RE: Need help access denied in OWA
Friggin' Logon dialog box, maybe. (The "friggin'" is for Lyris!) Ed Crowley MCSE+I MVP Technical Consultant hp Services "There are seldom good technological solutions to behavioral problems." -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Daniel Chenault Sent: Thursday, October 03, 2002 4:23 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Re: Need help access denied in OWA 2000 does indeed have a logon screen unless someone has hacked it out. - Original Message - From: "Andrey Fyodorov" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Exchange Discussions" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Thursday, October 03, 2002 5:18 PM Subject: RE: Need help access denied in OWA 2000 does not have a logon screen -Original Message- From: Tony Hlabse [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, October 04, 2002 2:37 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Re: Need help access denied in OWA A little more info needed. Are you saying they get the logon screen then immediately goes to access denied screen without any input? - Original Message - From: "Todd Youngbauer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Exchange Discussions" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Thursday, October 03, 2002 11:34 AM Subject: Need help access denied in OWA > I am having issues where I can not get anyone logged into OWA on a new > Exchange 2000 server. I have compared all of the settings on it to > other servers I have that are working and can not find any > differences. It is and Exchange 2000 Enterprise server that is > running on W2k as a member server. When you log in you get 3 prompt > and then it goes to access is denied. Any thoughts?/ > > Thanks > Todd > > _ > 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: MEC
Yes, in Hobbs, New Mexico. The nicest place in town. Ed Crowley MCSE+I MVP Technical Consultant hp Services "There are seldom good technological solutions to behavioral problems." -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of William Lefkovics Sent: Thursday, October 03, 2002 2:43 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: MEC Didn't he stay at a Holiday Inn Express once? -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Andy David Sent: Thursday, October 03, 2002 5:39 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: MEC Ed hasnt slept since 1979. -Original Message- From: TWU-Durham, Ryan [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, October 03, 2002 8:37 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: MEC Dang..I thought you were smart before. Uh so do you like ever sleep or anything, I spend a good deal of time just trying to keep up with exchange, I don't think I could handle all of that. :) -Original Message- From: Ed Crowley [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, October 02, 2002 10:39 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: MEC I've written "Hello World" in FORTRAN, Pascal, Turbo Pascal, C, LISP, PDP-11 assembler, 8080 assembler, COBOL, PL/I, Waterloo Script, BASIC, Visual Basic (various versions), VB Script, and who know what else. Don't ask me to do it in XML, though. Ed Crowley MCSE+I MVP Technical Consultant hp Services "There are seldom good technological solutions to behavioral problems." -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Woodruff, Michael Sent: Wednesday, October 02, 2002 9:46 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: MEC I can write the best "Hello World" hands down. -Original Message- From: Martin Blackstone [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, October 02, 2002 11:35 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: MEC I write a mean .bat file -Original Message- From: Webb, Andy [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, October 02, 2002 8:20 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: MEC It's just further evidence of the view that you must be a programmer to be a sysadmin. _ 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: Employee gone, what to do with the maill box
Yes. Ed Crowley MCSE+I MVP Technical Consultant hp Services "There are seldom good technological solutions to behavioral problems." -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of John Q Jr. Sent: Thursday, October 03, 2002 2:12 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Employee gone, what to do with the maill box I haveThere is a manager, nit mine, but of a guy he just let go, and he needs some information for this past Employees mailbox. What is the best way to allow this user to access this box. Just give him permissionas and have him add it to his profile? E2K, user is using Outlook 2K. - John Q _ 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: Command line Backup of Ex2k
I think it's gone. But you don't need it as much because NTBACKUP now has a basic scheduler. Ed Crowley MCSE+I MVP Technical Consultant hp Services "There are seldom good technological solutions to behavioral problems." -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Exchange List Sent: Thursday, October 03, 2002 9:43 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Command line Backup of Ex2k Err how is it done using ntbackup? Can't use ntbackup /IS "servername" anymore. I know to use the systemstate parameter, but don't know how to get the IS storage groups backed up. _ 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: win2k sp2 smtp server error 5.0.0
If a host answers and rejects the message, the message won't be rejected to another server. For example, a customer of mine had three ISP-managed MX recoreds, two of which pointed to a service provider that no longer hosted its domain. Had its primary mail server died, sending SMTP servers would try the bad alternates, which would bounce the messages. Without the two bad alternate MX records, the sending SMTP servers would retry for a while. Maybe what's happening in your case is that one of the two SMTP servers is misconfigured or something. Try doing a telnet session to port 25 on each to see if you can get any clues. Ed Crowley MCSE+I MVP Technical Consultant hp Services "There are seldom good technological solutions to behavioral problems." -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Kevin Cobb Sent: Wednesday, October 02, 2002 1:07 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: win2k sp2 smtp server error 5.0.0 I seem to be having the same issue with Exchange not mailing some domains, while mailing others just fine. (I also seen the same from time to time with Hotmail).What I've tracked down and believe to be happening is when a primary mx record is not answering, our exchange 2000 server is not attempting to mail to the secondary server. I'm seeing this on two other exchange 2000 servers as well. I fired up the older lotus notes server and watched the logs as it attempted mailing to the "bad domain". The logs show that the initial mx record was attempted and failed, but then connected to the secondary and mail is transferred. Unfortuantely I cannot find any logs of this nature in exchange to show the process, but every domain in the "retry queue" with "Connection Dropped by the Remote Host" has a primary MX record that is not responding. Anyone have any clues on what might be going on on the Exchange box there? It's set up behind an ISA server. Has local and remote DNS lookup. Can resolve NSLOOKUPs from the exchange server. It just doesn't seem to want to attempt a secondary MX record if the primary fails. Any ideas would be greatly appreciated, and would save hairs on my head! Kevin Cobb Network Manager (703) 449-7600 > Updated -=20 > > I think I might have found the problem: > > http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=3Dkb;en-us;Q240832 > > but if I set it to use HELO, I don't get the option for it to use > EHLO, so I would lose the ability to send out as ESMTP?? > > > > Rob Ellis=20 > Network Manager=20 > Profectus IT=20 > Tel 023 9224 7960=20 > Mob 07974 111867 > > > -Original Message- > From: Rob Ellis=20 > Sent: 26 September 2002 15:37 > To: Exchange Discussions > Subject: win2k sp2 smtp server error 5.0.0 > > Using a Win2K sp2 box in our DMZ running the MS smtp server, as a > relay for our E2K server. All incoming traffic flows fine, but we are > getting a number of NDRs such as: > > The e-mail system was unable to deliver the message, but did not > report a specific reason. Check the address and try again. If it > still fails, contact your system administrator. > > unrecognized> > > this is happening for a variety of domain names, including hotmail.com > (which I'm not that worried about, but some of the domains are > actually 'proper' domains.) > > Could it be that the IP that our server sits on has been blacklisted > by certain ISPs? > > > > Rob Ellis=20 > Network Manager=20 > Profectus IT=20 > Tel 023 9224 7960=20 > Mob 07974 111867 > > > > _ > 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 SP3 Problem with SMTP address with a dash ?
In that case first-last is the "local part" not the domain, and that is a legal construct. Care to be more specific? Ed Crowley MCSE+I MVP Technical Consultant hp Services "There are seldom good technological solutions to behavioral problems." -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Sam Todd Sent: Friday, October 04, 2002 10:56 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: E2k SP3 Problem with SMTP address with a dash ? Server is W2k sp3, Exchange 2k sp3, IE 6.1 Having problems sending mail to domains that have a dash in them (ie [EMAIL PROTECTED]) they just sit in the queue. It appears when I track them that smtp is attempting to connect (I see the remote server name in the message tracking output) but the event viewer shows the connection manager that the remote host dropped the connection. Anyone else having this problem, or thoughts on how to resolve ?? _ 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: Missing INBOXES
Also, logging with a MAPI profile that has Delivery setting set to deliver to a PST. Tell the user to go home and look for the mail on the computer there. Ed Crowley MCSE+I MVP Technical Consultant hp Services "There are seldom good technological solutions to behavioral problems." -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Darrin J. Carter Sent: Thursday, October 03, 2002 12:54 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Missing INBOXES Is it possible that the client has been set to use POP3 and is downloading the mailbox to a PST file? I had a client do this before -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, October 03, 2002 10:33 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Missing INBOXES We are using Exchange 5.5./sp/4. For some reason some users mailbox came up with no mail, once they are in Outlook 2000. I have did the Database clean up utilities for Exchange. Is there something else i can look at. Again nothing was deleted, for some reason they don't have thier mail in the inbox. 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] _ 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: McAfee GroupShield 5.2
or GFI? -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Andy David Sent: Friday, October 04, 2002 8:42 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: McAfee GroupShield 5.2 How about Sybari or Trend? -Original Message- From: Mike Carlson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, October 04, 2002 11:34 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: McAfee GroupShield 5.2 HA! I know, I get grief from people all the time over it, but its my only choice right now until I can get NAV implemented. > -- > From: Andy David > Reply To: Exchange Discussions > Sent: Friday, October 4, 2002 10:32 PM > To: Exchange Discussions > Subject: RE: McAfee GroupShield 5.2 > > Ah! > Groupshield! > I'm melting... > > > -Original Message- > From: Mike Carlson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Friday, October 04, 2002 9:31 PM > To: Exchange Discussions > Subject: McAfee GroupShield 5.2 > > > Anyone ever have problems with McAfee GSE 5.2 and it not being able to open > the private information store? > > I get the following error in Event Viewer: > > McAfee GroupShield Exchange failed to open private message store. > > Then I also get this error: > > Alert Manager Event Log Alert: > > An internal error occurred in Groupshield - please check the log for > details.(from Serial# 3) IP user SYSTEM running > GroupShield 5.20.664.0 odcmd) > > I have defragged the private store and I have uninstalled/reinstalled GSE > but > I cannot figure out why this is happening. > > Any help is appreciated. > > ~!M > > _ > 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] -- 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: McAfee GroupShield 5.2
Trend or Sybari. Either way you cant go wrong. Though I am partial to Trend myself. -Original Message- From: Mike Carlson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, October 04, 2002 8:39 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: McAfee GroupShield 5.2 I have NAV corp edition rolling out now, I was kinda hoping to get all my AV in one place by implementing the NAV For Exchange, but I am open to suggestions as well. > -- > From: Andy David > Reply To: Exchange Discussions > Sent: Friday, October 4, 2002 10:41 PM > To: Exchange Discussions > Subject: RE: McAfee GroupShield 5.2 > > How about Sybari or Trend? > > > -Original Message- > From: Mike Carlson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Friday, October 04, 2002 11:34 PM > To: Exchange Discussions > Subject: RE: McAfee GroupShield 5.2 > > > HA! > > I know, I get grief from people all the time over it, but its my only > choice right now until I can get NAV implemented. > > > -- > > From: Andy David > > Reply To: Exchange Discussions > > Sent: Friday, October 4, 2002 10:32 PM > > To: Exchange Discussions > > Subject:RE: McAfee GroupShield 5.2 > > > > Ah! > > Groupshield! > > I'm melting... > > > > > > -Original Message- > > From: Mike Carlson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > Sent: Friday, October 04, 2002 9:31 PM > > To: Exchange Discussions > > Subject: McAfee GroupShield 5.2 > > > > > > Anyone ever have problems with McAfee GSE 5.2 and it not being able > > to > open > > the private information store? > > > > I get the following error in Event Viewer: > > > > McAfee GroupShield Exchange failed to open private message store. > > > > Then I also get this error: > > > > Alert Manager Event Log Alert: > > > > An internal error occurred in Groupshield - please check the log for > > details.(from Serial# 3) IP user SYSTEM > > running GroupShield 5.20.664.0 odcmd) > > > > I have defragged the private store and I have > > uninstalled/reinstalled GSE but I cannot figure out why this is > > happening. > > > > Any help is appreciated. > > > > ~!M > > > > _ > > 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] > > -- > - > --- > 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] > > __
RE: McAfee GroupShield 5.2
I have NAV corp edition rolling out now, I was kinda hoping to get all my AV in one place by implementing the NAV For Exchange, but I am open to suggestions as well. > -- > From: Andy David > Reply To: Exchange Discussions > Sent: Friday, October 4, 2002 10:41 PM > To: Exchange Discussions > Subject: RE: McAfee GroupShield 5.2 > > How about Sybari or Trend? > > > -Original Message- > From: Mike Carlson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Friday, October 04, 2002 11:34 PM > To: Exchange Discussions > Subject: RE: McAfee GroupShield 5.2 > > > HA! > > I know, I get grief from people all the time over it, but its my only > choice > right now until I can get NAV implemented. > > > -- > > From: Andy David > > Reply To: Exchange Discussions > > Sent: Friday, October 4, 2002 10:32 PM > > To: Exchange Discussions > > Subject:RE: McAfee GroupShield 5.2 > > > > Ah! > > Groupshield! > > I'm melting... > > > > > > -Original Message- > > From: Mike Carlson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > Sent: Friday, October 04, 2002 9:31 PM > > To: Exchange Discussions > > Subject: McAfee GroupShield 5.2 > > > > > > Anyone ever have problems with McAfee GSE 5.2 and it not being able to > open > > the private information store? > > > > I get the following error in Event Viewer: > > > > McAfee GroupShield Exchange failed to open private message store. > > > > Then I also get this error: > > > > Alert Manager Event Log Alert: > > > > An internal error occurred in Groupshield - please check the log for > > details.(from Serial# 3) IP user SYSTEM running > > GroupShield 5.20.664.0 odcmd) > > > > I have defragged the private store and I have uninstalled/reinstalled GSE > > but > > I cannot figure out why this is happening. > > > > Any help is appreciated. > > > > ~!M > > > > _ > > 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] > > --- > --- > 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: McAfee GroupShield 5.2
How about Sybari or Trend? -Original Message- From: Mike Carlson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, October 04, 2002 11:34 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: McAfee GroupShield 5.2 HA! I know, I get grief from people all the time over it, but its my only choice right now until I can get NAV implemented. > -- > From: Andy David > Reply To: Exchange Discussions > Sent: Friday, October 4, 2002 10:32 PM > To: Exchange Discussions > Subject: RE: McAfee GroupShield 5.2 > > Ah! > Groupshield! > I'm melting... > > > -Original Message- > From: Mike Carlson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Friday, October 04, 2002 9:31 PM > To: Exchange Discussions > Subject: McAfee GroupShield 5.2 > > > Anyone ever have problems with McAfee GSE 5.2 and it not being able to open > the private information store? > > I get the following error in Event Viewer: > > McAfee GroupShield Exchange failed to open private message store. > > Then I also get this error: > > Alert Manager Event Log Alert: > > An internal error occurred in Groupshield - please check the log for > details.(from Serial# 3) IP user SYSTEM running > GroupShield 5.20.664.0 odcmd) > > I have defragged the private store and I have uninstalled/reinstalled GSE > but > I cannot figure out why this is happening. > > Any help is appreciated. > > ~!M > > _ > 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] -- 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]
RE: Missing INBOXES
Any rules setup? -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, October 03, 2002 13:33 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Missing INBOXES We are using Exchange 5.5./sp/4. For some reason some users mailbox came up with no mail, once they are in Outlook 2000. I have did the Database clean up utilities for Exchange. Is there something else i can look at. Again nothing was deleted, for some reason they don't have thier mail in the inbox. 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: McAfee GroupShield 5.2
HA! I know, I get grief from people all the time over it, but its my only choice right now until I can get NAV implemented. > -- > From: Andy David > Reply To: Exchange Discussions > Sent: Friday, October 4, 2002 10:32 PM > To: Exchange Discussions > Subject: RE: McAfee GroupShield 5.2 > > Ah! > Groupshield! > I'm melting... > > > -Original Message- > From: Mike Carlson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Friday, October 04, 2002 9:31 PM > To: Exchange Discussions > Subject: McAfee GroupShield 5.2 > > > Anyone ever have problems with McAfee GSE 5.2 and it not being able to open > the private information store? > > I get the following error in Event Viewer: > > McAfee GroupShield Exchange failed to open private message store. > > Then I also get this error: > > Alert Manager Event Log Alert: > > An internal error occurred in Groupshield - please check the log for > details.(from Serial# 3) IP user SYSTEM running > GroupShield 5.20.664.0 odcmd) > > I have defragged the private store and I have uninstalled/reinstalled GSE > but > I cannot figure out why this is happening. > > Any help is appreciated. > > ~!M > > _ > 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: McAfee GroupShield 5.2
Ah! Groupshield! I'm melting... -Original Message- From: Mike Carlson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, October 04, 2002 9:31 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: McAfee GroupShield 5.2 Anyone ever have problems with McAfee GSE 5.2 and it not being able to open the private information store? I get the following error in Event Viewer: McAfee GroupShield Exchange failed to open private message store. Then I also get this error: Alert Manager Event Log Alert: An internal error occurred in Groupshield - please check the log for details.(from Serial# 3) IP user SYSTEM running GroupShield 5.20.664.0 odcmd) I have defragged the private store and I have uninstalled/reinstalled GSE but I cannot figure out why this is happening. Any help is appreciated. ~!M _ 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]
McAfee GroupShield 5.2
Anyone ever have problems with McAfee GSE 5.2 and it not being able to open the private information store? I get the following error in Event Viewer: McAfee GroupShield Exchange failed to open private message store. Then I also get this error: Alert Manager Event Log Alert: An internal error occurred in Groupshield - please check the log for details.(from Serial# 3) IP user SYSTEM running GroupShield 5.20.664.0 odcmd) I have defragged the private store and I have uninstalled/reinstalled GSE but I cannot figure out why this is happening. Any help is appreciated. ~!M _ 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: Backing up Exchange 5.5
Are u saying Netbackup from CA ? -Original Message- From: Hurst, Paul [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, October 04, 2002 10:59 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Backing up Exchange 5.5 Try Netbackup works on Unix or NT. Cheers Paul Standards are like toothbrushes, everyone wants one but not yours -Original Message- From: Tony Hlabse [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 05 October 2002 03:33 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Re: Backing up Exchange 5.5 I was exposed recently to TSM Tivoli. I did about a 20-30 plus restores half of those from scratch. "Nothing but net". Pardon the pun. - Original Message - From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Exchange Discussions" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Friday, October 04, 2002 6:36 AM Subject: RE: Backing up Exchange 5.5 Try HP OmniBack II. Don't know the price but works just great. -Original Message- From: Fioon [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, October 04, 2002 9:07 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Backing up Exchange 5.5 It's BrightStor , same under CA .. Is ArcServe 2000 really that bad ? I've just tried, and it turned out not too bad. On the middle of discussing want to purchase or not !! -Original Message- From: William Lefkovics [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, October 04, 2002 2:53 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Backing up Exchange 5.5 Brightwhore? Same crap. New name. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Fioon Sent: Thursday, October 03, 2002 9:03 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Backing up Exchange 5.5 I've download the BE trial copy , but it can't run. Funny, hang on Self Extract. Download again, same thing happened again. Any opinion on new ArcServe2000 BrightStore for the Disaster Recovery on Exchange 5.5 Issue ? Fin -Original Message- From: Daniel Chenault [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, October 03, 2002 11:53 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Re: Backing up Exchange 5.5 Yes, as a google search would have shown. - Original Message - From: "Fioon" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Exchange Discussions" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Thursday, October 03, 2002 1:09 AM Subject: RE: Backing up Exchange 5.5 > Hi, > > May i know which third party are you guys talking about on this "Backup > Exec" ? > It's Veritas ?? > > Thanks _ 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 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] _ 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 Move Mailbox only works in one direction???
Tom, Sounds like a permissions issue, either NT or Exchange. Is the remote office in the same domain as you are? Is the remote office in a different site/organization? Jim -Original Message- From: Alverson, Tom [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, October 04, 2002 12:38 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: EX5.5 Move Mailbox only works in one direction??? I just added a second exchange 5.5 server to our organization. At first I had it in the lab and just moved my own mailbox to is as a guinea pig. They were both in this building. I then moved my mailbox back to the first server and shipped the second one to a remote office connected by a VPN. At first NAV for exchange wasn't starting due to the changed IP address (they are on a different subnet). I found the old IP in the registry and changed it and now NAV starts. I moved one user right away with no problems but forget which server I did the move on (I remote control the other server). Now today when I tried to move some more users, the progress screen would just flash on the screen for a second and go away. In the event log it just had an ID 1800 error (could not move user doe, john) and no other information or errors. I tried a couple of mailboxes and got the same result (this was on the remote server). I then tried it on the first server and it worked just fine there. Very strange... Tom Alverson _ 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: Policy issue
Buhler! -Original Message- From: Schwartz, Jim [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, October 04, 2002 2:32 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Policy issue There is a fairly good white paper on this subject here: http://www.ferris.com/ Look for White Paper: Email Archiving & Records Management in the sponsored research section. It also lists a number of vendors that can accommodate your needs. -Original Message- From: James Liddil [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, October 04, 2002 2:00 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Policy issue I agree. So if I read right you are suggesting this should be a completely automated process. So I should buy into a KVS type solution or does messageone have something. :-). I'd be happy to use the Mailbox Manager in E2K if I was allowed to. And yes I know it's my job, but I sure the heck don't want to spend a week or more manually going through our IS with a lawyer looking over my shoulder. Jim > -Original Message- > From: Chris Scharff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Friday, October 04, 2002 1:44 PM > To: Exchange Discussions > Subject: RE: Policy issue > > > Well, I'd join management in their resistance of an IT guy, > no matter how talented being the one to manually delete mail > on a retention period, even if the policy contains proper > exclusions for items which need to be retained longer (some > of which need to be retained significanly longer than a 5 > year tape rotation). Sorry, I don't think it's an efficient > use of someone that talented and it's too prone to human error. > > > -Original Message- > > From: James Liddil [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > Sent: Friday, October 04, 2002 11:57 AM > > To: Exchange Discussions > > Subject: RE: Policy issue > > > > > > Our lawyer is quite familiar with our business and what we do. Not > > to defend lawyers or anything. They are well versed in the 21CFR11 > > and FDA issues we face along with the legal implications of having > > "no policy" as we do now. So by default our policy for me to follow > > becomes keep everything and make sure backups are archived for 5 > > years. No system is perfect but the fact is that if you have no > > policy it then gives a lawyer who walks in the door for "discovery" > > purposes the right to sit and look over my shoulder while I go > > through all the IS and tapes. > > > > Jim > > > > > -Original Message- > > > From: Chris Scharff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > > Sent: Friday, October 04, 2002 12:33 PM > > > To: Exchange Discussions > > > Subject: RE: Policy issue > > > > > > > > > It's unlikely that you or the system itself has the ability to > > > delete mail in accordance with a well written retention > policy (no > > > offense, I've been researching this subject for a book for quite > > > some time). If your legal counsel has simply given you a > retention > > > policy of something like 'everything older than 120 days > should go' > > > then I'd respectfully suggest you ask your legal counsel > to revisit > > > the policy as it's woefully inadequate.. especially for a company > > > such as yours. > > > > > > -Original Message- > > > From: James Liddil > > > To: Exchange Discussions > > > Sent: 10/4/2002 9:00 AM > > > Subject: Policy issue > > > > > > I seem to be facing resistance from management on > implementation of > > > an e-mail policy. Despite everything our legal counsel > provided and > > > such are not ready to go forward. > > > They have a problem with either the system of myself deleting > > > mail that past the retention period. Some feel that a member > > > of management should be the one deleting the e-mail. I'm > > > sure you can see what's wrong with that picture. I am > > > looking for advice, besides sit on my hands and wait until an > > > event happens that forces them to implement a policy. > > _ > 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 email message is privileged and confidential information intended
EX5.5 Move Mailbox only works in one direction???
I just added a second exchange 5.5 server to our organization. At first I had it in the lab and just moved my own mailbox to is as a guinea pig. They were both in this building. I then moved my mailbox back to the first server and shipped the second one to a remote office connected by a VPN. At first NAV for exchange wasn't starting due to the changed IP address (they are on a different subnet). I found the old IP in the registry and changed it and now NAV starts. I moved one user right away with no problems but forget which server I did the move on (I remote control the other server). Now today when I tried to move some more users, the progress screen would just flash on the screen for a second and go away. In the event log it just had an ID 1800 error (could not move user doe, john) and no other information or errors. I tried a couple of mailboxes and got the same result (this was on the remote server). I then tried it on the first server and it worked just fine there. Very strange... Tom Alverson _ 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]
FW: OWA question
I'm sorry for posting this here but I've searched everywhere on the net including Slipstick and other Outlook forums and have only seen questions regarding this not answers. In our OWA most people don't have Sent to Sort choice option under send items folder. I thought it was because we were using Exchange 5.5. Today I saw a staff account in our network that had that option. I logged in as myself on her computer using the same IE and I didn't have the option. It must be something in the Outlook 2000 setting. I can't find anything on the web. It's something that lot of users would like to have. Can anyone help me out here? Thanks a lot. Sandhya _ 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: SMTP to aol.com
This is my personal address. I guess I should have made clear I am the postmaster for jergens.com. I receive the list at my work address ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) but cannot send from it as we attach a text file disclaimer a la Trend Micro so the list wont accept emails from that account. We are about to switch to Surf Control for SPAM and they can do an inline footer so I may not have to worry about it much after that. Thanks though! Chris - Original Message - From: "Blunt, James H (Jim)" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Exchange Discussions" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Friday, October 04, 2002 12:17 PM Subject: RE: SMTP to aol.com > I hate to be the bearer of bad news Bubba, but according to this query at > SamSpade.org, you're still being blacklisted by the Fiveten list: > > http://www.samspade.org/t/rbl?a=WOH.RR.COM > > -Original Message- > From: Chris H [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Thursday, October 03, 2002 3:43 PM > To: Exchange Discussions > Subject: Re: SMTP to aol.com > > > I feel your pain. I have been working for close to 6 months now to try to > solve that problem. We have reverse DNS. You dont get a NDR; nothing, it > just never gets there. If I telnet into their smtp server all goes okay but > again the mail never shows up in the recipient's inbox and I have tried > quite a few. I finally found a website that had us listed as a blackhole and > got removed from it. I even talked to AOL (703-265-4670 - postmaster line) > and they ran a check on my subnet against their database and it came up > clean. So we are still looking for an answer. Believe me I would rather NOT > send to AOL but we sell to the consumer and our customer service dept. gets > emails everyday from a domain containing 12 million users -- aol.com. :( > > > - Original Message - > From: "Daniel L. Miller" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: "Exchange Discussions" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent: Thursday, October 03, 2002 1:38 PM > Subject: SMTP to aol.com > > > What would cause my messages to AOL addresses to be rejected by AOL? I can > send reliably to any other domain. > > Daniel > > _ > 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: Policy issue
There is a fairly good white paper on this subject here: http://www.ferris.com/ Look for White Paper: Email Archiving & Records Management in the sponsored research section. It also lists a number of vendors that can accommodate your needs. -Original Message- From: James Liddil [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, October 04, 2002 2:00 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Policy issue I agree. So if I read right you are suggesting this should be a completely automated process. So I should buy into a KVS type solution or does messageone have something. :-). I'd be happy to use the Mailbox Manager in E2K if I was allowed to. And yes I know it's my job, but I sure the heck don't want to spend a week or more manually going through our IS with a lawyer looking over my shoulder. Jim > -Original Message- > From: Chris Scharff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Friday, October 04, 2002 1:44 PM > To: Exchange Discussions > Subject: RE: Policy issue > > > Well, I'd join management in their resistance of an IT guy, > no matter how talented being the one to manually delete mail > on a retention period, even if the policy contains proper > exclusions for items which need to be retained longer (some > of which need to be retained significanly longer than a 5 > year tape rotation). Sorry, I don't think it's an efficient > use of someone that talented and it's too prone to human error. > > > -Original Message- > > From: James Liddil [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > Sent: Friday, October 04, 2002 11:57 AM > > To: Exchange Discussions > > Subject: RE: Policy issue > > > > > > Our lawyer is quite familiar with our business and what we do. Not > > to defend lawyers or anything. They are well versed in the 21CFR11 > > and FDA issues we face along with the legal implications of having > > "no policy" as we do now. So by default our policy for me to follow > > becomes keep everything and make sure backups are archived for 5 > > years. No system is perfect but the fact is that if you have no > > policy it then gives a lawyer who walks in the door for "discovery" > > purposes the right to sit and look over my shoulder while I go > > through all the IS and tapes. > > > > Jim > > > > > -Original Message- > > > From: Chris Scharff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > > Sent: Friday, October 04, 2002 12:33 PM > > > To: Exchange Discussions > > > Subject: RE: Policy issue > > > > > > > > > It's unlikely that you or the system itself has the ability to > > > delete mail in accordance with a well written retention > policy (no > > > offense, I've been researching this subject for a book for quite > > > some time). If your legal counsel has simply given you a > retention > > > policy of something like 'everything older than 120 days > should go' > > > then I'd respectfully suggest you ask your legal counsel > to revisit > > > the policy as it's woefully inadequate.. especially for a company > > > such as yours. > > > > > > -Original Message- > > > From: James Liddil > > > To: Exchange Discussions > > > Sent: 10/4/2002 9:00 AM > > > Subject: Policy issue > > > > > > I seem to be facing resistance from management on > implementation of > > > an e-mail policy. Despite everything our legal counsel > provided and > > > such are not ready to go forward. > > > They have a problem with either the system of myself deleting > > > mail that past the retention period. Some feel that a member > > > of management should be the one deleting the e-mail. I'm > > > sure you can see what's wrong with that picture. I am > > > looking for advice, besides sit on my hands and wait until an > > > event happens that forces them to implement a policy. > > _ > 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: Policy issue
No, MessageOne doesn't have an archival solution... My research was for a customer of ours and a chapter of a book I've been asked to write. I don't normally say much when topics of discussion come around to products we make, but if you want an easy to manage reporting solution for an enterprise Exchange shop or a low cost messaging continuity solution for your Exchange environment then have we go the solution for you! ;) Yes, something like KVS or one of its competitors would be a much more adequate solution. Not inexpensive to implement, but it will pay for itself several times over the first time you have to comply with a discovery request. BTW, in general it's been my experience that the other guy's lawyer won't be the one looking over your should while you do discovery.. But YMMV. > -Original Message- > From: James Liddil [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Friday, October 04, 2002 1:00 PM > To: Exchange Discussions > Subject: RE: Policy issue > > > I agree. So if I read right you are suggesting this should > be a completely automated process. So I should buy into a > KVS type solution or does messageone have something. :-). > I'd be happy to use the Mailbox Manager in E2K if I was > allowed to. And yes I know it's my job, but I sure the heck > don't want to spend a week or more manually going through our > IS with a lawyer looking over my shoulder. > > Jim > > > -Original Message- > > From: Chris Scharff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > Sent: Friday, October 04, 2002 1:44 PM > > To: Exchange Discussions > > Subject: RE: Policy issue > > > > > > Well, I'd join management in their resistance of an IT guy, > > no matter how talented being the one to manually delete mail > > on a retention period, even if the policy contains proper > > exclusions for items which need to be retained longer (some > > of which need to be retained significanly longer than a 5 > > year tape rotation). Sorry, I don't think it's an efficient > > use of someone that talented and it's too prone to human error. > > > > > -Original Message- > > > From: James Liddil [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > > Sent: Friday, October 04, 2002 11:57 AM > > > To: Exchange Discussions > > > Subject: RE: Policy issue > > > > > > > > > Our lawyer is quite familiar with our business and what > we do. Not > > > to defend lawyers or anything. They are well versed in > the 21CFR11 > > > and FDA issues we face along with the legal implications > of having > > > "no policy" as we do now. So by default our policy for me > to follow > > > becomes keep everything and make sure backups are archived for 5 > > > years. No system is perfect but the fact is that if you have no > > > policy it then gives a lawyer who walks in the door for > "discovery" > > > purposes the right to sit and look over my shoulder while I go > > > through all the IS and tapes. > > > > > > Jim > > > > > > > -Original Message- > > > > From: Chris Scharff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > > > Sent: Friday, October 04, 2002 12:33 PM > > > > To: Exchange Discussions > > > > Subject: RE: Policy issue > > > > > > > > > > > > It's unlikely that you or the system itself has the ability to > > > > delete mail in accordance with a well written retention > > policy (no > > > > offense, I've been researching this subject for a book for quite > > > > some time). If your legal counsel has simply given you a > > retention > > > > policy of something like 'everything older than 120 days > > should go' > > > > then I'd respectfully suggest you ask your legal counsel > > to revisit > > > > the policy as it's woefully inadequate.. especially for > a company > > > > such as yours. > > > > > > > > -Original Message- > > > > From: James Liddil > > > > To: Exchange Discussions > > > > Sent: 10/4/2002 9:00 AM > > > > Subject: Policy issue > > > > > > > > I seem to be facing resistance from management on > > implementation of > > > > an e-mail policy. Despite everything our legal counsel > > provided and > > > > such are not ready to go forward. > > > > They have a problem with either the system of myself deleting > > > > mail that past the retention period. Some feel that a member > > > > of management should be the one deleting the e-mail. I'm > > > > sure you can see what's wrong with that picture. I am > > > > looking for advice, besides sit on my hands and wait until an > > > > event happens that forces them to implement a policy. > > > > _ > > 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:/
RE: Policy issue
I agree. So if I read right you are suggesting this should be a completely automated process. So I should buy into a KVS type solution or does messageone have something. :-). I'd be happy to use the Mailbox Manager in E2K if I was allowed to. And yes I know it's my job, but I sure the heck don't want to spend a week or more manually going through our IS with a lawyer looking over my shoulder. Jim > -Original Message- > From: Chris Scharff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Friday, October 04, 2002 1:44 PM > To: Exchange Discussions > Subject: RE: Policy issue > > > Well, I'd join management in their resistance of an IT guy, > no matter how talented being the one to manually delete mail > on a retention period, even if the policy contains proper > exclusions for items which need to be retained longer (some > of which need to be retained significanly longer than a 5 > year tape rotation). Sorry, I don't think it's an efficient > use of someone that talented and it's too prone to human error. > > > -Original Message- > > From: James Liddil [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > Sent: Friday, October 04, 2002 11:57 AM > > To: Exchange Discussions > > Subject: RE: Policy issue > > > > > > Our lawyer is quite familiar with our business and what we > > do. Not to defend lawyers or anything. They are well versed > > in the 21CFR11 and FDA issues we face along with the legal > > implications of having "no policy" as we do now. So by > > default our policy for me to follow becomes keep everything > > and make sure backups are archived for 5 years. No system is > > perfect but the fact is that if you have no policy it then > > gives a lawyer who walks in the door for "discovery" purposes > > the right to sit and look over my shoulder while I go through > > all the IS and tapes. > > > > Jim > > > > > -Original Message- > > > From: Chris Scharff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > > Sent: Friday, October 04, 2002 12:33 PM > > > To: Exchange Discussions > > > Subject: RE: Policy issue > > > > > > > > > It's unlikely that you or the system itself has the ability to > > > delete mail in accordance with a well written retention > policy (no > > > offense, I've been researching this subject for a book for quite > > > some time). If your legal counsel has simply given you a > retention > > > policy of something like 'everything older than 120 days > should go' > > > then I'd respectfully suggest you ask your legal counsel > to revisit > > > the policy as it's woefully inadequate.. especially for a company > > > such as yours. > > > > > > -Original Message- > > > From: James Liddil > > > To: Exchange Discussions > > > Sent: 10/4/2002 9:00 AM > > > Subject: Policy issue > > > > > > I seem to be facing resistance from management on > implementation of > > > an e-mail policy. Despite everything our legal counsel > provided and > > > such are not ready to go forward. > > > They have a problem with either the system of myself deleting > > > mail that past the retention period. Some feel that a member > > > of management should be the one deleting the e-mail. I'm > > > sure you can see what's wrong with that picture. I am > > > looking for advice, besides sit on my hands and wait until an > > > event happens that forces them to implement a policy. > > _ > 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: Policy issue
As someone else said, document yourself and your objections (in e-mail and on paper) with copies to appropriate parties. You can bet the legal dept. is doing exactly that and for the same reason. - Original Message - From: "James Liddil" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Exchange Discussions" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Friday, October 04, 2002 11:57 AM Subject: RE: Policy issue Our lawyer is quite familiar with our business and what we do. Not to defend lawyers or anything. They are well versed in the 21CFR11 and FDA issues we face along with the legal implications of having "no policy" as we do now. So by default our policy for me to follow becomes keep everything and make sure backups are archived for 5 years. No system is perfect but the fact is that if you have no policy it then gives a lawyer who walks in the door for "discovery" purposes the right to sit and look over my shoulder while I go through all the IS and tapes. Jim > -Original Message- > From: Chris Scharff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Friday, October 04, 2002 12:33 PM > To: Exchange Discussions > Subject: RE: Policy issue > > > It's unlikely that you or the system itself has the ability > to delete mail in accordance with a well written retention > policy (no offense, I've been researching this subject for a > book for quite some time). If your legal counsel has simply > given you a retention policy of something like 'everything > older than 120 days should go' then I'd respectfully suggest > you ask your legal counsel to revisit the policy as it's > woefully inadequate.. especially for a company such as yours. > > -Original Message- > From: James Liddil > To: Exchange Discussions > Sent: 10/4/2002 9:00 AM > Subject: Policy issue > > I seem to be facing resistance from management on > implementation of an e-mail policy. Despite everything our > legal counsel provided and such are not ready to go forward. > They have a problem with either the system of myself deleting > mail that past the retention period. Some feel that a member > of management should be the one deleting the e-mail. I'm > sure you can see what's wrong with that picture. I am > looking for advice, besides sit on my hands and wait until an > event happens that forces them to implement a policy. > > _ > 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]
E2k SP3 Problem with SMTP address with a dash ?
Server is W2k sp3, Exchange 2k sp3, IE 6.1 Having problems sending mail to domains that have a dash in them (ie [EMAIL PROTECTED]) they just sit in the queue. It appears when I track them that smtp is attempting to connect (I see the remote server name in the message tracking output) but the event viewer shows the connection manager that the remote host dropped the connection. Anyone else having this problem, or thoughts on how to resolve ?? _ 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: Policy issue
Well, I'd join management in their resistance of an IT guy, no matter how talented being the one to manually delete mail on a retention period, even if the policy contains proper exclusions for items which need to be retained longer (some of which need to be retained significanly longer than a 5 year tape rotation). Sorry, I don't think it's an efficient use of someone that talented and it's too prone to human error. > -Original Message- > From: James Liddil [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Friday, October 04, 2002 11:57 AM > To: Exchange Discussions > Subject: RE: Policy issue > > > Our lawyer is quite familiar with our business and what we > do. Not to defend lawyers or anything. They are well versed > in the 21CFR11 and FDA issues we face along with the legal > implications of having "no policy" as we do now. So by > default our policy for me to follow becomes keep everything > and make sure backups are archived for 5 years. No system is > perfect but the fact is that if you have no policy it then > gives a lawyer who walks in the door for "discovery" purposes > the right to sit and look over my shoulder while I go through > all the IS and tapes. > > Jim > > > -Original Message- > > From: Chris Scharff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > Sent: Friday, October 04, 2002 12:33 PM > > To: Exchange Discussions > > Subject: RE: Policy issue > > > > > > It's unlikely that you or the system itself has the ability > > to delete mail in accordance with a well written retention > > policy (no offense, I've been researching this subject for a > > book for quite some time). If your legal counsel has simply > > given you a retention policy of something like 'everything > > older than 120 days should go' then I'd respectfully suggest > > you ask your legal counsel to revisit the policy as it's > > woefully inadequate.. especially for a company such as yours. > > > > -Original Message- > > From: James Liddil > > To: Exchange Discussions > > Sent: 10/4/2002 9:00 AM > > Subject: Policy issue > > > > I seem to be facing resistance from management on > > implementation of an e-mail policy. Despite everything our > > legal counsel provided and such are not ready to go forward. > > They have a problem with either the system of myself deleting > > mail that past the retention period. Some feel that a member > > of management should be the one deleting the e-mail. I'm > > sure you can see what's wrong with that picture. I am > > looking for advice, besides sit on my hands and wait until an > > event happens that forces them to implement a policy. _ 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: Policy issue
I think you have some lawyers that are not quite up to snuff on this topic. You could do their homework for them, but of course that would be practicing law. You should have a policy. They should be highly motivated to have you delete any and all old digital data (especially mail) that you can, with whatever legal and contractual constraints that you have to the contrary (some folks, like people in public agencies, are often legally prevented from deleting). The major problem is NOT what is in the mail, but rather the potential for huge discovery costs, and establishing context for whatever disjointed things are found in there. The potential cost hit is huge. We did not adopt a policy in this regard through any great wisdom or foresight. We waited until we had been hit by discovery activities about three times in one year (it was over a decade ago). But that bad year was enough to get us off the dime. -Original Message- From: James Liddil [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, October 04, 2002 7:00 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Policy issue I seem to be facing resistance from management on implementation of an e-mail policy. Despite everything our legal counsel provided and such are not ready to go forward. They have a problem with either the system of myself deleting mail that past the retention period. Some feel that a member of management should be the one deleting the e-mail. I'm sure you can see what's wrong with that picture. I am looking for advice, besides sit on my hands and wait until an event happens that forces them to implement a policy. 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: Policy issue
Our lawyer is quite familiar with our business and what we do. Not to defend lawyers or anything. They are well versed in the 21CFR11 and FDA issues we face along with the legal implications of having "no policy" as we do now. So by default our policy for me to follow becomes keep everything and make sure backups are archived for 5 years. No system is perfect but the fact is that if you have no policy it then gives a lawyer who walks in the door for "discovery" purposes the right to sit and look over my shoulder while I go through all the IS and tapes. Jim > -Original Message- > From: Chris Scharff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Friday, October 04, 2002 12:33 PM > To: Exchange Discussions > Subject: RE: Policy issue > > > It's unlikely that you or the system itself has the ability > to delete mail in accordance with a well written retention > policy (no offense, I've been researching this subject for a > book for quite some time). If your legal counsel has simply > given you a retention policy of something like 'everything > older than 120 days should go' then I'd respectfully suggest > you ask your legal counsel to revisit the policy as it's > woefully inadequate.. especially for a company such as yours. > > -Original Message- > From: James Liddil > To: Exchange Discussions > Sent: 10/4/2002 9:00 AM > Subject: Policy issue > > I seem to be facing resistance from management on > implementation of an e-mail policy. Despite everything our > legal counsel provided and such are not ready to go forward. > They have a problem with either the system of myself deleting > mail that past the retention period. Some feel that a member > of management should be the one deleting the e-mail. I'm > sure you can see what's wrong with that picture. I am > looking for advice, besides sit on my hands and wait until an > event happens that forces them to implement a policy. > > _ > 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: lost in exchange
The Lotus Notes connector in Exchange ought to achieve objective 1. By contact info do you mean the GAL? If so the Notes connector ought to allow for this as well. Without a connector though the directory part should be reasonably straightforward either by writing your own directory synchronization tool or using one off of the shelf (MMS, SimpleSync, etc.). As for calendaring... if your notes client supports sending meeting requests in iCal format, that shoudl work without a connector as well, but the other users free/busy information would not be available without an amazing boatload of work. -Original Message- From: johnny li To: Exchange Discussions Sent: 10/4/2002 1:18 AM Subject: lost in exchange My company is partnering with another company. We both will be using exchange 2000. Currently we are on Lotus notes and they are on exchange 2000. Upper managment has made a few requests. I need help to find out if what the want is feasible 1) We need to be able to write calendar events to the other companies employees. Being able to modify those requests made would be nice also. But I am only required to make new calendar events. 2) We need to be able to pull the other companies or users contacts from their mail server. We just need to be able to see this info not write anything. there will be no trust or any type of connectors setup at all between us. basically all i can do is open up ports on exchange company needed to access the calendar and contact list. We can setup some type of user on there server with exchange admin rights. our programmers have an api that can talk to exchange i believe its just how do i set up the admin account on the box? My thoughts on how to do this is to set up an account on their server with admin rights for exchange and allow only writeing to calendar events and view only to contacts list. The problem is I dont know if this is possible to do. I have limited experience with exchange. I manage Lotus Notes usually but have been thrown into doing this. Im up for the challenge I just need some direction. Any help would be appreciated. Thanks Johnny _ 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: Policy issue
It's unlikely that you or the system itself has the ability to delete mail in accordance with a well written retention policy (no offense, I've been researching this subject for a book for quite some time). If your legal counsel has simply given you a retention policy of something like 'everything older than 120 days should go' then I'd respectfully suggest you ask your legal counsel to revisit the policy as it's woefully inadequate.. especially for a company such as yours. -Original Message- From: James Liddil To: Exchange Discussions Sent: 10/4/2002 9:00 AM Subject: Policy issue I seem to be facing resistance from management on implementation of an e-mail policy. Despite everything our legal counsel provided and such are not ready to go forward. They have a problem with either the system of myself deleting mail that past the retention period. Some feel that a member of management should be the one deleting the e-mail. I'm sure you can see what's wrong with that picture. I am looking for advice, besides sit on my hands and wait until an event happens that forces them to implement a policy. _ 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: SMTP to aol.com
I hate to be the bearer of bad news Bubba, but according to this query at SamSpade.org, you're still being blacklisted by the Fiveten list: http://www.samspade.org/t/rbl?a=WOH.RR.COM -Original Message- From: Chris H [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, October 03, 2002 3:43 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Re: SMTP to aol.com I feel your pain. I have been working for close to 6 months now to try to solve that problem. We have reverse DNS. You dont get a NDR; nothing, it just never gets there. If I telnet into their smtp server all goes okay but again the mail never shows up in the recipient's inbox and I have tried quite a few. I finally found a website that had us listed as a blackhole and got removed from it. I even talked to AOL (703-265-4670 - postmaster line) and they ran a check on my subnet against their database and it came up clean. So we are still looking for an answer. Believe me I would rather NOT send to AOL but we sell to the consumer and our customer service dept. gets emails everyday from a domain containing 12 million users -- aol.com. :( - Original Message - From: "Daniel L. Miller" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Exchange Discussions" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Thursday, October 03, 2002 1:38 PM Subject: SMTP to aol.com What would cause my messages to AOL addresses to be rejected by AOL? I can send reliably to any other domain. Daniel _ 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: Policy issue
Good luck - trying to do the same thing myself. I had assumed you'd already gotten the OK for a policy. Try making an argument in terms of money - are you using Enterprise version? If not, explain the growth patterns you're seeing, hard limit on the Standard IS, and how much it'd cost to upgrade to Enterprise, buy more disks, or another server vs. just imposing limits (no cost, but inconvenience and user responsibility). It's helped me to try and show the money people the inevitability of having limits, and also to give them the power to choose their own. Unfortunately, if the money folks decide that the business needs a holy freakin' ton of mail, they'll at least know what it'll cost to support it. John J. Steniger Network and Security Manager Familymeds, Inc. Phone: 860-676-1222 X633 Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.familymeds.com > -Original Message- > From: James Liddil [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Friday, October 04, 2002 11:18 AM > To: Exchange Discussions > Subject: RE: Policy issue > > > Because that would require that a policy be put in place to > force mail (or > even just inbox) limits. I can't get the powers that be to > even let the > server do this via implementing a policy. > > Jim > > > -Original Message- > > From: John Steniger [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > Sent: Friday, October 04, 2002 10:37 AM > > To: Exchange Discussions > > Subject: RE: Policy issue > > > > > > Why not set limits on the individual mailboxes and leave the > > management up to the mailbox owners as they get full? > > > > John J. Steniger > > > > > > > > > -Original Message- > > > From: James Liddil [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > > Sent: Friday, October 04, 2002 10:00 AM > > > To: Exchange Discussions > > > Subject: Policy issue > > > > > > > > > I seem to be facing resistance from management on > > > implementation of an e-mail > > > policy. Despite everything our legal counsel provided and > > > such are not ready > > > to go forward. They have a problem with either the system of > > > myself deleting > > > mail that past the retention period. Some feel that a member > > > of management > > > should be the one deleting the e-mail. I'm sure you can see > > > what's wrong > > > with that picture. I am looking for advice, besides sit on > > > my hands and wait > > > until an event happens that forces them to implement a policy. > > > > > > 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] > _ 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: Policy issue
If your policy is written down somewhere in the Standards and Practices for your infrastructure, then you have nothing to worry about. Legally anyhow. The people who break the standards are the one who wrote them or have lunch with the ones who did. I wouldn't do a thing until specifically told so and stated earlier document as much as possible to cover your as$ and support your argument. - Original Message - From: "James Liddil" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Exchange Discussions" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Friday, October 04, 2002 10:18 AM Subject: RE: Policy issue Because that would require that a policy be put in place to force mail (or even just inbox) limits. I can't get the powers that be to even let the server do this via implementing a policy. Jim > -Original Message- > From: John Steniger [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Friday, October 04, 2002 10:37 AM > To: Exchange Discussions > Subject: RE: Policy issue > > > Why not set limits on the individual mailboxes and leave the > management up to the mailbox owners as they get full? > > John J. Steniger > > > > > -Original Message- > > From: James Liddil [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > Sent: Friday, October 04, 2002 10:00 AM > > To: Exchange Discussions > > Subject: Policy issue > > > > > > I seem to be facing resistance from management on > > implementation of an e-mail > > policy. Despite everything our legal counsel provided and > > such are not ready > > to go forward. They have a problem with either the system of > > myself deleting > > mail that past the retention period. Some feel that a member > > of management > > should be the one deleting the e-mail. I'm sure you can see > > what's wrong > > with that picture. I am looking for advice, besides sit on > > my hands and wait > > until an event happens that forces them to implement a policy. > > > > 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] _ 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: Forms Registry Issue
Right click on public folders and choose System Folders -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Vijayakumar, T Sent: Friday, October 04, 2002 7:09 AM To: Exchange Discussions Cc: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]'; '[EMAIL PROTECTED]'; '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' Subject: Forms Registry Issue Hi All, I have Created Public Folder(Public tree and Public Store) in Exchange server 2000.I expanded the my Public folder i can see some entries but EFORMS REGISTRY is not there.If that is there then only i can create Organization Library. Is there any other way to get EFORMS REGISTRY. if any one knows about this pls let me know. Thanx -Vijay _ 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: Multiple People recieving Meeting Requests
Or delegates of delegates, etc. -Peter -Original Message- From: Chris Levis [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, October 04, 2002 7:30 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Multiple People recieving Meeting Requests The other people are probably delegates. > -Original Message- > From: Julian Brunt [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Friday, October 04, 2002 8:46 AM > To: Exchange Discussions > Subject: Multiple People recieving Meeting Requests > > > All > > I am confused: > I send a meeting request to 1 user and 3 receive the invitation. > > I have just tested sending to the same user from > someone else and again 3 users receive the invitation. > > I have looked at their mailbox in Outlook and in the > AD, but I can't find any reason for this to happen. > > Does anyone have any ideas? > > Using Office XP SP2 > Exchange Server 2000 SP2 > Windows 2000 AD > > _ > 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] __ 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]
Meeting Request not showing responses
I have an active/passive W2K sp2 E2K Sp2 cluster that usually runs without any problems. Today, one of the users called and said our meeting requests are no longer showing how many accepted the request and how many declined. This was working up until today as far as I know. I'm the only person who has rights to make any changes to the server. I've looked on MS knowledgebase, but couldn't find anything that matched. The event log hasn't logged any problems to help me out. Any ideas what to check? Thanks. Tara _ 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: Policy issue
Because that would require that a policy be put in place to force mail (or even just inbox) limits. I can't get the powers that be to even let the server do this via implementing a policy. Jim > -Original Message- > From: John Steniger [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Friday, October 04, 2002 10:37 AM > To: Exchange Discussions > Subject: RE: Policy issue > > > Why not set limits on the individual mailboxes and leave the > management up to the mailbox owners as they get full? > > John J. Steniger > > > > > -Original Message- > > From: James Liddil [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > Sent: Friday, October 04, 2002 10:00 AM > > To: Exchange Discussions > > Subject: Policy issue > > > > > > I seem to be facing resistance from management on > > implementation of an e-mail > > policy. Despite everything our legal counsel provided and > > such are not ready > > to go forward. They have a problem with either the system of > > myself deleting > > mail that past the retention period. Some feel that a member > > of management > > should be the one deleting the e-mail. I'm sure you can see > > what's wrong > > with that picture. I am looking for advice, besides sit on > > my hands and wait > > until an event happens that forces them to implement a policy. > > > > 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: win2k sp2 smtp server error 5.0.0
Our problem has been resolved by a colleague. http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;en-us;Q249104 explains it, although initially we were just getting the 5.0.0 errors, we got a few mentioning DNS. Rob Ellis Network Manager Profectus IT Tel 023 9224 7960 Mob 07974 111867 -Original Message- From: Kevin Cobb [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 02 October 2002 21:07 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: win2k sp2 smtp server error 5.0.0 I seem to be having the same issue with Exchange not mailing some domains, while mailing others just fine. (I also seen the same from time to time with Hotmail).What I've tracked down and believe to be happening is when a primary mx record is not answering, our exchange 2000 server is not attempting to mail to the secondary server. I'm seeing this on two other exchange 2000 servers as well. I fired up the older lotus notes server and watched the logs as it attempted mailing to the "bad domain". The logs show that the initial mx record was attempted and failed, but then connected to the secondary and mail is transferred. Unfortuantely I cannot find any logs of this nature in exchange to show the process, but every domain in the "retry queue" with "Connection Dropped by the Remote Host" has a primary MX record that is not responding. Anyone have any clues on what might be going on on the Exchange box there? It's set up behind an ISA server. Has local and remote DNS lookup. Can resolve NSLOOKUPs from the exchange server. It just doesn't seem to want to attempt a secondary MX record if the primary fails. Any ideas would be greatly appreciated, and would save hairs on my head! Kevin Cobb Network Manager (703) 449-7600 > Updated -=20 > > I think I might have found the problem: > > http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=3Dkb;en-us;Q240832 > > but if I set it to use HELO, I don't get the option for it to use EHLO, > so I would lose the ability to send out as ESMTP?? > > > > Rob Ellis=20 > Network Manager=20 > Profectus IT=20 > Tel 023 9224 7960=20 > Mob 07974 111867 > > > -Original Message- > From: Rob Ellis=20 > Sent: 26 September 2002 15:37 > To: Exchange Discussions > Subject: win2k sp2 smtp server error 5.0.0 > > Using a Win2K sp2 box in our DMZ running the MS smtp server, as a relay > for our E2K server. All incoming traffic flows fine, but we are getting > a number of NDRs such as: > > The e-mail system was unable to deliver the message, but did not report > a specific reason. Check the address and try again. If it still fails, > contact your system administrator. > > unrecognized> > > this is happening for a variety of domain names, including hotmail.com > (which I'm not that worried about, but some of the domains are actually > 'proper' domains.) > > Could it be that the IP that our server sits on has been blacklisted by > certain ISPs? > > > > Rob Ellis=20 > Network Manager=20 > Profectus IT=20 > Tel 023 9224 7960=20 > Mob 07974 111867 > > > > _ > 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: Hriday Faiku
Hriday is now here SoCal Smoggy Mickey Coughs MEC Badge.On -Original Message- From: Ammona Peuk [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, October 04, 2002 10:48 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Hriday Faiku Oh Tentacled One A kinder gentler GC? Just eat the bastards _ 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]
RE: Backing up Exchange 5.5
Try Netbackup works on Unix or NT. Cheers Paul Standards are like toothbrushes, everyone wants one but not yours -Original Message- From: Tony Hlabse [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 05 October 2002 03:33 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Re: Backing up Exchange 5.5 I was exposed recently to TSM Tivoli. I did about a 20-30 plus restores half of those from scratch. "Nothing but net". Pardon the pun. - Original Message - From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Exchange Discussions" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Friday, October 04, 2002 6:36 AM Subject: RE: Backing up Exchange 5.5 Try HP OmniBack II. Don't know the price but works just great. -Original Message- From: Fioon [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, October 04, 2002 9:07 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Backing up Exchange 5.5 It's BrightStor , same under CA .. Is ArcServe 2000 really that bad ? I've just tried, and it turned out not too bad. On the middle of discussing want to purchase or not !! -Original Message- From: William Lefkovics [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, October 04, 2002 2:53 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Backing up Exchange 5.5 Brightwhore? Same crap. New name. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Fioon Sent: Thursday, October 03, 2002 9:03 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Backing up Exchange 5.5 I've download the BE trial copy , but it can't run. Funny, hang on Self Extract. Download again, same thing happened again. Any opinion on new ArcServe2000 BrightStore for the Disaster Recovery on Exchange 5.5 Issue ? Fin -Original Message- From: Daniel Chenault [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, October 03, 2002 11:53 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Re: Backing up Exchange 5.5 Yes, as a google search would have shown. - Original Message - From: "Fioon" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Exchange Discussions" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Thursday, October 03, 2002 1:09 AM Subject: RE: Backing up Exchange 5.5 > Hi, > > May i know which third party are you guys talking about on this "Backup > Exec" ? > It's Veritas ?? > > Thanks _ 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 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]
E2K migration and deleted messages reappearing
We've had several users complain that messages they deleted "months ago" are reappearing in their folders after they are migrated from Ex55 to E2K (using the migration wizard). Our environment: E2K SP3 / W2K SP2 Ex55 SP4/ NT4 SP6 (Mixed Mode) My first guess would be this is caused by an OST/PST or by corrupt messages on the Ex55 store, but it's just a guess. Any further information would be greatly appreciated. -John O'Harra Delta Technology mailto:[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]
OWA
Subject: OWA Hi, Having just completed my first Exchange 2000 installation, everything seems to be working fine as long as I log into the system locally. I basically have a member server (with exchange) running within a w2k domain. Logging into another machine gives me an access denied error, have alter the permissions on the default directory and using IE 6.0 causes OWA to hang (loading message) - Netscape seem to work fine as well as the outlook client. Has anyone experienced this before and how did you get around it - many thanks Amos. /'^'\ ( o o ) ---oOOO-OOOo-- _ 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: IS 70GB and growing....
Would be tempted to look at things like restore time SLA, backup window time etc. -Original Message- From: Mark Hanji [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Posted At: 04 October 2002 09:36 Posted To: Exchange List Conversation: IS 70GB and growing Subject: Re: IS 70GB and growing I am reading all this thread, and still can't find which part made you so angry. How should the question be asked, so you would be so nice, to provide some information.. - Original Message - From: "Ed Crowley" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Exchange Discussions" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Thursday, October 03, 2002 5:25 AM Subject: RE: IS 70GB and growing > Heaven help him. > > Ed Crowley MCSE+I MVP > Technical Consultant > hp Services > "There are seldom good technological solutions to behavioral problems." > > > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Mark Hanji > Sent: Tuesday, October 01, 2002 1:00 PM > To: Exchange Discussions > Subject: Re: IS 70GB and growing > > > Hi. > > It may be some one you know. > > > - Original Message - > From: "Ed Crowley" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: "Exchange Discussions" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent: Monday, September 30, 2002 6:39 PM > Subject: RE: IS 70GB and growing > > > > Heaven help the consultant Hanji hires. > > > > Ed Crowley MCSE+Internet MVP kcCC+I > > Tech Consultant > > hp Services > > Protecting the world from PSTs and Bricked Backups! > > > > > > -Original Message- > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Great Cthulhu > > > Jones > > Sent: Monday, September 30, 2002 5:01 AM > > To: Exchange Discussions > > Subject: RE: IS 70GB and growing > > > > > > I vote Hanji hires a consultant to fix the problem. He's not showing > > much improvement... > > > > (:= > > > > -Original Message- > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Couch, Nate > > Sent: Monday, September 30, 2002 6:55 AM > > To: Exchange Discussions > > Subject: RE: IS 70GB and growing > > > > > > I vote for two servers. > > > > Nate Couch > > EDS Messaging > > > > > -- > > > From: Great Cthulhu Jones > > > Reply To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > Sent: Sunday, September 29, 2002 20:20 > > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > Subject: RE: IS 70GB and growing > > > > > > Who cares about it, though? If you need two servers, you need two > > > servers. If not, buy more hard drives. > > > > > > (:= > > > > > > -Original Message- > > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Sakti > > > Chakravarty (Senteq) > > > Sent: Sunday, September 29, 2002 6:44 PM > > > To: Exchange Discussions > > > Subject: RE: IS 70GB and growing > > > > > > > > > If I recall correctly, using the Move Mailbox utility retains SIS. > > > > > > -Original Message- > > > From: Mark Hanji [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > > Sent: Monday, 30 September 2002 6:29 AM > > > To: Exchange Discussions > > > Subject: IS 70GB and growing > > > > > > > > > Hi guys. > > > > > > I have an exchange 5.5 on a strong machine. The IS is over 73GB > > > (total > > > > > of 500 users). I am thinking whether it is the right move to split > > > this box into two servers. > > > The main problem is that I will loose SIS... > > > On the other hand, I will have two smaller databases. > > > > > > I am sure some of you had this scenario in the past. I would like to > > > hear your opinions. In case it is important, the IS is going to be > > > moved to EMC box in 3 months > > > (part of storage project). > > > > > > I am mostly intersted hearing from happy users with such big IS (are > > > there?!) > > > > > > Thanks! > > > > > > > > > _ > > > 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 PROTECTE
Command line Backup of Ex2k
Err how is it done using ntbackup? Can't use ntbackup /IS "servername" anymore. I know to use the systemstate parameter, but don't know how to get the IS storage groups backed up. _ 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]
lost in exchange
My company is partnering with another company. We both will be using exchange 2000. Currently we are on Lotus notes and they are on exchange 2000. Upper managment has made a few requests. I need help to find out if what the want is feasible 1) We need to be able to write calendar events to the other companies employees. Being able to modify those requests made would be nice also. But I am only required to make new calendar events. 2) We need to be able to pull the other companies or users contacts from their mail server. We just need to be able to see this info not write anything. there will be no trust or any type of connectors setup at all between us. basically all i can do is open up ports on exchange company needed to access the calendar and contact list. We can setup some type of user on there server with exchange admin rights. our programmers have an api that can talk to exchange i believe its just how do i set up the admin account on the box? My thoughts on how to do this is to set up an account on their server with admin rights for exchange and allow only writeing to calendar events and view only to contacts list. The problem is I dont know if this is possible to do. I have limited experience with exchange. I manage Lotus Notes usually but have been thrown into doing this. Im up for the challenge I just need some direction. Any help would be appreciated. Thanks Johnny _ Join the worldÂ’s largest e-mail service with MSN Hotmail. http://www.hotmail.com _ 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 help access denied in OWA
Q317471: http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;en-us;Q317471 In case you have a proxy between your users and exchange: Q292723: http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;en-us;Q292723 Rump -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Tony Hlabse Sent: Friday, October 04, 2002 08:37 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Re: Need help access denied in OWA Importance: High A little more info needed. Are you saying they get the logon screen then immediately goes to access denied screen without any input? - Original Message - From: "Todd Youngbauer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Exchange Discussions" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Thursday, October 03, 2002 11:34 AM Subject: Need help access denied in OWA > I am having issues where I can not get anyone logged into OWA on a new > Exchange 2000 server. I have compared all of the settings on it to > other servers I have that are working and can not find any > differences. It is and Exchange 2000 Enterprise server that is > running on W2k as a member server. When you log in you get 3 prompt > and then it goes to access is denied. Any thoughts?/ > > Thanks > Todd > > _ > 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]
Command line Backup of Ex2k
Err how is it done using ntbackup? Can't use ntbackup /IS "servername" anymore. I know to use the systemstate parameter, but don't know how to get the IS storage groups backed up. _ 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]
Hriday Faiku
Oh Tentacled One A kinder gentler GC? Just eat the bastards _ 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: win2k sp2 smtp server error 5.0.0
I seem to be having the same issue with Exchange not mailing some domains, while mailing others just fine. (I also seen the same from time to time with Hotmail).What I've tracked down and believe to be happening is when a primary mx record is not answering, our exchange 2000 server is not attempting to mail to the secondary server. I'm seeing this on two other exchange 2000 servers as well. I fired up the older lotus notes server and watched the logs as it attempted mailing to the "bad domain". The logs show that the initial mx record was attempted and failed, but then connected to the secondary and mail is transferred. Unfortuantely I cannot find any logs of this nature in exchange to show the process, but every domain in the "retry queue" with "Connection Dropped by the Remote Host" has a primary MX record that is not responding. Anyone have any clues on what might be going on on the Exchange box there? It's set up behind an ISA server. Has local and remote DNS lookup. Can resolve NSLOOKUPs from the exchange server. It just doesn't seem to want to attempt a secondary MX record if the primary fails. Any ideas would be greatly appreciated, and would save hairs on my head! Kevin Cobb Network Manager (703) 449-7600 > Updated -=20 > > I think I might have found the problem: > > http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=3Dkb;en-us;Q240832 > > but if I set it to use HELO, I don't get the option for it to use EHLO, > so I would lose the ability to send out as ESMTP?? > > > > Rob Ellis=20 > Network Manager=20 > Profectus IT=20 > Tel 023 9224 7960=20 > Mob 07974 111867 > > > -Original Message- > From: Rob Ellis=20 > Sent: 26 September 2002 15:37 > To: Exchange Discussions > Subject: win2k sp2 smtp server error 5.0.0 > > Using a Win2K sp2 box in our DMZ running the MS smtp server, as a relay > for our E2K server. All incoming traffic flows fine, but we are getting > a number of NDRs such as: > > The e-mail system was unable to deliver the message, but did not report > a specific reason. Check the address and try again. If it still fails, > contact your system administrator. > > unrecognized> > > this is happening for a variety of domain names, including hotmail.com > (which I'm not that worried about, but some of the domains are actually > 'proper' domains.) > > Could it be that the IP that our server sits on has been blacklisted by > certain ISPs? > > > > Rob Ellis=20 > Network Manager=20 > Profectus IT=20 > Tel 023 9224 7960=20 > Mob 07974 111867 > > > > _ > 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: Policy issue
Why not set limits on the individual mailboxes and leave the management up to the mailbox owners as they get full? John J. Steniger > -Original Message- > From: James Liddil [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Friday, October 04, 2002 10:00 AM > To: Exchange Discussions > Subject: Policy issue > > > I seem to be facing resistance from management on > implementation of an e-mail > policy. Despite everything our legal counsel provided and > such are not ready > to go forward. They have a problem with either the system of > myself deleting > mail that past the retention period. Some feel that a member > of management > should be the one deleting the e-mail. I'm sure you can see > what's wrong > with that picture. I am looking for advice, besides sit on > my hands and wait > until an event happens that forces them to implement a policy. > > 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: Backing up Exchange 5.5
I was exposed recently to TSM Tivoli. I did about a 20-30 plus restores half of those from scratch. "Nothing but net". Pardon the pun. - Original Message - From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Exchange Discussions" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Friday, October 04, 2002 6:36 AM Subject: RE: Backing up Exchange 5.5 Try HP OmniBack II. Don't know the price but works just great. -Original Message- From: Fioon [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, October 04, 2002 9:07 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Backing up Exchange 5.5 It's BrightStor , same under CA .. Is ArcServe 2000 really that bad ? I've just tried, and it turned out not too bad. On the middle of discussing want to purchase or not !! -Original Message- From: William Lefkovics [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, October 04, 2002 2:53 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Backing up Exchange 5.5 Brightwhore? Same crap. New name. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Fioon Sent: Thursday, October 03, 2002 9:03 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Backing up Exchange 5.5 I've download the BE trial copy , but it can't run. Funny, hang on Self Extract. Download again, same thing happened again. Any opinion on new ArcServe2000 BrightStore for the Disaster Recovery on Exchange 5.5 Issue ? Fin -Original Message- From: Daniel Chenault [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, October 03, 2002 11:53 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Re: Backing up Exchange 5.5 Yes, as a google search would have shown. - Original Message - From: "Fioon" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Exchange Discussions" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Thursday, October 03, 2002 1:09 AM Subject: RE: Backing up Exchange 5.5 > Hi, > > May i know which third party are you guys talking about on this "Backup > Exec" ? > It's Veritas ?? > > Thanks _ 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: Multiple People recieving Meeting Requests
The other people are probably delegates. > -Original Message- > From: Julian Brunt [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Friday, October 04, 2002 8:46 AM > To: Exchange Discussions > Subject: Multiple People recieving Meeting Requests > > > All > > I am confused: > I send a meeting request to 1 user and 3 receive the invitation. > > I have just tested sending to the same user from > someone else and again 3 users receive the invitation. > > I have looked at their mailbox in Outlook and in the > AD, but I can't find any reason for this to happen. > > Does anyone have any ideas? > > Using Office XP SP2 > Exchange Server 2000 SP2 > Windows 2000 AD > > _ > 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: Policy issue
CYA. Document everything so when the ducks come quacking you can pick them off one by one. -Original Message- From: James Liddil [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, October 04, 2002 10:00 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Policy issue I seem to be facing resistance from management on implementation of an e-mail policy. Despite everything our legal counsel provided and such are not ready to go forward. They have a problem with either the system of myself deleting mail that past the retention period. Some feel that a member of management should be the one deleting the e-mail. I'm sure you can see what's wrong with that picture. I am looking for advice, besides sit on my hands and wait until an event happens that forces them to implement a policy. 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 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]
Forms Registry Issue
Hi All, I have Created Public Folder(Public tree and Public Store) in Exchange server 2000.I expanded the my Public folder i can see some entries but EFORMS REGISTRY is not there.If that is there then only i can create Organization Library. Is there any other way to get EFORMS REGISTRY. if any one knows about this pls let me know. Thanx -Vijay _ 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: Multiple People recieving Meeting Requests
Delegates. -Original Message- From: Julian Brunt To: Exchange Discussions Sent: 10/4/2002 7:46 AM Subject: Multiple People recieving Meeting Requests All I am confused: I send a meeting request to 1 user and 3 receive the invitation. I have just tested sending to the same user from someone else and again 3 users receive the invitation. I have looked at their mailbox in Outlook and in the AD, but I can't find any reason for this to happen. Does anyone have any ideas? Using Office XP SP2 Exchange Server 2000 SP2 Windows 2000 AD _ 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]
Policy issue
I seem to be facing resistance from management on implementation of an e-mail policy. Despite everything our legal counsel provided and such are not ready to go forward. They have a problem with either the system of myself deleting mail that past the retention period. Some feel that a member of management should be the one deleting the e-mail. I'm sure you can see what's wrong with that picture. I am looking for advice, besides sit on my hands and wait until an event happens that forces them to implement a policy. 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: RAS Dial up issues
Sure. Well like I said we have 2 perle boxes that the users dial into. We then have a separate Exchange Server just for the dial in users. Its an EX2000 server. We have a checkpoint firewall but they don't have access to the Internet just the Intranet. The clients are all WXP and OXP. The users dial in via Outlook clicking send/receive and the dialer pops up. The email is then to be downloaded into an OST and then Outlook disconnects the dialer. The problem is that it hangs on different parts of the send/receive and sometimes it says it has 6 hours remaining even though there may only be one 25k email to download. When the users dial up manually and open Outlook and perform a send and receive it works fine. Also it works fine when they have a LAN connection. -Original Message- From: Tony Hlabse [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, October 04, 2002 3:34 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Re: RAS Dial up issues I have seen this before. But not with your setup. Is it all users or just some. It may have something with the blocking at a firewall somewhere either on where the users are connecting or your Firewall. It seems they connect and authenticate but then something is blocking traffic. Proxy? Not enough info. It would help this group if you explained how the infrastructure is setup. - Original Message - From: "Gonzalez, Alex" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Exchange Discussions" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Thursday, October 03, 2002 12:02 PM Subject: RE: RAS Dial up issues Yes and Yes -Original Message- From: Tony Hlabse [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, October 02, 2002 11:43 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Re: RAS Dial up issues Did it ever work. Is the Perl Ras boxes new? - Original Message - From: "Gonzalez, Alex" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Exchange Discussions" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Thursday, October 03, 2002 10:06 AM Subject: RAS Dial up issues We currently are having an issue when users dial up by doing a send/receive in Outlook their services hang while Outlook is trying to synchronize their inbox. It looks like data is transferring but there is only like 1 email in their box and it is telling them that they have about 6 hours to go. They are Outlook XP Clients on EX2000 Server with Perle Ras Boxes. We are running RADIUS. This is a huge issue so I hope you can help. Thanks _ 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: SMTP to aol.com
Just my two cents... The text below was copied from an MS paper a very long time ago and I keep it in a drafted email to send to my users when they insist our server is the problem because the recipient "never has any other problems receiving mail except from us". Obviously this doesn't apply in your case this time because of the blacklist issue but I think it's a good thing to keep around so you can reply "It's not us" for those times when it really isn't your server with the issue. Official looking text that comes direct from MS like this usually shuts my users up faster than an actual explanation would. 4.4.7 Possible Cause: The message in the queue has expired. The sending server tried to relay or deliver the message but the action was not completed before the message expiration time occurred. This message can also indicate that a message header limit has been reached on a remote server or some other protocol timeout occurred while communicating with the remote server. Troubleshooting: This message usually indicates an issue on the receiving server. Check the validity of the recipient address, and determine if the receiving server is configured to receive messages correctly. It may be necessary to reduce the number of recipients in the header of the message for the host to which you are receiving this error. If you resend the message, it is placed in the queue again. If the receiving server is up, the message is delivered. -Original Message- From: Daniel L. Miller [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Posted At: Thursday, October 03, 2002 7:03 PM Posted To: dsm_lists Conversation: SMTP to aol.com Subject: RE: SMTP to aol.com And to the questions of the NDR - Your message did not reach some or all of the intended recipients. Subject: Testing Sent: 10/3/2002 10:25 AM The following recipient(s) could not be reached: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' on 10/3/2002 12:44 PM Could not deliver the message in the time limit specified. Please retry or contact your administrator. Daniel NOTICE: This e-mail message and any attachment to this e-mail message contains confidential information that may be legally privileged. If you are not the intended recipient, you must not review, retransmit, convert to hard copy, copy, use or disseminate this e-mail or any attachments to it. If you have received this e-mail in error, please notify us immediately by return e-mail or by telephone at 954-764-6660 and delete this message. Please note that if this e-mail message contains a forwarded message or is a reply to a prior message, some or all of the contents of this message or any attachments may not have been produced by Ruden, McClosky, Smith, Schuster, & Russell, P.A. _ 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: New Exchange Server
Wow. I thought my name was bad :) Everyone thinks it is A-U-drey. -Original Message- From: Andrea Coppini [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, October 04, 2002 5:21 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: New Exchange Server If you were referring to me, I'll show you my willy... Regards _MR._ Andrea Coppini -Original Message- From: Jeremy I. Shannon [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 03 October 2002 7:39 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: New Exchange Server Maybe you should look into getting a better RAID controller. Her theory is right. -Original Message- From: Andrey Fyodorov [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, October 03, 2002 12:04 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: New Exchange Server Andrea, Please let me disagree. All I have to do is boot without the crashed page drive. Windows will create a temp page file on the C: drive and start (just confirmed this with my hardware guys). Then when time allows, the replacement drive can be added and the page file moved to it, with all the necessary reboots. I also disagree about the 0% downtime according to your scenario #2. Based on my experience, as soon as RAID failed on the page file volume, the server did a blue screen of death. So much for 0% downtime. *In theory* the server *should* have kept running. But it did not. So screw it. If it is going to crash anyway I am not going to spend extra money on it. -Original Message- From: Andrea Coppini [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, October 03, 2002 10:50 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: New Exchange Server Picture this: Your single (let's say IDE) pagefile drive fails, so your system crashes. You run down to your store or computer shop to buy a new drive (system still down) You install the disk in another machine (since Exchange might not start up without page drive) (system still down) You partition/format the drive (system still down) You install the new IDE disk in your exchange server (system still down) You start up Exchange. If you can afford all that downtime, go ahead and use a single drive. But now let's look at RAID1 swap: One of your swap disks fail.. Raid1 is broken so machine keeps running on one disk You take the bad disk Offline and pull it out You stroll and whistle your way down to your store or computer shop to get a new disk, maybe even have a couple of doughnuts on the way... You insert the new disk in your exchange server. run the RAID tools, rebuild the RAID. Pat yourself on the back for 0% downtime. -Original Message- From: Andrey Fyodorov [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 03 October 2002 4:23 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: New Exchange Server If it happened once it will probably happen again. I see no big benefit of putting page file on RAID. If I had a limited number of drive bays, I would rather have a separate RAID1 for transaction logs and a separate RAID5 for informations store database files; and if no more drive array bays are available for the page file volume - I would stick an IDE or SCSI drive in the CD-ROM bay or some other available space and connect it to the onboard controller and achieve better performance instead of perceived reliability. -Original Message- From: Robert Moir [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, October 03, 2002 9:38 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: New Exchange Server So because you once had a problem with RAID that caused it to stop working must mean that it's always unreliable for everyone else every time? Robert Moir IT Systems Engineer Luton Sixth Form College >SELECT * FROM users WHERE clue > 0 0 rows returned > -Original Message- > From: Andrey Fyodorov [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: 03 October 2002 13:53 > To: Exchange Discussions > Subject: RE: New Exchange Server > > > Do you need me to explain it all in small details? > > I had an Exchange server. Page file was on a separate RAID1 volume. > RAID1 broke. Server crashed with a blue screen. Having the page file > on RAID1 did not necessarily make it more reliable. Might as well have > had the page file on a single drive. Why did I write this? Because I > was answering someone else's remark "Placing the pagefile on a > separate drive sacrifices reliability for performance." > > Ok now? Can I go? > > -Original Message- > From: Ed Crowley [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Wednesday, October 02, 2002 11:52 PM > To: Exchange Discussions > Subject: RE: New Exchange Server > > > What does that have to do with Exchange? > > Ed Crowley MCSE+I MVP > Technical Consultant > hp Services > "There are seldom good technological solutions to behavioral > problems." > > > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Andrey > Fyodorov > Sent: Tuesday, October 01, 2002 9:04 AM > To: Exchange Discussions > Subject: RE: New Exchange Server > > > Well once I had a broken RAID1 on the page
RE: New Exchange Server
I would not deny that I probably had a crappy RAID controller BUT it was actually an Adaptec, not a crappy IDE/ATA. Anyway that was in the past. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, October 03, 2002 4:07 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: New Exchange Server On Thu, 3 Oct 2002, at 1:39pm, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > Maybe you should look into getting a better RAID controller. Her theory > is right. I'll second that. There seem to be a large number of really sh*tty IDE/ATA "RAID controllers" on the market these days. We had one customer who (against our objections) bought a "server" from "this guy I know". Along with other stupidities, it included a "RAID controller" from some outfit using the name of "StarTech". No management software, just a pre-boot BIOS interface with a four-function menu. Well, last week the server abruptly crashed for no apparent reason. Upon reboot, the controller said reported one of the disks as failed, but refused to tell us which one, or re-mirror with a new drive. Then it trashed part of the filesystem. We spent three days doing recovery -- oh, did I mention they weren't doing backups, either? BTW, that "RAID controller" is now severely fragmented. I wonder if DEFRAG can fix it? ;-) -- Ben Scott <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> | The opinions expressed in this message are those of the author and do not | | necessarily represent the views or policy of any other person, entity or | | organization. All information is provided without warranty of any kind. | _ 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]
Multiple People recieving Meeting Requests
All I am confused: I send a meeting request to 1 user and 3 receive the invitation. I have just tested sending to the same user from someone else and again 3 users receive the invitation. I have looked at their mailbox in Outlook and in the AD, but I can't find any reason for this to happen. Does anyone have any ideas? Using Office XP SP2 Exchange Server 2000 SP2 Windows 2000 AD _ 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: OWA Dial-up problems with Virtual IP address
WLBS is a tricky little thing. Depending on the brand and configuration of switches and routers, I have had to do all kinds of things to make WLBS work. Sometimes I had to do things directly the opposite of the WLBS setup instructions to make it work. Go figure. I too have had a case when I could not connect to WLBS from outside until we put a satic ARP entry. But then our network guys reconfigured the routers and the ARP entry became unnecessary. -Original Message- From: Pennell, Ronald B. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, October 04, 2002 7:40 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: OWA Dial-up problems with Virtual IP address Yes, had delivery problems in unicast mode.. But, got our router folks to put in a static entry in to the ARP Cache on the router and it works fine.. Thanks Ron -Original Message- From: Andrey Fyodorov [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, October 03, 2002 10:27 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: OWA Dial-up problems with Virtual IP address I think if you are using multicast, you have to put a static ARP entry. You need to use the virtual MAC address that is displayed in the WLBS properties. Have you tried not using multicast? -Original Message- From: Pennell, Ronald B. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, October 03, 2002 9:16 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: OWA Dial-up problems with Virtual IP address Yes, works from the inside. Results from wlbs query, Host 1 converged as DEFAULT with the following hosts as part of the cluster: 1, 2 Also, I checked the nlbs prop and have multicast checked. I understand that I might have to put a static entry into ARP cache on the AS5200 for the VIP to match up with the NIC address... Any ideas Ron -Original Message- From: Ed Crowley [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, October 02, 2002 11:43 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: OWA Dial-up problems with Virtual IP address Does it work from the inside? On one of the NLB servers enter "wlbs query". Has the "cluster" converged? Ed Crowley MCSE+I MVP Technical Consultant hp Services "There are seldom good technological solutions to behavioral problems." -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Pennell, Ronald B. Sent: Wednesday, October 02, 2002 6:48 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: OWA Dial-up problems with Virtual IP address I'm running FE/BE with NLB using a single virtual Ip address to get to OWA from the internet. I also have users who dial into the company via an AS5200 and try getting to OWA via IE or Netscape. If they use the Virtual DNS name /or IP address it will not allow them access. But, If they use the IP address of eith Front End servers they get in. Any ideas that might help Ron Pennell Institute For Defense Analyses _ 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: Backing up Exchange 5.5
"innocent" are you sure that is the correct word or meaning? "guilty" seems to come to mind for me... just keep dodging those bullets -Original Message- From: David N. Precht [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, October 04, 2002 8:39 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Backing up Exchange 5.5 Names have been changed to protect the innocent. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Andy David Sent: Friday, October 04, 2002 07:30 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Backing up Exchange 5.5 Ever wonder why CA keeps changing the names of their products? -Original Message- From: Fioon [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, October 04, 2002 12:03 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Backing up Exchange 5.5 I've download the BE trial copy , but it can't run. Funny, hang on Self Extract. Download again, same thing happened again. Any opinion on new ArcServe2000 BrightStore for the Disaster Recovery on Exchange 5.5 Issue ? Fin -Original Message- From: Daniel Chenault [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, October 03, 2002 11:53 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Re: Backing up Exchange 5.5 Yes, as a google search would have shown. - Original Message - From: "Fioon" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Exchange Discussions" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Thursday, October 03, 2002 1:09 AM Subject: RE: Backing up Exchange 5.5 > Hi, > > May i know which third party are you guys talking about on this > "Backup Exec" ? It's Veritas ?? > > Thanks > > -Original Message- > From: Karon Miller [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Friday, August 09, 2002 2:20 AM > To: Exchange Discussions > Subject: Backing up Exchange 5.5 > > > I know this has come up before but how is everyone else backing up > their Exchange servers. We're using Backup Exec and only backing up > the mailboxes not the pub.edb or priv.edb. Is it wise to stop those > services periodically to back those up? And how often? We're not > using the Open File Agent. > > _ > 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 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] _ 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 help access denied in OWA
Did you configure default domain for Exchange and Public virtual directories as \ ? -Original Message- From: Todd Youngbauer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, October 03, 2002 5:25 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Need help access denied in OWA They get a login screen, enter their information it pops up again because it looks like it does not like the password once you enter it 3 times then you get the access denied. I am using basic authentication and I have set the domain into the basic password settings in IIS. Can't think of any other reason why it won't work _ 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: Backing up Exchange 5.5
Names have been changed to protect the innocent. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Andy David Sent: Friday, October 04, 2002 07:30 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Backing up Exchange 5.5 Ever wonder why CA keeps changing the names of their products? -Original Message- From: Fioon [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, October 04, 2002 12:03 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Backing up Exchange 5.5 I've download the BE trial copy , but it can't run. Funny, hang on Self Extract. Download again, same thing happened again. Any opinion on new ArcServe2000 BrightStore for the Disaster Recovery on Exchange 5.5 Issue ? Fin -Original Message- From: Daniel Chenault [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, October 03, 2002 11:53 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Re: Backing up Exchange 5.5 Yes, as a google search would have shown. - Original Message - From: "Fioon" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Exchange Discussions" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Thursday, October 03, 2002 1:09 AM Subject: RE: Backing up Exchange 5.5 > Hi, > > May i know which third party are you guys talking about on this > "Backup Exec" ? It's Veritas ?? > > Thanks > > -Original Message- > From: Karon Miller [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Friday, August 09, 2002 2:20 AM > To: Exchange Discussions > Subject: Backing up Exchange 5.5 > > > I know this has come up before but how is everyone else backing up > their Exchange servers. We're using Backup Exec and only backing up > the mailboxes not the pub.edb or priv.edb. Is it wise to stop those > services periodically to back those up? And how often? We're not > using the Open File Agent. > > _ > 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 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: New Exchange Server
TMI -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Andrea Coppini Sent: Friday, October 04, 2002 05:21 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: New Exchange Server If you were referring to me, I'll show you my willy... Regards _MR._ Andrea Coppini -Original Message- From: Jeremy I. Shannon [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 03 October 2002 7:39 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: New Exchange Server Maybe you should look into getting a better RAID controller. Her theory is right. -Original Message- From: Andrey Fyodorov [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, October 03, 2002 12:04 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: New Exchange Server Andrea, Please let me disagree. All I have to do is boot without the crashed page drive. Windows will create a temp page file on the C: drive and start (just confirmed this with my hardware guys). Then when time allows, the replacement drive can be added and the page file moved to it, with all the necessary reboots. I also disagree about the 0% downtime according to your scenario #2. Based on my experience, as soon as RAID failed on the page file volume, the server did a blue screen of death. So much for 0% downtime. *In theory* the server *should* have kept running. But it did not. So screw it. If it is going to crash anyway I am not going to spend extra money on it. -Original Message- From: Andrea Coppini [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, October 03, 2002 10:50 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: New Exchange Server Picture this: Your single (let's say IDE) pagefile drive fails, so your system crashes. You run down to your store or computer shop to buy a new drive (system still down) You install the disk in another machine (since Exchange might not start up without page drive) (system still down) You partition/format the drive (system still down) You install the new IDE disk in your exchange server (system still down) You start up Exchange. If you can afford all that downtime, go ahead and use a single drive. But now let's look at RAID1 swap: One of your swap disks fail.. Raid1 is broken so machine keeps running on one disk You take the bad disk Offline and pull it out You stroll and whistle your way down to your store or computer shop to get a new disk, maybe even have a couple of doughnuts on the way... You insert the new disk in your exchange server. run the RAID tools, rebuild the RAID. Pat yourself on the back for 0% downtime. -Original Message- From: Andrey Fyodorov [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 03 October 2002 4:23 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: New Exchange Server If it happened once it will probably happen again. I see no big benefit of putting page file on RAID. If I had a limited number of drive bays, I would rather have a separate RAID1 for transaction logs and a separate RAID5 for informations store database files; and if no more drive array bays are available for the page file volume - I would stick an IDE or SCSI drive in the CD-ROM bay or some other available space and connect it to the onboard controller and achieve better performance instead of perceived reliability. -Original Message- From: Robert Moir [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, October 03, 2002 9:38 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: New Exchange Server So because you once had a problem with RAID that caused it to stop working must mean that it's always unreliable for everyone else every time? Robert Moir IT Systems Engineer Luton Sixth Form College >SELECT * FROM users WHERE clue > 0 0 rows returned > -Original Message- > From: Andrey Fyodorov [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: 03 October 2002 13:53 > To: Exchange Discussions > Subject: RE: New Exchange Server > > > Do you need me to explain it all in small details? > > I had an Exchange server. Page file was on a separate RAID1 volume. > RAID1 broke. Server crashed with a blue screen. Having the page file > on RAID1 did not necessarily make it more reliable. Might as well have > had the page file on a single drive. Why did I write this? Because I > was answering someone else's remark "Placing the pagefile on a > separate drive sacrifices reliability for performance." > > Ok now? Can I go? > > -Original Message- > From: Ed Crowley [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Wednesday, October 02, 2002 11:52 PM > To: Exchange Discussions > Subject: RE: New Exchange Server > > > What does that have to do with Exchange? > > Ed Crowley MCSE+I MVP > Technical Consultant > hp Services > "There are seldom good technological solutions to behavioral > problems." > > > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Andrey > Fyodorov > Sent: Tuesday, October 01, 2002 9:04 AM > To: Exchange Discussions > Subject: RE: New Exchange Server > > > Well once I had a broken RAID1 on the page file volume. RAID did not > save me. T
RE: New Exchange Server
Lol! -Original Message- From: Andrea Coppini [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 04 October 2002 11:21 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: New Exchange Server If you were referring to me, I'll show you my willy... Regards _MR._ Andrea Coppini -Original Message- From: Jeremy I. Shannon [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 03 October 2002 7:39 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: New Exchange Server Maybe you should look into getting a better RAID controller. Her theory is right. -Original Message- From: Andrey Fyodorov [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, October 03, 2002 12:04 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: New Exchange Server Andrea, Please let me disagree. All I have to do is boot without the crashed page drive. Windows will create a temp page file on the C: drive and start (just confirmed this with my hardware guys). Then when time allows, the replacement drive can be added and the page file moved to it, with all the necessary reboots. I also disagree about the 0% downtime according to your scenario #2. Based on my experience, as soon as RAID failed on the page file volume, the server did a blue screen of death. So much for 0% downtime. *In theory* the server *should* have kept running. But it did not. So screw it. If it is going to crash anyway I am not going to spend extra money on it. -Original Message- From: Andrea Coppini [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, October 03, 2002 10:50 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: New Exchange Server Picture this: Your single (let's say IDE) pagefile drive fails, so your system crashes. You run down to your store or computer shop to buy a new drive (system still down) You install the disk in another machine (since Exchange might not start up without page drive) (system still down) You partition/format the drive (system still down) You install the new IDE disk in your exchange server (system still down) You start up Exchange. If you can afford all that downtime, go ahead and use a single drive. But now let's look at RAID1 swap: One of your swap disks fail.. Raid1 is broken so machine keeps running on one disk You take the bad disk Offline and pull it out You stroll and whistle your way down to your store or computer shop to get a new disk, maybe even have a couple of doughnuts on the way... You insert the new disk in your exchange server. run the RAID tools, rebuild the RAID. Pat yourself on the back for 0% downtime. -Original Message- From: Andrey Fyodorov [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 03 October 2002 4:23 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: New Exchange Server If it happened once it will probably happen again. I see no big benefit of putting page file on RAID. If I had a limited number of drive bays, I would rather have a separate RAID1 for transaction logs and a separate RAID5 for informations store database files; and if no more drive array bays are available for the page file volume - I would stick an IDE or SCSI drive in the CD-ROM bay or some other available space and connect it to the onboard controller and achieve better performance instead of perceived reliability. -Original Message- From: Robert Moir [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, October 03, 2002 9:38 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: New Exchange Server So because you once had a problem with RAID that caused it to stop working must mean that it's always unreliable for everyone else every time? Robert Moir IT Systems Engineer Luton Sixth Form College >SELECT * FROM users WHERE clue > 0 0 rows returned > -Original Message- > From: Andrey Fyodorov [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: 03 October 2002 13:53 > To: Exchange Discussions > Subject: RE: New Exchange Server > > > Do you need me to explain it all in small details? > > I had an Exchange server. Page file was on a separate RAID1 volume. > RAID1 broke. Server crashed with a blue screen. Having the page file > on RAID1 did not necessarily make it more reliable. Might as well have > had the page file on a single drive. Why did I write this? Because I > was answering someone else's remark "Placing the pagefile on a > separate drive sacrifices reliability for performance." > > Ok now? Can I go? > > -Original Message- > From: Ed Crowley [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Wednesday, October 02, 2002 11:52 PM > To: Exchange Discussions > Subject: RE: New Exchange Server > > > What does that have to do with Exchange? > > Ed Crowley MCSE+I MVP > Technical Consultant > hp Services > "There are seldom good technological solutions to behavioral > problems." > > > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Andrey > Fyodorov > Sent: Tuesday, October 01, 2002 9:04 AM > To: Exchange Discussions > Subject: RE: New Exchange Server > > > Well once I had a broken RAID1 on the page file volume. RAID did not > save me. The server blue-screened. The RAID1
RE: OWA Dial-up problems with Virtual IP address
Yes, had delivery problems in unicast mode.. But, got our router folks to put in a static entry in to the ARP Cache on the router and it works fine.. Thanks Ron -Original Message- From: Andrey Fyodorov [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, October 03, 2002 10:27 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: OWA Dial-up problems with Virtual IP address I think if you are using multicast, you have to put a static ARP entry. You need to use the virtual MAC address that is displayed in the WLBS properties. Have you tried not using multicast? -Original Message- From: Pennell, Ronald B. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, October 03, 2002 9:16 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: OWA Dial-up problems with Virtual IP address Yes, works from the inside. Results from wlbs query, Host 1 converged as DEFAULT with the following hosts as part of the cluster: 1, 2 Also, I checked the nlbs prop and have multicast checked. I understand that I might have to put a static entry into ARP cache on the AS5200 for the VIP to match up with the NIC address... Any ideas Ron -Original Message- From: Ed Crowley [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, October 02, 2002 11:43 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: OWA Dial-up problems with Virtual IP address Does it work from the inside? On one of the NLB servers enter "wlbs query". Has the "cluster" converged? Ed Crowley MCSE+I MVP Technical Consultant hp Services "There are seldom good technological solutions to behavioral problems." -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Pennell, Ronald B. Sent: Wednesday, October 02, 2002 6:48 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: OWA Dial-up problems with Virtual IP address I'm running FE/BE with NLB using a single virtual Ip address to get to OWA from the internet. I also have users who dial into the company via an AS5200 and try getting to OWA via IE or Netscape. If they use the Virtual DNS name /or IP address it will not allow them access. But, If they use the IP address of eith Front End servers they get in. Any ideas that might help Ron Pennell Institute For Defense Analyses _ 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: Backing up Exchange 5.5
Try HP OmniBack II. Don't know the price but works just great. -Original Message- From: Fioon [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, October 04, 2002 9:07 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Backing up Exchange 5.5 It's BrightStor , same under CA .. Is ArcServe 2000 really that bad ? I've just tried, and it turned out not too bad. On the middle of discussing want to purchase or not !! -Original Message- From: William Lefkovics [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, October 04, 2002 2:53 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Backing up Exchange 5.5 Brightwhore? Same crap. New name. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Fioon Sent: Thursday, October 03, 2002 9:03 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Backing up Exchange 5.5 I've download the BE trial copy , but it can't run. Funny, hang on Self Extract. Download again, same thing happened again. Any opinion on new ArcServe2000 BrightStore for the Disaster Recovery on Exchange 5.5 Issue ? Fin -Original Message- From: Daniel Chenault [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, October 03, 2002 11:53 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Re: Backing up Exchange 5.5 Yes, as a google search would have shown. - Original Message - From: "Fioon" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Exchange Discussions" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Thursday, October 03, 2002 1:09 AM Subject: RE: Backing up Exchange 5.5 > Hi, > > May i know which third party are you guys talking about on this "Backup > Exec" ? > It's Veritas ?? > > Thanks _ 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: Backing up Exchange 5.5
I think we know why... -Original Message- From: Andy David [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, October 04, 2002 7:30 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Backing up Exchange 5.5 Ever wonder why CA keeps changing the names of their products? -Original Message- From: Fioon [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, October 04, 2002 12:03 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Backing up Exchange 5.5 I've download the BE trial copy , but it can't run. Funny, hang on Self Extract. Download again, same thing happened again. Any opinion on new ArcServe2000 BrightStore for the Disaster Recovery on Exchange 5.5 Issue ? Fin -Original Message- From: Daniel Chenault [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, October 03, 2002 11:53 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Re: Backing up Exchange 5.5 Yes, as a google search would have shown. - Original Message - From: "Fioon" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Exchange Discussions" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Thursday, October 03, 2002 1:09 AM Subject: RE: Backing up Exchange 5.5 > Hi, > > May i know which third party are you guys talking about on this > "Backup Exec" ? It's Veritas ?? > > Thanks > > -Original Message- > From: Karon Miller [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Friday, August 09, 2002 2:20 AM > To: Exchange Discussions > Subject: Backing up Exchange 5.5 > > > I know this has come up before but how is everyone else backing up > their Exchange servers. We're using Backup Exec and only backing up > the mailboxes not the pub.edb or priv.edb. Is it wise to stop those > services periodically to back those up? And how often? We're not > using the Open File Agent. > > _ > 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 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: Backing up Exchange 5.5
Ever wonder why CA keeps changing the names of their products? -Original Message- From: Fioon [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, October 04, 2002 12:03 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Backing up Exchange 5.5 I've download the BE trial copy , but it can't run. Funny, hang on Self Extract. Download again, same thing happened again. Any opinion on new ArcServe2000 BrightStore for the Disaster Recovery on Exchange 5.5 Issue ? Fin -Original Message- From: Daniel Chenault [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, October 03, 2002 11:53 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Re: Backing up Exchange 5.5 Yes, as a google search would have shown. - Original Message - From: "Fioon" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Exchange Discussions" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Thursday, October 03, 2002 1:09 AM Subject: RE: Backing up Exchange 5.5 > Hi, > > May i know which third party are you guys talking about on this "Backup > Exec" ? > It's Veritas ?? > > Thanks > > -Original Message- > From: Karon Miller [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Friday, August 09, 2002 2:20 AM > To: Exchange Discussions > Subject: Backing up Exchange 5.5 > > > I know this has come up before but how is everyone else backing up their > Exchange servers. We're using Backup Exec and only backing up the > mailboxes not the pub.edb or priv.edb. Is it wise to stop those services > periodically to back those up? And how often? We're not using the Open > File Agent. > > _ > 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 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]
RE: Backing up Exchange 5.5
ArcServe ruined that as well see what more proof does the world need about how bad arcserve is... dont go anywhere near it..dont utter its name. -Original Message- From: Hanna, Keith [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, October 04, 2002 12:44 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Backing up Exchange 5.5 I think your keyboard isn't working. -Original Message- From: Muqeem Syed [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 04 October 2002 10:18 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Backing up Exchange 5.5 Importance: High First to address Karons Issue of only backing up the mailboxes incase of a server crash.. you will notbe able to recover the priv and pub databases... so it is wise to backup atleast once the databases... so that in case there is a server crash you can first restore the database.. and then restore the mailboxes from the most recent backup the mailbox backups.. as far as I can recall cannot be used to restore a dead server with failed or corrupt databases. The second issue of Fioon being able to perfomr a full disaster recovery... and adding chorus to Robert's woes... we have a tape library and using arcserve for th ebackup.. yes I was able to perfomr a disaster recovery as well... but only for the local machine... and none of the network machines so far have been able to come back on the disaster recovery. Another thing... for the disaster recovery to work.. CA says that you have to make a full backup with the arcserve agent on the remote machine.. that is all that is needed they said to make the disaster recovery kit... MICROSOFT SAYS FOR THE EXCHANGE SERVER THE M: IS A VIRTUAL DRIVE AND DO NOT... REPEAT DO NOT ATTEMPT TO BACKUP OF PERFORM ANTIVIRUS SCANS CA HAS MENTIONED NOTHING ABOUT THAT SO FAR. POint number 2 noticed... though I succesfully staged the disaster recovery for the local machine on which the tape library is installed which incidentally hosts.. win 2k server note:WIN2K Server, at the time of the disaster recovery i was asked to pop in the CD for WIN2K ADVANCED SERVER "Please pop in your win2K Advanced Server CD" says the dialog box... Ok now me thinks that this is a typo error and instead doesnt want to listen to CA and pop in win2k server |CD instead... but the machine spits it out saying.. no way can I have that.. now be a good boy and pop in the advanced server CD... so I scramble my kit for the evaluation advanced server CD and pop it in thinking it aint gonna work either... but hey presto... it worked and there me completed the staging process of the disaster recovery, wondering if its Microsoft that more bizzare or ArcServe. and me still suspicious that Bill Gates might have bought some stocks for ArcServe. Anyways... no point boring you with my tragic story. But me is still working on resolving the issue of being able to perform remote disaster recovery.. If some one has done that please let me know... -Original Message- From: Fioon [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, October 04, 2002 12:01 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Backing up Exchange 5.5 Do you still remember the difficulty that you made on ArcServe ? Wondering .. Thanks Fiooon -Original Message- From: Robert Moir [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, October 04, 2002 4:49 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Backing up Exchange 5.5 Would you believe currently NTBackup - the windows 2000 version - on all the servers I run which are the backoffice stuff like SQL, Exhange, and DCs. There are a few other servers where we still use arcserve for "simple file and print" server backups. We plan to do a full evaluation of what is out there next year when our new budget period starts, and other than "ditch arcserve", we have a fairly open mind about what to use instead. > -Original Message- > From: Fioon [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: 04 October 2002 09:32 > To: Exchange Discussions > Subject: RE: Backing up Exchange 5.5 > > > Hi Robert, > > So then, what software are you using & what is your current > software max quality & relibility > can provide ? > > Maybe i can apply !! > > Thanks > -Original Message- > From: Robert Moir [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Friday, October 04, 2002 4:33 PM > To: Exchange Discussions > Subject: RE: Backing up Exchange 5.5 > > > Yeah I've got an opinion on Brightstore sure enough, but as > many people operate filters on "naughty" words, I'll confine > myself to stating that it does not meet my minimum quality > and reliability standards for server software. > > > -Original Message- > > From: Fioon [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > Sent: 04 October 2002 05:03 > > To: Exchange Discussions > > Subject: RE: Backing up Exchange 5.5 > > > > > > > > I've download the BE trial copy , but it can't run. Funny, > > hang on Self Extract. Download again, same thing happened again. > > > > Any opinion on new ArcServe2000 Brig
RE: Backing up Exchange 5.5
I think your keyboard isn't working. -Original Message- From: Muqeem Syed [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 04 October 2002 10:18 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Backing up Exchange 5.5 Importance: High First to address Karons Issue of only backing up the mailboxes incase of a server crash.. you will notbe able to recover the priv and pub databases... so it is wise to backup atleast once the databases... so that in case there is a server crash you can first restore the database.. and then restore the mailboxes from the most recent backup the mailbox backups.. as far as I can recall cannot be used to restore a dead server with failed or corrupt databases. The second issue of Fioon being able to perfomr a full disaster recovery... and adding chorus to Robert's woes... we have a tape library and using arcserve for th ebackup.. yes I was able to perfomr a disaster recovery as well... but only for the local machine... and none of the network machines so far have been able to come back on the disaster recovery. Another thing... for the disaster recovery to work.. CA says that you have to make a full backup with the arcserve agent on the remote machine.. that is all that is needed they said to make the disaster recovery kit... MICROSOFT SAYS FOR THE EXCHANGE SERVER THE M: IS A VIRTUAL DRIVE AND DO NOT... REPEAT DO NOT ATTEMPT TO BACKUP OF PERFORM ANTIVIRUS SCANS CA HAS MENTIONED NOTHING ABOUT THAT SO FAR. POint number 2 noticed... though I succesfully staged the disaster recovery for the local machine on which the tape library is installed which incidentally hosts.. win 2k server note:WIN2K Server, at the time of the disaster recovery i was asked to pop in the CD for WIN2K ADVANCED SERVER "Please pop in your win2K Advanced Server CD" says the dialog box... Ok now me thinks that this is a typo error and instead doesnt want to listen to CA and pop in win2k server |CD instead... but the machine spits it out saying.. no way can I have that.. now be a good boy and pop in the advanced server CD... so I scramble my kit for the evaluation advanced server CD and pop it in thinking it aint gonna work either... but hey presto... it worked and there me completed the staging process of the disaster recovery, wondering if its Microsoft that more bizzare or ArcServe. and me still suspicious that Bill Gates might have bought some stocks for ArcServe. Anyways... no point boring you with my tragic story. But me is still working on resolving the issue of being able to perform remote disaster recovery.. If some one has done that please let me know... -Original Message- From: Fioon [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, October 04, 2002 12:01 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Backing up Exchange 5.5 Do you still remember the difficulty that you made on ArcServe ? Wondering .. Thanks Fiooon -Original Message- From: Robert Moir [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, October 04, 2002 4:49 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Backing up Exchange 5.5 Would you believe currently NTBackup - the windows 2000 version - on all the servers I run which are the backoffice stuff like SQL, Exhange, and DCs. There are a few other servers where we still use arcserve for "simple file and print" server backups. We plan to do a full evaluation of what is out there next year when our new budget period starts, and other than "ditch arcserve", we have a fairly open mind about what to use instead. > -Original Message- > From: Fioon [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: 04 October 2002 09:32 > To: Exchange Discussions > Subject: RE: Backing up Exchange 5.5 > > > Hi Robert, > > So then, what software are you using & what is your current > software max quality & relibility > can provide ? > > Maybe i can apply !! > > Thanks > -Original Message- > From: Robert Moir [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Friday, October 04, 2002 4:33 PM > To: Exchange Discussions > Subject: RE: Backing up Exchange 5.5 > > > Yeah I've got an opinion on Brightstore sure enough, but as > many people operate filters on "naughty" words, I'll confine > myself to stating that it does not meet my minimum quality > and reliability standards for server software. > > > -Original Message- > > From: Fioon [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > Sent: 04 October 2002 05:03 > > To: Exchange Discussions > > Subject: RE: Backing up Exchange 5.5 > > > > > > > > I've download the BE trial copy , but it can't run. Funny, > > hang on Self Extract. Download again, same thing happened again. > > > > Any opinion on new ArcServe2000 BrightStore for the Disaster > > Recovery on Exchange 5.5 Issue ? > > > > Fin > > -Original Message- > > From: Daniel Chenault [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > Sent: Thursday, October 03, 2002 11:53 PM > > To: Exchange Discussions > > Subject: Re: Backing up Exchange 5.5 > > > > > > Yes, as a google search would
RE: Backing up Exchange 5.5
In Continuation to my ranting Network machines... in the sense that the tape lirary is attahced to server A, and I tried to perfomr disaster recovery by backing up Server B, C D and E... over the Network.. since those poor buggars dont have a local backup device attached to them,.. I performed a full backup for all the machines.. created the boot disks... and tried to recover the lost souls... but after booting from the boot floppy, it kept searching for the backup device for an eternity... now I still dont understand why there is no special wizard with arcserve disaster recovery... to create the boot kit for a machine that you backedup on the network.. they provide only one wizard that supposedly creates boot kits for machines with local backup device connected as well as machines that are being backed up on the networksince for a mchine to be able to connect to the remote backup device.. they need the network drivers... I dont know if the boot kit creates them... generic that is... not even bothering to ask what kind of network card exists on my remote machines. scared to ask CA this question.. since they ask you to pay first and then ask your stupid question later. -Original Message- From: Fioon [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, October 04, 2002 12:30 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Backing up Exchange 5.5 Hi Muqeem, 1. What do u mean by network machines ? I did a DRecovery, once rebooted, it did come back to my network and log on to network . Thanks Fioon -Original Message- From: Muqeem Syed [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, October 04, 2002 5:18 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Backing up Exchange 5.5 Importance: High First to address Karons Issue of only backing up the mailboxes incase of a server crash.. you will notbe able to recover the priv and pub databases... so it is wise to backup atleast once the databases... so that in case there is a server crash you can first restore the database.. and then restore the mailboxes from the most recent backup the mailbox backups.. as far as I can recall cannot be used to restore a dead server with failed or corrupt databases. The second issue of Fioon being able to perfomr a full disaster recovery... and adding chorus to Robert's woes... we have a tape library and using arcserve for th ebackup.. yes I was able to perfomr a disaster recovery as well... but only for the local machine... and none of the network machines so far have been able to come back on the disaster recovery. Another thing... for the disaster recovery to work.. CA says that you have to make a full backup with the arcserve agent on the remote machine.. that is all that is needed they said to make the disaster recovery kit... MICROSOFT SAYS FOR THE EXCHANGE SERVER THE M: IS A VIRTUAL DRIVE AND DO NOT... REPEAT DO NOT ATTEMPT TO BACKUP OF PERFORM ANTIVIRUS SCANS CA HAS MENTIONED NOTHING ABOUT THAT SO FAR. POint number 2 noticed... though I succesfully staged the disaster recovery for the local machine on which the tape library is installed which incidentally hosts.. win 2k server note:WIN2K Server, at the time of the disaster recovery i was asked to pop in the CD for WIN2K ADVANCED SERVER "Please pop in your win2K Advanced Server CD" says the dialog box... Ok now me thinks that this is a typo error and instead doesnt want to listen to CA and pop in win2k server |CD instead... but the machine spits it out saying.. no way can I have that.. now be a good boy and pop in the advanced server CD... so I scramble my kit for the evaluation advanced server CD and pop it in thinking it aint gonna work either... but hey presto... it worked and there me completed the staging process of the disaster recovery, wondering if its Microsoft that more bizzare or ArcServe. and me still suspicious that Bill Gates might have bought some stocks for ArcServe. Anyways... no point boring you with my tragic story. But me is still working on resolving the issue of being able to perform remote disaster recovery.. If some one has done that please let me know... -Original Message- From: Fioon [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, October 04, 2002 12:01 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Backing up Exchange 5.5 Do you still remember the difficulty that you made on ArcServe ? Wondering .. Thanks Fiooon -Original Message- From: Robert Moir [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, October 04, 2002 4:49 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Backing up Exchange 5.5 Would you believe currently NTBackup - the windows 2000 version - on all the servers I run which are the backoffice stuff like SQL, Exhange, and DCs. There are a few other servers where we still use arcserve for "simple file and print" server backups. We plan to do a full evaluation of what is out there next year when our new budget period starts, and other than "ditch arcserve", we have a fairly open mind about what
RE: Backing up Exchange 5.5
Hi Muqeem, 1. What do u mean by network machines ? I did a DRecovery, once rebooted, it did come back to my network and log on to network . Thanks Fioon -Original Message- From: Muqeem Syed [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, October 04, 2002 5:18 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Backing up Exchange 5.5 Importance: High First to address Karons Issue of only backing up the mailboxes incase of a server crash.. you will notbe able to recover the priv and pub databases... so it is wise to backup atleast once the databases... so that in case there is a server crash you can first restore the database.. and then restore the mailboxes from the most recent backup the mailbox backups.. as far as I can recall cannot be used to restore a dead server with failed or corrupt databases. The second issue of Fioon being able to perfomr a full disaster recovery... and adding chorus to Robert's woes... we have a tape library and using arcserve for th ebackup.. yes I was able to perfomr a disaster recovery as well... but only for the local machine... and none of the network machines so far have been able to come back on the disaster recovery. Another thing... for the disaster recovery to work.. CA says that you have to make a full backup with the arcserve agent on the remote machine.. that is all that is needed they said to make the disaster recovery kit... MICROSOFT SAYS FOR THE EXCHANGE SERVER THE M: IS A VIRTUAL DRIVE AND DO NOT... REPEAT DO NOT ATTEMPT TO BACKUP OF PERFORM ANTIVIRUS SCANS CA HAS MENTIONED NOTHING ABOUT THAT SO FAR. POint number 2 noticed... though I succesfully staged the disaster recovery for the local machine on which the tape library is installed which incidentally hosts.. win 2k server note:WIN2K Server, at the time of the disaster recovery i was asked to pop in the CD for WIN2K ADVANCED SERVER "Please pop in your win2K Advanced Server CD" says the dialog box... Ok now me thinks that this is a typo error and instead doesnt want to listen to CA and pop in win2k server |CD instead... but the machine spits it out saying.. no way can I have that.. now be a good boy and pop in the advanced server CD... so I scramble my kit for the evaluation advanced server CD and pop it in thinking it aint gonna work either... but hey presto... it worked and there me completed the staging process of the disaster recovery, wondering if its Microsoft that more bizzare or ArcServe. and me still suspicious that Bill Gates might have bought some stocks for ArcServe. Anyways... no point boring you with my tragic story. But me is still working on resolving the issue of being able to perform remote disaster recovery.. If some one has done that please let me know... -Original Message- From: Fioon [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, October 04, 2002 12:01 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Backing up Exchange 5.5 Do you still remember the difficulty that you made on ArcServe ? Wondering .. Thanks Fiooon -Original Message- From: Robert Moir [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, October 04, 2002 4:49 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Backing up Exchange 5.5 Would you believe currently NTBackup - the windows 2000 version - on all the servers I run which are the backoffice stuff like SQL, Exhange, and DCs. There are a few other servers where we still use arcserve for "simple file and print" server backups. We plan to do a full evaluation of what is out there next year when our new budget period starts, and other than "ditch arcserve", we have a fairly open mind about what to use instead. > -Original Message- > From: Fioon [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: 04 October 2002 09:32 > To: Exchange Discussions > Subject: RE: Backing up Exchange 5.5 > > > Hi Robert, > > So then, what software are you using & what is your current > software max quality & relibility > can provide ? > > Maybe i can apply !! > > Thanks > -Original Message- > From: Robert Moir [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Friday, October 04, 2002 4:33 PM > To: Exchange Discussions > Subject: RE: Backing up Exchange 5.5 > > > Yeah I've got an opinion on Brightstore sure enough, but as > many people operate filters on "naughty" words, I'll confine > myself to stating that it does not meet my minimum quality > and reliability standards for server software. > > > -Original Message- > > From: Fioon [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > Sent: 04 October 2002 05:03 > > To: Exchange Discussions > > Subject: RE: Backing up Exchange 5.5 > > > > > > > > I've download the BE trial copy , but it can't run. Funny, > > hang on Self Extract. Download again, same thing happened again. > > > > Any opinion on new ArcServe2000 BrightStore for the Disaster > > Recovery on Exchange 5.5 Issue ? > > > > Fin > > -Original Message- > > From: Daniel Chenault [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > Sent: Thursday, October 03, 2002 11:53 PM > > To: Ex
RE: Backing up Exchange 5.5
ArcServe was not *that* bad. Well, maybe it is. I have not looked at Brightstor as an Exchange solution. Mostly because they refused to pay me to use it. But still neither will go near my Exchange servers. www.clarksupport.com/whynotca.htm -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Fioon Sent: Friday, October 04, 2002 1:07 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Backing up Exchange 5.5 It's BrightStor , same under CA .. Is ArcServe 2000 really that bad ? I've just tried, and it turned out not too bad. On the middle of discussing want to purchase or not !! -Original Message- From: William Lefkovics [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, October 04, 2002 2:53 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Backing up Exchange 5.5 Brightwhore? Same crap. New name. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Fioon Sent: Thursday, October 03, 2002 9:03 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Backing up Exchange 5.5 I've download the BE trial copy , but it can't run. Funny, hang on Self Extract. Download again, same thing happened again. Any opinion on new ArcServe2000 BrightStore for the Disaster Recovery on Exchange 5.5 Issue ? Fin -Original Message- From: Daniel Chenault [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, October 03, 2002 11:53 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Re: Backing up Exchange 5.5 Yes, as a google search would have shown. - Original Message - From: "Fioon" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Exchange Discussions" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Thursday, October 03, 2002 1:09 AM Subject: RE: Backing up Exchange 5.5 > Hi, > > May i know which third party are you guys talking about on this "Backup > Exec" ? > It's Veritas ?? > > Thanks _ 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: New Exchange Server
If you were referring to me, I'll show you my willy... Regards _MR._ Andrea Coppini -Original Message- From: Jeremy I. Shannon [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 03 October 2002 7:39 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: New Exchange Server Maybe you should look into getting a better RAID controller. Her theory is right. -Original Message- From: Andrey Fyodorov [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, October 03, 2002 12:04 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: New Exchange Server Andrea, Please let me disagree. All I have to do is boot without the crashed page drive. Windows will create a temp page file on the C: drive and start (just confirmed this with my hardware guys). Then when time allows, the replacement drive can be added and the page file moved to it, with all the necessary reboots. I also disagree about the 0% downtime according to your scenario #2. Based on my experience, as soon as RAID failed on the page file volume, the server did a blue screen of death. So much for 0% downtime. *In theory* the server *should* have kept running. But it did not. So screw it. If it is going to crash anyway I am not going to spend extra money on it. -Original Message- From: Andrea Coppini [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, October 03, 2002 10:50 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: New Exchange Server Picture this: Your single (let's say IDE) pagefile drive fails, so your system crashes. You run down to your store or computer shop to buy a new drive (system still down) You install the disk in another machine (since Exchange might not start up without page drive) (system still down) You partition/format the drive (system still down) You install the new IDE disk in your exchange server (system still down) You start up Exchange. If you can afford all that downtime, go ahead and use a single drive. But now let's look at RAID1 swap: One of your swap disks fail.. Raid1 is broken so machine keeps running on one disk You take the bad disk Offline and pull it out You stroll and whistle your way down to your store or computer shop to get a new disk, maybe even have a couple of doughnuts on the way... You insert the new disk in your exchange server. run the RAID tools, rebuild the RAID. Pat yourself on the back for 0% downtime. -Original Message- From: Andrey Fyodorov [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 03 October 2002 4:23 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: New Exchange Server If it happened once it will probably happen again. I see no big benefit of putting page file on RAID. If I had a limited number of drive bays, I would rather have a separate RAID1 for transaction logs and a separate RAID5 for informations store database files; and if no more drive array bays are available for the page file volume - I would stick an IDE or SCSI drive in the CD-ROM bay or some other available space and connect it to the onboard controller and achieve better performance instead of perceived reliability. -Original Message- From: Robert Moir [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, October 03, 2002 9:38 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: New Exchange Server So because you once had a problem with RAID that caused it to stop working must mean that it's always unreliable for everyone else every time? Robert Moir IT Systems Engineer Luton Sixth Form College >SELECT * FROM users WHERE clue > 0 0 rows returned > -Original Message- > From: Andrey Fyodorov [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: 03 October 2002 13:53 > To: Exchange Discussions > Subject: RE: New Exchange Server > > > Do you need me to explain it all in small details? > > I had an Exchange server. Page file was on a separate RAID1 volume. > RAID1 broke. Server crashed with a blue screen. Having the page file > on RAID1 did not necessarily make it more reliable. Might as well have > had the page file on a single drive. Why did I write this? Because I > was answering someone else's remark "Placing the pagefile on a > separate drive sacrifices reliability for performance." > > Ok now? Can I go? > > -Original Message- > From: Ed Crowley [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Wednesday, October 02, 2002 11:52 PM > To: Exchange Discussions > Subject: RE: New Exchange Server > > > What does that have to do with Exchange? > > Ed Crowley MCSE+I MVP > Technical Consultant > hp Services > "There are seldom good technological solutions to behavioral > problems." > > > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Andrey > Fyodorov > Sent: Tuesday, October 01, 2002 9:04 AM > To: Exchange Discussions > Subject: RE: New Exchange Server > > > Well once I had a broken RAID1 on the page file volume. RAID did not > save me. The server blue-screened. The RAID1 was physical. How about > that for reliability? > > -Original Message- > From: Dennis Depp [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Tuesday, October 01, 2002 7:46 A
RE: Backing up Exchange 5.5
First to address Karons Issue of only backing up the mailboxes incase of a server crash.. you will notbe able to recover the priv and pub databases... so it is wise to backup atleast once the databases... so that in case there is a server crash you can first restore the database.. and then restore the mailboxes from the most recent backup the mailbox backups.. as far as I can recall cannot be used to restore a dead server with failed or corrupt databases. The second issue of Fioon being able to perfomr a full disaster recovery... and adding chorus to Robert's woes... we have a tape library and using arcserve for th ebackup.. yes I was able to perfomr a disaster recovery as well... but only for the local machine... and none of the network machines so far have been able to come back on the disaster recovery. Another thing... for the disaster recovery to work.. CA says that you have to make a full backup with the arcserve agent on the remote machine.. that is all that is needed they said to make the disaster recovery kit... MICROSOFT SAYS FOR THE EXCHANGE SERVER THE M: IS A VIRTUAL DRIVE AND DO NOT... REPEAT DO NOT ATTEMPT TO BACKUP OF PERFORM ANTIVIRUS SCANS CA HAS MENTIONED NOTHING ABOUT THAT SO FAR. POint number 2 noticed... though I succesfully staged the disaster recovery for the local machine on which the tape library is installed which incidentally hosts.. win 2k server note:WIN2K Server, at the time of the disaster recovery i was asked to pop in the CD for WIN2K ADVANCED SERVER "Please pop in your win2K Advanced Server CD" says the dialog box... Ok now me thinks that this is a typo error and instead doesnt want to listen to CA and pop in win2k server |CD instead... but the machine spits it out saying.. no way can I have that.. now be a good boy and pop in the advanced server CD... so I scramble my kit for the evaluation advanced server CD and pop it in thinking it aint gonna work either... but hey presto... it worked and there me completed the staging process of the disaster recovery, wondering if its Microsoft that more bizzare or ArcServe. and me still suspicious that Bill Gates might have bought some stocks for ArcServe. Anyways... no point boring you with my tragic story. But me is still working on resolving the issue of being able to perform remote disaster recovery.. If some one has done that please let me know... -Original Message- From: Fioon [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, October 04, 2002 12:01 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Backing up Exchange 5.5 Do you still remember the difficulty that you made on ArcServe ? Wondering .. Thanks Fiooon -Original Message- From: Robert Moir [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, October 04, 2002 4:49 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Backing up Exchange 5.5 Would you believe currently NTBackup - the windows 2000 version - on all the servers I run which are the backoffice stuff like SQL, Exhange, and DCs. There are a few other servers where we still use arcserve for "simple file and print" server backups. We plan to do a full evaluation of what is out there next year when our new budget period starts, and other than "ditch arcserve", we have a fairly open mind about what to use instead. > -Original Message- > From: Fioon [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: 04 October 2002 09:32 > To: Exchange Discussions > Subject: RE: Backing up Exchange 5.5 > > > Hi Robert, > > So then, what software are you using & what is your current > software max quality & relibility > can provide ? > > Maybe i can apply !! > > Thanks > -Original Message- > From: Robert Moir [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Friday, October 04, 2002 4:33 PM > To: Exchange Discussions > Subject: RE: Backing up Exchange 5.5 > > > Yeah I've got an opinion on Brightstore sure enough, but as > many people operate filters on "naughty" words, I'll confine > myself to stating that it does not meet my minimum quality > and reliability standards for server software. > > > -Original Message- > > From: Fioon [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > Sent: 04 October 2002 05:03 > > To: Exchange Discussions > > Subject: RE: Backing up Exchange 5.5 > > > > > > > > I've download the BE trial copy , but it can't run. Funny, > > hang on Self Extract. Download again, same thing happened again. > > > > Any opinion on new ArcServe2000 BrightStore for the Disaster > > Recovery on Exchange 5.5 Issue ? > > > > Fin > > -Original Message- > > From: Daniel Chenault [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > Sent: Thursday, October 03, 2002 11:53 PM > > To: Exchange Discussions > > Subject: Re: Backing up Exchange 5.5 > > > > > > Yes, as a google search would have shown. > > > > - Original Message - > > From: "Fioon" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > To: "Exchange Discussions" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Sent: Thursday, October 03, 2002 1:09 AM > > Subject: RE: Backing up Exchang
RE: Backing up Exchange 5.5
Nothing elaborate. We simply could not reliably restore from backup tapes it made. One or two times it worked, yes, but it seemed rather flakey to us. > -Original Message- > From: Fioon [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: 04 October 2002 10:01 > To: Exchange Discussions > Subject: RE: Backing up Exchange 5.5 > > > > Do you still remember the difficulty that you made on ArcServe ? > Wondering .. > > Thanks > Fiooon > > > > -Original Message- > From: Robert Moir [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Friday, October 04, 2002 4:49 PM > To: Exchange Discussions > Subject: RE: Backing up Exchange 5.5 > > > Would you believe currently NTBackup - the windows 2000 > version - on all the servers I run which are the backoffice > stuff like SQL, Exhange, and DCs. There are a few other > servers where we still use arcserve for "simple file and > print" server backups. We plan to do a full evaluation of > what is out there next year when our new budget period > starts, and other than "ditch arcserve", we have a fairly > open mind about what to use instead. > > > -Original Message- > > From: Fioon [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > Sent: 04 October 2002 09:32 > > To: Exchange Discussions > > Subject: RE: Backing up Exchange 5.5 > > > > > > Hi Robert, > > > > So then, what software are you using & what is your current > > software max quality & relibility > > can provide ? > > > > Maybe i can apply !! > > > > Thanks > > -Original Message- > > From: Robert Moir [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > Sent: Friday, October 04, 2002 4:33 PM > > To: Exchange Discussions > > Subject: RE: Backing up Exchange 5.5 > > > > > > Yeah I've got an opinion on Brightstore sure enough, but as > > many people operate filters on "naughty" words, I'll confine > > myself to stating that it does not meet my minimum quality > > and reliability standards for server software. > > > > > -Original Message- > > > From: Fioon [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > > Sent: 04 October 2002 05:03 > > > To: Exchange Discussions > > > Subject: RE: Backing up Exchange 5.5 > > > > > > > > > > > > I've download the BE trial copy , but it can't run. > Funny, hang on > > > Self Extract. Download again, same thing happened again. > > > > > > Any opinion on new ArcServe2000 BrightStore for the Disaster > > > Recovery on Exchange 5.5 Issue ? > > > > > > Fin > > > -Original Message- > > > From: Daniel Chenault [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > > Sent: Thursday, October 03, 2002 11:53 PM > > > To: Exchange Discussions > > > Subject: Re: Backing up Exchange 5.5 > > > > > > > > > Yes, as a google search would have shown. > > > > > > - Original Message - > > > From: "Fioon" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > To: "Exchange Discussions" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > Sent: Thursday, October 03, 2002 1:09 AM > > > Subject: RE: Backing up Exchange 5.5 > > > > > > > > > > Hi, > > > > > > > > May i know which third party are you guys talking about on this > > > > "Backup Exec" ? It's Veritas ?? > > > > > > > > Thanks > > > > > > > > -Original Message- > > > > From: Karon Miller [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > > > Sent: Friday, August 09, 2002 2:20 AM > > > > To: Exchange Discussions > > > > Subject: Backing up Exchange 5.5 > > > > > > > > > > > > I know this has come up before but how is everyone else > backing up > > > > their Exchange servers. We're using Backup Exec and only > > > backing up > > > > the mailboxes not the pub.edb or priv.edb. Is it wise to > > > stop those > > > > services periodically to back those up? And how often? > We're not > > > > using the Open File Agent. > > > > > > > > > _ > > > > 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 PROTEC
RE: Backing up Exchange 5.5
Do you still remember the difficulty that you made on ArcServe ? Wondering .. Thanks Fiooon -Original Message- From: Robert Moir [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, October 04, 2002 4:49 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Backing up Exchange 5.5 Would you believe currently NTBackup - the windows 2000 version - on all the servers I run which are the backoffice stuff like SQL, Exhange, and DCs. There are a few other servers where we still use arcserve for "simple file and print" server backups. We plan to do a full evaluation of what is out there next year when our new budget period starts, and other than "ditch arcserve", we have a fairly open mind about what to use instead. > -Original Message- > From: Fioon [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: 04 October 2002 09:32 > To: Exchange Discussions > Subject: RE: Backing up Exchange 5.5 > > > Hi Robert, > > So then, what software are you using & what is your current > software max quality & relibility > can provide ? > > Maybe i can apply !! > > Thanks > -Original Message- > From: Robert Moir [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Friday, October 04, 2002 4:33 PM > To: Exchange Discussions > Subject: RE: Backing up Exchange 5.5 > > > Yeah I've got an opinion on Brightstore sure enough, but as > many people operate filters on "naughty" words, I'll confine > myself to stating that it does not meet my minimum quality > and reliability standards for server software. > > > -Original Message- > > From: Fioon [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > Sent: 04 October 2002 05:03 > > To: Exchange Discussions > > Subject: RE: Backing up Exchange 5.5 > > > > > > > > I've download the BE trial copy , but it can't run. Funny, > > hang on Self Extract. Download again, same thing happened again. > > > > Any opinion on new ArcServe2000 BrightStore for the Disaster > > Recovery on Exchange 5.5 Issue ? > > > > Fin > > -Original Message- > > From: Daniel Chenault [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > Sent: Thursday, October 03, 2002 11:53 PM > > To: Exchange Discussions > > Subject: Re: Backing up Exchange 5.5 > > > > > > Yes, as a google search would have shown. > > > > - Original Message - > > From: "Fioon" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > To: "Exchange Discussions" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Sent: Thursday, October 03, 2002 1:09 AM > > Subject: RE: Backing up Exchange 5.5 > > > > > > > Hi, > > > > > > May i know which third party are you guys talking about on this > > > "Backup Exec" ? It's Veritas ?? > > > > > > Thanks > > > > > > -Original Message- > > > From: Karon Miller [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > > Sent: Friday, August 09, 2002 2:20 AM > > > To: Exchange Discussions > > > Subject: Backing up Exchange 5.5 > > > > > > > > > I know this has come up before but how is everyone else backing up > > > their Exchange servers. We're using Backup Exec and only > > backing up > > > the mailboxes not the pub.edb or priv.edb. Is it wise to > > stop those > > > services periodically to back those up? And how often? We're not > > > using the Open File Agent. > > > > > > _ > > > 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]
RE: Backing up Exchange 5.5
That's the thing i've tried. Do a full backup , Disaster Recovery and then crash the server. Then restore from bare , it's working. Puzzle me ?? -Original Message- From: Robert Moir [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, October 04, 2002 4:37 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Backing up Exchange 5.5 > -Original Message- > From: Fioon [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: 04 October 2002 09:07 > To: Exchange Discussions > Subject: RE: Backing up Exchange 5.5 > > > > It's BrightStor , same under CA .. > Is ArcServe 2000 really that bad ? No. It's worse. > I've just tried, and it > turned out not too bad. On the middle of discussing want to > purchase or not !! Ok, so it has a pretty looking backup routine. You can restore a few files from it. Now test if you can do a full disaster recovery "bare metal server" back to fully working with it. A surprisingly high number of people struggle to do this despite jumping through every hoop in the CA book. And the licencing doesn't work properly so prepare for lots of random failures to backup when the licence decides to fail because it's bored. Thanks to my boss, I had to use it for exchange and SQL backups in the past and it never ever worked properly to the point where I could trust it to work on backing things up unsupervised, and I never trusted it to restore properly either after many bad experiences. Robert Moir MS MVP IT Systems Engineer Luton Sixth Form College >SELECT * FROM users WHERE clue > 0 0 rows returned _ 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: Backing up Exchange 5.5
Would you believe currently NTBackup - the windows 2000 version - on all the servers I run which are the backoffice stuff like SQL, Exhange, and DCs. There are a few other servers where we still use arcserve for "simple file and print" server backups. We plan to do a full evaluation of what is out there next year when our new budget period starts, and other than "ditch arcserve", we have a fairly open mind about what to use instead. > -Original Message- > From: Fioon [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: 04 October 2002 09:32 > To: Exchange Discussions > Subject: RE: Backing up Exchange 5.5 > > > Hi Robert, > > So then, what software are you using & what is your current > software max quality & relibility > can provide ? > > Maybe i can apply !! > > Thanks > -Original Message- > From: Robert Moir [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Friday, October 04, 2002 4:33 PM > To: Exchange Discussions > Subject: RE: Backing up Exchange 5.5 > > > Yeah I've got an opinion on Brightstore sure enough, but as > many people operate filters on "naughty" words, I'll confine > myself to stating that it does not meet my minimum quality > and reliability standards for server software. > > > -Original Message- > > From: Fioon [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > Sent: 04 October 2002 05:03 > > To: Exchange Discussions > > Subject: RE: Backing up Exchange 5.5 > > > > > > > > I've download the BE trial copy , but it can't run. Funny, > > hang on Self Extract. Download again, same thing happened again. > > > > Any opinion on new ArcServe2000 BrightStore for the Disaster > > Recovery on Exchange 5.5 Issue ? > > > > Fin > > -Original Message- > > From: Daniel Chenault [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > Sent: Thursday, October 03, 2002 11:53 PM > > To: Exchange Discussions > > Subject: Re: Backing up Exchange 5.5 > > > > > > Yes, as a google search would have shown. > > > > - Original Message - > > From: "Fioon" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > To: "Exchange Discussions" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Sent: Thursday, October 03, 2002 1:09 AM > > Subject: RE: Backing up Exchange 5.5 > > > > > > > Hi, > > > > > > May i know which third party are you guys talking about on this > > > "Backup Exec" ? It's Veritas ?? > > > > > > Thanks > > > > > > -Original Message- > > > From: Karon Miller [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > > Sent: Friday, August 09, 2002 2:20 AM > > > To: Exchange Discussions > > > Subject: Backing up Exchange 5.5 > > > > > > > > > I know this has come up before but how is everyone else backing up > > > their Exchange servers. We're using Backup Exec and only > > backing up > > > the mailboxes not the pub.edb or priv.edb. Is it wise to > > stop those > > > services periodically to back those up? And how often? We're not > > > using the Open File Agent. > > > > > > _ > > > 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: mailt
RE: Backing up Exchange 5.5
Hi Guys, Add me to the list of greivances.. Welcome to the club of arcserve victims. call them up.. particularly if you are a user from a country like Cyprus and they give you telephone numbers to all the centers in the world.. where you are greeted saying either.. well we dont have a support center here.. call this number ... or they send you a link to a page.. that is completely meaningless to the issue... Why do people still buy Arcserve... I am gonna suggest Veritas to the management ..Arcserve looses one more client. -Original Message- From: Robert Moir [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, October 04, 2002 11:37 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Backing up Exchange 5.5 > -Original Message- > From: Fioon [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: 04 October 2002 09:07 > To: Exchange Discussions > Subject: RE: Backing up Exchange 5.5 > > > > It's BrightStor , same under CA .. > Is ArcServe 2000 really that bad ? No. It's worse. > I've just tried, and it > turned out not too bad. On the middle of discussing want to > purchase or not !! Ok, so it has a pretty looking backup routine. You can restore a few files from it. Now test if you can do a full disaster recovery "bare metal server" back to fully working with it. A surprisingly high number of people struggle to do this despite jumping through every hoop in the CA book. And the licencing doesn't work properly so prepare for lots of random failures to backup when the licence decides to fail because it's bored. Thanks to my boss, I had to use it for exchange and SQL backups in the past and it never ever worked properly to the point where I could trust it to work on backing things up unsupervised, and I never trusted it to restore properly either after many bad experiences. Robert Moir MS MVP IT Systems Engineer Luton Sixth Form College >SELECT * FROM users WHERE clue > 0 0 rows returned _ 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: Backing up Exchange 5.5
Hi Robert, So then, what software are you using & what is your current software max quality & relibility can provide ? Maybe i can apply !! Thanks -Original Message- From: Robert Moir [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, October 04, 2002 4:33 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Backing up Exchange 5.5 Yeah I've got an opinion on Brightstore sure enough, but as many people operate filters on "naughty" words, I'll confine myself to stating that it does not meet my minimum quality and reliability standards for server software. > -Original Message- > From: Fioon [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: 04 October 2002 05:03 > To: Exchange Discussions > Subject: RE: Backing up Exchange 5.5 > > > > I've download the BE trial copy , but it can't run. Funny, > hang on Self Extract. Download again, same thing happened again. > > Any opinion on new ArcServe2000 BrightStore for the Disaster > Recovery on Exchange 5.5 Issue ? > > Fin > -Original Message- > From: Daniel Chenault [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Thursday, October 03, 2002 11:53 PM > To: Exchange Discussions > Subject: Re: Backing up Exchange 5.5 > > > Yes, as a google search would have shown. > > - Original Message - > From: "Fioon" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: "Exchange Discussions" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent: Thursday, October 03, 2002 1:09 AM > Subject: RE: Backing up Exchange 5.5 > > > > Hi, > > > > May i know which third party are you guys talking about on this > > "Backup Exec" ? It's Veritas ?? > > > > Thanks > > > > -Original Message- > > From: Karon Miller [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > Sent: Friday, August 09, 2002 2:20 AM > > To: Exchange Discussions > > Subject: Backing up Exchange 5.5 > > > > > > I know this has come up before but how is everyone else backing up > > their Exchange servers. We're using Backup Exec and only > backing up > > the mailboxes not the pub.edb or priv.edb. Is it wise to > stop those > > services periodically to back those up? And how often? We're not > > using the Open File Agent. > > > > _ > > 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: Backing up Exchange 5.5
> -Original Message- > From: Fioon [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: 04 October 2002 09:07 > To: Exchange Discussions > Subject: RE: Backing up Exchange 5.5 > > > > It's BrightStor , same under CA .. > Is ArcServe 2000 really that bad ? No. It's worse. > I've just tried, and it > turned out not too bad. On the middle of discussing want to > purchase or not !! Ok, so it has a pretty looking backup routine. You can restore a few files from it. Now test if you can do a full disaster recovery "bare metal server" back to fully working with it. A surprisingly high number of people struggle to do this despite jumping through every hoop in the CA book. And the licencing doesn't work properly so prepare for lots of random failures to backup when the licence decides to fail because it's bored. Thanks to my boss, I had to use it for exchange and SQL backups in the past and it never ever worked properly to the point where I could trust it to work on backing things up unsupervised, and I never trusted it to restore properly either after many bad experiences. Robert Moir MS MVP IT Systems Engineer Luton Sixth Form College >SELECT * FROM users WHERE clue > 0 0 rows returned _ 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: Backing up Exchange 5.5
Yeah I've got an opinion on Brightstore sure enough, but as many people operate filters on "naughty" words, I'll confine myself to stating that it does not meet my minimum quality and reliability standards for server software. > -Original Message- > From: Fioon [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: 04 October 2002 05:03 > To: Exchange Discussions > Subject: RE: Backing up Exchange 5.5 > > > > I've download the BE trial copy , but it can't run. Funny, > hang on Self Extract. Download again, same thing happened again. > > Any opinion on new ArcServe2000 BrightStore for the Disaster > Recovery on Exchange 5.5 Issue ? > > Fin > -Original Message- > From: Daniel Chenault [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Thursday, October 03, 2002 11:53 PM > To: Exchange Discussions > Subject: Re: Backing up Exchange 5.5 > > > Yes, as a google search would have shown. > > - Original Message - > From: "Fioon" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: "Exchange Discussions" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent: Thursday, October 03, 2002 1:09 AM > Subject: RE: Backing up Exchange 5.5 > > > > Hi, > > > > May i know which third party are you guys talking about on this > > "Backup Exec" ? It's Veritas ?? > > > > Thanks > > > > -Original Message- > > From: Karon Miller [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > Sent: Friday, August 09, 2002 2:20 AM > > To: Exchange Discussions > > Subject: Backing up Exchange 5.5 > > > > > > I know this has come up before but how is everyone else backing up > > their Exchange servers. We're using Backup Exec and only > backing up > > the mailboxes not the pub.edb or priv.edb. Is it wise to > stop those > > services periodically to back those up? And how often? We're not > > using the Open File Agent. > > > > _ > > 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: Unable to publish form to organizational forms folder
Yes I do have owner rights, but it still won't let me! Vanessa -Original Message- From: John Q Jr. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 03 October 2002 19:46 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Re: Unable to publish form to organizational forms folder Do you have owner rights to that public folder? - Original Message - From: "Ed Crowley" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Exchange Discussions" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Wednesday, October 02, 2002 8:55 PM Subject: RE: Unable to publish form to organizational forms folder > Publish or perish! > > Well, here's a guess: Q241707. That applies to Exchange 2000, > though, so you might try searching TechNet for other suggestions. > > Ed Crowley MCSE+I MVP > Technical Consultant > hp Services > "There are seldom good technological solutions to behavioral > problems." > > > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Watkins V > Sent: Tuesday, October 01, 2002 6:41 AM > To: Exchange Discussions > Subject: Unable to publish form to organizational forms folder > > > > When I try to publish, I get the message that I am unable to publish > due to a mapi error, I do not have owner rights. Have checked on > administrator that I have owner rights on the folder and I do. What > else could be wrong? Am using Exchange 5.5 sp4 NT4 sp6a etc. > Any ideas please, > many thanks > > Vanessa Watkins > Royal Holloway, University of London > > > > > _ > 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: Backing up Exchange 5.5
It's BrightStor , same under CA .. Is ArcServe 2000 really that bad ? I've just tried, and it turned out not too bad. On the middle of discussing want to purchase or not !! -Original Message- From: William Lefkovics [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, October 04, 2002 2:53 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Backing up Exchange 5.5 Brightwhore? Same crap. New name. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Fioon Sent: Thursday, October 03, 2002 9:03 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Backing up Exchange 5.5 I've download the BE trial copy , but it can't run. Funny, hang on Self Extract. Download again, same thing happened again. Any opinion on new ArcServe2000 BrightStore for the Disaster Recovery on Exchange 5.5 Issue ? Fin -Original Message- From: Daniel Chenault [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, October 03, 2002 11:53 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Re: Backing up Exchange 5.5 Yes, as a google search would have shown. - Original Message - From: "Fioon" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Exchange Discussions" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Thursday, October 03, 2002 1:09 AM Subject: RE: Backing up Exchange 5.5 > Hi, > > May i know which third party are you guys talking about on this "Backup > Exec" ? > It's Veritas ?? > > Thanks _ 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: New Exchange Server
I know, but that's not a valid reason for dropping raid.. I would say identify where the problem was (if it was a bad card, bad drivers or just an unrelated crash), and fix it. -Original Message- From: Hurst, Paul [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 03 October 2002 5:21 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: New Exchange Server Andrea, I do believe though he said that... 'I had an Exchange server. Page file was on a separate RAID1 > volume. RAID1 broke. Server crashed with a blue screen. ' IE he had it > on Raid 1 and it still failed (don't know why probably because of a problem with the Raid1 hardware/BIOS or it was the ID0 drive in the mirror? Cheers Paul Standards are like toothbrushes, everyone wants one but not yours -Original Message- From: Andrea Coppini [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 03 October 2002 15:50 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: New Exchange Server Picture this: Your single (let's say IDE) pagefile drive fails, so your system crashes. You run down to your store or computer shop to buy a new drive (system still down) You install the disk in another machine (since Exchange might not start up without page drive) (system still down) You partition/format the drive (system still down) You install the new IDE disk in your exchange server (system still down) You start up Exchange. If you can afford all that downtime, go ahead and use a single drive. But now let's look at RAID1 swap: One of your swap disks fail.. Raid1 is broken so machine keeps running on one disk You take the bad disk Offline and pull it out You stroll and whistle your way down to your store or computer shop to get a new disk, maybe even have a couple of doughnuts on the way... You insert the new disk in your exchange server. run the RAID tools, rebuild the RAID. Pat yourself on the back for 0% downtime. -Original Message- From: Andrey Fyodorov [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 03 October 2002 4:23 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: New Exchange Server If it happened once it will probably happen again. I see no big benefit of putting page file on RAID. If I had a limited number of drive bays, I would rather have a separate RAID1 for transaction logs and a separate RAID5 for informations store database files; and if no more drive array bays are available for the page file volume - I would stick an IDE or SCSI drive in the CD-ROM bay or some other available space and connect it to the onboard controller and achieve better performance instead of perceived reliability. -Original Message- From: Robert Moir [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, October 03, 2002 9:38 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: New Exchange Server So because you once had a problem with RAID that caused it to stop working must mean that it's always unreliable for everyone else every time? Robert Moir IT Systems Engineer Luton Sixth Form College >SELECT * FROM users WHERE clue > 0 0 rows returned > -Original Message- > From: Andrey Fyodorov [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: 03 October 2002 13:53 > To: Exchange Discussions > Subject: RE: New Exchange Server > > > Do you need me to explain it all in small details? > > I had an Exchange server. Page file was on a separate RAID1 volume. > RAID1 broke. Server crashed with a blue screen. Having the page file > on RAID1 did not necessarily make it more reliable. Might as well have > had the page file on a single drive. Why did I write this? Because I > was answering someone else's remark "Placing the pagefile on a > separate drive sacrifices reliability for performance." > > Ok now? Can I go? > > -Original Message- > From: Ed Crowley [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Wednesday, October 02, 2002 11:52 PM > To: Exchange Discussions > Subject: RE: New Exchange Server > > > What does that have to do with Exchange? > > Ed Crowley MCSE+I MVP > Technical Consultant > hp Services > "There are seldom good technological solutions to behavioral > problems." > > > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Andrey > Fyodorov > Sent: Tuesday, October 01, 2002 9:04 AM > To: Exchange Discussions > Subject: RE: New Exchange Server > > > Well once I had a broken RAID1 on the page file volume. RAID did not > save me. The server blue-screened. The RAID1 was physical. How about > that for reliability? > > -Original Message- > From: Dennis Depp [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Tuesday, October 01, 2002 7:46 AM > To: Exchange Discussions > Subject: RE: New Exchange Server > > > Why? Placing the pagefile on a separate drive sacrifices reliability > for performance. This is not normally a choice I would make on a > production server. > > Dennis Depp > > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Andrey > Fyodorov > Sent: Monday, September 30, 2002 12:58 PM > To: Exchange Discussions > Subject: RE: New Ex
Re: IS 70GB and growing....
I am reading all this thread, and still can't find which part made you so angry. How should the question be asked, so you would be so nice, to provide some information.. - Original Message - From: "Ed Crowley" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Exchange Discussions" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Thursday, October 03, 2002 5:25 AM Subject: RE: IS 70GB and growing > Heaven help him. > > Ed Crowley MCSE+I MVP > Technical Consultant > hp Services > "There are seldom good technological solutions to behavioral problems." > > > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Mark Hanji > Sent: Tuesday, October 01, 2002 1:00 PM > To: Exchange Discussions > Subject: Re: IS 70GB and growing > > > Hi. > > It may be some one you know. > > > - Original Message - > From: "Ed Crowley" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: "Exchange Discussions" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent: Monday, September 30, 2002 6:39 PM > Subject: RE: IS 70GB and growing > > > > Heaven help the consultant Hanji hires. > > > > Ed Crowley MCSE+Internet MVP kcCC+I > > Tech Consultant > > hp Services > > Protecting the world from PSTs and Bricked Backups! > > > > > > -Original Message- > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Great Cthulhu > > > Jones > > Sent: Monday, September 30, 2002 5:01 AM > > To: Exchange Discussions > > Subject: RE: IS 70GB and growing > > > > > > I vote Hanji hires a consultant to fix the problem. He's not showing > > much improvement... > > > > (:= > > > > -Original Message- > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Couch, Nate > > Sent: Monday, September 30, 2002 6:55 AM > > To: Exchange Discussions > > Subject: RE: IS 70GB and growing > > > > > > I vote for two servers. > > > > Nate Couch > > EDS Messaging > > > > > -- > > > From: Great Cthulhu Jones > > > Reply To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > Sent: Sunday, September 29, 2002 20:20 > > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > Subject: RE: IS 70GB and growing > > > > > > Who cares about it, though? If you need two servers, you need two > > > servers. If not, buy more hard drives. > > > > > > (:= > > > > > > -Original Message- > > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Sakti > > > Chakravarty (Senteq) > > > Sent: Sunday, September 29, 2002 6:44 PM > > > To: Exchange Discussions > > > Subject: RE: IS 70GB and growing > > > > > > > > > If I recall correctly, using the Move Mailbox utility retains SIS. > > > > > > -Original Message- > > > From: Mark Hanji [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > > Sent: Monday, 30 September 2002 6:29 AM > > > To: Exchange Discussions > > > Subject: IS 70GB and growing > > > > > > > > > Hi guys. > > > > > > I have an exchange 5.5 on a strong machine. The IS is over 73GB > > > (total > > > > > of 500 users). I am thinking whether it is the right move to split > > > this box into two servers. > > > The main problem is that I will loose SIS... > > > On the other hand, I will have two smaller databases. > > > > > > I am sure some of you had this scenario in the past. I would like to > > > hear your opinions. In case it is important, the IS is going to be > > > moved to EMC box in 3 months > > > (part of storage project). > > > > > > I am mostly intersted hearing from happy users with such big IS (are > > > there?!) > > > > > > Thanks! > > > > > > > > > _ > > > 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:
