RE: Non-existent E2K size limits?
Did you check out Q326998? Gèoff... -Original Message- From: Julian Nimmo [mailto:discussion-exchange;bbs.eu.com] Sent: Wednesday, October 30, 2002 4:16 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Re: Non-existent E2K size limits? The message is sent from any Outlook 2000 client directly to the Exchange 2000 server, which then sends the NDR below to the sender. It doesn't get any further than a single step in the path! It allows large messages in, no problem. The NDR is definitely coming from the postmaster on the E2k server, and it has the server FQDN in the error at the bottom: mailserver.ourdomain.com #5.2.3 Any further ideas? Gary What is the exact path that message took? - Original Message - From: Gary Duckman [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, October 28, 2002 7:05 AM Subject: Non-existent E2K size limits? Hi Guys, I have an E2K single server that is not allowing messages over 6Mb to be sent out. I have checked the outbound limits in the SMTP protocol, the default limits on the main settings and the user's AD settings. I have searched Microsoft support for all 5.2.3 errors as well, and looked at all settings suggested there, but with no joy. The server can receive large emails, no problem. It is not the ISP. The message gets returned with the following error: Your message did not reach some or all of the intended recipients. Subject: large email test Sent: 21/10/02 09:02 The following recipient(s) could not be reached: [EMAIL PROTECTED] on 21/10/02 09:02 The message was not delivered because it is larger than the current system limit. Create a shorter message body or remove attachments and try sending it again. I am obviously missing something obvious - anybody know of any other restriction or setting that might cause this error? Thanks, Gary Duckman BBS Gary Duckman Networking Manager Tel: +44 (0) 20 8663 0077 Fax: +44 (0) 870 1389349 E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] This Email is confidential, may be legally privileged, and is for the intended recipient only. Access to, disclosure of, copying, distribution of, or reliance on any part of it by anyone else is prohibited and may be a criminal offence. Please delete if obtained in error and Email confirmation to the sender. Any views expressed in this message are those of the individual sender, except where the sender specifically states them to be the views of Beckenham Business Systems. _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:leave-exchange;ls.swynk.com 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:leave-exchange;ls.swynk.com 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:leave-exchange;ls.swynk.com 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:leave-exchange;ls.swynk.com Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Installing an internet mail connector
This is new to me so I was hoping for a few suggestions and some help. I have Exchange 5.5 in my organization. I currently have an internet mail connector. However the server is having problems and I am building a new one. My question is. How do I install the internet mail connector? I do not see it as part of the installation options. By having two internet mail connectors in the same site... will it cause any problems or can they co-exist until I can remove the original one? Any information would help. Thanks all. Ed *This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the addressee. If you have received this email in error please notify [EMAIL PROTECTED] Any views or opinions presented in this email are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of Stainsafe Inc. or any of its subsidiaries or affiliates. The company accepts no liability for any damage caused by any virus transmitted by this email.* _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:leave-exchange;ls.swynk.com Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Exchange 2000 Active Directory Attributes
Chris and Greg, thank you both for your assistance. We really only need to add as contacts to of Active Directory the people who do not have Exchange mailboxes. They have their mail on other non-exchange systems. I understand that MMS can do this job for us, but MMS 3.0 is not release yet and so we are trying to find another way to maintain the synchronization of the Active Directory with the HR database which is oracle-based. However, we can get an extracted flat HR file to work with, if we need to do that. Thank you again. -Original Message- From: Chris Scharff [mailto:chris_scharff;messageone.com] Sent: Tuesday, November 05, 2002 5:08 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Exchange 2000 Active Directory Attributes I'd always categorized you as $arse0 Greg[1], but thanks for the additional information. I think Ron had also previously asked about metadirectory tools, some of which might be able to provide significant assistance in developing an overall data synchronization strategy. [1] g -Original Message- From: Greg Deckler [mailto:greg;infonition.com] Sent: Tuesday, November 05, 2002 12:43 PM To: Exchange Discussions $arse1 reporting for duty. Chris has everything right here, especially about how to think of accounts and mailboxes. There are dozens of fields that you can test for to determine whether or not an account is mailbox-enabled. One such field is msExchHomeServerName. The other item to note here is that most of the code routines used to mailbox-enable someone will simply fail if the account is already mailbox-enabled, so you really do not have to be too concerned with it. A good example is the Exchange Migration Wizard's ability to flip contacts into mailboxes. If you happen to run it against a pre-existing mailbox, it simply does nothing. So, no harm, no foul. Ronald, I strongly urge you to read up on accounts/contacts, mail-enabled accounts/contacts and mailbox-enabled accounts. You still seem to be speaking in E55 terminology and it is a whole new ball game in E2K and AD. BTW, what HR system are you interfacing with? More and more of them are starting to provide connectors with AD. At the risk of a moron or two trying to indicate that I'm rude in my response, can I point that there isn't really a difference between a user account and a mailbox per se (or at least that's a backwards way to think about it for your purposes), instead there is a user object and that object can be mail or mailbox enabled. In your instance I believe that you will first want to determine if there is a user account for the user in question. If there is, then you want to determine if it is a mail enabled or a mailbox enabled object. If it is neither, you likely want to mail enable it, rather than create a contact for it. If a user object does not exist for a user, then you have to decide if you want to create a user account for it (and optionally mail or mailbox enable it) or create a contact for it. Further risking the ire of a moron or two, I'll start first with a fishing lesson.. and point you to two articles which show how to create mailbox and mail enabled users respectively and hint that they provide a good starting point for further research on your query. http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/default.asp?url=/library/en- us/wss/wss/_cd o_creating_a_mailbox_enabled_recipient.asp http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/default.asp?url=/library/en- us/wss/wss/_cd o_creating_a_contact.asp As an additional pointer, you might also want to take a look at ADSI Edit which can provide some additional useful information. If after looking over that information you have additional queries, please feel free to post a follow-up question or three. Or, just wait for $arse1 and $arse2 to post much more complete and helpful answers than mine. -Original Message- From: Bare, Ronald A. [mailto:RABARE;ANL.GOV] Sent: Monday, November 04, 2002 3:43 PM To: Exchange Discussions Can anyone point me to information on what Active Directory attributes are used to indicate that an Exchange 2000 mailbox has been associate with an Active Directory account. We are trying to prepare a program to synchronize the Active Directory with our HR directory and we need this information to decide for which users to create contact entries. We (of course) do not want to create contacts for the people who already Exchange enabled accounts. Thank you. _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:leave-exchange;ls.swynk.com Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ:
RE: Using a PST for 'overflow'
Wtf? -Original Message- From: Seitz, Peter [mailto:PETER.SEITZ;cubic.com] Sent: Wednesday, November 06, 2002 10:50 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Using a PST for 'overflow' .cshrc short% more .cshrc # @(#)cshrc 1.11 89/11/29 SMI umask 022 if ( $?prompt ) then set history=32 endif # # oracle environment variables setenv ORACLE_HOME /apps/oracle/816 setenv HARVESTDIR /home/user3/harvest5 setenv ORACLE_BASE /apps/oracle/816 setenv ORACLE_SID HARVEST5 setenv ORACLE_TERM dtterm setenv PATH $ORACLE_HOME/bin:$PATH setenv ODBC_HOME /apps/caiptodbc setenv ODBCINI $ODBC_HOME/odbc.ini # Harvest environment variables #setenv HARVESTHOME /apps/harvest5 setenv HARVESTHOME /home/user3/harvest5 #setenv LM_LICENSE_FILE $HARVESTHOME/license/license.dat setenv LM_LICENSE_FILE /ca_lic setenv PATH $HARVESTHOME/bin:$PATH setenv PATH /apps/caiptodbc/bin:$PATH #setenv LD_LIBRARY_PATH /home/user3/harvest5/lib:/usr/local/CAcrypto:/usr/pec/li b/sun4_solaris:/usr/local/CAlib:/apps/caiptodbc/lib setenv LD_LIBRARY_PATH /home/user3/harvest5/lib:/usr/local/CAcrypto:/usr/pec/lib /sun4_solaris:/usr/local/CAlib # setenv DEFAULT_BROWSER hotjava setenv HARREPHOME /apps/Harvest5/harrep # # FCP environment variables # setenv GALAXYHOME /apps/FCP/Galaxy setenv PATH $GALAXYHOME/bin:$PATH #set path=(/bin /usr/bin /usr/ucb /etc $HARVESTHOME/lib $ODBC_HOME/lib $ODBC_HOM E/bin $ORACLE_HOME/bin $ORACLE_HOME/lib .) set path=(/bin /usr/bin /usr/ucb /etc $HARVESTHOME/lib $HARVESTHOME/bin $ORACLE_ HOME/bin $ORACLE_HOME/lib .) setenv OPENWINHOME /usr/openwin short% -Original Message- From: Niki Blowfield - Exchange [mailto:exchangelist;partition.co.uk] Sent: Wednesday, November 06, 2002 6:26 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Using a PST for 'overflow' We've been forced into restricting mailboxes as everyones being moved to a central server. Most users are having no problems getting their mailboxes down to 25-50mb, some much lower, a handful much higher. I'm finding it easiest to set some limits on the IS, then override that on individual mailboxes, as required, the MD for instance has a 500mb mailbox, after 2 CD's worth of archiving :-O What I've been saying to users is delete everything you can, anything older than 2 months that you need to keep put into a subfolder, then I go round and export these folders to PSTs, and dump them in their user folders on their local file servers, meaning they're included in the backups on their local servers, but the backup and disk space burden is removed from the Exchange server. I test the PSTs before deleting the originals, but I've seen nothing bigger than about 4-500mb. With enforced limits user will have to keep things in order, and we'll have to look at ongoing archiving in the method described above. 99% aren't aware of PST's, which is probably a good thing, though its added to my workload -Original Message- From: David N. Precht [mailto:discussions;entrysecurity.com] Sent: 06 November 2002 13:01 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Using a PST for 'overflow' I do. They don't know they can save them up on their home folder. They know I don't back up the workstations, but most think that you only can save PSTs on local drives ;) -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:bounce-exchange-224131;ls.swynk.com] On Behalf Of Sander Van Butzelaar Sent: Wednesday, November 06, 2002 07:05 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Using a PST for 'overflow' Why the hard line approach? I never said I made the backup of the PST, that's why one has a facilities department...I also didn't say that I found that mail particularly important, the user wants to keep it, so why not let him/her? They know not to come to me regarding items in PST files. Give the user a bit of slack here David. Sander -Original Message- From: David N. Precht [mailto:discussions;entrysecurity.com] Sent: 06 November 2002 01:56 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Using a PST for 'overflow' No, just inform them of the 'No PST Backup' policy. I don't back up PSTs. Period. Either its in their mailbox or it is not that important. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:bounce-exchange-224131;ls.swynk.com] On Behalf Of Sander Van Butzelaar Sent: Wednesday, November 06, 2002 05:49 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Using a PST for 'overflow' I have a couple of users who do the same thing. They don't want to delete old mail (for whatever reason) and I can't keep extending their mailbox sizes. So they move to PST. Be aware of the risks here! Make a periodic backup of that PST as hard drives are prone to failure. Sander -Original Message- From: Niki Blowfield - Exchange [mailto:exchangelist;partition.co.uk] Sent: 06 November 2002 12:45 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Using a PST for 'overflow' I was having a
RE: RBL's
Lets talk about something else like making it illegal to smoke in restaurants or bars -Original Message- From: Andy David [mailto:davida;vss.com] Sent: Wednesday, November 06, 2002 9:45 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: RBL's Caution: Thread is hot. -Original Message- From: Chris Scharff [mailto:chris_scharff;messageone.com] Sent: Wednesday, November 06, 2002 10:47 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: RBL's At no time have I said that companies can't choose to implement RBLs; simply that they should be cognizant of the complete ramifications of the technology. Obtaining this level of understanding is a much better example of risk management than some theoretical defense against a risk which appears to have no foundation in reality. Please don't use the McDonalds lawsuit as some type of example of the legal system gone bezerk. If you actually understood the history of the case, you'd find that the judgment itself was well within the bounds of reason, even if the monetary damages awarded appear to be a bit shocking. -Original Message- From: Finch Brett [mailto:brett.finch;hrs.ualberta.ca] Sent: Wednesday, November 06, 2002 1:31 AM To: Exchange Discussions Can you say 'risk management'. If someone can drive up to a window, order a coffee then take the lid off, drive over a speed bump and sue someone else, anything is possible :) -Original Message- From: Chris Scharff [mailto:chris_scharff;messageone.com] Sent: Tuesday, November 05, 2002 21:20 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: RBL's I've never heard of a single instance where a lawsuit was initiated against an organization based on incoming *spam*. Can you point to one? I can point to deals which didn't get done because of RBLs which resulted in real monetary loss, which would seem to make one more likely than the other unless you can point to a court case I'm not aware of. Matt's client side could technically be much different from a normal organization since his firm provides hosting to businesses (clients) who have their own users (another type of client). There are plenty of examples of server based filtering based on individual user settings which could potentially meet his objective and address your objection. Most of those solutions are poorly done IMNSHO. RBLs in general aren't content filtering solutions, they are connection filtering solutions. While they may at some level achieve similar results, their objectives are actually quite different. -Original Message- From: Finch Brett [mailto:brett.finch;hrs.ualberta.ca] Sent: Tuesday, November 05, 2002 4:46 PM To: Exchange Discussions I've watched this thread for a while. I don't buy the argument that a ten million deal will fail because of a bounced email via RBL. It's just as likely that a dept. with predominant females could sue for fifteen million for sexual harassment in the fact the company with the ten million dollar deal didn't take reasonable steps to protect them from this spam. There also seems to be no argument about the value of email in the workplace and that a business may find they loose a ten thousand dollar deal but save fifteen thousand in the fact their people are actually doing what they were hired to do (as mentioned in other posts bandwidth costs, storage costs as well). As for the per client configuration, that works until they start adding their contacts to the junk list or they log into a Terminal Server or via wireless with a PDA. We also don't hire people based on their skills to manage their email. Finding a moderate RBL with reasonable rules and sending a nice e-mail back to a would be spammer seems to work as well as anything. -Original Message- From: Matt Natkin [mailto:mnatkin;natco-inc.com] Sent: Tuesday, November 05, 2002 11:49 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: RBL's Very true..We have hosted exchange for business and we get the sh-t spammed out of us. But we do not block any email! That may change as our customers are complaining bitterly. The best solution we would like is a filter on the client side and not the server side. MacAfee spam kill product looks nice but I do not know if it can talk to Exchange server. (not POP) I just felt we started something ugly on this list!!:) Wanted to clarify why we were interested. -Original Message- From: Chris Scharff [mailto:chris_scharff;messageone.com] Sent: Tuesday, November 05, 2002 11:35 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: RBL's And in general, the business needs of a firm providing free web based e-mail, vs. the business needs of a Fortune 500 company are a tad different. So are the usage patterns and a host of other factors. My only comment about RBLs as it related to your question (not being defensive, just reiterating for those who
Upgrade 5.5 on Nt 4 to 2000 question
I have read much and am feeling pretty comfortable starting this whole process but just have a couple questions I would like to comfirm. First of all when on my network I have just the one NT 4.0 server (non DC) left to upgrade that is running exchange 5.5 and I upgrade it to 2000 I am going to promote it to a DC before touching exchange. Are there any problems with this as far as exchange 5.5 functioning on this server if need be? Then when I run ADC I can set it to connect to the same server its running on correct? Then after ADC has done its thing I will start the upgrade to exchange 2000. This is the basic path I am taking. I will have 2 other servers upgraded to windows 2000 as DC's before I start so there should be no problems there. Just looking for any insite or peculiar problems with following this path for my server. Thanks _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:leave-exchange;ls.swynk.com Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Using a PST for 'overflow'
Tongue out of cheek - this is a product design problem of course. Give me one good reason for Exchange being in the storage or data management business. How it ought to work in a world with Active Directories and Distributed File System overlays to NTFS is that a mailbox should be a pointer to user provided storage. Who provides your snail mail box? It's not the post office, unless you are renting a PO Box. Normal delivery is to storage that you provide, structure and manage. Why does Exchange deliver primarily to message stores? Because of a lack of sufficient protocols and customer demand to do it right. If your customer thinks your service is inadequate, your customer is not wrong. As someone earlier in this thread said so eloquently (if misguidedly) duh! -Original Message- From: Etts, Russell [mailto:retts;harman.com] Sent: Wednesday, November 06, 2002 8:35 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Using a PST for 'overflow' Hi there I have the same issue here. People have PST files that are well over a gig, and we had one person go over the 2 gig limit. No matter what we tell them, they insist that they need a mailbox over a gig. I limit them to a max of 300 megs, no matter how much crying they do. I just don't know what to do. I have told people once their PSTs hit 600 megs, then I'll transfer it to my machine and burn them a CD rom. Thanks Russell -Original Message- From: David N. Precht [mailto:discussions;entrysecurity.com] Sent: Wednesday, November 06, 2002 6:56 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Using a PST for 'overflow' No, just inform them of the 'No PST Backup' policy. I don't back up PSTs. Period. Either its in their mailbox or it is not that important. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:bounce-exchange-224131;ls.swynk.com] On Behalf Of Sander Van Butzelaar Sent: Wednesday, November 06, 2002 05:49 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Using a PST for 'overflow' I have a couple of users who do the same thing. They don't want to delete old mail (for whatever reason) and I can't keep extending their mailbox sizes. So they move to PST. Be aware of the risks here! Make a periodic backup of that PST as hard drives are prone to failure. Sander -Original Message- From: Niki Blowfield - Exchange [mailto:exchangelist;partition.co.uk] Sent: 06 November 2002 12:45 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Using a PST for 'overflow' I was having a discussion with someone the other day and he mentioned this phrase in passing, that they used PST files when user mailboxes became full I didn't dwell on this as we were talking about something else, but can anyone suggest what he may have meant? We are now enforcing stricter limits on mailbox size and would be interested in something like this. For ongoing maintenance, is Outlooks Autoarchiving a viable solution? i.e. does this move mail out of the server information store and into a PST in the users local profile? Thanks _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:leave-exchange;ls.swynk.com 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:leave-exchange;ls.swynk.com 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:leave-exchange;ls.swynk.com 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:leave-exchange;ls.swynk.com 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:leave-exchange;ls.swynk.com Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Suppressing the envelope
I've looked for this off and on an never had any luck finding it. Now we have an application server that is being shared, and folks are complaining that the envelop icon is appearing multiple times when they use Outlook via this server. Here's the question: Is there some way to suppress the envelope icon that shows up in the task bar when new mail comes in? Many thanks! Darcy Adams Sr. Exchange Administrator Getty Images 601 N. 34th Street Seattle, WA 98103 Tel 206-925-6617 Cell 206-255-0169 http://www.gettyimages.com [EMAIL PROTECTED] === This email and its contents are confidential. If you are not the intended recipient, please do not disclose or use the information within this email or its attachments. If you have received this email in error, please delete it immediately. Thank you. === _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:leave-exchange;ls.swynk.com Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Exchange 2000 Active Directory Attributes
Well, if you can get a flat file, then you can use CSVDE or LDIFDE to get the users into AD. Of course, synchronization is going to be a problem. I actually put together a batch file for a client that sucked down a flat CSV file, reformatted it for CSVDE and imported the contacts. It also generated a delete file which on subsequent runs blasted all previously created contacts and the imported them again. A really, really crude form of syncrhonization to be sure, but it worked. Is your Oracle HR system LDAP compliant? If so, my company has a tool called Furnace. Furnace is primarily geared toward Exchange-to-Exchange organization connectivity for synchronizing directories, free/busy info and public folders, but the directory synchronization piece will actually work for any LDAP compliant directory. Chris and Greg, thank you both for your assistance. We really only need to add as contacts to of Active Directory the people who do not have Exchange mailboxes. They have their mail on other non-exchange systems. I understand that MMS can do this job for us, but MMS 3.0 is not release yet and so we are trying to find another way to maintain the synchronization of the Active Directory with the HR database which is oracle-based. However, we can get an extracted flat HR file to work with, if we need to do that. Thank you again. -Original Message- From: Chris Scharff [mailto:chris_scharff;messageone.com] Sent: Tuesday, November 05, 2002 5:08 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Exchange 2000 Active Directory Attributes I'd always categorized you as $arse0 Greg[1], but thanks for the additional information. I think Ron had also previously asked about metadirectory tools, some of which might be able to provide significant assistance in developing an overall data synchronization strategy. [1] g -Original Message- From: Greg Deckler [mailto:greg;infonition.com] Sent: Tuesday, November 05, 2002 12:43 PM To: Exchange Discussions $arse1 reporting for duty. Chris has everything right here, especially about how to think of accounts and mailboxes. There are dozens of fields that you can test for to determine whether or not an account is mailbox-enabled. One such field is msExchHomeServerName. The other item to note here is that most of the code routines used to mailbox-enable someone will simply fail if the account is already mailbox-enabled, so you really do not have to be too concerned with it. A good example is the Exchange Migration Wizard's ability to flip contacts into mailboxes. If you happen to run it against a pre-existing mailbox, it simply does nothing. So, no harm, no foul. Ronald, I strongly urge you to read up on accounts/contacts, mail-enabled accounts/contacts and mailbox-enabled accounts. You still seem to be speaking in E55 terminology and it is a whole new ball game in E2K and AD. BTW, what HR system are you interfacing with? More and more of them are starting to provide connectors with AD. At the risk of a moron or two trying to indicate that I'm rude in my response, can I point that there isn't really a difference between a user account and a mailbox per se (or at least that's a backwards way to think about it for your purposes), instead there is a user object and that object can be mail or mailbox enabled. In your instance I believe that you will first want to determine if there is a user account for the user in question. If there is, then you want to determine if it is a mail enabled or a mailbox enabled object. If it is neither, you likely want to mail enable it, rather than create a contact for it. If a user object does not exist for a user, then you have to decide if you want to create a user account for it (and optionally mail or mailbox enable it) or create a contact for it. Further risking the ire of a moron or two, I'll start first with a fishing lesson.. and point you to two articles which show how to create mailbox and mail enabled users respectively and hint that they provide a good starting point for further research on your query. http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/default.asp?url=/library/en- us/wss/wss/_cd o_creating_a_mailbox_enabled_recipient.asp http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/default.asp?url=/library/en- us/wss/wss/_cd o_creating_a_contact.asp As an additional pointer, you might also want to take a look at ADSI Edit which can provide some additional useful information. If after looking over that information you have additional queries, please feel free to post a follow-up question or three. Or, just wait for $arse1 and $arse2 to post much more complete and helpful answers than mine. -Original Message- From: Bare, Ronald A. [mailto:RABARE;ANL.GOV] Sent: Monday, November 04, 2002 3:43 PM To: Exchange Discussions Can anyone
RE: Postmaster reply address
No. root@, postmaster@, hostmaster@, abuse@, etc. are just strongly suggested iirc. -Original Message- From: Drew Nicholson [mailto:DNicholson;rapidapp.com] Posted At: Wednesday, November 06, 2002 11:05 AM Posted To: MSExchange Mailing List Conversation: Postmaster reply address Subject: RE: Postmaster reply address I don't know if you _can_ change it, but you shouldn't. Isn't there an RFC that says a system has to have to have [EMAIL PROTECTED]? Anyway, just configure your profile (or another one) to look at that mailbox. Drew Nicholson Technical Writer Network Engineer LAN Manager RapidApp 312-372-7188 (work) 312-543-0008 (cell) Born To Edit -Original Message- From: Woodruff, Michael [mailto:MWoodruff;inchord.com] Sent: Wednesday, November 06, 2002 8:20 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Postmaster reply address Exchange2k SP3 I am having trouble trying to figure out how to change the postmaster reply address on NDRs sent to internet users. Is it possible? _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:leave-exchange;ls.swynk.com 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:leave-exchange;ls.swynk.com 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:leave-exchange;ls.swynk.com Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Installing an internet mail connector
First of all, in E55, it is the Internet Mail Service. Second, man; not to be rude, but do a little research. I mean, go into the E55 Administrator program and hit the freakin' help menu. I pulled this DIRECTLY from Books Online: You can add an Internet Mail Service to a site that has an existing service. Only one Internet Mail Service can be installed on a single server. You should consider adding another Internet Mail Service when: Backlogs regularly build up in one of the Internet Mail Service queues. A backup computer is required to eliminate any interruption of the mail transfer between the Microsoft Exchange Server site and the other SMTP hosts. When your site has more than one Internet Mail Service, you should consider the following: If the amount of mail to specific domains on the SMTP messaging system can be divided, consider configuring each of the Internet Mail Services to process mail for specific domains only. You can assign a cost to the address spaces of each Internet Mail Service. This partially determines Internet Mail Service throughput and can be used to optimize Internet Mail Service performance. If incoming and outgoing mail to the SMTP messaging system is balanced, consider configuring one Internet Mail Service to process incoming messages and the other Internet Mail Service to process outgoing messages. When you add a new Internet Mail Service, you may need to perform one or more of the following tasks: Modify the address space of existing Internet Mail Services depending upon the address space you assign to the new Internet Mail Service. Change the maximum number of inbound and outbound connections of existing Internet Mail Services depending upon the number of inbound and outbound connections you want to assign to the new Internet Mail Service. Change the DNS or Hosts file to reflect the existence of the new Internet Mail Service host. Change the MX records in DNS to forward mail to a new Internet Mail Service host if the primary Internet Mail Service is down or too busy. Here is a brief step-by-step: 1. Start Exchange Server Administrator program. 2. On the File menu, click New Other, and then click Internet Mail Service. 3. Finish the wizard with all the necessary information. This is new to me so I was hoping for a few suggestions and some help. I have Exchange 5.5 in my organization. I currently have an internet mail connector. However the server is having problems and I am building a new one. My question is. How do I install the internet mail connector? I do not see it as part of the installation options. By having two internet mail connectors in the same site... will it cause any problems or can they co-exist until I can remove the original one? Any information would help. Thanks all. Ed *This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the addressee. If you have received this email in error please notify [EMAIL PROTECTED] Any views or opinions presented in this email are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of Stainsafe Inc. or any of its subsidiaries or affiliates. The company accepts no liability for any damage caused by any virus transmitted by this email.* _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:leave-exchange;ls.swynk.com Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: PF access
Are we talking E2K? If you get the properties of a public folder, the Permissions tab has an Administrative rights... button. It allows pretty detailed control over what can and cannot be done. However, in all honesty, I do not know if this will solve your problem. There are so many issues with public folder permissions in Exchange and so many little details that it is almost impossible to properly manage them. They have always been a pain from a permissions point of view. And I really do not have the time that it would take to properly test out whether this will meet your needs. But, if you have the time, let me know what you find out. I am going to be running some Public Folder assessments for forms, event scripting, and data types, amounts, etc. I have been very happy with MicroEye's script director and have already used it for forms and scripts. How do you guys make sure you have an account that has access to all public folders? 2 levels below the root, our users have full access to specific public folders and often times remove admin access. I know we can go in and manually add them through the administrator, but does anyone know of way to give an account all access to all public folders without changing the other acls? And is there a good reporting tool for number and types of data within public folders? _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:leave-exchange;ls.swynk.com Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Distribution List
E2K or E55? E2K or E55? E2K or E55? E2K or E55? E2K or E55? People, if you want help, please refrain from straining yourselves to provide the most useless information possible. I mean, it has to be intentional. I have some users who can't see inside a distrbution list. When they are in outlook and go to the distrbution list, they can se the list ,but not the people in them. any ideas thanks _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:leave-exchange;ls.swynk.com Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: AW: Logging denied connections on Exchange 2000
All righty then, give this one a whirl. This comes from Q324205. http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=KB;EN-US;Q324205; SUMMARY Exchange 2000 Service Pack 1 (SP1) or later includes the Simple Mail Transport Protocol (SMTP) Protocol diagnostics logging functionality. You can use SMTP Protocol diagnostics logging to troubleshoot connectivity and mail flow issues. This article describes how to configure the SMTP Protocol log file. MORE INFORMATION How to Configure the SMTP Protocol Log File Start Exchange System Manager, expand Administrative Groups, expand First Administrative Group, and then expand Servers. Right-click Server_name, and then click Properties. Click the Diagnostics Logging tab. Click MSExchangeTransport in the Services pane, click SMTP Protocol in the Categories pane, and then set the SMTP Protocol logging level to Minimum or higher so that you can see header and transaction data. NOTE: The SMTP Protocol Log file is located in the Exchsrvr\Server_name.log folder. For example, if the Exchange 2000 server is named Exchange2000, the SMTP Protocol Log file is located in Exchsrvr\Exchange2000.log. The SMTP Protocol log file is saved as a tab-delimited text file. Microsoft recommends that you view the file by using Microsoft Excel. Available Logging Levels None: Nothing is logged. Minimal: Fatal (500 level) SMTP protocol errors are logged. Medium: Transient (400 level) SMTP protocol errors are logged. NOTE: If you set the logging level to Maximum, you receive the same information as you do when you set the logging level to Medium. You gain no additional benefits if you change the logging level from Medium to Maximum. Greg I have activated everything there but it seems it is only logging what happens AFTER the connection was successfully established. What I want to see is if an incoming connection is NOT accepted by my server because the IP address has been blocked Freddie Exchange System Manager | Servers | server | Protocols | SMTP | SMTP virtual server | Properties On the General tab at the bottom you can enable logging and by hitting the properties button, you can include a ton of information. Hi list I have now been searching the Exchange Help and Google for some time to find out how to do this but I cannot find the answer If I have blocked some IP addresses from connecting in the SMTP Virtual Server Properties, I would like to be able to check if there has been any attempts to connect from these hosts. In Exchange 5.5 I could enable full SMPT logging and check here but I cannot find the equivalent feature in Exchange 2000 The same goes for the filtering in the Message Delivery Properties Can anybody help, please TIA Freddie _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:leave-exchange;ls.swynk.com 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:leave-exchange;ls.swynk.com Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Mail Relaying Originator
I heard it had to be at least 28 degrees C, but yeah, I agree. -Original Message- From: East, Bill [mailto:eastb;PFFCU.org] Sent: Wednesday, November 06, 2002 9:17 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Mail Relaying Originator There are tiny evil gremlins in your server that are sending these messages. But unlike in the movie Gremlins, (which was excellent if slightly technically flawed) these ones will shrivel into dust if they are put in water. Submerge your server in 24 degree (celcius) water for one full hour *while it is turned on*. I can't tell you how important this last part is. Alternately, it is perfectly normal behavior that is discussed in the SMTP RFCs as well as the list posting FAQ, section 3.39. Choose wisely. -- be - MOS A computer program does what you tell it to do, not what you want it to do. -Original Message- From: Dave Morrow [mailto:David.Morrow;autodata.net] Sent: Wednesday, November 06, 2002 10:28 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Mail Relaying Originator I recently setup my MS Exchange server such that only people connecting from a specific set of IP addresses (my company's IP range) and connections to an internal IP address are allowed to relay mail. After doing so, I am still noticing mail in the IMC queue that has an originator of David Morrow Network Administrator Autodata Solutions Company Ph: (519) 951-6067 Fax: (519) 451-6615 mailto: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Poor planning on your part does not necessitate an emergency on my part. This message has originated from Autodata Solutions Company. The attached material is not the Confidential and Proprietary Information of Autodata Solutions Company. This email and any files transmitted with it are not confidential and intended solely for the use of any individual or entity. If you have received this email in error please delete this message and notify the Autodata system administrator at [EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:leave-exchange;ls.swynk.com 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:leave-exchange;ls.swynk.com 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:leave-exchange;ls.swynk.com Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Associate a Public Folder to a specific Mailbox
Thanks Ed and Chris I understand now. I thought that I could associate one storage group to a particular public folder. Even though outlook would not see it but OWA would. I wonder why they made so difficult. Does anyone know if the next version will have that ability? Or if Outlook 11 can see more than just the default Public Folder Tree? Thanks -Original Message- From: Ed Crowley [mailto:curspice;pacbell.net] Posted At: Wednesday, November 06, 2002 12:20 AM Posted To: Exchange Newsgroups Conversation: Associate a Public Folder to a specific Mailbox Subject: RE: Associate a Public Folder to a specific Mailbox Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets. Ed Crowley MCSE+I MVP Technical Consultant hp Services There are seldom good technological solutions to behavioral problems. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:bounce-exchange-94760;ls.swynk.com] On Behalf Of John Matteson Sent: Tuesday, November 05, 2002 7:13 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Associate a Public Folder to a specific Mailbox Which book would you recommend that sucks less? John Matteson Geac Corporate ISS (404) 239 - 2981 Atlanta, Georgia, USA. -Original Message- From: Chris Scharff [mailto:chris_scharff;messageone.com] Sent: Friday, November 01, 2002 5:04 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Associate a Public Folder to a specific Mailbox That book sucks. -Original Message- From: Newsgroups [mailto:Newsgroups;henwoodenergy.com] Sent: Friday, November 01, 2002 3:54 PM To: Exchange Discussions I am looking at the Microsoft Exchange 2000 Administrator's Companion and on page 275 it shows I can select another public folder as default but I don't see that on my ESM. Any ideas? Thanks _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:leave-exchange;ls.swynk.com 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:leave-exchange;ls.swynk.com 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:leave-exchange;ls.swynk.com Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Service account password change
In E2K, you don't need one, so don't create one. In E5.5, you need one, and you better change it when that admin leaves. No telling what kind of back doors he's left open. When you do that, be sure to catch all dependent services. Also be sure to use clever ALT characters in the password to keep brute force password crackers from having a field day with it. (:= -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:bounce-exchange-274642;ls.swynk.com]On Behalf Of Ashraph, Elizabeth A. Sent: Wednesday, November 06, 2002 12:51 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Service account password change What's the general recommendation on changing service account passwords. Should it be done periodically for security reasons, perhaps when an Admin leaves the company. Is there a good online reference for all the considerations in making the change. Thanks all. Liz Ashraph Messaging Systems 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:leave-exchange;ls.swynk.com 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:leave-exchange;ls.swynk.com Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Distribution List
Permissions. (:= -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:bounce-exchange-274642;ls.swynk.com]On Behalf Of Smith Thomas Contr 911 SPTG/SC Sent: Wednesday, November 06, 2002 12:49 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Distribution List I have some users who can't see inside a distrbution list. When they are in outlook and go to the distrbution list, they can se the list ,but not the people in them. any ideas thanks _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:leave-exchange;ls.swynk.com 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:leave-exchange;ls.swynk.com Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Instant Messaging Troubleshooting
I always advocate setting up IM servers. Not only does it torment the IT guys who have to support that piece of crap, their worthless managers have the perfect micromanagement technology at their fingertips. I know one who loves to watch for people to go to some sort of status indicating slackness, then send an email marked high priority with read and delivery receipts turned on to that person asking WHY they've been idle for the last 2.43 minutes and counting? Craig is right. It's vile and inhuman. And that's why I, a vile, inhuman, planet-crushing deity support it 100%. (:= -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:bounce-exchange-274642;ls.swynk.com]On Behalf Of Dupler, Craig Sent: Wednesday, November 06, 2002 1:01 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Instant Messaging Troubleshooting Hi Greg. This reminds me of the days when Ed C. called you Deckler the heckler. How have you been? I thought that nobody was going to pick-up the bait that I threw out there. I thought it was sort of like throwing a copy of the beatitudes or some Gandhi quotes into a debate about what to do about Saddam. So being a semi-troglodyte / Luddite curmudgeon, I'll respond and see if anyone else jumps in. All of this is preceded with IMHO . . . At the heart of IM is the server which is maintaining a dynamic list of who is on line at the moment. Currently location is not an attribute in that data, but will be once the whole E-911 scenario is sorted out. There are two ways of looking at the server. In one (the one most people think about) it is purely a client view. You sign on and then ask others who are already there to be added to their lists or permission to add them to your lists. My second objection deals with this view of the technology. Some managers will see this as an opportunity to keep track of people and reserve the right to interrupt spasmodically (I like that word). PHB idiots will abuse this possibility in an almost endless array of ways that are demeaning and insulting. The first objection deals with a perspective that I don't believe most people even consider. The server to provide information about who is on line to applications through an API (probably a form of an LDAP query). This could be used for behavior tracking and advertising pushes - think of it as a cookie that is on the server instead of local. Perhaps AOL and MSN will not use it for that - but do you believe that? If so, I have a land deal in the Everglades that I would like to discuss. The very last thing that people should want to do is subscribe to a presence technology that is not purely peer-to-peer. Sometimes I think that techies have all of the worst characteristics of Robert Teller - the one guy on the Manhattan Project that would not have understood even one tiny scintilla what Jeff Goldbloom's character said in Jurassic Park, just because you can do it doesn't mean you should. IM is a vile and inhuman technology. I think it is pathetic that people are drawn to it sort of like moths to a zap light or flies to flypaper.. -Original Message- From: Greg Deckler [mailto:greg;infonition.com] Sent: Tuesday, November 05, 2002 2:48 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Instant Messaging Troubleshooting So IM is vile and inhuman technology, but email isn't? :) I have to say, you've always got a different perspective on things, Craig! I have to admit that if you have the time, I would personally LOVE to hear your thoughts on this subject. You always had good insights on UM and other technologies back in the day. I know it is probably off topic for the list, but this list generates so much noise anyway... IM is vile and inhuman technology, especially in the hands of carriers and others with capitalist motives; but it can also move us back toward 19th century attitudes about employee-management relations. We should launch a campaign to stamp it out. I just thought I'd throw that out there. -Original Message- From: Mark Harford [mailto:mark.harford;bbc.co.uk] Sent: Monday, November 04, 2002 9:44 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Instant Messaging Troubleshooting So gold is also the server name? I'm not familiar with IM on non-default virtual servers so the only other troubleshooting step I can suggest is to try signing in using the actual IM address as shown in ADUC on your account. Presumably [EMAIL PROTECTED]? Mark -Original Message- From: Jonathan [mailto:jwright;spectore.com] Sent: 04 November 2002 17:07 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Instant Messaging Troubleshooting Thanks for your reply. I am using [EMAIL PROTECTED] in the IM logon. My DNS is setup with the SRV record under the _tcp folder listed as: rvp service location [0][0][80] gold.domain.com A Host record for the server (which has IM, E2K, IIS running on it) was dynamically added to the DNS: gold A 192.168.xxx.xxx I think I should also mention that our web
RE: Logging denied connections on Exchange 2000
Always looking to learn something new.. what does one learn by examining this information? -Original Message- From: Freddie Soerensen To: Exchange Discussions Sent: 11/6/2002 12:43 PM Subject: AW: Logging denied connections on Exchange 2000 Greg I have activated everything there but it seems it is only logging what happens AFTER the connection was successfully established. What I want to see is if an incoming connection is NOT accepted by my server because the IP address has been blocked _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:leave-exchange;ls.swynk.com Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Distribution List
any ideas that inclusion of Exchange version, SP and Outlook version and SP along with additional background information would have yeilded a better response than the one you are currently reading. _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:leave-exchange;ls.swynk.com Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Service account password change
Re: Exchange service account passwords.. I believe the FAQ covers the hows. -Original Message- From: Ashraph, Elizabeth A. To: Exchange Discussions Sent: 11/6/2002 12:50 PM Subject: Service account password change What's the general recommendation on changing service account passwords. Should it be done periodically for security reasons, perhaps when an Admin leaves the company. Is there a good online reference for all the considerations in making the change. Thanks all. _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:leave-exchange;ls.swynk.com Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Service account password change
Changing service accounts are in general a real pain in the arse. Especially if you have multiple email servers in multiple sites. Most places just make a group that has the same rights as the service account for most of the general administrative functions and add/delete users to that group as is needed. Only a select few have or knowledge of the account name or password which is usually a complex one that is kept in a safe. - Original Message - From: Ashraph, Elizabeth A. [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, November 06, 2002 1:50 PM Subject: Service account password change What's the general recommendation on changing service account passwords. Should it be done periodically for security reasons, perhaps when an Admin leaves the company. Is there a good online reference for all the considerations in making the change. Thanks all. Liz Ashraph Messaging Systems 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:leave-exchange;ls.swynk.com 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:leave-exchange;ls.swynk.com Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Distribution List
Well, since you didn't specify, I'll assume Ex5.5... Highlight the DL -- Properties -- Advanced tab and clear the Hide membership from address book checkbox. -Original Message- From: Smith Thomas Contr 911 SPTG/SC [mailto:Thomas.Smith;pittsburgh.af.mil] Sent: Wednesday, November 06, 2002 10:49 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Distribution List I have some users who can't see inside a distrbution list. When they are in outlook and go to the distrbution list, they can se the list ,but not the people in them. any ideas thanks _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:leave-exchange;ls.swynk.com 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:leave-exchange;ls.swynk.com Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Service account password change
EVERY TIME, when an admin with access to that password leaves the company, without exception. -Original Message- From: Ashraph, Elizabeth A. [mailto:liz.ashraph;mirant.com] Sent: Wednesday, November 06, 2002 10:51 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Service account password change What's the general recommendation on changing service account passwords. Should it be done periodically for security reasons, perhaps when an Admin leaves the company. Is there a good online reference for all the considerations in making the change. Thanks all. Liz Ashraph Messaging Systems 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:leave-exchange;ls.swynk.com 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:leave-exchange;ls.swynk.com Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Change to different organization without losing SIS??
Tools | Move Mailbox The Move Server Wizard. Using the tools mentioned, I don't believe there is any way to maintain SIS when moving between orgs. 3rd party tools such as those from NetIQ might maintain SIS, they however aren't free. -Original Message- From: Petri To: Exchange Discussions Sent: 11/6/2002 1:41 PM Subject: Re: Change to different organization without losing SIS?? You can read Q175481. SIS should be still existing in there. From what I understand of the Move Server Wizard and exmerge we would lose SIS (Single Instance Storage) if we used the wizard (or any other method??) to change our organization. (??) We are currently running Exchange 5.5 and our parent company (which we may need to change our organization to someday) is also running 5.5 today. Maybe we need to force everyone to remove their mail from the server (to those robust PST files) before attempting a changeover? Tom _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:leave-exchange;ls.swynk.com Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Exchange 2000 and GC
Well, in general if Paul Bowden tells me something isn't a good idea (if I can avoid it) with relation to Exchange I tend not to argue the point too heavily if there are other architectural solutions which will acheive the desired objective. If there aren't other solutions to the problem, then I bite the bullet and do what has to be done. I've installed Exchange on a DC and not. All other things being equal, I much prefer on not. In Exchange 5.5 the directory related operations consumed approximately 20 - 25% of the total resources Exchange was using. All other things being equal, I like to plan for as much growth as reasonably possible on a single Exchange box before adding additional Exchange servers into an environment. If my GC responsibilities are offloaded to another machine, that gives me an additional margin for growth. -Original Message- From: Petri To: Exchange Discussions Sent: 11/6/2002 1:56 PM Subject: RE: Exchange 2000 and GC It is great to see the real reasons why I should not do this. I have always got an answer like: ..in my mind its not a good and MS doesn't recommends... Just a few comments about the list: 1. When you have a real problems they are always quite complexity 2. agree 3. if you create a separate site for these GC, then normal user load doesn't reach these GCs. 4. Only replication. 5. agree 6-7. true ! Do I have saw dreams or is it so that in Titanium there will be somekind small directory ? But many thanks of the list. .-Pepi-. You also want to consider the more applications/processes you run the more likely one of them will stop working. This translates into downtime. If for some reason your GC stops replicating or answering requests and the normal recovery steps don't work, you may have to reboot. It is the same for any additional processes you run on any one machine. To summarize: Reasons not to have and exchange and a GC on the same machine 1. Added troubleshooting complexity 2. Added DR complexity 3. Added CPU load 4. Added network load 5. Added disk I/O 6. Added hot-fix and SP complexity (dealing with interactions of hotfixes) 7. Domain Controller Security Policy _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:leave-exchange;ls.swynk.com Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Can't activate Net Folder in Outlook 2000
Hi all, Has anyone tried out to activate Net Folder? Have tried my best to configure but the emails are still not shared in between OUtlook Users. Notifications are sent out to Users regards about Net Folder Sharing but emails are not displayed in the folders. Hope someone can give me a link/tips on this issue.. THanks in advanced! Regards, Ken L - This email was sent using FREE Catholic Online Webmail. Please tell your family, friends and children about COL Webmail! http://webmail.catholic.org/ _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:leave-exchange;ls.swynk.com Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Front-end OWA issues
All changes to virtual directories or servers that *can* be made in Exchange System Manager *should* be made in ESM. If you make them in ISM, that's when they'll get overwritten. http://www.microsoft.com/technet/treeview/default.asp?url=/technet/prodt echnol/exchange/exchange2000/support/trowae2k.asp has an explanation of why this is - see Ensure replication of IIS settings. - KC -Original Message- From: Andrey Fyodorov [mailto:afyodorov;innerhost.com] Sent: Tuesday, November 05, 2002 1:39 PM To: Exchange Discussions You may also need to do this to prevent the Default Website from reverting back to the domain name instead of \ start CMD and go to C:\Inetpub\AdminScripts then run: cscript.exe adsutil.vbs set w3svc/1/root/defaultlogonDomain \ -Original Message- From: Julian Stone [mailto:julian.stone;netstore.net] Sent: Monday, November 04, 2002 7:50 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Front-end OWA issues Instead of using the IIS mmc to set the setting, use Exchange System Manager. Expand Servers\\your server\\protocols\\http\\virtual server(s) and select the properties for Exchange Public. On the access tab select Basic Authentication with a \ as the Default Domain and Integrated Windows Authentication. Yours, Julian Stone -Original Message- From: Michel, David [mailto:david.michel;ruden.com] Sent: 04 November 2002 21:05 pm To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Front-end OWA issues Hello all. I have a E2k front-end server which seems to not want to keep it's directory security settings for OWA. Since it's a front-end server the Directory Security is set to basic authentication and all will work fine for about two days. After that OWA just returns a page not found error. At that point I can go back into the IIS admin program and add/remove any other directory security setting such as anonymous or integrated Windows and stop/start the site then remove that setting and stop/start again to have only basic authentication and everything will work fine again for a few days (simply rebooting doesn't help). I've turned up logging but see nothing at all in any log or the event viewer which would indicate a problem. Nothing happens physically to the server (like a reboot or logoff) before this occurs and I have tried applying sp3 again. Just a note that I had the same issue with sp2 and now with sp3 and I've seen nothing on MS or google. Any ideas on where to turn would be appreciated. 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:leave-exchange;ls.swynk.com 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:leave-exchange;ls.swynk.com 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:leave-exchange;ls.swynk.com 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:leave-exchange;ls.swynk.com Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Using a PST for 'overflow'
I don't know Peter, moving all the mail to an Oracle box just doesn't do it for me ..:-) Sander -Original Message- From: Seitz, Peter [mailto:PETER.SEITZ;cubic.com] Sent: 06 November 2002 07:50 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Using a PST for 'overflow' .cshrc short% more .cshrc # @(#)cshrc 1.11 89/11/29 SMI umask 022 if ( $?prompt ) then set history=32 endif # # oracle environment variables setenv ORACLE_HOME /apps/oracle/816 setenv HARVESTDIR /home/user3/harvest5 setenv ORACLE_BASE /apps/oracle/816 setenv ORACLE_SID HARVEST5 setenv ORACLE_TERM dtterm setenv PATH $ORACLE_HOME/bin:$PATH setenv ODBC_HOME /apps/caiptodbc setenv ODBCINI $ODBC_HOME/odbc.ini # Harvest environment variables #setenv HARVESTHOME /apps/harvest5 setenv HARVESTHOME /home/user3/harvest5 #setenv LM_LICENSE_FILE $HARVESTHOME/license/license.dat setenv LM_LICENSE_FILE /ca_lic setenv PATH $HARVESTHOME/bin:$PATH setenv PATH /apps/caiptodbc/bin:$PATH #setenv LD_LIBRARY_PATH /home/user3/harvest5/lib:/usr/local/CAcrypto:/usr/pec/li b/sun4_solaris:/usr/local/CAlib:/apps/caiptodbc/lib setenv LD_LIBRARY_PATH /home/user3/harvest5/lib:/usr/local/CAcrypto:/usr/pec/lib /sun4_solaris:/usr/local/CAlib # setenv DEFAULT_BROWSER hotjava setenv HARREPHOME /apps/Harvest5/harrep # # FCP environment variables # setenv GALAXYHOME /apps/FCP/Galaxy setenv PATH $GALAXYHOME/bin:$PATH #set path=(/bin /usr/bin /usr/ucb /etc $HARVESTHOME/lib $ODBC_HOME/lib $ODBC_HOM E/bin $ORACLE_HOME/bin $ORACLE_HOME/lib .) set path=(/bin /usr/bin /usr/ucb /etc $HARVESTHOME/lib $HARVESTHOME/bin $ORACLE_ HOME/bin $ORACLE_HOME/lib .) setenv OPENWINHOME /usr/openwin short% -Original Message- From: Niki Blowfield - Exchange [mailto:exchangelist;partition.co.uk] Sent: Wednesday, November 06, 2002 6:26 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Using a PST for 'overflow' We've been forced into restricting mailboxes as everyones being moved to a central server. Most users are having no problems getting their mailboxes down to 25-50mb, some much lower, a handful much higher. I'm finding it easiest to set some limits on the IS, then override that on individual mailboxes, as required, the MD for instance has a 500mb mailbox, after 2 CD's worth of archiving :-O What I've been saying to users is delete everything you can, anything older than 2 months that you need to keep put into a subfolder, then I go round and export these folders to PSTs, and dump them in their user folders on their local file servers, meaning they're included in the backups on their local servers, but the backup and disk space burden is removed from the Exchange server. I test the PSTs before deleting the originals, but I've seen nothing bigger than about 4-500mb. With enforced limits user will have to keep things in order, and we'll have to look at ongoing archiving in the method described above. 99% aren't aware of PST's, which is probably a good thing, though its added to my workload -Original Message- From: David N. Precht [mailto:discussions;entrysecurity.com] Sent: 06 November 2002 13:01 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Using a PST for 'overflow' I do. They don't know they can save them up on their home folder. They know I don't back up the workstations, but most think that you only can save PSTs on local drives ;) -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:bounce-exchange-224131;ls.swynk.com] On Behalf Of Sander Van Butzelaar Sent: Wednesday, November 06, 2002 07:05 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Using a PST for 'overflow' Why the hard line approach? I never said I made the backup of the PST, that's why one has a facilities department...I also didn't say that I found that mail particularly important, the user wants to keep it, so why not let him/her? They know not to come to me regarding items in PST files. Give the user a bit of slack here David. Sander -Original Message- From: David N. Precht [mailto:discussions;entrysecurity.com] Sent: 06 November 2002 01:56 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Using a PST for 'overflow' No, just inform them of the 'No PST Backup' policy. I don't back up PSTs. Period. Either its in their mailbox or it is not that important. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:bounce-exchange-224131;ls.swynk.com] On Behalf Of Sander Van Butzelaar Sent: Wednesday, November 06, 2002 05:49 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Using a PST for 'overflow' I have a couple of users who do the same thing. They don't want to delete old mail (for whatever reason) and I can't keep extending their mailbox sizes. So they move to PST. Be aware of the risks here! Make a periodic backup of that PST as hard drives are prone to failure. Sander -Original Message- From: Niki Blowfield - Exchange [mailto:exchangelist;partition.co.uk] Sent: 06 November
RE: Moving E2k storage group to new Server
But is competition. Hopefully someday it will become good competition and finally Microsoft will have someone to try to one up again with each release instead of providing new functions and features when they get around to it -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:bounce-exchange-97309;ls.swynk.com] On Behalf Of Chris Scharff Sent: Wednesday, November 06, 2002 12:04 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Moving E2k storage group to new Server It's not open and it's certainly not Exchange. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:tony.mccullough;hcs.state.or.us] Sent: Wednesday, November 06, 2002 10:21 AM To: Exchange Discussions You mentioned that there is nothing in the Linux world like Exchange. I haven't looked at this but I received this Open Exchange link from a friend of mine the other day. I can't vouch for it, but thought I'd throw it out. http://www.suse.com/us/business/products/suse_business/openexchange/in dex. ht ml Tony McCullough -Original Message- From: Ken Cornetet [mailto:Ken.Cornetet;kimball.com] Sent: Wednesday, November 06, 2002 7:09 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Moving E2k storage group to new Server Here's my take: A quick peek a CDW shows SBS at $1277 http://www.cdw.com/shop/products/default.asp?EDC=274287. Microsoft is offering a $500 rebate if you can read the SBS sales literature and answer 20 some-odd questions. That puts the price at $777. I'm not familiar with the MCSP program, so I cannot comment on that. You are also forgetting about Exchange CALS at $70 each. You are correct in that growing past SBS is somewhat painful (I might argue with the 10-20 times more expensive. Exmerging 50 mailboxes is not that painful...), but I would maintain that if a company finds themselves outgrowing SBS, then it should not have been put in in the first place. Yes, Linux is a viable option for small companies (big ones, too). It does have some drawbacks, though. 1. Support. Finding a local consultant to support a Linux system is going to be harder than finding someone to support Microsoft products. 2. Third-party applications. Going Linux defiantly puts a company outside the mainstream and limits third party server applications like mail filtering, antivirus, web surfing control, etc. Running a business on Linux servers is, IMHO, very a very viable option. But, it pretty much requires a resident propeller-head to smooth over the rough spots. Most small companies (where SBS is targeted) just can't afford a full-time system admin. They would much rather farm it out to a consultant. Let's not forget that Exchange is more than email as well. There's nothing in the open source arena (that I know of) that can provide the same functionality that Exchange provides. I'll conclude stating that IMHO, SBS is an excellent value when applied in the appropriate environment - that is a small company (5-15 employees) needing at least file-sharing and Exchange and with no resident system admin. -Original Message- From: Greg Deckler [mailto:greg;infonition.com] Sent: Tuesday, November 05, 2002 6:55 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Moving E2k storage group to new Server Thought long and hard about letting this go, but where is the fun in that? First, to answer the migration piece of this. The only option I can think of at this time would be to treat the SBS Exchange system as a foreign mail system, meaning export and import mailbox data to migrate. Migration costs will be 10-20 times what it would be to simply put another server in place and move users. But, if is your only option... Now on to the fun... SBS License: $1,499.00 (5 clients) Real W2K Server license: $1,199.00 (10 clients) E2K Standard Edition: $1,299.00 (can always be upgraded to Enterprise if needed) Now, realistically, if you are a small little shop, this is all the Microsoft products that you need and so for 1.67 times the amount you eliminate all of the limitations of SBS and have actual, real products versus cripple-ware. But what about ISA? Don't need it. Go get a Linksys box for $100 for your firewall and it is wide open outbound. But what about SQL Server? IF you need it, then it's $1,499.00. Otherwise, you don't need it. If you are a small business, you can get cripple-ware for $1.5K or actual software to run your business for $2-4K. Under the first scenario you are setting yourself up for failure and under the second, you have invested just a little more money but have primed your business for growth. And if you are such a cash-strapped business that you cannot afford the extra grand or two, then you should probably be looking at free software. Put a Linux box up, done. It's cost $0.00. And, just for fun, 2 MCP exams, ~$250 and an MCSP license ~$2000.00. So again,
RE: field is empty
This means there is no remedy, and we have to live with it. Irf. -Original Message- From: Ed Crowley [mailto:curspice;pacbell.net] Sent: Wednesday, November 06, 2002 12:11 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: field is empty Buy an add-on product. But in treating a rather uncommon symptom it would be a rather ineffective Spam filter. Ed Crowley MCSE+I MVP Technical Consultant hp Services There are seldom good technological solutions to behavioral problems. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:bounce-exchange-94760;ls.swynk.com] On Behalf Of Exchange List Sent: Monday, November 04, 2002 11:01 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: field is empty Some users are getting mails from the Internet in which To: field is empty, or doing BCC: how can I block such kind of mails. Irf. -Original Message- From: Dale Geoffrey Edwards [mailto:Dale.Edwards;AmericanTower.com] Sent: Monday, November 04, 2002 7:38 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: field is empty If I understand you correctly, which I believe I am a little confused, if you put all the names in the BCC field, no other person will know that someone got the same message. Is this what you are loosing for? Gèoff... -Original Message- From: Exchange List [mailto:exchangelist;ubl.com.pk] Sent: Monday, November 04, 2002 3:33 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: To: field is empty Is their a way that we block emails that does not contain any to header in To: and yet still managed to deliver to our users ? Thanks Regards. Irfan Malik. _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:leave-exchange;ls.swynk.com 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:leave-exchange;ls.swynk.com 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:leave-exchange;ls.swynk.com 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:leave-exchange;ls.swynk.com 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:leave-exchange;ls.swynk.com Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
XCH 5.5 Dir Replication Problem
Hi, we have the following setup. We have the HQ and several branch offices all sites in one Exchange 5.5 Org. All branches replicate the directory over X.400 through the HQ. One of the branches had recently a disaster. After they recovered from it their GAL shows some double entries. We are not sure why those occured, they have different aliases and I suspect they played around because they (that particular branch) also recently merged with other companies. The weired thing is that the HQ says that they can not see any double entries in the GAL while other branches do. I tried requesting a replication update but that didn't change anything. What can I do to solve this problem? regards Uso _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:leave-exchange;ls.swynk.com Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Using a PST for 'overflow'
I agree with you Andy in principal, however real world limitations (read: non-existent budgets) dictate that it is not viable to get a near-line storage system going for a handful of users that have that type of need. So think of my handful of user-managed, user-backed up and user-owned PST's as a cheap near-line storage system..:-) Regards Sander -Original Message- From: Webb, Andy [mailto:Andy.Webb;swinc.com] Sent: 06 November 2002 06:05 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Using a PST for 'overflow' I think you'd benefit more from something like kvault that moved the data out to nearline or offline storage, but left it within the Exchange environment. It will result in far less usage of drive space, is easily backed up and will result in fewer support calls. There are several Exchange Archiving products out there. None are particularly cheap, but then what's the total organizational cost of how you're managing it today? IT is supposed to be a facilitator of whatever the business does to make money. In general individual users do not have the skill or regimentation to be their own librarians. That's why in many large companies there is one, though not in nearly enough companies. IT should be helping the users apply the data retention, categorization, and retrievability policies defined by the librarian. Any mucking about with mailbox limits is a treatment of a symptom, not the root causes. I do understand that servers must be maintained at a recoverable level as defined by formal or informal SLA's. I just don't believe that pushing data that people deem valuable into unrecoverable and widely dispersed storage media is the right way to maintain the SLA. === Andy Webb[EMAIL PROTECTED] www.swinc.com Simpler-Webb, Inc. Austin, TX512-322-0071 === ---Original Message- From: Niki Blowfield - Exchange [mailto:exchangelist;partition.co.uk] Posted At: Wednesday, November 06, 2002 8:26 AM Posted To: Microsoft Exchange Conversation: Using a PST for 'overflow' Subject: RE: Using a PST for 'overflow' We've been forced into restricting mailboxes as everyones being moved to a central server. Most users are having no problems getting their mailboxes down to 25-50mb, some much lower, a handful much higher. I'm finding it easiest to set some limits on the IS, then override that on individual mailboxes, as required, the MD for instance has a 500mb mailbox, after 2 CD's worth of archiving :-O What I've been saying to users is delete everything you can, anything older than 2 months that you need to keep put into a subfolder, then I go round and export these folders to PSTs, and dump them in their user folders on their local file servers, meaning they're included in the backups on their local servers, but the backup and disk space burden is removed from the Exchange server. I test the PSTs before deleting the originals, but I've seen nothing bigger than about 4-500mb. With enforced limits user will have to keep things in order, and we'll have to look at ongoing archiving in the method described above. 99% aren't aware of PST's, which is probably a good thing, though its added to my workload -Original Message- From: David N. Precht [mailto:discussions;entrysecurity.com] Sent: 06 November 2002 13:01 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Using a PST for 'overflow' I do. They don't know they can save them up on their home folder. They know I don't back up the workstations, but most think that you only can save PSTs on local drives ;) -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:bounce-exchange-224131;ls.swynk.com] On Behalf Of Sander Van Butzelaar Sent: Wednesday, November 06, 2002 07:05 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Using a PST for 'overflow' Why the hard line approach? I never said I made the backup of the PST, that's why one has a facilities department...I also didn't say that I found that mail particularly important, the user wants to keep it, so why not let him/her? They know not to come to me regarding items in PST files. Give the user a bit of slack here David. Sander -Original Message- From: David N. Precht [mailto:discussions;entrysecurity.com] Sent: 06 November 2002 01:56 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Using a PST for 'overflow' No, just inform them of the 'No PST Backup' policy. I don't back up PSTs. Period. Either its in their mailbox or it is not that important. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:bounce-exchange-224131;ls.swynk.com] On Behalf Of Sander Van Butzelaar Sent: Wednesday, November 06, 2002 05:49 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Using a PST for 'overflow' I have a couple of users who do the same thing. They don't want to delete old mail (for whatever reason) and I can't keep extending their mailbox sizes. So they move to PST. Be aware of the risks
Dir Replication Problem Exchange 5.5
Hi, we have the following setup. We have the HQ and several branch offices all sites in one Exchange 5.5 Org. All branches replicate the directory over X.400 through the HQ. One of the branches had recently a disaster. After they recovered from it their GAL shows some double entries. We are not sure why those occured, they have different aliases and I suspect they played around because they (that particular branch) also recently merged with other companies. The weired thing is that the HQ says that they can not see any double entries in the GAL while other branches do. I tried requesting a replication update but that didn't change anything. What can I do to solve this problem? regards Uso _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:leave-exchange;ls.swynk.com Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: RBL's
Don't need to, it already works well here ;-) - Original Message - From: Martin Blackstone [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: 'Exchange Discussions' [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, November 06, 2002 2:11 PM Subject: RE: RBL's Lets talk about something else like making it illegal to smoke in restaurants or bars -Original Message- From: Andy David [mailto:davida;vss.com] Sent: Wednesday, November 06, 2002 9:45 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: RBL's Caution: Thread is hot. -Original Message- From: Chris Scharff [mailto:chris_scharff;messageone.com] Sent: Wednesday, November 06, 2002 10:47 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: RBL's At no time have I said that companies can't choose to implement RBLs; simply that they should be cognizant of the complete ramifications of the technology. Obtaining this level of understanding is a much better example of risk management than some theoretical defense against a risk which appears to have no foundation in reality. Please don't use the McDonalds lawsuit as some type of example of the legal system gone bezerk. If you actually understood the history of the case, you'd find that the judgment itself was well within the bounds of reason, even if the monetary damages awarded appear to be a bit shocking. -Original Message- From: Finch Brett [mailto:brett.finch;hrs.ualberta.ca] Sent: Wednesday, November 06, 2002 1:31 AM To: Exchange Discussions Can you say 'risk management'. If someone can drive up to a window, order a coffee then take the lid off, drive over a speed bump and sue someone else, anything is possible :) -Original Message- From: Chris Scharff [mailto:chris_scharff;messageone.com] Sent: Tuesday, November 05, 2002 21:20 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: RBL's I've never heard of a single instance where a lawsuit was initiated against an organization based on incoming *spam*. Can you point to one? I can point to deals which didn't get done because of RBLs which resulted in real monetary loss, which would seem to make one more likely than the other unless you can point to a court case I'm not aware of. Matt's client side could technically be much different from a normal organization since his firm provides hosting to businesses (clients) who have their own users (another type of client). There are plenty of examples of server based filtering based on individual user settings which could potentially meet his objective and address your objection. Most of those solutions are poorly done IMNSHO. RBLs in general aren't content filtering solutions, they are connection filtering solutions. While they may at some level achieve similar results, their objectives are actually quite different. -Original Message- From: Finch Brett [mailto:brett.finch;hrs.ualberta.ca] Sent: Tuesday, November 05, 2002 4:46 PM To: Exchange Discussions I've watched this thread for a while. I don't buy the argument that a ten million deal will fail because of a bounced email via RBL. It's just as likely that a dept. with predominant females could sue for fifteen million for sexual harassment in the fact the company with the ten million dollar deal didn't take reasonable steps to protect them from this spam. There also seems to be no argument about the value of email in the workplace and that a business may find they loose a ten thousand dollar deal but save fifteen thousand in the fact their people are actually doing what they were hired to do (as mentioned in other posts bandwidth costs, storage costs as well). As for the per client configuration, that works until they start adding their contacts to the junk list or they log into a Terminal Server or via wireless with a PDA. We also don't hire people based on their skills to manage their email. Finding a moderate RBL with reasonable rules and sending a nice e-mail back to a would be spammer seems to work as well as anything. -Original Message- From: Matt Natkin [mailto:mnatkin;natco-inc.com] Sent: Tuesday, November 05, 2002 11:49 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: RBL's Very true..We have hosted exchange for business and we get the sh-t spammed out of us. But we do not block any email! That may change as our customers are complaining bitterly. The best solution we would like is a filter on the client side and not the server side. MacAfee spam kill product looks nice but I do not know if it can talk to Exchange server. (not POP) I just felt we started something ugly on this list!!:) Wanted to clarify why we were interested. -Original Message- From: Chris Scharff [mailto:chris_scharff;messageone.com] Sent: Tuesday, November 05, 2002 11:35 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: RBL's And in general, the business
RE: Distribution List
When the DL was created (5.5) there was an option on the advanced tab 'Hide Membership from Address Book'. William -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:bounce-exchange-104116;ls.swynk.com] On Behalf Of Smith Thomas Contr 911 SPTG/SC Sent: Wednesday, November 06, 2002 10:49 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Distribution List I have some users who can't see inside a distrbution list. When they are in outlook and go to the distrbution list, they can se the list ,but not the people in them. any ideas thanks _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:leave-exchange;ls.swynk.com Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Moving E2k storage group to new Server
But when have facts worried a lienux zealot? -Original Message- From: Chris Scharff [mailto:chris_scharff;messageone.com] Sent: 06 November 2002 20:04 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Moving E2k storage group to new Server It's not open and it's certainly not Exchange. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:tony.mccullough;hcs.state.or.us] Sent: Wednesday, November 06, 2002 10:21 AM To: Exchange Discussions You mentioned that there is nothing in the Linux world like Exchange. I haven't looked at this but I received this Open Exchange link from a friend of mine the other day. I can't vouch for it, but thought I'd throw it out. http://www.suse.com/us/business/products/suse_business/openexchange/in dex. ht ml Tony McCullough -Original Message- From: Ken Cornetet [mailto:Ken.Cornetet;kimball.com] Sent: Wednesday, November 06, 2002 7:09 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Moving E2k storage group to new Server Here's my take: A quick peek a CDW shows SBS at $1277 http://www.cdw.com/shop/products/default.asp?EDC=274287. Microsoft is offering a $500 rebate if you can read the SBS sales literature and answer 20 some-odd questions. That puts the price at $777. I'm not familiar with the MCSP program, so I cannot comment on that. You are also forgetting about Exchange CALS at $70 each. You are correct in that growing past SBS is somewhat painful (I might argue with the 10-20 times more expensive. Exmerging 50 mailboxes is not that painful...), but I would maintain that if a company finds themselves outgrowing SBS, then it should not have been put in in the first place. Yes, Linux is a viable option for small companies (big ones, too). It does have some drawbacks, though. 1. Support. Finding a local consultant to support a Linux system is going to be harder than finding someone to support Microsoft products. 2. Third-party applications. Going Linux defiantly puts a company outside the mainstream and limits third party server applications like mail filtering, antivirus, web surfing control, etc. Running a business on Linux servers is, IMHO, very a very viable option. But, it pretty much requires a resident propeller-head to smooth over the rough spots. Most small companies (where SBS is targeted) just can't afford a full-time system admin. They would much rather farm it out to a consultant. Let's not forget that Exchange is more than email as well. There's nothing in the open source arena (that I know of) that can provide the same functionality that Exchange provides. I'll conclude stating that IMHO, SBS is an excellent value when applied in the appropriate environment - that is a small company (5-15 employees) needing at least file-sharing and Exchange and with no resident system admin. -Original Message- From: Greg Deckler [mailto:greg;infonition.com] Sent: Tuesday, November 05, 2002 6:55 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Moving E2k storage group to new Server Thought long and hard about letting this go, but where is the fun in that? First, to answer the migration piece of this. The only option I can think of at this time would be to treat the SBS Exchange system as a foreign mail system, meaning export and import mailbox data to migrate. Migration costs will be 10-20 times what it would be to simply put another server in place and move users. But, if is your only option... Now on to the fun... SBS License: $1,499.00 (5 clients) Real W2K Server license: $1,199.00 (10 clients) E2K Standard Edition: $1,299.00 (can always be upgraded to Enterprise if needed) Now, realistically, if you are a small little shop, this is all the Microsoft products that you need and so for 1.67 times the amount you eliminate all of the limitations of SBS and have actual, real products versus cripple-ware. But what about ISA? Don't need it. Go get a Linksys box for $100 for your firewall and it is wide open outbound. But what about SQL Server? IF you need it, then it's $1,499.00. Otherwise, you don't need it. If you are a small business, you can get cripple-ware for $1.5K or actual software to run your business for $2-4K. Under the first scenario you are setting yourself up for failure and under the second, you have invested just a little more money but have primed your business for growth. And if you are such a cash-strapped business that you cannot afford the extra grand or two, then you should probably be looking at free software. Put a Linux box up, done. It's cost $0.00. And, just for fun, 2 MCP exams, ~$250 and an MCSP license ~$2000.00. So again, for just a few extra (hundreds) of dollars you get lots
RE: RBL's
-Original Message- From: Chris Scharff [mailto:chris_scharff;messageone.com] Sent: 06 November 2002 15:47 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: RBL's Please don't use the McDonalds lawsuit as some type of example of the legal system gone bezerk. If you actually understood the history of the case, you'd find that the judgment itself was well within the bounds of reason, even if the monetary damages awarded appear to be a bit shocking. It's a great example, however, of people jumping all over something despite not understanding it much at all, which makes it a good parable for computing issues. Robert Moir MSMVP IT Systems Engineer Luton Sixth Form College Ciderspace: An online 3D virtual reality environment for tramps. Ciderspace Cafe: A park Bench. _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:leave-exchange;ls.swynk.com Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Using a PST for 'overflow'
If you do think of going KVault, wait till V4 (with offline vault is available as it's only in beta at the moment). Cheers Paul Standards are like toothbrushes, everyone wants one but not yours -Original Message- From: Webb, Andy [mailto:Andy.Webb;swinc.com] Sent: 06 November 2002 16:05 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Using a PST for 'overflow' I think you'd benefit more from something like kvault that moved the data out to nearline or offline storage, but left it within the Exchange environment. It will result in far less usage of drive space, is easily backed up and will result in fewer support calls. There are several Exchange Archiving products out there. None are particularly cheap, but then what's the total organizational cost of how you're managing it today? IT is supposed to be a facilitator of whatever the business does to make money. In general individual users do not have the skill or regimentation to be their own librarians. That's why in many large companies there is one, though not in nearly enough companies. IT should be helping the users apply the data retention, categorization, and retrievability policies defined by the librarian. Any mucking about with mailbox limits is a treatment of a symptom, not the root causes. I do understand that servers must be maintained at a recoverable level as defined by formal or informal SLA's. I just don't believe that pushing data that people deem valuable into unrecoverable and widely dispersed storage media is the right way to maintain the SLA. === Andy Webb[EMAIL PROTECTED] www.swinc.com Simpler-Webb, Inc. Austin, TX512-322-0071 === ---Original Message- From: Niki Blowfield - Exchange [mailto:exchangelist;partition.co.uk] Posted At: Wednesday, November 06, 2002 8:26 AM Posted To: Microsoft Exchange Conversation: Using a PST for 'overflow' Subject: RE: Using a PST for 'overflow' We've been forced into restricting mailboxes as everyones being moved to a central server. Most users are having no problems getting their mailboxes down to 25-50mb, some much lower, a handful much higher. I'm finding it easiest to set some limits on the IS, then override that on individual mailboxes, as required, the MD for instance has a 500mb mailbox, after 2 CD's worth of archiving :-O What I've been saying to users is delete everything you can, anything older than 2 months that you need to keep put into a subfolder, then I go round and export these folders to PSTs, and dump them in their user folders on their local file servers, meaning they're included in the backups on their local servers, but the backup and disk space burden is removed from the Exchange server. I test the PSTs before deleting the originals, but I've seen nothing bigger than about 4-500mb. With enforced limits user will have to keep things in order, and we'll have to look at ongoing archiving in the method described above. 99% aren't aware of PST's, which is probably a good thing, though its added to my workload -Original Message- From: David N. Precht [mailto:discussions;entrysecurity.com] Sent: 06 November 2002 13:01 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Using a PST for 'overflow' I do. They don't know they can save them up on their home folder. They know I don't back up the workstations, but most think that you only can save PSTs on local drives ;) -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:bounce-exchange-224131;ls.swynk.com] On Behalf Of Sander Van Butzelaar Sent: Wednesday, November 06, 2002 07:05 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Using a PST for 'overflow' Why the hard line approach? I never said I made the backup of the PST, that's why one has a facilities department...I also didn't say that I found that mail particularly important, the user wants to keep it, so why not let him/her? They know not to come to me regarding items in PST files. Give the user a bit of slack here David. Sander -Original Message- From: David N. Precht [mailto:discussions;entrysecurity.com] Sent: 06 November 2002 01:56 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Using a PST for 'overflow' No, just inform them of the 'No PST Backup' policy. I don't back up PSTs. Period. Either its in their mailbox or it is not that important. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:bounce-exchange-224131;ls.swynk.com] On Behalf Of Sander Van Butzelaar Sent: Wednesday, November 06, 2002 05:49 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Using a PST for 'overflow' I have a couple of users who do the same thing. They don't want to delete old mail (for whatever reason) and I can't keep extending their mailbox sizes. So they move to PST. Be aware of the risks here! Make a periodic backup of that PST as hard drives are prone to failure. Sander -Original Message- From: Niki Blowfield - Exchange
RE: Mail Relaying Originator
RFC2821 (http://www.faqs.org/rfcs/rfc2821.html) section 6.1. Such mails can be swallowed or ignored, but they should never be bounced. You can check your mail server's compliance here: http://vger.kernel.org/mxverify.html Phil - Phil Randal Network Engineer Herefordshire Council Hereford, UK -Original Message- From: Roger Seielstad [mailto:roger.seielstad;inovis.com] Sent: 06 November 2002 17:20 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Mail Relaying Originator That's fine. Those are NDRs and probably shouldn't be blocked. -- Roger D. Seielstad - MCSE Sr. Systems Administrator Inovis - Formerly Harbinger and Extricity Atlanta, GA -Original Message- From: Dave Morrow [mailto:David.Morrow;autodata.net] Sent: Wednesday, November 06, 2002 10:28 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Mail Relaying Originator I recently setup my MS Exchange server such that only people connecting from a specific set of IP addresses (my company's IP range) and connections to an internal IP address are allowed to relay mail. After doing so, I am still noticing mail in the IMC queue that has an originator of David Morrow Network Administrator Autodata Solutions Company Ph: (519) 951-6067 Fax: (519) 451-6615 mailto: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Poor planning on your part does not necessitate an emergency on my part. This message has originated from Autodata Solutions Company. The attached material is the Confidential and Proprietary Information of Autodata Solutions Company. This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. If you have received this email in error please delete this message and notify the Autodata system administrator at [EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:leave-exchange;ls.swynk.com 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:leave-exchange;ls.swynk.com 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:leave-exchange;ls.swynk.com Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Distribution List
Someone has set the 'hide from address book' setting on the DL? Cheers Paul Standards are like toothbrushes, everyone wants one but not yours -Original Message- From: Smith Thomas Contr 911 SPTG/SC [mailto:Thomas.Smith;pittsburgh.af.mil] Sent: 06 November 2002 18:49 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Distribution List I have some users who can't see inside a distrbution list. When they are in outlook and go to the distrbution list, they can se the list ,but not the people in them. any ideas thanks _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:leave-exchange;ls.swynk.com 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:leave-exchange;ls.swynk.com Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Using a PST for 'overflow'
Users have been complaining that they're being victimised and they cant possibly delete 200mb of sent items, or at least move them to a PST that takes all of 2 minutes to open from a backed up file server. Funny how much of the space is taken up by 2mb spreadsheets emailed to the 'everyone' mailing list, that are all unread, or emails to their mate title 'bloke_falls_over.mpeg.zip' Just having a look around autoarchive, I see you have the option to specify a location. I'm thinking, although it's a thankless task, that I could configure all users' Outlook to autoarchive everything over a couple of months old. I'm not sure whether to configure it to dump the files onto a local file server or not, diskspace over time being the obvious downside. Perhaps we could do a bi-annual CD burning session of all archive PST files. How does Outlook react if you take away its archive PST, does it generate a new one? Or does that whole aspect need to be reconfigured on all clients Any thoughts? 3rd party may be our only solution -Original Message- From: Couch, Nate [mailto:nate.couch;eds.com] Sent: 06 November 2002 12:29 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Using a PST for 'overflow' I know several people who use autoarchiving to handle stuff they no longer use. Much better than keeping email from three and four years ago. Talk about packrats. You'd think the world was going to end if they had to actually delete email that old. Nate -Original Message- From: Niki Blowfield - Exchange [mailto:exchangelist;partition.co.uk] Sent: Wednesday, November 06, 2002 4:45 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Using a PST for 'overflow' I was having a discussion with someone the other day and he mentioned this phrase in passing, that they used PST files when user mailboxes became full I didn't dwell on this as we were talking about something else, but can anyone suggest what he may have meant? We are now enforcing stricter limits on mailbox size and would be interested in something like this. For ongoing maintenance, is Outlooks Autoarchiving a viable solution? i.e. does this move mail out of the server information store and into a PST in the users local profile? Thanks _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:leave-exchange;ls.swynk.com 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:leave-exchange;ls.swynk.com 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:leave-exchange;ls.swynk.com Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Using a PST for 'overflow'
Users have been complaining that they're being victimised and they cant possibly delete 200mb of sent items, or at least move them to a PST that takes all of 2 minutes to open from a backed up file server. Funny how much of the space is taken up by 2mb spreadsheets emailed to the 'everyone' mailing list, that are all unread, or emails to their mate title 'bloke_falls_over.mpeg.zip' Just having a look around autoarchive, I see you have the option to specify a location. I'm thinking, although it's a thankless task, that I could configure all users' Outlook to autoarchive everything over a couple of months old. I'm not sure whether to configure it to dump the files onto a local file server or not, diskspace over time being the obvious downside. Perhaps we could do a bi-annual CD burning session of all archive PST files. How does Outlook react if you take away its archive PST, does it generate a new one? Or does that whole aspect need to be reconfigured on all clients Any thoughts? 3rd party may be our only solution -Original Message- From: Couch, Nate [mailto:nate.couch;eds.com] Sent: 06 November 2002 12:29 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Using a PST for 'overflow' I know several people who use autoarchiving to handle stuff they no longer use. Much better than keeping email from three and four years ago. Talk about packrats. You'd think the world was going to end if they had to actually delete email that old. Nate -Original Message- From: Niki Blowfield - Exchange [mailto:exchangelist;partition.co.uk] Sent: Wednesday, November 06, 2002 4:45 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Using a PST for 'overflow' I was having a discussion with someone the other day and he mentioned this phrase in passing, that they used PST files when user mailboxes became full I didn't dwell on this as we were talking about something else, but can anyone suggest what he may have meant? We are now enforcing stricter limits on mailbox size and would be interested in something like this. For ongoing maintenance, is Outlooks Autoarchiving a viable solution? i.e. does this move mail out of the server information store and into a PST in the users local profile? Thanks _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:leave-exchange;ls.swynk.com 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:leave-exchange;ls.swynk.com 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:leave-exchange;ls.swynk.com Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: X.400 issues
Now we have the picture... You either need a consultant or a new resume. At this point, the consultant is the better choice. Seriously - this gets into the big ugly of how Exchange 5.5 routes mail, and goes back to what I said the other day about connector cost being one of the last used factors in routing mail. Since you're routing across organizations, your x.400 connectors have some very specific address space entries, and I'll bet that you messed one of those up. And that's way to hard to figure out in this kind of forum. Personally, I'd either go for the consultant, or go call PSS and spend the money to get them to walk you though the fixes. -- Roger D. Seielstad - MCSE Sr. Systems Administrator Inovis - Formerly Harbinger and Extricity Atlanta, GA -Original Message- From: Bennett, Joshua [mailto:jbennett;cotelligent.com] Sent: Wednesday, November 06, 2002 12:07 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: X.400 issues This is where things get really complicated. These 2 servers are not in the same ORG as all the other servers. They are, however (through some procedure that I am have no knowledge of that was done 2 years before I took this over) faked into thinking that they are in the same ORG. I have no idea how any of this was done, again before my time. I may want to just delete the old X.400 between SD and Irvine and force a re-calculation of the routing table. I am grasping a straws at this point. -Original Message- From: Roger Seielstad [mailto:roger.seielstad;inovis.com] Sent: Wednesday, November 06, 2002 8:35 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: X.400 issues G-d do you need a consulting engagement! I know someone in San Diego who could spend a couple days with you on this if you really need the help. Anyway, let me see if I can sort this out: EC -x400- Irvine (cost 1) EC -x400- SD (cost 1) Irvine -x400- SD (cost 100) EC -IMC (cost 1?) Irvine -IMC (Cost 99) Now, a few things to keep in mind. In the grand scheme of Ex5.5 routing, cost is the 7th (of 7) factors used for routing decisions, and therefore doesn't play as much of a role in routing as it should. However, make sure that you've set the cost correctly at both ends, and make sure that you're not setting the option to only use least cost routes. Now - another question. You bought this company. Did you migrate them to the same Org as your company, or are they set up as a separate org name? If they are different orgs, what are the address space entries on your x.400 and IMS with regards to the other company's domains? -- Roger D. Seielstad - MCSE Sr. Systems Administrator Inovis - Formerly Harbinger and Extricity Atlanta, GA -Original Message- From: Bennett, Joshua [mailto:jbennett;cotelligent.com] Sent: Tuesday, November 05, 2002 3:36 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: X.400 issues Not really an option. The scenario is this: The one remote server is in San Diego that used to be connected to the other remote server in Irvine, CA by an X.400 connector over a T1. The only server that was connected to the hub server on the E. Coast was the one in Irvine. There was an X.400 connector between SD and Irvine, then an X.400connector to the EC. There is now an separate X.400 connector from SD and Irvine to the hub server. The Irvine server has an IMC that was used by the old company (that was bought by us). The cost on the connectors to the hub server from each site is set to 1. The old connector from SD to Irvine has a cost of 100. The IMC on Irvine is set to 99. I would like to remove the old connector from SD-Irvine but, the connectors from each remote site to the hub server is sooo erratic that I have mail that routes from SD-Irvine-out the IMC in Irvine then back to the hub server on the E. Coast through the corporate IMC. There is the jist of what I am going through. It is driving me nuts trying to troubleshoot this. Please help. Josh -Original Message- From: Roger Seielstad [mailto:roger.seielstad;inovis.com] Sent: Tuesday, November 05, 2002 10:36 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: X.400 issues What is it about your routing table that is causing the looping messages? Is it possible for you to remove redundant routes, even just one or two, to see what happens? -- Roger D. Seielstad - MCSE Sr. Systems Administrator Inovis - Formerly Harbinger and Extricity Atlanta, GA -Original Message- From: Bennett, Joshua [mailto:jbennett;cotelligent.com] Sent: Tuesday, November 05, 2002 9:56 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: X.400
RE: Distribution List
Two things. First, the DLs have the option to hide memebership of their list (Advanced tab of the DL, IIRC). Second, they're using the offline address book and it was generated without full details. -- Roger D. Seielstad - MCSE Sr. Systems Administrator Inovis - Formerly Harbinger and Extricity Atlanta, GA -Original Message- From: Smith Thomas Contr 911 SPTG/SC [mailto:Thomas.Smith;pittsburgh.af.mil] Sent: Wednesday, November 06, 2002 1:49 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Distribution List I have some users who can't see inside a distrbution list. When they are in outlook and go to the distrbution list, they can se the list ,but not the people in them. any ideas thanks _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:leave-exchange;ls.swynk.com 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:leave-exchange;ls.swynk.com Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Exchange 2000 and GC
Look - do what you want. You're obviously not open to hearing why its considered good to keep global catalogs/DCs off Exchange servers. So far, you have argued against every valid point. So go off and do it already. And a few months from now, when you start seeing mail delivery issues because your Exchange/DC/GC boxes are overloaded, you'll understand the recommendations. -- Roger D. Seielstad - MCSE Sr. Systems Administrator Inovis - Formerly Harbinger and Extricity Atlanta, GA -Original Message- From: Petri [mailto:omatesti;jippii.fi] Sent: Wednesday, November 06, 2002 2:56 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Exchange 2000 and GC It is great to see the real reasons why I should not do this. I have always got an answer like: ..in my mind its not a good and MS doesn't recommends... Just a few comments about the list: 1. When you have a real problems they are always quite complexity 2. agree 3. if you create a separate site for these GC, then normal user load doesn't reach these GCs. 4. Only replication. 5. agree 6-7. true ! Do I have saw dreams or is it so that in Titanium there will be somekind small directory ? But many thanks of the list. .-Pepi-. You also want to consider the more applications/processes you run the more likely one of them will stop working. This translates into downtime. If for some reason your GC stops replicating or answering requests and the normal recovery steps don't work, you may have to reboot. It is the same for any additional processes you run on any one machine. To summarize: Reasons not to have and exchange and a GC on the same machine 1. Added troubleshooting complexity 2. Added DR complexity 3. Added CPU load 4. Added network load 5. Added disk I/O 6. Added hot-fix and SP complexity (dealing with interactions of hotfixes) 7. Domain Controller Security Policy _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:leave-exchange;ls.swynk.com 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:leave-exchange;ls.swynk.com Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: scan Ex2000 for phrases or certain words in emails
OKI have an Exchange 2000 server with 4 SG's and 4 databases per SG,I need something that will scan the databases either continuously or on a per night basis with. It needs to scan not only subjects and attachment names but also the emails for any type of common 4 letter words or phrases like I promise a 50% return on this investment. I know all the downsides of running something like this on an Exchange Server but I have to provide a customer with a solution. Thanks for your help so far.. Clint It takes a boy to be a man behind a keyboard.unkown -Original Message- From: Chris Scharff [mailto:chris_scharff;messageone.com] Sent: Tuesday, November 05, 2002 6:04 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: scan Ex2000 for phrases or certain words in emails Insufficient problem description. Resubmit a more technically accurate query and perhaps. -Original Message- From: Kleciak, Clint D N21 [mailto:Clint.Kleciak;CIGNA.COM] Sent: Tuesday, November 05, 2002 12:46 PM To: Exchange Discussions OK,,,any details on such product? thanks Clint -Original Message- From: Chris Scharff [mailto:chris_scharff;messageone.com] Sent: Tuesday, November 05, 2002 12:05 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: scan Ex2000 for phrases or certain words in emails Yes. -Original Message- From: Kleciak, Clint D N21 [mailto:Clint.Kleciak;CIGNA.COM] Sent: Tuesday, November 05, 2002 10:02 AM To: Exchange Discussions Any such functionality or third product tool? thanks Clint _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:leave-exchange;ls.swynk.com Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] -- CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: If you have received this e-mail in error, please immediately notify the sender by e-mail at the address shown. This e-mail transmission may contain confidential information. This information is intended only for the use of the individual(s) or entity to whom it is intended even if addressed incorrectly. Please delete it from your files if you are not the intended recipient. Thank you for your compliance. Copyright (c) 2002 CIGNA _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:leave-exchange;ls.swynk.com 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:leave-exchange;ls.swynk.com Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] -- CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: If you have received this e-mail in error, please immediately notify the sender by e-mail at the address shown. This e-mail transmission may contain confidential information. This information is intended only for the use of the individual(s) or entity to whom it is intended even if addressed incorrectly. Please delete it from your files if you are not the intended recipient. Thank you for your compliance. Copyright (c) 2002 CIGNA _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:leave-exchange;ls.swynk.com Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Service account password change
That really all depends on what you feel like doing. How many servers? How many people have the password? How secure is the password? How much work do you feel like doing? I would say, change it as often as needed to be secure, but not so often as to break Exchange. I'm sure there's a Q article about it. -Original Message- From: Ashraph, Elizabeth A. [mailto:liz.ashraph;mirant.com] Posted At: Wednesday, November 06, 2002 1:51 PM Posted To: List - Exchange Server List Conversation: Service account password change Subject: Service account password change What's the general recommendation on changing service account passwords. Should it be done periodically for security reasons, perhaps when an Admin leaves the company. Is there a good online reference for all the considerations in making the change. Thanks all. Liz Ashraph Messaging Systems 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:leave-exchange;ls.swynk.com 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:leave-exchange;ls.swynk.com Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Distribution List
Perhaps the names are being hidden from the DL, so all they are supposed to see is the DL name. Check and see if that option is ticked. Gèoff... -Original Message- From: Smith Thomas Contr 911 SPTG/SC [mailto:Thomas.Smith;pittsburgh.af.mil] Sent: Wednesday, November 06, 2002 1:49 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Distribution List I have some users who can't see inside a distrbution list. When they are in outlook and go to the distrbution list, they can se the list ,but not the people in them. any ideas thanks _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:leave-exchange;ls.swynk.com 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:leave-exchange;ls.swynk.com Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Using a PST for 'overflow'
So - how much mailbox size do you give your users? And do you give them the opportunity to burn their PST's to CD just in case? Finally - who are you to judge what's important and what isn't? Do you do their jobs, as well as your own. Darcy -Original Message- From: David N. Precht [mailto:discussions;entrysecurity.com] Sent: Wednesday, November 06, 2002 3:56 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Using a PST for 'overflow' No, just inform them of the 'No PST Backup' policy. I don't back up PSTs. Period. Either its in their mailbox or it is not that important. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:bounce-exchange-224131;ls.swynk.com] On Behalf Of Sander Van Butzelaar Sent: Wednesday, November 06, 2002 05:49 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Using a PST for 'overflow' I have a couple of users who do the same thing. They don't want to delete old mail (for whatever reason) and I can't keep extending their mailbox sizes. So they move to PST. Be aware of the risks here! Make a periodic backup of that PST as hard drives are prone to failure. Sander -Original Message- From: Niki Blowfield - Exchange [mailto:exchangelist;partition.co.uk] Sent: 06 November 2002 12:45 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Using a PST for 'overflow' I was having a discussion with someone the other day and he mentioned this phrase in passing, that they used PST files when user mailboxes became full I didn't dwell on this as we were talking about something else, but can anyone suggest what he may have meant? We are now enforcing stricter limits on mailbox size and would be interested in something like this. For ongoing maintenance, is Outlooks Autoarchiving a viable solution? i.e. does this move mail out of the server information store and into a PST in the users local profile? Thanks _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:leave-exchange;ls.swynk.com 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:leave-exchange;ls.swynk.com 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:leave-exchange;ls.swynk.com Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] === This email and its contents are confidential. If you are not the intended recipient, please do not disclose or use the information within this email or its attachments. If you have received this email in error, please delete it immediately. Thank you. === _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:leave-exchange;ls.swynk.com Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Using a PST for 'overflow'
So - not only do you tell them no PST backups, you lie to them about where PST's can be saved. Nice customer service standards you have there. Darcy -Original Message- From: David N. Precht [mailto:discussions;entrysecurity.com] Sent: Wednesday, November 06, 2002 5:01 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Using a PST for 'overflow' I do. They don't know they can save them up on their home folder. They know I don't back up the workstations, but most think that you only can save PSTs on local drives ;) -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:bounce-exchange-224131;ls.swynk.com] On Behalf Of Sander Van Butzelaar Sent: Wednesday, November 06, 2002 07:05 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Using a PST for 'overflow' Why the hard line approach? I never said I made the backup of the PST, that's why one has a facilities department...I also didn't say that I found that mail particularly important, the user wants to keep it, so why not let him/her? They know not to come to me regarding items in PST files. Give the user a bit of slack here David. Sander -Original Message- From: David N. Precht [mailto:discussions;entrysecurity.com] Sent: 06 November 2002 01:56 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Using a PST for 'overflow' No, just inform them of the 'No PST Backup' policy. I don't back up PSTs. Period. Either its in their mailbox or it is not that important. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:bounce-exchange-224131;ls.swynk.com] On Behalf Of Sander Van Butzelaar Sent: Wednesday, November 06, 2002 05:49 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Using a PST for 'overflow' I have a couple of users who do the same thing. They don't want to delete old mail (for whatever reason) and I can't keep extending their mailbox sizes. So they move to PST. Be aware of the risks here! Make a periodic backup of that PST as hard drives are prone to failure. Sander -Original Message- From: Niki Blowfield - Exchange [mailto:exchangelist;partition.co.uk] Sent: 06 November 2002 12:45 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Using a PST for 'overflow' I was having a discussion with someone the other day and he mentioned this phrase in passing, that they used PST files when user mailboxes became full I didn't dwell on this as we were talking about something else, but can anyone suggest what he may have meant? We are now enforcing stricter limits on mailbox size and would be interested in something like this. For ongoing maintenance, is Outlooks Autoarchiving a viable solution? i.e. does this move mail out of the server information store and into a PST in the users local profile? Thanks _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:leave-exchange;ls.swynk.com 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:leave-exchange;ls.swynk.com 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:leave-exchange;ls.swynk.com 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:leave-exchange;ls.swynk.com 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:leave-exchange;ls.swynk.com Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] === This email and its contents are confidential. If you are not the intended recipient, please do not disclose or use the information within this email or its attachments. If you have received this email in error, please delete it immediately. Thank you. === _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:leave-exchange;ls.swynk.com Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Outlook 2002 contacts
If you're taking about the view from the Address Book itself, you can change the FILE AS dropdown to include the company name. But that still won't show up in the TO field. The only way to do that is to actually add the company name to the first or last name fields. Drew Nicholson Technical Writer Network Engineer LAN Manager RapidApp 312-372-7188 (work) 312-543-0008 (cell) Born To Edit -Original Message- From: Niki Blowfield - Exchange [mailto:exchangelist;partition.co.uk] Sent: Tuesday, November 05, 2002 3:22 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Outlook 2002 contacts Dear All, We have several public folders used as address books User are complaining that they only get to see the name of the contact, and not the associated email address, or their company. (sounds like an MCP question) Is there a way of automatically changing the contacts to display the name as well as the email address? And/or the company field? Thanks _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:leave-exchange;ls.swynk.com 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:leave-exchange;ls.swynk.com Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: RBL's
When Everything Was Spam to ISP http://www.wired.com/news/technology/0,1282,56235,00.html An overly-sensitive spam filter is to blame for a week-long blockade that resulted in nondelivery of some e-mail messages sent to EarthLink subscribers in late October Shaw confirmed that EarthLink, like many ISPs, uses a blacklist to block all mail coming from specific Internet addresses that are known to be used by spammers. -Original Message- From: Andy David [mailto:davida;vss.com] Sent: Wednesday, November 06, 2002 11:45 AM To: Exchange Discussions Caution: Thread is hot. -Original Message- From: Chris Scharff [mailto:chris_scharff;messageone.com] Sent: Wednesday, November 06, 2002 10:47 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: RBL's At no time have I said that companies can't choose to implement RBLs; simply that they should be cognizant of the complete ramifications of the technology. Obtaining this level of understanding is a much better example of risk management than some theoretical defense against a risk which appears to have no foundation in reality. Please don't use the McDonalds lawsuit as some type of example of the legal system gone bezerk. If you actually understood the history of the case, you'd find that the judgment itself was well within the bounds of reason, even if the monetary damages awarded appear to be a bit shocking. -Original Message- From: Finch Brett [mailto:brett.finch;hrs.ualberta.ca] Sent: Wednesday, November 06, 2002 1:31 AM To: Exchange Discussions Can you say 'risk management'. If someone can drive up to a window, order a coffee then take the lid off, drive over a speed bump and sue someone else, anything is possible :) -Original Message- From: Chris Scharff [mailto:chris_scharff;messageone.com] Sent: Tuesday, November 05, 2002 21:20 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: RBL's I've never heard of a single instance where a lawsuit was initiated against an organization based on incoming *spam*. Can you point to one? I can point to deals which didn't get done because of RBLs which resulted in real monetary loss, which would seem to make one more likely than the other unless you can point to a court case I'm not aware of. Matt's client side could technically be much different from a normal organization since his firm provides hosting to businesses (clients) who have their own users (another type of client). There are plenty of examples of server based filtering based on individual user settings which could potentially meet his objective and address your objection. Most of those solutions are poorly done IMNSHO. RBLs in general aren't content filtering solutions, they are connection filtering solutions. While they may at some level achieve similar results, their objectives are actually quite different. -Original Message- From: Finch Brett [mailto:brett.finch;hrs.ualberta.ca] Sent: Tuesday, November 05, 2002 4:46 PM To: Exchange Discussions I've watched this thread for a while. I don't buy the argument that a ten million deal will fail because of a bounced email via RBL. It's just as likely that a dept. with predominant females could sue for fifteen million for sexual harassment in the fact the company with the ten million dollar deal didn't take reasonable steps to protect them from this spam. There also seems to be no argument about the value of email in the workplace and that a business may find they loose a ten thousand dollar deal but save fifteen thousand in the fact their people are actually doing what they were hired to do (as mentioned in other posts bandwidth costs, storage costs as well). As for the per client configuration, that works until they start adding their contacts to the junk list or they log into a Terminal Server or via wireless with a PDA. We also don't hire people based on their skills to manage their email. Finding a moderate RBL with reasonable rules and sending a nice e-mail back to a would be spammer seems to work as well as anything. -Original Message- From: Matt Natkin [mailto:mnatkin;natco-inc.com] Sent: Tuesday, November 05, 2002 11:49 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: RBL's Very true..We have hosted exchange for business and we get the sh-t spammed out of us. But we do not block any email! That may change as our customers are complaining bitterly. The best solution we would like is a filter on the client side and not the server side. MacAfee spam kill product looks nice but I do not know if it can talk to Exchange server. (not POP) I just felt we started something ugly on this list!!:) Wanted to clarify why we were interested. -Original Message- From: Chris Scharff [mailto:chris_scharff;messageone.com] Sent: Tuesday, November 05,
public folders permission denied NAV
Word of warning to anyone running NAV Corporate Edition 7.x: Messages in public folders for which users have read-only permissions will not be accessible if (a) they contain attachments and (b) the folder is homed on an E2K server. Apparently the NAV e-mail plugin scans the message before opening it and tries to mark the message as scanned. If the user doesn't have change rights, s/he can't mark the message and you get a permission-denied error. For some reason the problem doesn't manifest itself if the PF is homed on an E5.5 server. I spent most of last week troubleshooting until PSS found an internal KB article describing it as a known issue. The workarounds I've tested successfully are: * turn off NAV's e-mail plugin * access the public folders through OWA * copy the message to your Inbox and open it there When I upgraded my NAVCE 7.5 client to Symantec AntiVirus (SAV?) Corporate Edition 8.0, the problem disappeared. http://service1.symantec.com/SUPPORT/ent-security.nsf/3d2a1f71c5a003348525680f006426be/a6b13da3189e3c5888256b88007bb053?OpenDocument _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:leave-exchange;ls.swynk.com Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: RBL's
If that is what had happened with the coffee, I suppose you might have an actual point. But it's not. So you don't. :) Drew Nicholson Technical Writer Network Engineer LAN Manager RapidApp 312-372-7188 (work) 312-543-0008 (cell) Born To Edit -Original Message- From: Finch Brett [mailto:brett.finch;hrs.ualberta.ca] Sent: Wednesday, November 06, 2002 1:31 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: RBL's Can you say 'risk management'. If someone can drive up to a window, order a coffee then take the lid off, drive over a speed bump and sue someone else, anything is possible :) _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:leave-exchange;ls.swynk.com Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Using a PST for 'overflow'
If you want to give the user slack, expand the Information Store. That's the best way to store mail anyway. Drew Nicholson Technical Writer Network Engineer LAN Manager RapidApp 312-372-7188 (work) 312-543-0008 (cell) Born To Edit -Original Message- From: Sander Van Butzelaar [mailto:sander;korbi.net] Sent: Wednesday, November 06, 2002 6:05 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Using a PST for 'overflow' Why the hard line approach? I never said I made the backup of the PST, that's why one has a facilities department...I also didn't say that I found that mail particularly important, the user wants to keep it, so why not let him/her? They know not to come to me regarding items in PST files. Give the user a bit of slack here David. Sander -Original Message- From: David N. Precht [mailto:discussions;entrysecurity.com] Sent: 06 November 2002 01:56 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Using a PST for 'overflow' No, just inform them of the 'No PST Backup' policy. I don't back up PSTs. Period. Either its in their mailbox or it is not that important. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:bounce-exchange-224131;ls.swynk.com] On Behalf Of Sander Van Butzelaar Sent: Wednesday, November 06, 2002 05:49 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Using a PST for 'overflow' I have a couple of users who do the same thing. They don't want to delete old mail (for whatever reason) and I can't keep extending their mailbox sizes. So they move to PST. Be aware of the risks here! Make a periodic backup of that PST as hard drives are prone to failure. Sander -Original Message- From: Niki Blowfield - Exchange [mailto:exchangelist;partition.co.uk] Sent: 06 November 2002 12:45 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Using a PST for 'overflow' I was having a discussion with someone the other day and he mentioned this phrase in passing, that they used PST files when user mailboxes became full I didn't dwell on this as we were talking about something else, but can anyone suggest what he may have meant? We are now enforcing stricter limits on mailbox size and would be interested in something like this. For ongoing maintenance, is Outlooks Autoarchiving a viable solution? i.e. does this move mail out of the server information store and into a PST in the users local profile? Thanks _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:leave-exchange;ls.swynk.com 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:leave-exchange;ls.swynk.com 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:leave-exchange;ls.swynk.com 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:leave-exchange;ls.swynk.com 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:leave-exchange;ls.swynk.com Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Installing an internet mail connector
What exactly is the problem? What errors? - Original Message - From: Ed Esgro [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, November 06, 2002 4:19 PM Subject: Installing an internet mail connector This is new to me so I was hoping for a few suggestions and some help. I have Exchange 5.5 in my organization. I currently have an internet mail connector. However the server is having problems and I am building a new one. My question is. How do I install the internet mail connector? I do not see it as part of the installation options. By having two internet mail connectors in the same site... will it cause any problems or can they co-exist until I can remove the original one? Any information would help. Thanks all. Ed *This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the addressee. If you have received this email in error please notify [EMAIL PROTECTED] Any views or opinions presented in this email are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of Stainsafe Inc. or any of its subsidiaries or affiliates. The company accepts no liability for any damage caused by any virus transmitted by this email.* _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:leave-exchange;ls.swynk.com 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:leave-exchange;ls.swynk.com Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Installing an internet mail connector
The IMC is installed with the Exchange Server, when you first install the Server. You then create the IMC once Exchange is installed (File/New Other/. . . . Gèoff... -Original Message- From: Ed Esgro [mailto:EdE;stainsafe.com] Sent: Wednesday, November 06, 2002 4:20 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Installing an internet mail connector This is new to me so I was hoping for a few suggestions and some help. I have Exchange 5.5 in my organization. I currently have an internet mail connector. However the server is having problems and I am building a new one. My question is. How do I install the internet mail connector? I do not see it as part of the installation options. By having two internet mail connectors in the same site... will it cause any problems or can they co-exist until I can remove the original one? Any information would help. Thanks all. Ed *This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the addressee. If you have received this email in error please notify [EMAIL PROTECTED] Any views or opinions presented in this email are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of Stainsafe Inc. or any of its subsidiaries or affiliates. The company accepts no liability for any damage caused by any virus transmitted by this email.* _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:leave-exchange;ls.swynk.com 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:leave-exchange;ls.swynk.com Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Using a PST for 'overflow'
Storing PSTs on servers is simply a dumb idea. Are the file server disks cheaper than your Exchange disks, especially keeping in mind that you lose single instance storage and PSTs require more space even not taking into consideration single instance storage? You're looking at storing data in a format that requires maybe 2X to 15X the amount of space required in a store. Any data worth retaining belongs in the information store. Users who simply can't delete anything should keep their PSTs on their PCs' disks and back them up themselves. 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:bounce-exchange-94760;ls.swynk.com] On Behalf Of Sander Van Butzelaar Sent: Wednesday, November 06, 2002 4:05 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Using a PST for 'overflow' Why the hard line approach? I never said I made the backup of the PST, that's why one has a facilities department...I also didn't say that I found that mail particularly important, the user wants to keep it, so why not let him/her? They know not to come to me regarding items in PST files. Give the user a bit of slack here David. Sander -Original Message- From: David N. Precht [mailto:discussions;entrysecurity.com] Sent: 06 November 2002 01:56 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Using a PST for 'overflow' No, just inform them of the 'No PST Backup' policy. I don't back up PSTs. Period. Either its in their mailbox or it is not that important. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:bounce-exchange-224131;ls.swynk.com] On Behalf Of Sander Van Butzelaar Sent: Wednesday, November 06, 2002 05:49 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Using a PST for 'overflow' I have a couple of users who do the same thing. They don't want to delete old mail (for whatever reason) and I can't keep extending their mailbox sizes. So they move to PST. Be aware of the risks here! Make a periodic backup of that PST as hard drives are prone to failure. Sander -Original Message- From: Niki Blowfield - Exchange [mailto:exchangelist;partition.co.uk] Sent: 06 November 2002 12:45 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Using a PST for 'overflow' I was having a discussion with someone the other day and he mentioned this phrase in passing, that they used PST files when user mailboxes became full I didn't dwell on this as we were talking about something else, but can anyone suggest what he may have meant? We are now enforcing stricter limits on mailbox size and would be interested in something like this. For ongoing maintenance, is Outlooks Autoarchiving a viable solution? i.e. does this move mail out of the server information store and into a PST in the users local profile? Thanks _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:leave-exchange;ls.swynk.com 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:leave-exchange;ls.swynk.com 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:leave-exchange;ls.swynk.com 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:leave-exchange;ls.swynk.com 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:leave-exchange;ls.swynk.com Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Email sent
Does any know why this would happen? A guy at my office sends out an email to a company and it only happens with this company and when this company recieves his emial it has an attachment containing the same text of what is in the email. I think he uses outlook express. Thanks rich _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:leave-exchange;ls.swynk.com Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Using a PST for 'overflow'
KVault is pretty expensive, though. It's really a product for fairly large organizations. 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:bounce-exchange-94760;ls.swynk.com] On Behalf Of Webb, Andy Sent: Wednesday, November 06, 2002 8:05 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Using a PST for 'overflow' I think you'd benefit more from something like kvault that moved the data out to nearline or offline storage, but left it within the Exchange environment. It will result in far less usage of drive space, is easily backed up and will result in fewer support calls. There are several Exchange Archiving products out there. None are particularly cheap, but then what's the total organizational cost of how you're managing it today? IT is supposed to be a facilitator of whatever the business does to make money. In general individual users do not have the skill or regimentation to be their own librarians. That's why in many large companies there is one, though not in nearly enough companies. IT should be helping the users apply the data retention, categorization, and retrievability policies defined by the librarian. Any mucking about with mailbox limits is a treatment of a symptom, not the root causes. I do understand that servers must be maintained at a recoverable level as defined by formal or informal SLA's. I just don't believe that pushing data that people deem valuable into unrecoverable and widely dispersed storage media is the right way to maintain the SLA. === Andy Webb[EMAIL PROTECTED] www.swinc.com Simpler-Webb, Inc. Austin, TX512-322-0071 === ---Original Message- From: Niki Blowfield - Exchange [mailto:exchangelist;partition.co.uk] Posted At: Wednesday, November 06, 2002 8:26 AM Posted To: Microsoft Exchange Conversation: Using a PST for 'overflow' Subject: RE: Using a PST for 'overflow' We've been forced into restricting mailboxes as everyones being moved to a central server. Most users are having no problems getting their mailboxes down to 25-50mb, some much lower, a handful much higher. I'm finding it easiest to set some limits on the IS, then override that on individual mailboxes, as required, the MD for instance has a 500mb mailbox, after 2 CD's worth of archiving :-O What I've been saying to users is delete everything you can, anything older than 2 months that you need to keep put into a subfolder, then I go round and export these folders to PSTs, and dump them in their user folders on their local file servers, meaning they're included in the backups on their local servers, but the backup and disk space burden is removed from the Exchange server. I test the PSTs before deleting the originals, but I've seen nothing bigger than about 4-500mb. With enforced limits user will have to keep things in order, and we'll have to look at ongoing archiving in the method described above. 99% aren't aware of PST's, which is probably a good thing, though its added to my workload -Original Message- From: David N. Precht [mailto:discussions;entrysecurity.com] Sent: 06 November 2002 13:01 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Using a PST for 'overflow' I do. They don't know they can save them up on their home folder. They know I don't back up the workstations, but most think that you only can save PSTs on local drives ;) -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:bounce-exchange-224131;ls.swynk.com] On Behalf Of Sander Van Butzelaar Sent: Wednesday, November 06, 2002 07:05 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Using a PST for 'overflow' Why the hard line approach? I never said I made the backup of the PST, that's why one has a facilities department...I also didn't say that I found that mail particularly important, the user wants to keep it, so why not let him/her? They know not to come to me regarding items in PST files. Give the user a bit of slack here David. Sander -Original Message- From: David N. Precht [mailto:discussions;entrysecurity.com] Sent: 06 November 2002 01:56 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Using a PST for 'overflow' No, just inform them of the 'No PST Backup' policy. I don't back up PSTs. Period. Either its in their mailbox or it is not that important. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:bounce-exchange-224131;ls.swynk.com] On Behalf Of Sander Van Butzelaar Sent: Wednesday, November 06, 2002 05:49 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Using a PST for 'overflow' I have a couple of users who do the same thing. They don't want to delete old mail (for whatever reason) and I can't keep extending their mailbox sizes. So they move to PST. Be aware of the risks here! Make a periodic backup of that PST as hard drives are prone to failure. Sander
RE: Using a PST for 'overflow'
That was Lily Tomlin's line from Laugh-In. 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:bounce-exchange-94760;ls.swynk.com] On Behalf Of Dupler, Craig Sent: Wednesday, November 06, 2002 11:15 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Using a PST for 'overflow' I am reminded of the old phrase that was so lovingly attributed to ATT back in the 60's: We're the phone company, we don't care, we don't have to. Perhaps one in the business of providing a service and wanting to be continuously improving the quality of that service with an aim toward keeping one's customers both surprised and delighted, just perhaps such a person might want to reconsider arrogant and customer abusive policies . . . Naw, especially not on the day after a kinder and gentler victory. Arrogance is in. Have at it. -Original Message- From: David N. Precht [mailto:discussions;entrysecurity.com] Sent: Wednesday, November 06, 2002 3:56 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Using a PST for 'overflow' No, just inform them of the 'No PST Backup' policy. I don't back up PSTs. Period. Either its in their mailbox or it is not that important. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:bounce-exchange-224131;ls.swynk.com] On Behalf Of Sander Van Butzelaar Sent: Wednesday, November 06, 2002 05:49 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Using a PST for 'overflow' I have a couple of users who do the same thing. They don't want to delete old mail (for whatever reason) and I can't keep extending their mailbox sizes. So they move to PST. Be aware of the risks here! Make a periodic backup of that PST as hard drives are prone to failure. Sander -Original Message- From: Niki Blowfield - Exchange [mailto:exchangelist;partition.co.uk] Sent: 06 November 2002 12:45 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Using a PST for 'overflow' I was having a discussion with someone the other day and he mentioned this phrase in passing, that they used PST files when user mailboxes became full I didn't dwell on this as we were talking about something else, but can anyone suggest what he may have meant? We are now enforcing stricter limits on mailbox size and would be interested in something like this. For ongoing maintenance, is Outlooks Autoarchiving a viable solution? i.e. does this move mail out of the server information store and into a PST in the users local profile? Thanks _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:leave-exchange;ls.swynk.com 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:leave-exchange;ls.swynk.com 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:leave-exchange;ls.swynk.com 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:leave-exchange;ls.swynk.com 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:leave-exchange;ls.swynk.com Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Instant Messaging Troubleshooting
I first saw that moniker used by Elaine Sharp. I'm reasonably sure Mr. Deckler has heard that as far back as grade school. 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:bounce-exchange-94760;ls.swynk.com] On Behalf Of Dupler, Craig Sent: Wednesday, November 06, 2002 11:01 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Instant Messaging Troubleshooting Hi Greg. This reminds me of the days when Ed C. called you Deckler the heckler. How have you been? I thought that nobody was going to pick-up the bait that I threw out there. I thought it was sort of like throwing a copy of the beatitudes or some Gandhi quotes into a debate about what to do about Saddam. So being a semi-troglodyte / Luddite curmudgeon, I'll respond and see if anyone else jumps in. All of this is preceded with IMHO . . . At the heart of IM is the server which is maintaining a dynamic list of who is on line at the moment. Currently location is not an attribute in that data, but will be once the whole E-911 scenario is sorted out. There are two ways of looking at the server. In one (the one most people think about) it is purely a client view. You sign on and then ask others who are already there to be added to their lists or permission to add them to your lists. My second objection deals with this view of the technology. Some managers will see this as an opportunity to keep track of people and reserve the right to interrupt spasmodically (I like that word). PHB idiots will abuse this possibility in an almost endless array of ways that are demeaning and insulting. The first objection deals with a perspective that I don't believe most people even consider. The server to provide information about who is on line to applications through an API (probably a form of an LDAP query). This could be used for behavior tracking and advertising pushes - think of it as a cookie that is on the server instead of local. Perhaps AOL and MSN will not use it for that - but do you believe that? If so, I have a land deal in the Everglades that I would like to discuss. The very last thing that people should want to do is subscribe to a presence technology that is not purely peer-to-peer. Sometimes I think that techies have all of the worst characteristics of Robert Teller - the one guy on the Manhattan Project that would not have understood even one tiny scintilla what Jeff Goldbloom's character said in Jurassic Park, just because you can do it doesn't mean you should. IM is a vile and inhuman technology. I think it is pathetic that people are drawn to it sort of like moths to a zap light or flies to flypaper.. -Original Message- From: Greg Deckler [mailto:greg;infonition.com] Sent: Tuesday, November 05, 2002 2:48 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Instant Messaging Troubleshooting So IM is vile and inhuman technology, but email isn't? :) I have to say, you've always got a different perspective on things, Craig! I have to admit that if you have the time, I would personally LOVE to hear your thoughts on this subject. You always had good insights on UM and other technologies back in the day. I know it is probably off topic for the list, but this list generates so much noise anyway... IM is vile and inhuman technology, especially in the hands of carriers and others with capitalist motives; but it can also move us back toward 19th century attitudes about employee-management relations. We should launch a campaign to stamp it out. I just thought I'd throw that out there. -Original Message- From: Mark Harford [mailto:mark.harford;bbc.co.uk] Sent: Monday, November 04, 2002 9:44 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Instant Messaging Troubleshooting So gold is also the server name? I'm not familiar with IM on non-default virtual servers so the only other troubleshooting step I can suggest is to try signing in using the actual IM address as shown in ADUC on your account. Presumably [EMAIL PROTECTED]? Mark -Original Message- From: Jonathan [mailto:jwright;spectore.com] Sent: 04 November 2002 17:07 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Instant Messaging Troubleshooting Thanks for your reply. I am using [EMAIL PROTECTED] in the IM logon. My DNS is setup with the SRV record under the _tcp folder listed as: rvp service location [0][0][80] gold.domain.com A Host record for the server (which has IM, E2K, IIS running on it) was dynamically added to the DNS: gold A 192.168.xxx.xxx I think I should also mention that our web service and Exchange is on the same server gold.domain.com _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe:
RE: Service account password change
I would give the service account a very cryptic, practically-impossible-to-remember password and leave it alone. 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:bounce-exchange-94760;ls.swynk.com] On Behalf Of Ashraph, Elizabeth A. Sent: Wednesday, November 06, 2002 10:51 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Service account password change What's the general recommendation on changing service account passwords. Should it be done periodically for security reasons, perhaps when an Admin leaves the company. Is there a good online reference for all the considerations in making the change. Thanks all. Liz Ashraph Messaging Systems 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:leave-exchange;ls.swynk.com 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:leave-exchange;ls.swynk.com Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Installing an internet mail connector
From ExAdmin - File, New Other -- Roger D. Seielstad - MCSE Sr. Systems Administrator Inovis - Formerly Harbinger and Extricity Atlanta, GA -Original Message- From: Ed Esgro [mailto:EdE;stainsafe.com] Sent: Wednesday, November 06, 2002 4:20 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Installing an internet mail connector This is new to me so I was hoping for a few suggestions and some help. I have Exchange 5.5 in my organization. I currently have an internet mail connector. However the server is having problems and I am building a new one. My question is. How do I install the internet mail connector? I do not see it as part of the installation options. By having two internet mail connectors in the same site... will it cause any problems or can they co-exist until I can remove the original one? Any information would help. Thanks all. Ed *This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the addressee. If you have received this email in error please notify [EMAIL PROTECTED] Any views or opinions presented in this email are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of Stainsafe Inc. or any of its subsidiaries or affiliates. The company accepts no liability for any damage caused by any virus transmitted by this email.* _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:leave-exchange;ls.swynk.com 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:leave-exchange;ls.swynk.com Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Scripting Exchange 2000
Reason number 2,391... 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:bounce-exchange-94760;ls.swynk.com] On Behalf Of Webb, Andy Sent: Wednesday, November 06, 2002 12:35 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Scripting Exchange 2000 No, cluster installs are not scriptable if I remember correctly. Standalone installs are scriptable - there's an option on the setup program to cause it to simulate the install and capture the setup information. === Andy Webb[EMAIL PROTECTED] www.swinc.com Simpler-Webb, Inc. Austin, TX512-322-0071 === ---Original Message- From: Robert Jan Duyverman [mailto:r.duyverman;pink.nl] Posted At: Thursday, October 31, 2002 7:22 AM Posted To: Microsoft Exchange Conversation: Scripting Exchange 2000 Subject: Scripting Exchange 2000 Hi, Is it possible to script the installation and configuration of an Exchange 2000 server on MSCS? Any tips, tricks or examples? Thanks in advance, Robert _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:leave-exchange;ls.swynk.com 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:leave-exchange;ls.swynk.com 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:leave-exchange;ls.swynk.com Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Installing an internet mail connector
Answers inline. 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:bounce-exchange-94760;ls.swynk.com] On Behalf Of Ed Esgro Sent: Wednesday, November 06, 2002 1:20 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Installing an internet mail connector This is new to me so I was hoping for a few suggestions and some help. I have Exchange 5.5 in my organization. I currently have an internet mail connector. However the server is having problems and I am building a new one. My question is. How do I install the internet mail connector? I do not see it as part of the installation options. File New Other Internet Mail Service By having two internet mail connectors in the same site... will it cause any problems or can they co-exist until I can remove the original one? If one isn't working, mail may queue up for it. Mail in IMS queues will not reroute to other IMSes. So, it's best to raise the address space costs on the bad IMS so mail routes to the good one. Also keep in mind the IMS's scope. If your servers are in two sites, be sure that the IMS is set to be used by the entire organization, or else the other site's routing table will not include it. Also, be sure your MX records have a lower cost for the preferred route. Setting costs equal will generally result in pretty good load balancing if you prefer that. Any information would help. Thanks all. Ed *This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the addressee. If you have received this email in error please notify [EMAIL PROTECTED] Any views or opinions presented in this email are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of Stainsafe Inc. or any of its subsidiaries or affiliates. The company accepts no liability for any damage caused by any virus transmitted by this email.* _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:leave-exchange;ls.swynk.com 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:leave-exchange;ls.swynk.com Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Mass Create Public Folders
Is there a way to mass create a public folder structure in Exchange 5.5 SP 4? PFAdmin? I didnt see anything in the /help or through searches of the MS KB or Google . . . Anyone done this? TIA _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:leave-exchange;ls.swynk.com Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: RBL's
I'll second that topic. Gèoff... -Original Message- From: Martin Blackstone [mailto:MBlackstone;superioraccess.com] Sent: Wednesday, November 06, 2002 5:11 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: RBL's Lets talk about something else like making it illegal to smoke in restaurants or bars -Original Message- From: Andy David [mailto:davida;vss.com] Sent: Wednesday, November 06, 2002 9:45 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: RBL's Caution: Thread is hot. -Original Message- From: Chris Scharff [mailto:chris_scharff;messageone.com] Sent: Wednesday, November 06, 2002 10:47 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: RBL's At no time have I said that companies can't choose to implement RBLs; simply that they should be cognizant of the complete ramifications of the technology. Obtaining this level of understanding is a much better example of risk management than some theoretical defense against a risk which appears to have no foundation in reality. Please don't use the McDonalds lawsuit as some type of example of the legal system gone bezerk. If you actually understood the history of the case, you'd find that the judgment itself was well within the bounds of reason, even if the monetary damages awarded appear to be a bit shocking. -Original Message- From: Finch Brett [mailto:brett.finch;hrs.ualberta.ca] Sent: Wednesday, November 06, 2002 1:31 AM To: Exchange Discussions Can you say 'risk management'. If someone can drive up to a window, order a coffee then take the lid off, drive over a speed bump and sue someone else, anything is possible :) -Original Message- From: Chris Scharff [mailto:chris_scharff;messageone.com] Sent: Tuesday, November 05, 2002 21:20 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: RBL's I've never heard of a single instance where a lawsuit was initiated against an organization based on incoming *spam*. Can you point to one? I can point to deals which didn't get done because of RBLs which resulted in real monetary loss, which would seem to make one more likely than the other unless you can point to a court case I'm not aware of. Matt's client side could technically be much different from a normal organization since his firm provides hosting to businesses (clients) who have their own users (another type of client). There are plenty of examples of server based filtering based on individual user settings which could potentially meet his objective and address your objection. Most of those solutions are poorly done IMNSHO. RBLs in general aren't content filtering solutions, they are connection filtering solutions. While they may at some level achieve similar results, their objectives are actually quite different. -Original Message- From: Finch Brett [mailto:brett.finch;hrs.ualberta.ca] Sent: Tuesday, November 05, 2002 4:46 PM To: Exchange Discussions I've watched this thread for a while. I don't buy the argument that a ten million deal will fail because of a bounced email via RBL. It's just as likely that a dept. with predominant females could sue for fifteen million for sexual harassment in the fact the company with the ten million dollar deal didn't take reasonable steps to protect them from this spam. There also seems to be no argument about the value of email in the workplace and that a business may find they loose a ten thousand dollar deal but save fifteen thousand in the fact their people are actually doing what they were hired to do (as mentioned in other posts bandwidth costs, storage costs as well). As for the per client configuration, that works until they start adding their contacts to the junk list or they log into a Terminal Server or via wireless with a PDA. We also don't hire people based on their skills to manage their email. Finding a moderate RBL with reasonable rules and sending a nice e-mail back to a would be spammer seems to work as well as anything. -Original Message- From: Matt Natkin [mailto:mnatkin;natco-inc.com] Sent: Tuesday, November 05, 2002 11:49 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: RBL's Very true..We have hosted exchange for business and we get the sh-t spammed out of us. But we do not block any email! That may change as our customers are complaining bitterly. The best solution we would like is a filter on the client side and not the server side. MacAfee spam kill product looks nice but I do not know if it can talk to Exchange server. (not POP) I just felt we started something ugly on this list!!:) Wanted to clarify why we were interested. -Original Message- From: Chris Scharff [mailto:chris_scharff;messageone.com] Sent: Tuesday, November 05, 2002 11:35 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: RBL's And in general, the business needs of a firm providing free web based e-mail, vs. the business needs of a Fortune 500
RE: Suppressing the envelope
Check out the Advanced Email Options. There's a checkbox. Drew Nicholson Technical Writer Network Engineer LAN Manager RapidApp 312-372-7188 (work) 312-543-0008 (cell) Born To Edit -Original Message- From: Darcy Adams [mailto:Darcy.Adams;gettyimages.com] Sent: Wednesday, November 06, 2002 4:33 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Suppressing the envelope I've looked for this off and on an never had any luck finding it. Now we have an application server that is being shared, and folks are complaining that the envelop icon is appearing multiple times when they use Outlook via this server. Here's the question: Is there some way to suppress the envelope icon that shows up in the task bar when new mail comes in? Many thanks! Darcy Adams Sr. Exchange Administrator Getty Images 601 N. 34th Street Seattle, WA 98103 Tel 206-925-6617 Cell 206-255-0169 http://www.gettyimages.com [EMAIL PROTECTED] === This email and its contents are confidential. If you are not the intended recipient, please do not disclose or use the information within this email or its attachments. If you have received this email in error, please delete it immediately. Thank you. === _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:leave-exchange;ls.swynk.com 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:leave-exchange;ls.swynk.com Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Suppressing the envelope
At least in Outlook XP Tools Options Preferences EMail Options Advanced EMail Options Show an Envelope Icon in the System Tray - Original Message - From: Darcy Adams [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, November 06, 2002 5:32 PM Subject: Suppressing the envelope I've looked for this off and on an never had any luck finding it. Now we have an application server that is being shared, and folks are complaining that the envelop icon is appearing multiple times when they use Outlook via this server. Here's the question: Is there some way to suppress the envelope icon that shows up in the task bar when new mail comes in? Many thanks! Darcy Adams Sr. Exchange Administrator Getty Images 601 N. 34th Street Seattle, WA 98103 Tel 206-925-6617 Cell 206-255-0169 http://www.gettyimages.com [EMAIL PROTECTED] === This email and its contents are confidential. If you are not the intended recipient, please do not disclose or use the information within this email or its attachments. If you have received this email in error, please delete it immediately. Thank you. === _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:leave-exchange;ls.swynk.com 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:leave-exchange;ls.swynk.com Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Suppressing the envelope
In outlook Tools = options = mail options = advanced options = show envelope in tray when mail arrives (uncheck this) Hth mike -Original Message- From: Darcy Adams [mailto:Darcy.Adams;gettyimages.com] Sent: Wednesday, November 06, 2002 3:33 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Suppressing the envelope I've looked for this off and on an never had any luck finding it. Now we have an application server that is being shared, and folks are complaining that the envelop icon is appearing multiple times when they use Outlook via this server. Here's the question: Is there some way to suppress the envelope icon that shows up in the task bar when new mail comes in? Many thanks! Darcy Adams Sr. Exchange Administrator Getty Images 601 N. 34th Street Seattle, WA 98103 Tel 206-925-6617 Cell 206-255-0169 http://www.gettyimages.com [EMAIL PROTECTED] === This email and its contents are confidential. If you are not the intended recipient, please do not disclose or use the information within this email or its attachments. If you have received this email in error, please delete it immediately. Thank you. === _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:leave-exchange;ls.swynk.com 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:leave-exchange;ls.swynk.com Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Suppressing the envelope
Sure, Darcy. I am on 2002 but I believe it is the same in 2000. Tools/Options/E-Mail Options/Advanced E-Mail Option. Un-tick the Show envelope in System tray. Gèoff... -Original Message- From: Darcy Adams [mailto:Darcy.Adams;gettyimages.com] Sent: Wednesday, November 06, 2002 5:33 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Suppressing the envelope I've looked for this off and on an never had any luck finding it. Now we have an application server that is being shared, and folks are complaining that the envelop icon is appearing multiple times when they use Outlook via this server. Here's the question: Is there some way to suppress the envelope icon that shows up in the task bar when new mail comes in? Many thanks! Darcy Adams Sr. Exchange Administrator Getty Images 601 N. 34th Street Seattle, WA 98103 Tel 206-925-6617 Cell 206-255-0169 http://www.gettyimages.com [EMAIL PROTECTED] === This email and its contents are confidential. If you are not the intended recipient, please do not disclose or use the information within this email or its attachments. If you have received this email in error, please delete it immediately. Thank you. === _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:leave-exchange;ls.swynk.com 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:leave-exchange;ls.swynk.com Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Suppressing the envelope
Click the Tools menu, Select Options. On the Preferences Tab, Click E-mail Options. Click Advanced E-mail Options. Uncheck the Show an envelope icon in the system tray. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:bounce-exchange-97309;ls.swynk.com] On Behalf Of Darcy Adams Sent: Wednesday, November 06, 2002 2:33 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Suppressing the envelope I've looked for this off and on an never had any luck finding it. Now we have an application server that is being shared, and folks are complaining that the envelop icon is appearing multiple times when they use Outlook via this server. Here's the question: Is there some way to suppress the envelope icon that shows up in the task bar when new mail comes in? Many thanks! Darcy Adams Sr. Exchange Administrator Getty Images 601 N. 34th Street Seattle, WA 98103 Tel 206-925-6617 Cell 206-255-0169 http://www.gettyimages.com [EMAIL PROTECTED] === This email and its contents are confidential. If you are not the intended recipient, please do not disclose or use the information within this email or its attachments. If you have received this email in error, please delete it immediately. Thank you. === _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:leave-exchange;ls.swynk.com 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:leave-exchange;ls.swynk.com Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Using a PST for 'overflow'
My bad, clicked on the wrong email and replied without thinking. It happens. -Original Message- From: Hutchins, Mike [mailto:mhutchins;amr-corp.com] Sent: Wednesday, November 06, 2002 2:12 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Using a PST for 'overflow' Wtf? -Original Message- From: Seitz, Peter [mailto:PETER.SEITZ;cubic.com] Sent: Wednesday, November 06, 2002 10:50 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Using a PST for 'overflow' .cshrc short% more .cshrc # @(#)cshrc 1.11 89/11/29 SMI umask 022 if ( $?prompt ) then set history=32 endif # # oracle environment variables setenv ORACLE_HOME /apps/oracle/816 setenv HARVESTDIR /home/user3/harvest5 setenv ORACLE_BASE /apps/oracle/816 setenv ORACLE_SID HARVEST5 setenv ORACLE_TERM dtterm setenv PATH $ORACLE_HOME/bin:$PATH setenv ODBC_HOME /apps/caiptodbc setenv ODBCINI $ODBC_HOME/odbc.ini # Harvest environment variables #setenv HARVESTHOME /apps/harvest5 setenv HARVESTHOME /home/user3/harvest5 #setenv LM_LICENSE_FILE $HARVESTHOME/license/license.dat setenv LM_LICENSE_FILE /ca_lic setenv PATH $HARVESTHOME/bin:$PATH setenv PATH /apps/caiptodbc/bin:$PATH #setenv LD_LIBRARY_PATH /home/user3/harvest5/lib:/usr/local/CAcrypto:/usr/pec/li b/sun4_solaris:/usr/local/CAlib:/apps/caiptodbc/lib setenv LD_LIBRARY_PATH /home/user3/harvest5/lib:/usr/local/CAcrypto:/usr/pec/lib /sun4_solaris:/usr/local/CAlib # setenv DEFAULT_BROWSER hotjava setenv HARREPHOME /apps/Harvest5/harrep # # FCP environment variables # setenv GALAXYHOME /apps/FCP/Galaxy setenv PATH $GALAXYHOME/bin:$PATH #set path=(/bin /usr/bin /usr/ucb /etc $HARVESTHOME/lib $ODBC_HOME/lib $ODBC_HOM E/bin $ORACLE_HOME/bin $ORACLE_HOME/lib .) set path=(/bin /usr/bin /usr/ucb /etc $HARVESTHOME/lib $HARVESTHOME/bin $ORACLE_ HOME/bin $ORACLE_HOME/lib .) setenv OPENWINHOME /usr/openwin short% -Original Message- From: Niki Blowfield - Exchange [mailto:exchangelist;partition.co.uk] Sent: Wednesday, November 06, 2002 6:26 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Using a PST for 'overflow' We've been forced into restricting mailboxes as everyones being moved to a central server. Most users are having no problems getting their mailboxes down to 25-50mb, some much lower, a handful much higher. I'm finding it easiest to set some limits on the IS, then override that on individual mailboxes, as required, the MD for instance has a 500mb mailbox, after 2 CD's worth of archiving :-O What I've been saying to users is delete everything you can, anything older than 2 months that you need to keep put into a subfolder, then I go round and export these folders to PSTs, and dump them in their user folders on their local file servers, meaning they're included in the backups on their local servers, but the backup and disk space burden is removed from the Exchange server. I test the PSTs before deleting the originals, but I've seen nothing bigger than about 4-500mb. With enforced limits user will have to keep things in order, and we'll have to look at ongoing archiving in the method described above. 99% aren't aware of PST's, which is probably a good thing, though its added to my workload -Original Message- From: David N. Precht [mailto:discussions;entrysecurity.com] Sent: 06 November 2002 13:01 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Using a PST for 'overflow' I do. They don't know they can save them up on their home folder. They know I don't back up the workstations, but most think that you only can save PSTs on local drives ;) -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:bounce-exchange-224131;ls.swynk.com] On Behalf Of Sander Van Butzelaar Sent: Wednesday, November 06, 2002 07:05 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Using a PST for 'overflow' Why the hard line approach? I never said I made the backup of the PST, that's why one has a facilities department...I also didn't say that I found that mail particularly important, the user wants to keep it, so why not let him/her? They know not to come to me regarding items in PST files. Give the user a bit of slack here David. Sander -Original Message- From: David N. Precht [mailto:discussions;entrysecurity.com] Sent: 06 November 2002 01:56 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Using a PST for 'overflow' No, just inform them of the 'No PST Backup' policy. I don't back up PSTs. Period. Either its in their mailbox or it is not that important. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:bounce-exchange-224131;ls.swynk.com] On Behalf Of Sander Van Butzelaar Sent: Wednesday, November 06, 2002 05:49 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Using a PST for 'overflow' I have a couple of users who do the same thing. They
RE: Suppressing the envelope
May be different for other versions but in XP : Tools\Options\Preferences\Email Options\Advanced - There is a check box for incoming mail notification on the system tray. -Original Message- From: Darcy Adams [mailto:Darcy.Adams;gettyimages.com] Sent: Wednesday, November 06, 2002 4:33 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Suppressing the envelope I've looked for this off and on an never had any luck finding it. Now we have an application server that is being shared, and folks are complaining that the envelop icon is appearing multiple times when they use Outlook via this server. Here's the question: Is there some way to suppress the envelope icon that shows up in the task bar when new mail comes in? Many thanks! Darcy Adams Sr. Exchange Administrator Getty Images 601 N. 34th Street Seattle, WA 98103 Tel 206-925-6617 Cell 206-255-0169 http://www.gettyimages.com [EMAIL PROTECTED] === This email and its contents are confidential. If you are not the intended recipient, please do not disclose or use the information within this email or its attachments. If you have received this email in error, please delete it immediately. Thank you. === _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:leave-exchange;ls.swynk.com 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:leave-exchange;ls.swynk.com Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Non-existent E2K size limits?
If the remote system does not allow larger than 6MB, it will say so to your SMTP server. Then the bounce will be actually autographed by your SMTP server. It's not like the remote system takes the message, looks at it for a while, and then decides to bounce it. It is bounced before it ever sees the queue on the remote side. Therefore the author of the bounce is your server. -Original Message- From: Julian Nimmo [mailto:discussion-exchange;bbs.eu.com] Sent: Wednesday, October 30, 2002 4:16 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Re: Non-existent E2K size limits? The message is sent from any Outlook 2000 client directly to the Exchange 2000 server, which then sends the NDR below to the sender. It doesn't get any further than a single step in the path! It allows large messages in, no problem. The NDR is definitely coming from the postmaster on the E2k server, and it has the server FQDN in the error at the bottom: mailserver.ourdomain.com #5.2.3 Any further ideas? Gary What is the exact path that message took? - Original Message - From: Gary Duckman [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, October 28, 2002 7:05 AM Subject: Non-existent E2K size limits? Hi Guys, I have an E2K single server that is not allowing messages over 6Mb to be sent out. I have checked the outbound limits in the SMTP protocol, the default limits on the main settings and the user's AD settings. I have searched Microsoft support for all 5.2.3 errors as well, and looked at all settings suggested there, but with no joy. The server can receive large emails, no problem. It is not the ISP. The message gets returned with the following error: Your message did not reach some or all of the intended recipients. Subject: large email test Sent: 21/10/02 09:02 The following recipient(s) could not be reached: [EMAIL PROTECTED] on 21/10/02 09:02 The message was not delivered because it is larger than the current system limit. Create a shorter message body or remove attachments and try sending it again. I am obviously missing something obvious - anybody know of any other restriction or setting that might cause this error? Thanks, Gary Duckman BBS Gary Duckman Networking Manager Tel: +44 (0) 20 8663 0077 Fax: +44 (0) 870 1389349 E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] This Email is confidential, may be legally privileged, and is for the intended recipient only. Access to, disclosure of, copying, distribution of, or reliance on any part of it by anyone else is prohibited and may be a criminal offence. Please delete if obtained in error and Email confirmation to the sender. Any views expressed in this message are those of the individual sender, except where the sender specifically states them to be the views of Beckenham Business Systems. _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:leave-exchange;ls.swynk.com 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:leave-exchange;ls.swynk.com 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:leave-exchange;ls.swynk.com 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:leave-exchange;ls.swynk.com Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Postmaster reply address
Wrong! See http://www.faqs.org/rfcs/rfc2821.html section 4.5.1. postmaster is required. Phil - Phil Randal Network Engineer Herefordshire Council Hereford, UK -Original Message- From: Tom Meunier [mailto:Tom.Meunier;courts.state.tx.us] Sent: 06 November 2002 23:15 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Postmaster reply address No. root@, postmaster@, hostmaster@, abuse@, etc. are just strongly suggested iirc. -Original Message- From: Drew Nicholson [mailto:DNicholson;rapidapp.com] Posted At: Wednesday, November 06, 2002 11:05 AM Posted To: MSExchange Mailing List Conversation: Postmaster reply address Subject: RE: Postmaster reply address I don't know if you _can_ change it, but you shouldn't. Isn't there an RFC that says a system has to have to have [EMAIL PROTECTED]? Anyway, just configure your profile (or another one) to look at that mailbox. Drew Nicholson Technical Writer Network Engineer LAN Manager RapidApp 312-372-7188 (work) 312-543-0008 (cell) Born To Edit -Original Message- From: Woodruff, Michael [mailto:MWoodruff;inchord.com] Sent: Wednesday, November 06, 2002 8:20 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Postmaster reply address Exchange2k SP3 I am having trouble trying to figure out how to change the postmaster reply address on NDRs sent to internet users. Is it possible? _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:leave-exchange;ls.swynk.com 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:leave-exchange;ls.swynk.com 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:leave-exchange;ls.swynk.com 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:leave-exchange;ls.swynk.com Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Distribution List
Please stay on topic and don't crosspost. OS and SP? -Original Message- From: Greg Deckler [mailto:greg;infonition.com] Sent: Wednesday, November 06, 2002 6:39 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Re: Distribution List E2K or E55? E2K or E55? E2K or E55? E2K or E55? E2K or E55? People, if you want help, please refrain from straining yourselves to provide the most useless information possible. I mean, it has to be intentional. I have some users who can't see inside a distrbution list. When they are in outlook and go to the distrbution list, they can se the list ,but not the people in them. any ideas thanks _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:leave-exchange;ls.swynk.com 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:leave-exchange;ls.swynk.com Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Suppressing the envelope
You can do this with OL2002 (XP). I don't think you can with any prior versions. -Original Message- From: Darcy Adams [mailto:Darcy.Adams;gettyimages.com] Sent: Wednesday, November 06, 2002 2:33 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Suppressing the envelope I've looked for this off and on an never had any luck finding it. Now we have an application server that is being shared, and folks are complaining that the envelop icon is appearing multiple times when they use Outlook via this server. Here's the question: Is there some way to suppress the envelope icon that shows up in the task bar when new mail comes in? Many thanks! Darcy Adams Sr. Exchange Administrator Getty Images 601 N. 34th Street Seattle, WA 98103 Tel 206-925-6617 Cell 206-255-0169 http://www.gettyimages.com [EMAIL PROTECTED] === This email and its contents are confidential. If you are not the intended recipient, please do not disclose or use the information within this email or its attachments. If you have received this email in error, please delete it immediately. Thank you. === _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:leave-exchange;ls.swynk.com 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:leave-exchange;ls.swynk.com Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: PF access
No, Ex5.5 in preparation for migration for E2K. I have to document everything for cleanup prior to migration. -Original Message- From: Greg Deckler [mailto:greg;infonition.com] Sent: Wednesday, November 06, 2002 5:34 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Re: PF access Are we talking E2K? If you get the properties of a public folder, the Permissions tab has an Administrative rights... button. It allows pretty detailed control over what can and cannot be done. However, in all honesty, I do not know if this will solve your problem. There are so many issues with public folder permissions in Exchange and so many little details that it is almost impossible to properly manage them. They have always been a pain from a permissions point of view. And I really do not have the time that it would take to properly test out whether this will meet your needs. But, if you have the time, let me know what you find out. I am going to be running some Public Folder assessments for forms, event scripting, and data types, amounts, etc. I have been very happy with MicroEye's script director and have already used it for forms and scripts. How do you guys make sure you have an account that has access to all public folders? 2 levels below the root, our users have full access to specific public folders and often times remove admin access. I know we can go in and manually add them through the administrator, but does anyone know of way to give an account all access to all public folders without changing the other acls? And is there a good reporting tool for number and types of data within public folders? _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:leave-exchange;ls.swynk.com 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:leave-exchange;ls.swynk.com Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Installing an internet mail connector
Thank you Greg for the information. I apologize if I offended you or anyone else with my apparent stupid question and terminology. -Original Message- From: Greg Deckler [mailto:greg;infonition.com] Sent: Wednesday, November 06, 2002 6:28 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Re: Installing an internet mail connector First of all, in E55, it is the Internet Mail Service. Second, man; not to be rude, but do a little research. I mean, go into the E55 Administrator program and hit the freakin' help menu. I pulled this DIRECTLY from Books Online: You can add an Internet Mail Service to a site that has an existing service. Only one Internet Mail Service can be installed on a single server. You should consider adding another Internet Mail Service when: Backlogs regularly build up in one of the Internet Mail Service queues. A backup computer is required to eliminate any interruption of the mail transfer between the Microsoft Exchange Server site and the other SMTP hosts. When your site has more than one Internet Mail Service, you should consider the following: If the amount of mail to specific domains on the SMTP messaging system can be divided, consider configuring each of the Internet Mail Services to process mail for specific domains only. You can assign a cost to the address spaces of each Internet Mail Service. This partially determines Internet Mail Service throughput and can be used to optimize Internet Mail Service performance. If incoming and outgoing mail to the SMTP messaging system is balanced, consider configuring one Internet Mail Service to process incoming messages and the other Internet Mail Service to process outgoing messages. When you add a new Internet Mail Service, you may need to perform one or more of the following tasks: Modify the address space of existing Internet Mail Services depending upon the address space you assign to the new Internet Mail Service. Change the maximum number of inbound and outbound connections of existing Internet Mail Services depending upon the number of inbound and outbound connections you want to assign to the new Internet Mail Service. Change the DNS or Hosts file to reflect the existence of the new Internet Mail Service host. Change the MX records in DNS to forward mail to a new Internet Mail Service host if the primary Internet Mail Service is down or too busy. Here is a brief step-by-step: 1. Start Exchange Server Administrator program. 2. On the File menu, click New Other, and then click Internet Mail Service. 3. Finish the wizard with all the necessary information. This is new to me so I was hoping for a few suggestions and some help. I have Exchange 5.5 in my organization. I currently have an internet mail connector. However the server is having problems and I am building a new one. My question is. How do I install the internet mail connector? I do not see it as part of the installation options. By having two internet mail connectors in the same site... will it cause any problems or can they co-exist until I can remove the original one? Any information would help. Thanks all. Ed *This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the addressee. If you have received this email in error please notify [EMAIL PROTECTED] Any views or opinions presented in this email are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of Stainsafe Inc. or any of its subsidiaries or affiliates. The company accepts no liability for any damage caused by any virus transmitted by this email.* _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:leave-exchange;ls.swynk.com Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] *This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the addressee. If you have received this email in error please notify [EMAIL PROTECTED] Any views or opinions presented in this email are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of Stainsafe Inc. or any of its subsidiaries or affiliates. The company accepts no liability for any damage caused by any virus transmitted by this email.* _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:leave-exchange;ls.swynk.com Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Postmaster reply address
I'm not sure what Drew is referring to about the profile, but the postmaster address has our default AD domain name as the address. I need to change that to something else. We have a company who doesn't want anyone to know they are part of our org so we need it to say something else in the NDR that gets bounced back to internet users so they will not know. I have tried the masquerade domain option, but that doesn't work. Is this possible? -Original Message- From: Tom Meunier [mailto:Tom.Meunier;courts.state.tx.us] Sent: Wednesday, November 06, 2002 6:15 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Postmaster reply address No. root@, postmaster@, hostmaster@, abuse@, etc. are just strongly suggested iirc. -Original Message- From: Drew Nicholson [mailto:DNicholson;rapidapp.com] Posted At: Wednesday, November 06, 2002 11:05 AM Posted To: MSExchange Mailing List Conversation: Postmaster reply address Subject: RE: Postmaster reply address I don't know if you _can_ change it, but you shouldn't. Isn't there an RFC that says a system has to have to have [EMAIL PROTECTED]? Anyway, just configure your profile (or another one) to look at that mailbox. Drew Nicholson Technical Writer Network Engineer LAN Manager RapidApp 312-372-7188 (work) 312-543-0008 (cell) Born To Edit -Original Message- From: Woodruff, Michael [mailto:MWoodruff;inchord.com] Sent: Wednesday, November 06, 2002 8:20 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Postmaster reply address Exchange2k SP3 I am having trouble trying to figure out how to change the postmaster reply address on NDRs sent to internet users. Is it possible? _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:leave-exchange;ls.swynk.com 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:leave-exchange;ls.swynk.com 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:leave-exchange;ls.swynk.com 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:leave-exchange;ls.swynk.com Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: RBL's
Personally, you can smoke in bars all you want...I don't go to bars, so I don't care. Smoking in restaurants however, is something I am vehemently against. Wanna know why? I'm alleric to cigarette smoke. I choke up and can't breath and I won't frequent restaurants that let people smoke inside. Not only that, but smokers NEVER smoke during their own meal, because they have so little sense of taste left, that to do so would interfere with them being able to enjoy their meal. But they have no problem with ruining someone else's meal by blowing smoke all over them while they're trying to eat. Double yuck and good riddance! -Original Message- From: Martin Blackstone [mailto:MBlackstone;superioraccess.com] Sent: Wednesday, November 06, 2002 2:11 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: RBL's Lets talk about something else like making it illegal to smoke in restaurants or bars -Original Message- From: Andy David [mailto:davida;vss.com] Sent: Wednesday, November 06, 2002 9:45 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: RBL's Caution: Thread is hot. -Original Message- From: Chris Scharff [mailto:chris_scharff;messageone.com] Sent: Wednesday, November 06, 2002 10:47 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: RBL's At no time have I said that companies can't choose to implement RBLs; simply that they should be cognizant of the complete ramifications of the technology. Obtaining this level of understanding is a much better example of risk management than some theoretical defense against a risk which appears to have no foundation in reality. Please don't use the McDonalds lawsuit as some type of example of the legal system gone bezerk. If you actually understood the history of the case, you'd find that the judgment itself was well within the bounds of reason, even if the monetary damages awarded appear to be a bit shocking. -Original Message- From: Finch Brett [mailto:brett.finch;hrs.ualberta.ca] Sent: Wednesday, November 06, 2002 1:31 AM To: Exchange Discussions Can you say 'risk management'. If someone can drive up to a window, order a coffee then take the lid off, drive over a speed bump and sue someone else, anything is possible :) -Original Message- From: Chris Scharff [mailto:chris_scharff;messageone.com] Sent: Tuesday, November 05, 2002 21:20 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: RBL's I've never heard of a single instance where a lawsuit was initiated against an organization based on incoming *spam*. Can you point to one? I can point to deals which didn't get done because of RBLs which resulted in real monetary loss, which would seem to make one more likely than the other unless you can point to a court case I'm not aware of. Matt's client side could technically be much different from a normal organization since his firm provides hosting to businesses (clients) who have their own users (another type of client). There are plenty of examples of server based filtering based on individual user settings which could potentially meet his objective and address your objection. Most of those solutions are poorly done IMNSHO. RBLs in general aren't content filtering solutions, they are connection filtering solutions. While they may at some level achieve similar results, their objectives are actually quite different. -Original Message- From: Finch Brett [mailto:brett.finch;hrs.ualberta.ca] Sent: Tuesday, November 05, 2002 4:46 PM To: Exchange Discussions I've watched this thread for a while. I don't buy the argument that a ten million deal will fail because of a bounced email via RBL. It's just as likely that a dept. with predominant females could sue for fifteen million for sexual harassment in the fact the company with the ten million dollar deal didn't take reasonable steps to protect them from this spam. There also seems to be no argument about the value of email in the workplace and that a business may find they loose a ten thousand dollar deal but save fifteen thousand in the fact their people are actually doing what they were hired to do (as mentioned in other posts bandwidth costs, storage costs as well). As for the per client configuration, that works until they start adding their contacts to the junk list or they log into a Terminal Server or via wireless with a PDA. We also don't hire people based on their skills to manage their email. Finding a moderate RBL with reasonable rules and sending a nice e-mail back to a would be spammer seems to work as well as anything. -Original Message- From: Matt Natkin [mailto:mnatkin;natco-inc.com] Sent: Tuesday, November 05, 2002 11:49 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: RBL's Very true..We have hosted exchange for business and we get the sh-t spammed out of us. But we do not block any email! That may change as our customers are complaining bitterly. The
RE: Can't activate Net Folder in Outlook 2000
I much prefer using an Exchange server to a tried and discontinued feature like NetFolders. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:exhq05a;catholic.org] Sent: Wednesday, November 06, 2002 8:58 PM To: Exchange Discussions Hi all, Has anyone tried out to activate Net Folder? Have tried my best to configure but the emails are still not shared in between OUtlook Users. Notifications are sent out to Users regards about Net Folder Sharing but emails are not displayed in the folders. Hope someone can give me a link/tips on this issue.. THanks in advanced! Regards, Ken L _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:leave-exchange;ls.swynk.com Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: RBL's
-Original Message- From: Robert Moir [mailto:rim;LutonSFC.ac.uk] Sent: Thursday, November 07, 2002 4:26 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: RBL's It's a great example, however, of people jumping all over something despite not understanding it much at all, which makes it a good parable for computing issues. Or women. _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:leave-exchange;ls.swynk.com Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Moving E2k storage group to new Server
There's plenty of competition today to Exchange which provides significantly more groupware functionality than openexchange. Some of it even runs on *nix. -Original Message- From: Christopher Hummert [mailto:hummertc;noghri.net] Sent: Wednesday, November 06, 2002 10:40 PM To: Exchange Discussions But is competition. Hopefully someday it will become good competition and finally Microsoft will have someone to try to one up again with each release instead of providing new functions and features when they get around to it -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:bounce-exchange-97309;ls.swynk.com] On Behalf Of Chris Scharff Sent: Wednesday, November 06, 2002 12:04 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Moving E2k storage group to new Server It's not open and it's certainly not Exchange. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:tony.mccullough;hcs.state.or.us] Sent: Wednesday, November 06, 2002 10:21 AM To: Exchange Discussions You mentioned that there is nothing in the Linux world like Exchange. I haven't looked at this but I received this Open Exchange link from a friend of mine the other day. I can't vouch for it, but thought I'd throw it out. http://www.suse.com/us/business/products/suse_business/openexchange/in dex. ht ml Tony McCullough -Original Message- From: Ken Cornetet [mailto:Ken.Cornetet;kimball.com] Sent: Wednesday, November 06, 2002 7:09 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Moving E2k storage group to new Server Here's my take: A quick peek a CDW shows SBS at $1277 http://www.cdw.com/shop/products/default.asp?EDC=274287. Microsoft is offering a $500 rebate if you can read the SBS sales literature and answer 20 some-odd questions. That puts the price at $777. I'm not familiar with the MCSP program, so I cannot comment on that. You are also forgetting about Exchange CALS at $70 each. You are correct in that growing past SBS is somewhat painful (I might argue with the 10-20 times more expensive. Exmerging 50 mailboxes is not that painful...), but I would maintain that if a company finds themselves outgrowing SBS, then it should not have been put in in the first place. Yes, Linux is a viable option for small companies (big ones, too). It does have some drawbacks, though. 1. Support. Finding a local consultant to support a Linux system is going to be harder than finding someone to support Microsoft products. 2. Third-party applications. Going Linux defiantly puts a company outside the mainstream and limits third party server applications like mail filtering, antivirus, web surfing control, etc. Running a business on Linux servers is, IMHO, very a very viable option. But, it pretty much requires a resident propeller-head to smooth over the rough spots. Most small companies (where SBS is targeted) just can't afford a full-time system admin. They would much rather farm it out to a consultant. Let's not forget that Exchange is more than email as well. There's nothing in the open source arena (that I know of) that can provide the same functionality that Exchange provides. I'll conclude stating that IMHO, SBS is an excellent value when applied in the appropriate environment - that is a small company (5-15 employees) needing at least file-sharing and Exchange and with no resident system admin. -Original Message- From: Greg Deckler [mailto:greg;infonition.com] Sent: Tuesday, November 05, 2002 6:55 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Moving E2k storage group to new Server Thought long and hard about letting this go, but where is the fun in that? First, to answer the migration piece of this. The only option I can think of at this time would be to treat the SBS Exchange system as a foreign mail system, meaning export and import mailbox data to migrate. Migration costs will be 10-20 times what it would be to simply put another server in place and move users. But, if is your only option... Now on to the fun... SBS License: $1,499.00 (5 clients) Real W2K Server license: $1,199.00 (10 clients) E2K Standard Edition: $1,299.00 (can always be upgraded to Enterprise if needed) Now, realistically, if you are a small little shop, this is all the Microsoft products that you need and so for 1.67 times the amount you eliminate all of the limitations of SBS and have actual, real products versus cripple-ware. But what about ISA? Don't need it. Go get a Linksys box for $100 for your firewall and it is wide open outbound. But what about SQL Server? IF you need it, then it's $1,499.00. Otherwise, you don't need it. If you are a small business, you can get cripple-ware for $1.5K or actual software to run your business for $2-4K. Under the first scenario you are setting yourself up for failure and
RE: field is empty
That's not what it means or what he said. -Original Message- From: Exchange List [mailto:exchangelist;ubl.com.pk] Sent: Wednesday, November 06, 2002 11:46 PM To: Exchange Discussions This means there is no remedy, and we have to live with it. Irf. -Original Message- From: Ed Crowley [mailto:curspice;pacbell.net] Sent: Wednesday, November 06, 2002 12:11 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: field is empty Buy an add-on product. But in treating a rather uncommon symptom it would be a rather ineffective Spam filter. Ed Crowley MCSE+I MVP Technical Consultant hp Services There are seldom good technological solutions to behavioral problems. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:bounce-exchange-94760;ls.swynk.com] On Behalf Of Exchange List Sent: Monday, November 04, 2002 11:01 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: field is empty Some users are getting mails from the Internet in which To: field is empty, or doing BCC: how can I block such kind of mails. Irf. -Original Message- From: Dale Geoffrey Edwards [mailto:Dale.Edwards;AmericanTower.com] Sent: Monday, November 04, 2002 7:38 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: field is empty If I understand you correctly, which I believe I am a little confused, if you put all the names in the BCC field, no other person will know that someone got the same message. Is this what you are loosing for? Gèoff... -Original Message- From: Exchange List [mailto:exchangelist;ubl.com.pk] Sent: Monday, November 04, 2002 3:33 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: To: field is empty Is their a way that we block emails that does not contain any to header in To: and yet still managed to deliver to our users ? Thanks Regards. Irfan Malik. _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:leave-exchange;ls.swynk.com 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:leave-exchange;ls.swynk.com 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:leave-exchange;ls.swynk.com 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:leave-exchange;ls.swynk.com 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:leave-exchange;ls.swynk.com 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:leave-exchange;ls.swynk.com Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: RBL's
-Original Message- From: Robert Moir [mailto:rim;LutonSFC.ac.uk] Sent: Thursday, November 07, 2002 3:26 AM To: Exchange Discussions -Original Message- From: Chris Scharff [mailto:chris_scharff;messageone.com] Sent: 06 November 2002 15:47 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: RBL's Please don't use the McDonalds lawsuit as some type of example of the legal system gone bezerk. If you actually understood the history of the case, you'd find that the judgment itself was well within the bounds of reason, even if the monetary damages awarded appear to be a bit shocking. It's a great example, however, of people jumping all over something despite not understanding it much at all, which makes it a good parable for computing issues. Computing issues like say... an RBL? I applaud your amazing insight. _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:leave-exchange;ls.swynk.com Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: scan Ex2000 for phrases or certain words in emails
Why do it after the fact? Why not before hand with content filtering? -Original Message- From: Kleciak, Clint D N21 [mailto:Clint.Kleciak;CIGNA.COM] Sent: Thursday, November 07, 2002 5:29 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: scan Ex2000 for phrases or certain words in emails OKI have an Exchange 2000 server with 4 SG's and 4 databases per SG,I need something that will scan the databases either continuously or on a per night basis with. It needs to scan not only subjects and attachment names but also the emails for any type of common 4 letter words or phrases like I promise a 50% return on this investment. I know all the downsides of running something like this on an Exchange Server but I have to provide a customer with a solution. Thanks for your help so far.. Clint It takes a boy to be a man behind a keyboard.unkown -Original Message- From: Chris Scharff [mailto:chris_scharff;messageone.com] Sent: Tuesday, November 05, 2002 6:04 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: scan Ex2000 for phrases or certain words in emails Insufficient problem description. Resubmit a more technically accurate query and perhaps. -Original Message- From: Kleciak, Clint D N21 [mailto:Clint.Kleciak;CIGNA.COM] Sent: Tuesday, November 05, 2002 12:46 PM To: Exchange Discussions OK,,,any details on such product? thanks Clint -Original Message- From: Chris Scharff [mailto:chris_scharff;messageone.com] Sent: Tuesday, November 05, 2002 12:05 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: scan Ex2000 for phrases or certain words in emails Yes. -Original Message- From: Kleciak, Clint D N21 [mailto:Clint.Kleciak;CIGNA.COM] Sent: Tuesday, November 05, 2002 10:02 AM To: Exchange Discussions Any such functionality or third product tool? thanks Clint _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:leave-exchange;ls.swynk.com Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] -- CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: If you have received this e-mail in error, please immediately notify the sender by e-mail at the address shown. This e-mail transmission may contain confidential information. This information is intended only for the use of the individual(s) or entity to whom it is intended even if addressed incorrectly. Please delete it from your files if you are not the intended recipient. Thank you for your compliance. Copyright (c) 2002 CIGNA _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:leave-exchange;ls.swynk.com 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:leave-exchange;ls.swynk.com Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] -- CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: If you have received this e-mail in error, please immediately notify the sender by e-mail at the address shown. This e-mail transmission may contain confidential information. This information is intended only for the use of the individual(s) or entity to whom it is intended even if addressed incorrectly. Please delete it from your files if you are not the intended recipient. Thank you for your compliance. Copyright (c) 2002 CIGNA _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:leave-exchange;ls.swynk.com 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:leave-exchange;ls.swynk.com Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Postmaster reply address
RFC 2821 section 4.5.1: Any lowdown horny toad what doesn't have a postmaster address is gonna get his bottom whupped. There are exceptions, but they are rare. -- be - MOS Professor Farnsworth: Oh my, that steamed carrot was a bit spicy for me. -Original Message- From: Tom Meunier [mailto:Tom.Meunier;courts.state.tx.us] Sent: Wednesday, November 06, 2002 6:15 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Postmaster reply address No. root@, postmaster@, hostmaster@, abuse@, etc. are just strongly suggested iirc. -Original Message- From: Drew Nicholson [mailto:DNicholson;rapidapp.com] Posted At: Wednesday, November 06, 2002 11:05 AM Posted To: MSExchange Mailing List Conversation: Postmaster reply address Subject: RE: Postmaster reply address I don't know if you _can_ change it, but you shouldn't. Isn't there an RFC that says a system has to have to have [EMAIL PROTECTED]? Anyway, just configure your profile (or another one) to look at that mailbox. Drew Nicholson Technical Writer Network Engineer LAN Manager RapidApp 312-372-7188 (work) 312-543-0008 (cell) Born To Edit -Original Message- From: Woodruff, Michael [mailto:MWoodruff;inchord.com] Sent: Wednesday, November 06, 2002 8:20 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Postmaster reply address Exchange2k SP3 I am having trouble trying to figure out how to change the postmaster reply address on NDRs sent to internet users. Is it possible? _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:leave-exchange;ls.swynk.com 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:leave-exchange;ls.swynk.com 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:leave-exchange;ls.swynk.com 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:leave-exchange;ls.swynk.com Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: scan Ex2000 for phrases or certain words in emails
We use Trend Micro's Scanmail and eManager. No complaints or issues with performance. Melissa -Original Message- From: Kleciak, Clint D N21 [mailto:Clint.Kleciak;CIGNA.COM] Sent: Thursday, November 07, 2002 8:29 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: scan Ex2000 for phrases or certain words in emails OKI have an Exchange 2000 server with 4 SG's and 4 databases per SG,I need something that will scan the databases either continuously or on a per night basis with. It needs to scan not only subjects and attachment names but also the emails for any type of common 4 letter words or phrases like I promise a 50% return on this investment. I know all the downsides of running something like this on an Exchange Server but I have to provide a customer with a solution. Thanks for your help so far.. Clint It takes a boy to be a man behind a keyboard.unkown -Original Message- From: Chris Scharff [mailto:chris_scharff;messageone.com] Sent: Tuesday, November 05, 2002 6:04 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: scan Ex2000 for phrases or certain words in emails Insufficient problem description. Resubmit a more technically accurate query and perhaps. -Original Message- From: Kleciak, Clint D N21 [mailto:Clint.Kleciak;CIGNA.COM] Sent: Tuesday, November 05, 2002 12:46 PM To: Exchange Discussions OK,,,any details on such product? thanks Clint -Original Message- From: Chris Scharff [mailto:chris_scharff;messageone.com] Sent: Tuesday, November 05, 2002 12:05 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: scan Ex2000 for phrases or certain words in emails Yes. -Original Message- From: Kleciak, Clint D N21 [mailto:Clint.Kleciak;CIGNA.COM] Sent: Tuesday, November 05, 2002 10:02 AM To: Exchange Discussions Any such functionality or third product tool? thanks Clint _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:leave-exchange;ls.swynk.com Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] -- CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: If you have received this e-mail in error, please immediately notify the sender by e-mail at the address shown. This e-mail transmission may contain confidential information. This information is intended only for the use of the individual(s) or entity to whom it is intended even if addressed incorrectly. Please delete it from your files if you are not the intended recipient. Thank you for your compliance. Copyright (c) 2002 CIGNA _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:leave-exchange;ls.swynk.com 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:leave-exchange;ls.swynk.com Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] -- CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: If you have received this e-mail in error, please immediately notify the sender by e-mail at the address shown. This e-mail transmission may contain confidential information. This information is intended only for the use of the individual(s) or entity to whom it is intended even if addressed incorrectly. Please delete it from your files if you are not the intended recipient. Thank you for your compliance. Copyright (c) 2002 CIGNA _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:leave-exchange;ls.swynk.com 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:leave-exchange;ls.swynk.com Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Using a PST for 'overflow'
Many organizations see messaging as a transport system or a communication system and fail to see the significant body of knowledge that is captured in the e-mails. The problem arises with this data not being organized into easily searchable information. Archival solutions are really a patch on top of this, allowing the organization to index and search for the information that they need. I think you're correct in thinking that most companies don't see the cost of implementing an archival solution being lower than the benefit of being able to mine the information out of the messages. Where you will see some movement is the in the regulatory and other legal compliance issues. Being able to discover all messages relating to an incident, a business decision, customer trades, etc. etc. and getting this information to lawyers or regulators is fast becoming an important piece of business. Companies that must implement these types of solutions would be smart to leverage their investment in archival solutions to also provide knowledge management. -Original Message- From: Greg Deckler [mailto:greg;infonition.com] Sent: Wednesday, November 06, 2002 6:00 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Using a PST for 'overflow' I have ony found one solution to this type of problem and it is called an Email Archival system. I have no idea why this type of a solution is not more popular. It gets the information out of the Exchange stores and off user's hard drives and onto permanent storage on CD's or DVD's. The systems they have now integrate quite well with Exchange, provide advanced security capabilities and include full-text searching capabilities. And users can access the systems via a web browser. Why more people do not use these systems is anyone's guess. Apparently most email admins out there are content with draconian storage policies or catering to users like poor Russell who is personally buring CD's. It can all be automated and you can have the best of all worlds. Email Archival systems folks, they have been around for a long time and work quite well. I recommend them to nearly every client that I work for because there is so much business knowledge in email that it is almost criminal the way some companies blast it from their systems after only a week or two. If they actually understood and appreciated the amount of knowledge and business process information that they were losing, they would never do such an incredibly stupid thing. And Craig, I have to disagree with you about user provided storage. Individuals have consistently proven that they simply cannot store, organize and process large amounts of data. If I received as much snail mail as email, my entire house would be full of unorganized stacks of crap. Proper storage of business information should reside on business systems, not on personally provided storage. Centralization and automation of storage is incredibly more efficient and productive than individual users storing their own information. Tongue out of cheek - this is a product design problem of course. Give me one good reason for Exchange being in the storage or data management business. How it ought to work in a world with Active Directories and Distributed File System overlays to NTFS is that a mailbox should be a pointer to user provided storage. Who provides your snail mail box? It's not the post office, unless you are renting a PO Box. Normal delivery is to storage that you provide, structure and manage. Why does Exchange deliver primarily to message stores? Because of a lack of sufficient protocols and customer demand to do it right. If your customer thinks your service is inadequate, your customer is not wrong. As someone earlier in this thread said so eloquently (if misguidedly) duh! -Original Message- From: Etts, Russell [mailto:retts;harman.com] Sent: Wednesday, November 06, 2002 8:35 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Using a PST for 'overflow' Hi there I have the same issue here. People have PST files that are well over a gig, and we had one person go over the 2 gig limit. No matter what we tell them, they insist that they need a mailbox over a gig. I limit them to a max of 300 megs, no matter how much crying they do. I just don't know what to do. I have told people once their PSTs hit 600 megs, then I'll transfer it to my machine and burn them a CD rom. Thanks Russell -Original Message- From: David N. Precht [mailto:discussions;entrysecurity.com] Sent: Wednesday, November 06, 2002 6:56 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Using a PST for 'overflow' No, just inform them of the 'No PST Backup' policy. I don't back up PSTs. Period. Either its in their mailbox or it is not that important. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:bounce-exchange-224131;ls.swynk.com] On Behalf Of Sander Van Butzelaar Sent: Wednesday, November 06, 2002
RE: scan Ex2000 for phrases or certain words in emails
To what end? Once you've scanned them, do you plan to build an index file? Delete them? Copy them to a database for regulatory compliance? Archive them? Notify persons based on a predetermined workflow? There are dozens of products which scan mail, mail streams or mail stores for word, phrases or other criteria and then do a variety of things with that information. -Original Message- From: Kleciak, Clint D N21 [mailto:Clint.Kleciak;CIGNA.COM] Sent: Thursday, November 07, 2002 7:29 AM To: Exchange Discussions OKI have an Exchange 2000 server with 4 SG's and 4 databases per SG,I need something that will scan the databases either continuously or on a per night basis with. It needs to scan not only subjects and attachment names but also the emails for any type of common 4 letter words or phrases like I promise a 50% return on this investment. I know all the downsides of running something like this on an Exchange Server but I have to provide a customer with a solution. Thanks for your help so far.. Clint It takes a boy to be a man behind a keyboard.unkown -Original Message- From: Chris Scharff [mailto:chris_scharff;messageone.com] Sent: Tuesday, November 05, 2002 6:04 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: scan Ex2000 for phrases or certain words in emails Insufficient problem description. Resubmit a more technically accurate query and perhaps. -Original Message- From: Kleciak, Clint D N21 [mailto:Clint.Kleciak;CIGNA.COM] Sent: Tuesday, November 05, 2002 12:46 PM To: Exchange Discussions OK,,,any details on such product? thanks Clint -Original Message- From: Chris Scharff [mailto:chris_scharff;messageone.com] Sent: Tuesday, November 05, 2002 12:05 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: scan Ex2000 for phrases or certain words in emails Yes. -Original Message- From: Kleciak, Clint D N21 [mailto:Clint.Kleciak;CIGNA.COM] Sent: Tuesday, November 05, 2002 10:02 AM To: Exchange Discussions Any such functionality or third product tool? thanks Clint _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:leave-exchange;ls.swynk.com Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] -- CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: If you have received this e-mail in error, please immediately notify the sender by e-mail at the address shown. This e- mail transmission may contain confidential information. This information is intended only for the use of the individual(s) or entity to whom it is intended even if addressed incorrectly. Please delete it from your files if you are not the intended recipient. Thank you for your compliance. Copyright (c) 2002 CIGNA _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:leave-exchange;ls.swynk.com 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:leave-exchange;ls.swynk.com Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] -- CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: If you have received this e-mail in error, please immediately notify the sender by e-mail at the address shown. This e-mail transmission may contain confidential information. This information is intended only for the use of the individual(s) or entity to whom it is intended even if addressed incorrectly. Please delete it from your files if you are not the intended recipient. Thank you for your compliance. Copyright (c) 2002 CIGNA _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:leave-exchange;ls.swynk.com 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:leave-exchange;ls.swynk.com Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Using a PST for 'overflow'
I have a few reasons that an archival system might not be appropriate. 1. Cost. 2. Retention policies. These systems are in opposition to many companies' legal departments' opinions that all e-mail older than a certain age must be destroyed. I'm not arguing that these policies are valid (I think they almost always are wrong-headed) but that they exist and have to be followed when so dictated by corporate management. 3. Need. Plenty of organizations simply don't need them. Enlightened database sizing and retention policies can obviate such a requirement in many cases. Myself, I would prefer spending funds on improved backup systems rather than an archival system if each achieves the same end goal of allowing users to store more data. 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:bounce-exchange-94760;ls.swynk.com] On Behalf Of Greg Deckler Sent: Wednesday, November 06, 2002 3:00 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Using a PST for 'overflow' I have ony found one solution to this type of problem and it is called an Email Archival system. I have no idea why this type of a solution is not more popular. It gets the information out of the Exchange stores and off user's hard drives and onto permanent storage on CD's or DVD's. The systems they have now integrate quite well with Exchange, provide advanced security capabilities and include full-text searching capabilities. And users can access the systems via a web browser. Why more people do not use these systems is anyone's guess. Apparently most email admins out there are content with draconian storage policies or catering to users like poor Russell who is personally buring CD's. It can all be automated and you can have the best of all worlds. Email Archival systems folks, they have been around for a long time and work quite well. I recommend them to nearly every client that I work for because there is so much business knowledge in email that it is almost criminal the way some companies blast it from their systems after only a week or two. If they actually understood and appreciated the amount of knowledge and business process information that they were losing, they would never do such an incredibly stupid thing. And Craig, I have to disagree with you about user provided storage. Individuals have consistently proven that they simply cannot store, organize and process large amounts of data. If I received as much snail mail as email, my entire house would be full of unorganized stacks of crap. Proper storage of business information should reside on business systems, not on personally provided storage. Centralization and automation of storage is incredibly more efficient and productive than individual users storing their own information. Tongue out of cheek - this is a product design problem of course. Give me one good reason for Exchange being in the storage or data management business. How it ought to work in a world with Active Directories and Distributed File System overlays to NTFS is that a mailbox should be a pointer to user provided storage. Who provides your snail mail box? It's not the post office, unless you are renting a PO Box. Normal delivery is to storage that you provide, structure and manage. Why does Exchange deliver primarily to message stores? Because of a lack of sufficient protocols and customer demand to do it right. If your customer thinks your service is inadequate, your customer is not wrong. As someone earlier in this thread said so eloquently (if misguidedly) duh! -Original Message- From: Etts, Russell [mailto:retts;harman.com] Sent: Wednesday, November 06, 2002 8:35 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Using a PST for 'overflow' Hi there I have the same issue here. People have PST files that are well over a gig, and we had one person go over the 2 gig limit. No matter what we tell them, they insist that they need a mailbox over a gig. I limit them to a max of 300 megs, no matter how much crying they do. I just don't know what to do. I have told people once their PSTs hit 600 megs, then I'll transfer it to my machine and burn them a CD rom. Thanks Russell -Original Message- From: David N. Precht [mailto:discussions;entrysecurity.com] Sent: Wednesday, November 06, 2002 6:56 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Using a PST for 'overflow' No, just inform them of the 'No PST Backup' policy. I don't back up PSTs. Period. Either its in their mailbox or it is not that important. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:bounce-exchange-224131;ls.swynk.com] On Behalf Of Sander Van Butzelaar Sent: Wednesday, November 06, 2002 05:49 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Using a PST for 'overflow' I have a couple of users who do the same thing. They don't
RE: Dir Replication Problem Exchange 5.5
The answer depends on the nebulous cloud surrounding everything you did when you recovered it from their GAL. 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:bounce-exchange-94760;ls.swynk.com] On Behalf Of Uso Sent: Wednesday, November 06, 2002 11:30 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Dir Replication Problem Exchange 5.5 Hi, we have the following setup. We have the HQ and several branch offices all sites in one Exchange 5.5 Org. All branches replicate the directory over X.400 through the HQ. One of the branches had recently a disaster. After they recovered from it their GAL shows some double entries. We are not sure why those occured, they have different aliases and I suspect they played around because they (that particular branch) also recently merged with other companies. The weired thing is that the HQ says that they can not see any double entries in the GAL while other branches do. I tried requesting a replication update but that didn't change anything. What can I do to solve this problem? regards Uso _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:leave-exchange;ls.swynk.com 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:leave-exchange;ls.swynk.com Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Associate a Public Folder to a specific Mailbox
If I knew I wouldn't be able to tell you any more than you can find out yourself on the Internet because I would be bound by NDA. But I don't know, so that doesn't matter. 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:bounce-exchange-94760;ls.swynk.com] On Behalf Of Newsgroups Sent: Wednesday, November 06, 2002 4:08 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Associate a Public Folder to a specific Mailbox Thanks Ed and Chris I understand now. I thought that I could associate one storage group to a particular public folder. Even though outlook would not see it but OWA would. I wonder why they made so difficult. Does anyone know if the next version will have that ability? Or if Outlook 11 can see more than just the default Public Folder Tree? Thanks -Original Message- From: Ed Crowley [mailto:curspice;pacbell.net] Posted At: Wednesday, November 06, 2002 12:20 AM Posted To: Exchange Newsgroups Conversation: Associate a Public Folder to a specific Mailbox Subject: RE: Associate a Public Folder to a specific Mailbox Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets. Ed Crowley MCSE+I MVP Technical Consultant hp Services There are seldom good technological solutions to behavioral problems. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:bounce-exchange-94760;ls.swynk.com] On Behalf Of John Matteson Sent: Tuesday, November 05, 2002 7:13 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Associate a Public Folder to a specific Mailbox Which book would you recommend that sucks less? John Matteson Geac Corporate ISS (404) 239 - 2981 Atlanta, Georgia, USA. -Original Message- From: Chris Scharff [mailto:chris_scharff;messageone.com] Sent: Friday, November 01, 2002 5:04 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Associate a Public Folder to a specific Mailbox That book sucks. -Original Message- From: Newsgroups [mailto:Newsgroups;henwoodenergy.com] Sent: Friday, November 01, 2002 3:54 PM To: Exchange Discussions I am looking at the Microsoft Exchange 2000 Administrator's Companion and on page 275 it shows I can select another public folder as default but I don't see that on my ESM. Any ideas? Thanks _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:leave-exchange;ls.swynk.com 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:leave-exchange;ls.swynk.com 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:leave-exchange;ls.swynk.com 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:leave-exchange;ls.swynk.com Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Suppressing the envelope
In Outlook XP, uncheck Tools Options Preferences E-Mail Options Advanced Options Show an envelope icon in the system tray. 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:bounce-exchange-94760;ls.swynk.com] On Behalf Of Darcy Adams Sent: Wednesday, November 06, 2002 2:33 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Suppressing the envelope I've looked for this off and on an never had any luck finding it. Now we have an application server that is being shared, and folks are complaining that the envelop icon is appearing multiple times when they use Outlook via this server. Here's the question: Is there some way to suppress the envelope icon that shows up in the task bar when new mail comes in? Many thanks! Darcy Adams Sr. Exchange Administrator Getty Images 601 N. 34th Street Seattle, WA 98103 Tel 206-925-6617 Cell 206-255-0169 http://www.gettyimages.com [EMAIL PROTECTED] === This email and its contents are confidential. If you are not the intended recipient, please do not disclose or use the information within this email or its attachments. If you have received this email in error, please delete it immediately. Thank you. === _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:leave-exchange;ls.swynk.com 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:leave-exchange;ls.swynk.com Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Upgrade 5.5 on Nt 4 to 2000 question
That, my friend, is a consulting engagement question. From your question, I'm not really sure what upgrade process you're really talking about following, but I'll give you one piece of advice. You must upgrade your Windows NT 4.0 domain to Windows 2000 Active Directory before doing anything else. 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:bounce-exchange-94760;ls.swynk.com] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, November 06, 2002 2:16 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Upgrade 5.5 on Nt 4 to 2000 question I have read much and am feeling pretty comfortable starting this whole process but just have a couple questions I would like to comfirm. First of all when on my network I have just the one NT 4.0 server (non DC) left to upgrade that is running exchange 5.5 and I upgrade it to 2000 I am going to promote it to a DC before touching exchange. Are there any problems with this as far as exchange 5.5 functioning on this server if need be? Then when I run ADC I can set it to connect to the same server its running on correct? Then after ADC has done its thing I will start the upgrade to exchange 2000. This is the basic path I am taking. I will have 2 other servers upgraded to windows 2000 as DC's before I start so there should be no problems there. Just looking for any insite or peculiar problems with following this path for my server. Thanks _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:leave-exchange;ls.swynk.com 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:leave-exchange;ls.swynk.com Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
