start now? -Original Message- From: Dale Geoffrey Edwards [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, September 04, 2002 12:35 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: To Great Cthulhu Jones It's pronounced JONES, like cones, but with a J. Geoff... -Original Message- From: Ray Beckwith [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, September 04, 2002 1:29 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: To Great Cthulhu Jones Pardon me for the confusion, I meant the last name... Thanks...Ray Quote of the day: When a person can no longer laugh at himself, it is time for others to laugh at him. -- Thomas Szasz -Original Message- From: Schwartz, Jim [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, September 04, 2002 10:26 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: To Great Cthulhu Jones You pronounce it the same way it is spelled. Kind of sounds like spitting out a watermelon seed. [1] [1] Begging forgiveness from Kimmie for stealing her line. -Original Message- From: Ray Beckwith [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, September 04, 2002 1:14 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: OT: To Great Cthulhu Jones A humble question to the Great one. I am relatively new to the list (been monitoring and occasionally posting for about 2 years) and I have always wondered, what is the correct pronunciation of your name. I would hate to insult your greatness by mispronouncing it when paying homage. Thanks...Ray Quote of the day: When a person can no longer laugh at himself, it is time for others to laugh at him. -- Thomas Szasz _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
RE: need ammo
I've never seen a large message crash servers, but I have seen them bring everything to a halt, all queued up til the message was sent. What's reasonable really depends on your needs. I think 10MB is very reasonable. There are better mechanisms for file transfer than SMTP, I think. FTP perhaps? William -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Andrey Fyodorov Sent: Thursday, September 05, 2002 2:17 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: need ammo Hi all. I have this customer who is unhappy about 10MB message limit size on SMTP connectors in our shared Exchange environment. Does anyone have any scary stories about what happens when people try to send too many messages that are too large? What is a reasonable size for SMTP message? Our servers originally had higher limits but a few times large SMTP messages crashed the servers. I just need to convince this customer that it is not a good idea to send large messages. Thanks! Andrey Fyodorov ___ _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Must Decide; EX5.5 or EX2K
Assuming you're still using Windows. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Dupler, Craig Sent: Thursday, September 05, 2002 2:49 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Must Decide; EX5.5 or EX2K Well if you get stranded for four years like Tom Hanks' character in castaway, then native mode will be hard to avoid. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, September 05, 2002 11:51 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Must Decide; EX5.5 or EX2K A much improved OWA, for one - a steadily decreasing lack of support for another. Especially if you're starting from scratch, I recommend Exch2K. AD will not hurt you, and you need not switch to native mode, ever, unless you wish. David -Original Message- From: Eric Fors, II [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, August 12, 2002 1:51 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Must Decide; EX5.5 or EX2K I've recently come into the need to implement Exchange server for my new employer. I have been blissfully ignorant of all things related to Exchange for nearly a year and a half now, but alas that is at an end. I've had substantial experience with Exchange with my previous employer, but when I was hired on here they already had some other e-mail product and were not interested in switching to Exchange. Now they are and I am needing to catch up. My experience with Exchange goes back to the RC for Exchange 4.0 and runs up to EX55 SP3. EX2K was only just starting to be implemented widely by the more adventurous members of this list at the time I changed jobs. With that lengthy pre-amble, here's my question: I have seen some of the recent posts with scary stories about what to expect when upgrading EX55 to EX2K and read some other things about AD implementations gone awry. These cause me to wonder if it is worth it to install EX2K? We already own EX55 and our Windows networking is run strictly on a domains model, (no AD anywhere and none planned in the near future.) Our implementation will be rather small, one site, one server, about 50 users, and a handful of remote users. What if any advantages would there be to me to implement EX2K over EX55? Thanx, Eric Fors, II BTW - I'm glad to see that the Ed's and Missy K. are still on the list. Your posts in the archives have pulled my proverbial bacon out of the fire more than a few times. _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Desperate Newbie
Cool beans. That message took 8.5 hours! -Original Message- From: Martin Blackstone Sent: Thursday, September 05, 2002 8:06 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Desperate Newbie Nope. Your women. -Original Message- From: Chris Scharff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, September 05, 2002 7:31 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Desperate Newbie Ouch, I've jest been classified as a desperate newbie. Have you been talking to my guitar instructor or something? -Original Message- From: Hurst, Paul [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, September 05, 2002 2:33 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Desperate Newbie Chris, If you are using Scanmail 3.5x and active update, have you applied the hot fix released in July 2002? it fixes memory leakage problem from the active updates. Cheers Paul Standards are like toothbrushes, everyone wants one but not yours -Original Message- From: Chris Scharff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 04 September 2002 16:28 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Desperate Newbie Uninstall the one of them which is Exchange aware and make sure the other is not scannign the Exchange directories... Any change? -Original Message- From: James Liddil [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, September 04, 2002 10:24 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Desperate Newbie Already tried that. Stop both the McAffee and Trend Micro. No effect. -Original Message- From: Dale Geoffrey Edwards [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, September 04, 2002 11:20 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Desperate Newbie You have AV software running on this machine? You might look the way of your AV software. Geoff... -Original Message- From: James Liddil [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, September 04, 2002 11:17 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Desperate Newbie W2K SP3,E2K SP3, AD. I noticed my store.exe using almost 500,000 K and the CPU pegged at 100%. This is a dual 866 processor box with 1 gig of RAM. I stopped and restarted the IS and this clear the memory usage problem. But the CPU is still pegged at 100%. I don't want to reboot as of yet. I am way to green to know where to look to figure out what is going on. I am unclear as to which perfmon indicators to look at. So I throw myself at the mercy of the listserv as the easy way out. Jim Liddil _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Desperate Newbie
Wow, both you and Leo casting aspersions on my sexuality. If this weren't the mSexChange mailing list, some might consider that to be a bit off topic. -Original Message- From: Martin Blackstone [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, September 05, 2002 10:06 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Desperate Newbie Nope. Your women. -Original Message- From: Chris Scharff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, September 05, 2002 7:31 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Desperate Newbie Ouch, I've jest been classified as a desperate newbie. Have you been talking to my guitar instructor or something? -Original Message- From: Hurst, Paul [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, September 05, 2002 2:33 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Desperate Newbie Chris, If you are using Scanmail 3.5x and active update, have you applied the hot fix released in July 2002? it fixes memory leakage problem from the active updates. Cheers Paul Standards are like toothbrushes, everyone wants one but not yours _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Spam Spin
Maybe you'd get less spam if you didn't keep trying to unsubscribe. Edgar J. Crowley Jr. Technical Consultant Windows Messaging Platforms Practice hp Services *510-612-3365 *[EMAIL PROTECTED] -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Durkee, Peter Sent: Monday, August 05, 2002 11:36 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Spam Spin Hi All, I just wanted to share this with everyone because it cheered me right up this morning. Today I received a piece o spam in my inbox, apparently from myself, and down near the part where you get to confirm...err, I mean, unsubscribe your address, was this notice... This email was sent to you via Saf-E Mail Systems. Your email address was automatically inserted into the To and From addresses to eliminate undeliverables which waste bandwidth and cause internet congestion. Isn't that thoughtful? I think Saf-E Mail Systems deserves everyone's support in their valiant effort to fight Wasted Bandwidth and Internet Congestion! -Peter __ This message is private or privileged. If you are not the person for whom this message is intended, please delete it and notify me immediately, and please do not copy or send this message to anyone else. _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Merge all Mailboxes to a single PST using Exmerge
Thanks Andrey. I found it. I could I have missed it. Anyhow it looks like I will have experiment with that setting. I am guessing I may have to do this in two runs. One to get the user names that contain the subject matter and then run it again with the all mailboxes being put into one PST once the ones are identified in the first run. - Original Message - From: Andrey Fyodorov [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, September 05, 2002 3:25 PM Subject: RE: Merge all Mailboxes to a single PST using Exmerge Yes this is possible with ExMerge. ExMErge documentation as well as the default ExMerge.ini file show such a configuration. -Original Message- From: EXTERN Hlabse Tony (Tek Systems;RBNA/CIT1) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, September 05, 2002 11:43 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Merge all Mailboxes to a single PST using Exmerge Fellow Admins. Is there away to run exmerge and put all of the selected mailboxes messages into a single PST. If not, is there a tool out there that will let you do that after you run Exmerge. I have looked hard and couldn't find anything in the latest Exmerge version's document. _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: need ammo
We have a 15 MB limit to keep the users happy, then block all AVI, MP* files -Original Message- From: Steven A. Christensen [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, September 05, 2002 3:51 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Re: need ammo We use a 2MB limit as a general rule - with plenty of exceptions, of course. Steve C. - Original Message - From: Andrey Fyodorov [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, September 05, 2002 4:17 PM Subject: need ammo Hi all. I have this customer who is unhappy about 10MB message limit size on SMTP connectors in our shared Exchange environment. Does anyone have any scary stories about what happens when people try to send too many messages that are too large? What is a reasonable size for SMTP message? Our servers originally had higher limits but a few times large SMTP messages crashed the servers. I just need to convince this customer that it is not a good idea to send large messages. Thanks! Andrey Fyodorov _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: need ammo
The general policy of most companies is 5MB limit of Internet inbound/Outbound messages. In my opinion, too many users think of email systems as being some panacean highway for any kind of data transmission no matter the threat or inconvenience to others. I have had nitwits send out large messages which got caught in a nasty mail loop. There is no easy answer but I recommend that you approach this from a policy point of view. Our policy here is 5MB. No ifs or butts (pun intended). D. -Original Message- From: Andrey Fyodorov [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, September 05, 2002 2:17 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: need ammo Hi all. I have this customer who is unhappy about 10MB message limit size on SMTP connectors in our shared Exchange environment. Does anyone have any scary stories about what happens when people try to send too many messages that are too large? What is a reasonable size for SMTP message? Our servers originally had higher limits but a few times large SMTP messages crashed the servers. I just need to convince this customer that it is not a good idea to send large messages. Thanks! Andrey Fyodorov _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: need ammo
What caused the mail loop? -Original Message- From: Darryl Harris [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, September 05, 2002 8:35 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: need ammo The general policy of most companies is 5MB limit of Internet inbound/Outbound messages. In my opinion, too many users think of email systems as being some panacean highway for any kind of data transmission no matter the threat or inconvenience to others. I have had nitwits send out large messages which got caught in a nasty mail loop. There is no easy answer but I recommend that you approach this from a policy point of view. Our policy here is 5MB. No ifs or butts (pun intended). D. -Original Message- From: Andrey Fyodorov [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, September 05, 2002 2:17 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: need ammo Hi all. I have this customer who is unhappy about 10MB message limit size on SMTP connectors in our shared Exchange environment. Does anyone have any scary stories about what happens when people try to send too many messages that are too large? What is a reasonable size for SMTP message? Our servers originally had higher limits but a few times large SMTP messages crashed the servers. I just need to convince this customer that it is not a good idea to send large messages. Thanks! Andrey Fyodorov _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] -- The information contained in this email message is privileged and confidential information intended only for the use of the individual or entity to whom it is addressed. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copy of this message is strictly prohibited. If you have received this email in error, please immediately notify Veronis Suhler Stevenson by telephone (212)935-4990, fax (212)381-8168, or email ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) and delete the message. Thank you. == _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Communication
Okay, I am getting knee deep into a conversion from Exchange 5.5 to Exchange 2000. Now we have an NT 4 Domain with two Exchange 5.5 Servers. We are creating a 2000 Domain that is going to house our new Exchange 2000 Servers. Now we are going to migrate with a test group to make sure everything is going smoothly. What would be the best scenerio to have these servers communicate with each other, that causes the least amount of network traffic. _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: To Great Cthulhu Jones
And the first name rhymes with crate. Edgar J. Crowley Jr. Technical Consultant Windows Messaging Platforms Practice hp Services *510-612-3365 *[EMAIL PROTECTED] -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Aaron Brasslett Sent: Wednesday, September 04, 2002 10:34 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: To Great Cthulhu Jones Oh, that is pronounced: 'jOnz That one stumps me on occasion as well. -Original Message- From: Ray Beckwith [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, September 04, 2002 1:29 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: To Great Cthulhu Jones Pardon me for the confusion, I meant the last name... Thanks...Ray Quote of the day: When a person can no longer laugh at himself, it is time for others to laugh at him. -- Thomas Szasz -Original Message- From: Schwartz, Jim [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, September 04, 2002 10:26 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: To Great Cthulhu Jones You pronounce it the same way it is spelled. Kind of sounds like spitting out a watermelon seed. [1] [1] Begging forgiveness from Kimmie for stealing her line. -Original Message- From: Ray Beckwith [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, September 04, 2002 1:14 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: OT: To Great Cthulhu Jones A humble question to the Great one. I am relatively new to the list (been monitoring and occasionally posting for about 2 years) and I have always wondered, what is the correct pronunciation of your name. I would hate to insult your greatness by mispronouncing it when paying homage. Thanks...Ray Quote of the day: When a person can no longer laugh at himself, it is time for others to laugh at him. -- Thomas Szasz _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: NT 2000 backup of Exchange.
I think he means NT 5.0. Ed Crowley -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Tom Meunier Sent: Wednesday, September 04, 2002 10:27 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: NT 2000 backup of Exchange. Whatever you're reading, you should be using to wrap fish or line birdcages. What's Windows NT 2000? -Original Message- From: Couch, Nate [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Posted At: Wednesday, September 04, 2002 11:59 AM Posted To: MSExchange Mailing List Conversation: NT 2000 backup of Exchange. Subject: RE: NT 2000 backup of Exchange. From what I have been reading the Windows NT 2000 version of ntbackup.exe is not Exchange aware. I know they tell you to to use the Exchange 2000 version for MS Exchange 2000 Server. Admittedly, I don't recall anything about using it with MS Exchange 5.5. Nate Couch EDS Messaging -- From: Pfefferkorn, Pete (PFEFFEPE) Reply To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, September 4, 2002 11:23 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject:NT 2000 backup of Exchange. Exchange 5.5 SP4 under NT 2000 SP2. Well we have our first 2000 server up running Exchange 5.5 SP3. I'm trying to get the backups to run similar to what I had with NT 4.0. With the 4.0 version I had the cmd set to initialize any tape in the drive, backup and eject and mail the logs for verification. With 2000 I used the wizard to create the backup but I can't seem to get it to grab any tape I have inserted. I tried adding multiple tapes to the media pool with the same name, but I always get The operation was not performed, no storage media was specified message on the report. What am I missing? There must be a simple way to say any tape in there grab it and use it for a backup. Pete Pfefferkorn Senior Systems Engineer/Mail Administrator University of Cincinnati 51 Goodman Street Cincinnati, OH 45221 Phone - (513) 556-9076 Fax - (513) 556-2042 _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: NT 2000 backup of Exchange.
Actually, he's right. You have to install the Exchange System Tools to make the version that ships with Windows 2000 Exchange-aware. Edgar J. Crowley Jr. Technical Consultant Windows Messaging Platforms Practice hp Services *510-612-3365 *[EMAIL PROTECTED] -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Tom Meunier Sent: Wednesday, September 04, 2002 10:27 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: NT 2000 backup of Exchange. Whatever you're reading, you should be using to wrap fish or line birdcages. What's Windows NT 2000? -Original Message- From: Couch, Nate [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Posted At: Wednesday, September 04, 2002 11:59 AM Posted To: MSExchange Mailing List Conversation: NT 2000 backup of Exchange. Subject: RE: NT 2000 backup of Exchange. From what I have been reading the Windows NT 2000 version of ntbackup.exe is not Exchange aware. I know they tell you to to use the Exchange 2000 version for MS Exchange 2000 Server. Admittedly, I don't recall anything about using it with MS Exchange 5.5. Nate Couch EDS Messaging -- From: Pfefferkorn, Pete (PFEFFEPE) Reply To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, September 4, 2002 11:23 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject:NT 2000 backup of Exchange. Exchange 5.5 SP4 under NT 2000 SP2. Well we have our first 2000 server up running Exchange 5.5 SP3. I'm trying to get the backups to run similar to what I had with NT 4.0. With the 4.0 version I had the cmd set to initialize any tape in the drive, backup and eject and mail the logs for verification. With 2000 I used the wizard to create the backup but I can't seem to get it to grab any tape I have inserted. I tried adding multiple tapes to the media pool with the same name, but I always get The operation was not performed, no storage media was specified message on the report. What am I missing? There must be a simple way to say any tape in there grab it and use it for a backup. Pete Pfefferkorn Senior Systems Engineer/Mail Administrator University of Cincinnati 51 Goodman Street Cincinnati, OH 45221 Phone - (513) 556-9076 Fax - (513) 556-2042 _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Daffynitions (OT)
You should send that one to Boys' Life. Edgar J. Crowley Jr. Technical Consultant Windows Messaging Platforms Practice hp Services *510-612-3365 *[EMAIL PROTECTED] -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Ali Wilkes (IT) Sent: Wednesday, September 04, 2002 9:39 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Daffynitions (OT) 1. Micromended[1] (adj); Something that has been recommended by Microsoft; usage: Win2k SP3 is Micromended. [1] credit to my coworker, Boyd[2], who combined the two. [2] Boyd, eh, _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: need ammo
A message from cheerios.com. (:= -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Andy David Sent: Thursday, September 05, 2002 7:57 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: need ammo What caused the mail loop? -Original Message- From: Darryl Harris [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, September 05, 2002 8:35 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: need ammo The general policy of most companies is 5MB limit of Internet inbound/Outbound messages. In my opinion, too many users think of email systems as being some panacean highway for any kind of data transmission no matter the threat or inconvenience to others. I have had nitwits send out large messages which got caught in a nasty mail loop. There is no easy answer but I recommend that you approach this from a policy point of view. Our policy here is 5MB. No ifs or butts (pun intended). D. -Original Message- From: Andrey Fyodorov [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, September 05, 2002 2:17 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: need ammo Hi all. I have this customer who is unhappy about 10MB message limit size on SMTP connectors in our shared Exchange environment. Does anyone have any scary stories about what happens when people try to send too many messages that are too large? What is a reasonable size for SMTP message? Our servers originally had higher limits but a few times large SMTP messages crashed the servers. I just need to convince this customer that it is not a good idea to send large messages. Thanks! Andrey Fyodorov _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] -- The information contained in this email message is privileged and confidential information intended only for the use of the individual or entity to whom it is addressed. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copy of this message is strictly prohibited. If you have received this email in error, please immediately notify Veronis Suhler Stevenson by telephone (212)935-4990, fax (212)381-8168, or email ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) and delete the message. Thank you. == _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: To Great Cthulhu Jones
We're related, yes. (:= -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Hanna, Keith Sent: Thursday, September 05, 2002 5:04 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: To Great Cthulhu Jones Slight Welsh accent? Les? Is that you? -Original Message- From: Great Cthulhu Jones [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 05 September 2002 02:55 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: To Great Cthulhu Jones You can always initiate a self-punishment session at any time. And, yes, it's pronounced the way it's spelled. It sounds like a universe being sucked backwards through a flexi-straw into a tailpipe somehow capable of saying Jones at the end, with a slight Welsh accent. (:= -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Lentz, Wayne Sent: Wednesday, September 04, 2002 1:06 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: To Great Cthulhu Jones ..And I always pronounced it as hoe-neez. Like cahones without the ca. Must I wait for direct order before whipping myself with frayed cat5 cabling, or do I start now? -Original Message- From: Dale Geoffrey Edwards [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, September 04, 2002 12:35 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: To Great Cthulhu Jones It's pronounced JONES, like cones, but with a J. Geoff... -Original Message- From: Ray Beckwith [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, September 04, 2002 1:29 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: To Great Cthulhu Jones Pardon me for the confusion, I meant the last name... Thanks...Ray Quote of the day: When a person can no longer laugh at himself, it is time for others to laugh at him. -- Thomas Szasz -Original Message- From: Schwartz, Jim [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, September 04, 2002 10:26 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: To Great Cthulhu Jones You pronounce it the same way it is spelled. Kind of sounds like spitting out a watermelon seed. [1] [1] Begging forgiveness from Kimmie for stealing her line. -Original Message- From: Ray Beckwith [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, September 04, 2002 1:14 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: OT: To Great Cthulhu Jones A humble question to the Great one. I am relatively new to the list (been monitoring and occasionally posting for about 2 years) and I have always wondered, what is the correct pronunciation of your name. I would hate to insult your greatness by mispronouncing it when paying homage. Thanks...Ray Quote of the day: When a person can no longer laugh at himself, it is time for others to laugh at him. -- Thomas Szasz _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe:
RE: Must Decide; EX5.5 or EX2K
Hear about the sequel where he goes back for Wilson? (:= -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Dupler, Craig Sent: Thursday, September 05, 2002 4:49 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Must Decide; EX5.5 or EX2K Well if you get stranded for four years like Tom Hanks' character in castaway, then native mode will be hard to avoid. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, September 05, 2002 11:51 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Must Decide; EX5.5 or EX2K A much improved OWA, for one - a steadily decreasing lack of support for another. Especially if you're starting from scratch, I recommend Exch2K. AD will not hurt you, and you need not switch to native mode, ever, unless you wish. David -Original Message- From: Eric Fors, II [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, August 12, 2002 1:51 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Must Decide; EX5.5 or EX2K I've recently come into the need to implement Exchange server for my new employer. I have been blissfully ignorant of all things related to Exchange for nearly a year and a half now, but alas that is at an end. I've had substantial experience with Exchange with my previous employer, but when I was hired on here they already had some other e-mail product and were not interested in switching to Exchange. Now they are and I am needing to catch up. My experience with Exchange goes back to the RC for Exchange 4.0 and runs up to EX55 SP3. EX2K was only just starting to be implemented widely by the more adventurous members of this list at the time I changed jobs. With that lengthy pre-amble, here's my question: I have seen some of the recent posts with scary stories about what to expect when upgrading EX55 to EX2K and read some other things about AD implementations gone awry. These cause me to wonder if it is worth it to install EX2K? We already own EX55 and our Windows networking is run strictly on a domains model, (no AD anywhere and none planned in the near future.) Our implementation will be rather small, one site, one server, about 50 users, and a handful of remote users. What if any advantages would there be to me to implement EX2K over EX55? Thanx, Eric Fors, II BTW - I'm glad to see that the Ed's and Missy K. are still on the list. Your posts in the archives have pulled my proverbial bacon out of the fire more than a few times. _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Merge all Mailboxes to a single PST using Exmerge
Good news is, if you get a PST over 2GB in size, you only have to truncate the file size to read what's in it! (:= -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Tony Hlabse Sent: Thursday, September 05, 2002 7:09 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Re: Merge all Mailboxes to a single PST using Exmerge Thanks Andrey. I found it. I could I have missed it. Anyhow it looks like I will have experiment with that setting. I am guessing I may have to do this in two runs. One to get the user names that contain the subject matter and then run it again with the all mailboxes being put into one PST once the ones are identified in the first run. - Original Message - From: Andrey Fyodorov [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, September 05, 2002 3:25 PM Subject: RE: Merge all Mailboxes to a single PST using Exmerge Yes this is possible with ExMerge. ExMErge documentation as well as the default ExMerge.ini file show such a configuration. -Original Message- From: EXTERN Hlabse Tony (Tek Systems;RBNA/CIT1) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, September 05, 2002 11:43 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Merge all Mailboxes to a single PST using Exmerge Fellow Admins. Is there away to run exmerge and put all of the selected mailboxes messages into a single PST. If not, is there a tool out there that will let you do that after you run Exmerge. I have looked hard and couldn't find anything in the latest Exmerge version's document. _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: E2K: OUTLOOK Can't open this item SP3 bug?
One other guy on this list saw that and there's very little information on that error message. Do you have any other error messages in conjunction with those? No matter what, call Microsoft. This may be an emerging issue with that SP. (:= -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of MS Exchange List Sent: Wednesday, September 04, 2002 5:49 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: E2K: OUTLOOK Can't open this item SP3 bug? OS: Win2K, SP2, IIS Roll-up, (+most Critical Windows Update published hotfixes) E2K: Native, SP3, Trend 6.0 Scanmail Single Native Domain, Single Exchange Server, 1 SG, 4 Mailbox DBs, 1 PF DB Hello, Not sure if this is a new bug introduced with E2K SP3, or just my bad luck with E2K. Some users are unable to open/delete/move/reply/forward... some Messages with OUTLOOK (various versions) or E2K OWA. The error they get in OUTLOOK is: Can't open this item On the Server side an error is logged in the App log: === Event Type: Error Event Source: MSExchangeIS Event Category: Content Engine Event ID: 12002 Date: 9/4/2002 Time: 1:38:05 PM User: N/A Computer: EXCHANGE Description: Error 8004011B-8000 occurred while processing message from 'SearchStorage.com'. === Combing through the App log it looks like we've got at least 9 different Messages with this problem. I CAN access them with an IMAP client, view it, and delete it. It is then deleted on the Server side mailbox. Since this problem started I have run ISINTEG against all databases, and even compacted the databases (ya, ya, I know, but it is documented a compact will get rid of various DB problems Q314917, Q195856, and I had an Open maintenance window). This did not get rid of the problem, and a user has gotten a new message since then with this problem. The problem messages I have looked at are of type Content-Type: multipart/alternative and contain both a text/plain and text/html versions of the email. Guessing a content conversion problem with MAPI and SP3 ... but haven't heard anyone else complain of something similar. I have looked at Q232323 and Q296598, but they didn't seem to apply. Anyone else seeing this with SP3? Thanks, Brent _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Merge all Mailboxes to a single PST using Exmerge
Not a problem. We figured most of the monthly runs will be under that. In fact will make them under 650 so they will fit on a CD. Still can't believe I missed it in the manual. My only other possible problem is the older version doesn't have that feature. If not will have to load up 2000 workstation for the new Exmerge. The new one does not run on NT4.0 - Original Message - From: Great Cthulhu Jones [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, September 05, 2002 9:58 PM Subject: RE: Merge all Mailboxes to a single PST using Exmerge Good news is, if you get a PST over 2GB in size, you only have to truncate the file size to read what's in it! (:= -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Tony Hlabse Sent: Thursday, September 05, 2002 7:09 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Re: Merge all Mailboxes to a single PST using Exmerge Thanks Andrey. I found it. I could I have missed it. Anyhow it looks like I will have experiment with that setting. I am guessing I may have to do this in two runs. One to get the user names that contain the subject matter and then run it again with the all mailboxes being put into one PST once the ones are identified in the first run. - Original Message - From: Andrey Fyodorov [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, September 05, 2002 3:25 PM Subject: RE: Merge all Mailboxes to a single PST using Exmerge Yes this is possible with ExMerge. ExMErge documentation as well as the default ExMerge.ini file show such a configuration. -Original Message- From: EXTERN Hlabse Tony (Tek Systems;RBNA/CIT1) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, September 05, 2002 11:43 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Merge all Mailboxes to a single PST using Exmerge Fellow Admins. Is there away to run exmerge and put all of the selected mailboxes messages into a single PST. If not, is there a tool out there that will let you do that after you run Exmerge. I have looked hard and couldn't find anything in the latest Exmerge version's document. _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Communication
Well... for the LEAST amount of network traffic, do not have either system on the same network. Create an X.400 connector between the two, but use a postal address at either end of the connector. Then, for every message to the other server, have the sender print it out, submit it to the postal service, and then to a scan of the message when it arrives at its destination. Once the scan converts the message to a digital text format, it can then be stored in the recipient's mailbox. (:= -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Callan, Chris Sent: Thursday, September 05, 2002 2:41 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Communication Okay, I am getting knee deep into a conversion from Exchange 5.5 to Exchange 2000. Now we have an NT 4 Domain with two Exchange 5.5 Servers. We are creating a 2000 Domain that is going to house our new Exchange 2000 Servers. Now we are going to migrate with a test group to make sure everything is going smoothly. What would be the best scenerio to have these servers communicate with each other, that causes the least amount of network traffic. _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Merge all Mailboxes to a single PST using Exmerge
Ho ho ho. PST on a CD. Good luck reading *that*! (:= -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Tony Hlabse Sent: Thursday, September 05, 2002 10:02 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Re: Merge all Mailboxes to a single PST using Exmerge Not a problem. We figured most of the monthly runs will be under that. In fact will make them under 650 so they will fit on a CD. Still can't believe I missed it in the manual. My only other possible problem is the older version doesn't have that feature. If not will have to load up 2000 workstation for the new Exmerge. The new one does not run on NT4.0 - Original Message - From: Great Cthulhu Jones [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, September 05, 2002 9:58 PM Subject: RE: Merge all Mailboxes to a single PST using Exmerge Good news is, if you get a PST over 2GB in size, you only have to truncate the file size to read what's in it! (:= -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Tony Hlabse Sent: Thursday, September 05, 2002 7:09 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Re: Merge all Mailboxes to a single PST using Exmerge Thanks Andrey. I found it. I could I have missed it. Anyhow it looks like I will have experiment with that setting. I am guessing I may have to do this in two runs. One to get the user names that contain the subject matter and then run it again with the all mailboxes being put into one PST once the ones are identified in the first run. - Original Message - From: Andrey Fyodorov [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, September 05, 2002 3:25 PM Subject: RE: Merge all Mailboxes to a single PST using Exmerge Yes this is possible with ExMerge. ExMErge documentation as well as the default ExMerge.ini file show such a configuration. -Original Message- From: EXTERN Hlabse Tony (Tek Systems;RBNA/CIT1) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, September 05, 2002 11:43 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Merge all Mailboxes to a single PST using Exmerge Fellow Admins. Is there away to run exmerge and put all of the selected mailboxes messages into a single PST. If not, is there a tool out there that will let you do that after you run Exmerge. I have looked hard and couldn't find anything in the latest Exmerge version's document. _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Merge all Mailboxes to a single PST using Exmerge
Just for mailing to lawyers then they will copy to hard drive. Yes I know about it is written to open. - Original Message - From: Great Cthulhu Jones [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, September 05, 2002 10:10 PM Subject: RE: Merge all Mailboxes to a single PST using Exmerge Ho ho ho. PST on a CD. Good luck reading *that*! (:= -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Tony Hlabse Sent: Thursday, September 05, 2002 10:02 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Re: Merge all Mailboxes to a single PST using Exmerge Not a problem. We figured most of the monthly runs will be under that. In fact will make them under 650 so they will fit on a CD. Still can't believe I missed it in the manual. My only other possible problem is the older version doesn't have that feature. If not will have to load up 2000 workstation for the new Exmerge. The new one does not run on NT4.0 - Original Message - From: Great Cthulhu Jones [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, September 05, 2002 9:58 PM Subject: RE: Merge all Mailboxes to a single PST using Exmerge Good news is, if you get a PST over 2GB in size, you only have to truncate the file size to read what's in it! (:= -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Tony Hlabse Sent: Thursday, September 05, 2002 7:09 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Re: Merge all Mailboxes to a single PST using Exmerge Thanks Andrey. I found it. I could I have missed it. Anyhow it looks like I will have experiment with that setting. I am guessing I may have to do this in two runs. One to get the user names that contain the subject matter and then run it again with the all mailboxes being put into one PST once the ones are identified in the first run. - Original Message - From: Andrey Fyodorov [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, September 05, 2002 3:25 PM Subject: RE: Merge all Mailboxes to a single PST using Exmerge Yes this is possible with ExMerge. ExMErge documentation as well as the default ExMerge.ini file show such a configuration. -Original Message- From: EXTERN Hlabse Tony (Tek Systems;RBNA/CIT1) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, September 05, 2002 11:43 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Merge all Mailboxes to a single PST using Exmerge Fellow Admins. Is there away to run exmerge and put all of the selected mailboxes messages into a single PST. If not, is there a tool out there that will let you do that after you run Exmerge. I have looked hard and couldn't find anything in the latest Exmerge version's document. _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Feedback request - NEMX PowerTools
Does anyone here have any experience with NEMX PowerTools for Exchange, specifically the modules for spam blocking and content management and filtering? I'm considering this primarily for the ability to query the MAPS database and block the spam before it gets in the door. Is this a good idea? All feedback is welcome. Thanks in advance! Mike _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: need ammo
Well for one, who is going to accept 15MB on the incoming side? I definitely wouldn't. Without attachments 15MB is a hell of a lot of typing ..:-) Sander -Original Message- From: Andrey Fyodorov [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 05 September 2002 11:17 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: need ammo Hi all. I have this customer who is unhappy about 10MB message limit size on SMTP connectors in our shared Exchange environment. Does anyone have any scary stories about what happens when people try to send too many messages that are too large? What is a reasonable size for SMTP message? Our servers originally had higher limits but a few times large SMTP messages crashed the servers. I just need to convince this customer that it is not a good idea to send large messages. Thanks! Andrey Fyodorov _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
