RE: Backup Exec 9.0 and 9.1 does not see Exchange 2003 Stores?
Did you install the Exchange Admin with the same SP on the backup systems? Scott -Original Message- From: ml.exchange [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, December 09, 2003 3:22 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Backup Exec 9.0 and 9.1 does not see Exchange 2003 Stores? We are currently running a Ex 5.5 mixed mode environment with our First Exchange 2003 server deployed for testing with our IT department. For the life of me I can not get Backup Exec 9.0 4454 (with E2k3 hot fix) or 9.1 to see and backup the private and public info stores. It WILL see and backup the mailboxes and public folders just fine in bricks mode (not that I want to). It gives me no errors, but just does not show the IS as an available item to backup. I have tried this with two different backup servers, and by installing BE 9.1 on to the new Exchange server by its self. I have even created a new account for it to use to login with. Has anyone seen this behavior before? I'd like to rule out something stupid if I can before I spend an hour on hold with Veritas. Thanks Miles _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang=en glish To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Exchange 5.5 IS has reached the 16GB limit
Yes, but I would recommend adding a second drive to your current box if possible instead. Routing to a different drive across the network will at minimum double the time it takes to run this. Scott -Original Message- From: Guy Fortin [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, December 03, 2003 11:14 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Exchange 5.5 IS has reached the 16GB limit http://support.microsoft.com/?id=185457 I want to do an eseutil to defragment the IS, but I do not have enough space on the server to have a second copy on the database. Can I specify to eseutil to put the temporary copy on a network drive ? Regards, _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang=en glish To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: 3 Layers of Virus protection.
3 levels here also. I match the below configuration except we have the e500, GroupShield 5, and Enterprise 7 on the desktops, all managed with EPO. -Original Message- From: John Orban [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, August 20, 2003 6:14 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: 3 Layers of Virus protection. We use McAfee's e250 through which all traffic in and out of the network is proxied. We have GroupShield on the Exchange Server and VirusScan Enterprise on the desktops. Everything is managed with ePolicy Orchestrator. So far, so good...knock on wood. John Orban System Administrator The Country School www.countryschool.org -Original Message- From: Tony Hlabse [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, August 20, 2003 8:39 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: 3 Layers of Virus protection. I was curious how many have 3 layers of protection for their email systems. My current assignment has me at a place where they are comfortable with desktop and a set of SMTP servers doing virus and spam. Desktop is Symantec and Trend on the SMTP servers. My gut feeling is to also protect the IS stores too. How many have 3 levels. _ bGet MSN 8/b and help protect your children with advanced parental controls. http://join.msn.com/?page=features/parental _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang =english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang=en glish To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Exchange 5.5 server sending and receiving previously processe d me ssages
I would suspect the system is replaying the queue.dat file found in the imcdata folder. I would hazard a guess that all the messages being replayed if you will are all SMTP. Stop the Internet mail service then rename/move/delete the queue.dat file and then restart the service. This should correct the problem. Provided I guessed the origin of the problem correctly. Good luck. Scott -Original Message- From: Sean Brandt [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, August 20, 2003 1:19 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Exchange 5.5 server sending and receiving previously processed me ssages Hi All, A few days ago some of our users reported receiving emails that they had previously received up to a month ago. Also messages that had been sent before were getting sent again. We had a disk failure on the exchange server over the weekend and just rebuilt it. People started reporting these symptoms on Monday. Anybody have any ideas on why our server is sending and receiving previously processed messages? Thanks, Sean ~~ Sean Brandt, MCSE Systems Engineer Lonely Planet Publications, USA tel: 510.893.8556 x217 mobile: 510.541.2601 [EMAIL PROTECTED] ** This email, including attachments, is intended only for the addressee and may be confidential, privileged and subject to copyright. If you have received this email in error, please advise the sender and delete it. If you are not the intended recipient of this email, you must not use, copy or disclose its content to anyone. You must not copy or communicate to others content that is confidential or subject to copyright, unless you have the consent of the content owner. ** _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang=en glish To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Veritas 9.0 Remote Agent Stopping
There is also a HOTFIX 2 for this version and also a new set of drivers out there. You might try the Hotfix. Scott -Original Message- From: Bill Kuhl [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, July 14, 2003 8:18 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Veritas 9.0 Remote Agent Stopping Yes, and it didn't help. -Original Message- From: Andy David [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, July 14, 2003 10:23 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Re: Veritas 9.0 Remote Agent Stopping Have you applied SP1? - Original Message - From: Bill Kuhl [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, July 14, 2003 11:04 AM Subject: Veritas 9.0 Remote Agent Stopping Are other people having trouble with the Exchange remote agent service stopping? We did the update to 9.0, it worked two days in a row and failed again. Thanks for any replies, Bill Kuhl _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang=en glish To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang=en glish To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang=en glish To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Brick level backups - legal disclaimers
Well I am not a legal speagle by any means, but the disclaimer issue it bad joke. The true responsibility of who the message went to is in the hands of the sender. If the message was addressed correctly then the need for disclaimers would be a non-issue. Sorry I watched this thread long enough that I had to put my two cents in there. I find it hard that anyone should accept the burden of responsibility for receiving an electronic message that was sent to them by mistake. And those disclaimers that try to shift the burden of responiblity from the shoulders of the sender to the reciever are a sad attempt at just that. -Original Message- From: Steve Molkentin [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, June 18, 2003 3:34 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Brick level backups - legal disclaimers What about Klingon and Elvish? Google is available in both, so people must speak it. Should we not then make disclaimers available in these languages too? themolk. -Original Message- From: Martin Tuip [MVP] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, 19 June 2003 12:13 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Re: Brick level backups - legal disclaimers About a billion people on this planet speak Chinese ... going to included that as well ? I like the fact you are going to add Dutch to the disclaimer, but around 99% of the Dutch population speaks and understands English very well. ** Please prefix your subject header with BETA for posts dealing with Exchange 2003 ** -- Martin Tuip MVP Exchange Exchange 2000 List owner www.exchange-mail.org www.sharepointserver.com [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- - Original Message - From: Midgley, Ian [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, June 18, 2003 4:10 PM Subject: RE: Brick level backups - legal disclaimers Yup, Greek and Double-Dutch are in the list of languages that need to be covered. Web links are unacceptable since there is no way of checking whether the recipient clicked the link, or they might not be online when they read the message. We thought of using Latin since most of the legal team know that. Esperanto is a bit too leading edge. -Original Message- From: Shotton Jolyon [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 18 June 2003 13:54 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Brick level backups - legal disclaimers *Has* anyone tested email disclaimers in the courts in the UK, EU or US? I'm not aware of any cases. I do find it ironic that lawyers, who knowingly write in a way that most people do not find clear, should be concerned that the disclaimer should be written so as to be understood by any recipient. It's all Greek to me. Or double-Dutch. Perhaps your disclaimer could consist of Legal disclaimer - you must read this in every relevant language, each linked to a web page which contains the text in that language. Or write it in Esperanto. -Original Message- From: Midgley, Ian [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 18 June 2003 14:07 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Brick level backups That's not funny !! I'm currently involved in discussions with our legal team regarding the validity of English language disclaimers on messages written in various different European languages (we route all our Internet mail through a single SMTP gateway in the UK). The legal team are pushing to add disclaimers in each language. Just because no-one ever reads disclaimers doesn't mean that they are not legally applicable - when was the last time you read the MS license agreement when installing software? And just because I select the other radio button and click OK doesn't mean that I have read the labels attached to those actions either. I would be interested in Williams disclaimer list if he would be happy to publish. Also, does anyone know of a disclaimer adder that is language aware? Otherwise I'm going to have to do some funny tricks with SMTP connectors and routing inside the company. The information contained in this e-mail is intended for the recipient or entity to whom it is addressed. It may contain confidential information that is exempt from disclosure by law and if you are not the intended recipient, you must not copy, distribute or take any act in reliance on it. If you have received this e-mail in error, please notify the sender immediately and delete from your system. _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchanget ext_mode=lang =english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Brick level backups - legal disclaimers
Well I am not a legal speagle by any means, but the disclaimer issue it bad joke. The true responsibility of who the message went to is in the hands of the sender. If the message was addressed correctly then the need for disclaimers would be a non-issue. Sorry I watched this thread long enough that I had to put my two cents in there. I find it hard that anyone should accept the burden of responsibility for receiving an electronic message that was sent to them by mistake. And those disclaimers that try to shift the burden of responiblity from the shoulders of the sender to the reciever are a sad attempt at just that. -Original Message- From: Steve Molkentin [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, June 18, 2003 3:34 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Brick level backups - legal disclaimers What about Klingon and Elvish? Google is available in both, so people must speak it. Should we not then make disclaimers available in these languages too? themolk. -Original Message- From: Martin Tuip [MVP] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, 19 June 2003 12:13 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Re: Brick level backups - legal disclaimers About a billion people on this planet speak Chinese ... going to included that as well ? I like the fact you are going to add Dutch to the disclaimer, but around 99% of the Dutch population speaks and understands English very well. ** Please prefix your subject header with BETA for posts dealing with Exchange 2003 ** -- Martin Tuip MVP Exchange Exchange 2000 List owner www.exchange-mail.org www.sharepointserver.com [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- - Original Message - From: Midgley, Ian [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, June 18, 2003 4:10 PM Subject: RE: Brick level backups - legal disclaimers Yup, Greek and Double-Dutch are in the list of languages that need to be covered. Web links are unacceptable since there is no way of checking whether the recipient clicked the link, or they might not be online when they read the message. We thought of using Latin since most of the legal team know that. Esperanto is a bit too leading edge. -Original Message- From: Shotton Jolyon [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 18 June 2003 13:54 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Brick level backups - legal disclaimers *Has* anyone tested email disclaimers in the courts in the UK, EU or US? I'm not aware of any cases. I do find it ironic that lawyers, who knowingly write in a way that most people do not find clear, should be concerned that the disclaimer should be written so as to be understood by any recipient. It's all Greek to me. Or double-Dutch. Perhaps your disclaimer could consist of Legal disclaimer - you must read this in every relevant language, each linked to a web page which contains the text in that language. Or write it in Esperanto. -Original Message- From: Midgley, Ian [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 18 June 2003 14:07 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Brick level backups That's not funny !! I'm currently involved in discussions with our legal team regarding the validity of English language disclaimers on messages written in various different European languages (we route all our Internet mail through a single SMTP gateway in the UK). The legal team are pushing to add disclaimers in each language. Just because no-one ever reads disclaimers doesn't mean that they are not legally applicable - when was the last time you read the MS license agreement when installing software? And just because I select the other radio button and click OK doesn't mean that I have read the labels attached to those actions either. I would be interested in Williams disclaimer list if he would be happy to publish. Also, does anyone know of a disclaimer adder that is language aware? Otherwise I'm going to have to do some funny tricks with SMTP connectors and routing inside the company. The information contained in this e-mail is intended for the recipient or entity to whom it is addressed. It may contain confidential information that is exempt from disclosure by law and if you are not the intended recipient, you must not copy, distribute or take any act in reliance on it. If you have received this e-mail in error, please notify the sender immediately and delete from your system. _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchanget ext_mode=lang =english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Exchange and AD Question
You want a separate TREE in the forest, not a child domain. -Original Message- From: Ray Beckwith [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, June 03, 2003 11:54 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Exchange and AD Question This question may be a little off the list subject but you guys are some of the best authorities I know so I wanted your opinions. (Note the subtle butt-kissing) Situation: Single domain forest with single Exchange Server and total 4 DC. About 85 Employees. Class C IP block with fixed IP addresses for all. We are in the process of starting up a new venture company and want to keep them relatively separate from our main organization so as they grow, they can be easily separated if so chosen. We have our web presence under ourcompany.org and have reserved a domain theircompany.com for the new company's web presence. We have also set up recipient policies in Exchange to receive email sent to theircompany.com for the first couple users we have set up in our domain. Question. What would be the best way to set up this new company in our AD organization to meet the requirements of easy separation in the future, while allowing us to continue serving them with our single Exchange server and with minimal additional expense and complexity. We have been looking into the possibility of setting up a child domain for them so that they can have separate security and domain suffix but are unsure if we can do this without adding a subnet or some other complexity. I appreciate any opinions or recommendations from the wise ones of the list (more butt-kissing). Thanks... Ray Beckwith Network Administrator California Credit Union League Information Technology [EMAIL PROTECTED] www.ccul.org Thought for the day: An expert is a person who has made all the mistakes which can be made in a very narrow field. --Niels Bohr An expert is someone who knows some of the worst mistakes that can be made in his subject, and how to avoid them. --Werner Karl Heisenberg _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang=en glish To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Exchange and AD Question
My understanding is that so long as it is all part of the same root forest you should have no problem with that. If I am wrong I am sure someone here will be more than happy to correct me. Scott -Original Message- From: Ray Beckwith [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, June 03, 2003 12:01 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Exchange and AD Question But, we found a reference that said that an Exchange server could not serve 2 trees without a third party application. Is my information bad on that subject? Thanks...Ray Thought for the day: An expert is a person who has made all the mistakes which can be made in a very narrow field. --Niels Bohr An expert is someone who knows some of the worst mistakes that can be made in his subject, and how to avoid them. --Werner Karl Heisenberg -Original Message- From: Akerlund, Scott [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, June 03, 2003 11:56 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Exchange and AD Question You want a separate TREE in the forest, not a child domain. -Original Message- From: Ray Beckwith [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, June 03, 2003 11:54 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Exchange and AD Question This question may be a little off the list subject but you guys are some of the best authorities I know so I wanted your opinions. (Note the subtle butt-kissing) Situation: Single domain forest with single Exchange Server and total 4 DC. About 85 Employees. Class C IP block with fixed IP addresses for all. We are in the process of starting up a new venture company and want to keep them relatively separate from our main organization so as they grow, they can be easily separated if so chosen. We have our web presence under ourcompany.org and have reserved a domain theircompany.com for the new company's web presence. We have also set up recipient policies in Exchange to receive email sent to theircompany.com for the first couple users we have set up in our domain. Question. What would be the best way to set up this new company in our AD organization to meet the requirements of easy separation in the future, while allowing us to continue serving them with our single Exchange server and with minimal additional expense and complexity. We have been looking into the possibility of setting up a child domain for them so that they can have separate security and domain suffix but are unsure if we can do this without adding a subnet or some other complexity. I appreciate any opinions or recommendations from the wise ones of the list (more butt-kissing). Thanks... Ray Beckwith Network Administrator California Credit Union League Information Technology [EMAIL PROTECTED] www.ccul.org Thought for the day: An expert is a person who has made all the mistakes which can be made in a very narrow field. --Niels Bohr An expert is someone who knows some of the worst mistakes that can be made in his subject, and how to avoid them. --Werner Karl Heisenberg _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang=en glish To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang=en glish To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang=en glish To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Exchange and AD Question
My understanding (flawed it might be) considering the original question and design you suggested. Says you want a separate Tree, the two branches of this tree if you will can be on different subnets one for ourcompany.org and another for theircompany.org, you do not get this with the Child domain model. You only get the seperation you suggested with the separate Tree model, or a completely separate forest. But you can't go the Forest route, well unless you went to Windows 2003 then you could do a level 3 Federated Forest to share the GAL, Calendar excetra between forests. But that is outside of what you asked. Yes you can have these two trees on separate ip address or segments if you want to do that. A Forest is one or more Trees. The trees in a forest do not share a contiguous name space. However, the trees in a forest share a common schema and global catalog. Although two orgainizations do not share a common name space, adding the new Active Directory domain as a new tree in an existing Forest allows the two orgainizations to share resources and administrative Functions. In this model I do belive you can share a single Exchange 2000 Server and maintain the structure as you asked. -Original Message- From: Ray Beckwith [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, June 03, 2003 12:06 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Exchange and AD Question In either the child-domain or new tree scenario, is there a need to separate them onto a subnet or can they just be assigned IP addresses from our existing class C block? I wanted to clarify that this was one of the important questions that I have not been able to find a definitive answer on Thanks again for your assistance. ...Ray Thought for the day: An expert is a person who has made all the mistakes which can be made in a very narrow field. --Niels Bohr An expert is someone who knows some of the worst mistakes that can be made in his subject, and how to avoid them. --Werner Karl Heisenberg -Original Message- From: Akerlund, Scott [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, June 03, 2003 12:04 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Exchange and AD Question My understanding is that so long as it is all part of the same root forest you should have no problem with that. If I am wrong I am sure someone here will be more than happy to correct me. Scott -Original Message- From: Ray Beckwith [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, June 03, 2003 12:01 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Exchange and AD Question But, we found a reference that said that an Exchange server could not serve 2 trees without a third party application. Is my information bad on that subject? Thanks...Ray Thought for the day: An expert is a person who has made all the mistakes which can be made in a very narrow field. --Niels Bohr An expert is someone who knows some of the worst mistakes that can be made in his subject, and how to avoid them. --Werner Karl Heisenberg -Original Message- From: Akerlund, Scott [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, June 03, 2003 11:56 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Exchange and AD Question You want a separate TREE in the forest, not a child domain. -Original Message- From: Ray Beckwith [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, June 03, 2003 11:54 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Exchange and AD Question This question may be a little off the list subject but you guys are some of the best authorities I know so I wanted your opinions. (Note the subtle butt-kissing) Situation: Single domain forest with single Exchange Server and total 4 DC. About 85 Employees. Class C IP block with fixed IP addresses for all. We are in the process of starting up a new venture company and want to keep them relatively separate from our main organization so as they grow, they can be easily separated if so chosen. We have our web presence under ourcompany.org and have reserved a domain theircompany.com for the new company's web presence. We have also set up recipient policies in Exchange to receive email sent to theircompany.com for the first couple users we have set up in our domain. Question. What would be the best way to set up this new company in our AD organization to meet the requirements of easy separation in the future, while allowing us to continue serving them with our single Exchange server and with minimal additional expense and complexity. We have been looking into the possibility of setting up a child domain for them so that they can have separate security and domain suffix but are unsure if we can do this without adding a subnet or some other complexity. I appreciate any opinions or recommendations from the wise ones of the list (more butt-kissing). Thanks... Ray Beckwith Network Administrator California Credit Union League
RE: SpamBelt
Not only that, but since lots of us asked to be on the mailing list of Sunbelt.com it's not spam because we opted to have them send us that kind of stuff. Scott -Original Message- From: Durkee, Peter [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, May 29, 2003 1:45 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: SpamBelt And in fact, if they send enough of it, their messages are guaranteed to be perfectly targeted. -Peter -Original Message- From: Martin Blackstone [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, May 29, 2003 13:17 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: SpamBelt The subscribe to the following theory: Its only SPAM if someone else sends it. We send out specially targeted marketing material -Original Message- From: Tom Meunier [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, May 29, 2003 1:08 PM To: Exchange Discussions Why would a company who sends me so much SPAM sell a product called SpamSucks!? Especially spam trying to sell me a product called SpamSucks! And sent with a throw-away account at juno.com as a reply-to address, yet sent through a spamming firm's (roving.com) servers... yeesh. How many more alarms need to go off here before people realize how egregiously these people commit the crime they're purported to guard against??? Just trying to help a struggling business gain exposure to their target audience... We now return you to your regularly scheduled technical discussion. I'll be over there adding sunbelt.com to my smtp gateway filters if you need me. Not that it'll help me since they obfuscate the injection point of their spam. -tom _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang =english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang=en glish To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] __ This message is private or privileged. If you are not the person for whom this message is intended, please delete it and notify me immediately, and please do not copy or send this message to anyone else. _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang=en glish To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: SPAM blocking software recommendations.....
I prefer to not let them hit my mails systems and so I prefer the SMTP products that I can load on a stand alone box. This way I can filter out as much garbage prior to hitting the mailboxes as possible so it is not filling up my IS. Products like Trend's ScanMail or MailEssentials Exchange/SMTP by GFI. Then all the porn crude, and blatant advertising never clogs up my mail system. That is my method of dealing with the madness anyway. Scott -Original Message- From: Christopher Hummert [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, March 11, 2003 8:04 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: SPAM blocking software recommendations. This one works on the client level, but Cloudmark's Spamnet catches almost every piece of spam I receive. www.cloudmark.com -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Brian Dugas Sent: Tuesday, March 11, 2003 6:59 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: SPAM blocking software recommendations. We are seeing more and more SPAM coming through as HTML, which eManager will not pick up, do these other products work at stopping HTML encoded emails too? Brian -Original Message- From: Bailey, Matthew [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, March 11, 2003 9:48 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: SPAM blockin software recommendations. We use SurfControl's SMTP product and it works very well. -Matt Matthew Bailey LAN Engineer CSK Auto, Inc. [EMAIL PROTECTED] Office: (602) 631-7486 Fax: (602) 294-7486 Chaos reigns within. Reflect, repent, and reboot. Order shall return. -Original Message- From: Brian Dugas [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, March 11, 2003 7:36 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: SPAM blockin software recommendations. Good Morning, I am currently using Trend eManager to block SPAM(in trial version still), it is not appearing to be very effective. What are some other options for blocking SPAM? Thanks in advance. Brian _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: SPAM blocking software recommendations.....
I can accept that, I didn't say it was bad method. My hang up with your solution (from my point of view) is that your mail system still had to process the messages; the mail system had to spend resources to deliver it. Your client computers had to spend resources on processing it, including space on there computer for the software. They likely had to set up rules to process what is or is not junk. With mine it was never there. :o) Scott -Original Message- From: Christopher Hummert [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, March 11, 2003 8:23 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: SPAM blocking software recommendations. Yea but you can't beat the price of Spamnet. As far as taking up space, I just have the folder emptied on exiting from outlook. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Akerlund, Scott Sent: Tuesday, March 11, 2003 8:18 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: SPAM blocking software recommendations. I prefer to not let them hit my mails systems and so I prefer the SMTP products that I can load on a stand alone box. This way I can filter out as much garbage prior to hitting the mailboxes as possible so it is not filling up my IS. Products like Trend's ScanMail or MailEssentials Exchange/SMTP by GFI. Then all the p/o/r/n crude, and blatant advertising never clogs up my mail system. That is my method of dealing with the madness anyway. Scott -Original Message- From: Christopher Hummert [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, March 11, 2003 8:04 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: SPAM blocking software recommendations. This one works on the client level, but Cloudmark's Spamnet catches almost every piece of spam I receive. www.cloudmark.com -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Brian Dugas Sent: Tuesday, March 11, 2003 6:59 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: SPAM blocking software recommendations. We are seeing more and more SPAM coming through as HTML, which eManager will not pick up, do these other products work at stopping HTML encoded emails too? Brian -Original Message- From: Bailey, Matthew [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, March 11, 2003 9:48 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: SPAM blockin software recommendations. We use SurfControl's SMTP product and it works very well. -Matt Matthew Bailey LAN Engineer CSK Auto, Inc. [EMAIL PROTECTED] Office: (602) 631-7486 Fax: (602) 294-7486 Chaos reigns within. Reflect, repent, and reboot. Order shall return. -Original Message- From: Brian Dugas [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, March 11, 2003 7:36 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: SPAM blockin software recommendations. Good Morning, I am currently using Trend eManager to block SPAM(in trial version still), it is not appearing to be very effective. What are some other options for blocking SPAM? Thanks in advance. Brian _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives
RE: Nt 4.0 dns
That would be nice, but as I recall you have to create these yourself. -Original Message- From: Matt [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, February 20, 2003 8:21 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Nt 4.0 dns Should not NT 4.0 dns upon first creation..create ptr's and reverse dns automatically? _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Forestprep Domain Prep
It was published under Q297921 from what I am finding. Provided this was the problem as I am missing that part of this thread. While you are running Setup or Setup /forestprep to join an existing Microsoft Exchange Server 5.5 organization, you may experience the following behavior on the Service Account page. The User name box will have the correct Exchange Server 5.5 service account, but if you type the correct password for that account into the Password box, you may receive the following error message: Microsoft Exchange 2000 Installation Wizard This account must be valid before continuing. Scott -Original Message- From: Tony Hlabse [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, February 19, 2003 12:52 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Forestprep Domain Prep That's just it. He couldn't find any reference to it. Just wondering where Ed got the info? Um...if your consultant works for MS, shouldn't he have the resources to find out? And shouldn't that be his responsibility and not yours? -Matt Matthew Bailey LAN Engineer CSK Auto, Inc. [EMAIL PROTECTED] Office: (602) 631-7486 Fax: (602) 294-7486 Chaos reigns within. Reflect, repent, and reboot. Order shall return. -Original Message- From: Tony Hlabse [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, February 19, 2003 10:55 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Forestprep Domain Prep Ed Can you point to a article on that. I am working with a consultant from MS and he says he never heard of that. He looked for a reference to that procedure, but could not find anything. You should run: update /ForestPrep update /DomainPrep from Exchange 2000 SP3 CD. Ed Crowley MCSE+Internet MVP Freelance E-Mail Philosopher Protecting the world from PSTs and Bricked Backups!T -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Tony Hlabse Sent: Wednesday, February 19, 2003 6:24 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Forestprep Domain Prep It was mentioned on this list but I do not remember. When you use setup to use ForestPrep and DomainPrep option, it was mentioned that you use the version from the latest SP for Exchange 2000. Is this true? If so is more for the Forest Prep or Domain Prep? _ Protect your PC - get McAfee.com VirusScan Online http://clinic.mcafee.com/clinic/ibuy/campaign.asp?cid=3963 _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ STOP MORE SPAM with the new MSN 8 and get 2 months FREE* http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ Help STOP SPAM with the new MSN 8 and get 2 months FREE* http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Pole on largest PRIV.EDB size?
Currently sitting at 70gb with 2269 users. Single box with EX 5.5 SP 4 running in W2K Sp3. Backed up with a Qualstar 4222 Tape Library with 2 AIT (50/100) drives and 20 tapes. Automated on Backup Exec v8.6 Scott -Original Message- From: Woodruff, Michael [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, January 23, 2003 10:32 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Pole on largest PRIV.EDB size? 70 gig or so and I hate Arcserve so I am using Backup Exec on an ADIC Scalar 100 LTO. Thank you. -Original Message- From: Martin Blackstone [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, January 23, 2003 1:22 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Pole on largest PRIV.EDB size? 1TB. Holding all the spam from my Hotmail account. -Original Message- From: Andy David [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, January 23, 2003 10:06 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Re: Pole on largest PRIV.EDB size? 250 TB ( 1 User). Using Arcserve with the Open File Agent. Colorado Backup. - Original Message - From: Pillai, Raj [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, January 23, 2003 12:59 PM Subject: RE: Pole on largest PRIV.EDB size? About 25gbs(200 users), Using Benchmark DLT1 backup device with native Microsoft Windows 2000 backup module (NTBackup). Raj -Original Message- From: King, Arron S. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, January 23, 2003 11:50 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Pole on largest PRIV.EDB size? Pete, We have about ~55 gb or so (Exchange 2k w/3 storage groups) Using Backup Exec and a Compaq TL890 Storage Library. === Arron S. King Network Systems Administrator Ohio Dominican University [EMAIL PROTECTED] v: 614.251.4515 f: 614.252.2650 -Original Message- From: Pfefferkorn, Pete (PFEFFEPE) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, January 23, 2003 11:13 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Pole on largest PRIV.EDB size? Exchange 5.5 SP4 I'm curious to find out what other Exchange Administrators see for the Private Info Store database size and what backup solutions that they are using? Ours largest Private DB is 70 Gig and we're using Dells PowerVault 110T and NT backup. Pete Pfefferkorn Senior Systems Engineer/Mail Administrator University of Cincinnati 51 Goodman Street Cincinnati, OH 45221 Phone - (513) 556-9076 Fax - (513) 556-2042 _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] ** This e-mail message, including any attachments, contains information that is confidential, may be protected by the attorney/client or other applicable privileges, and may constitute non-public information. This message is intended to be conveyed only to the designated recipient(s). If you are not the intended recipient of this message, do not read it; please immediately notify the sender that you have received this message in error and delete this message.Unauthorized use, disclosure, dissemination, distribution, reproduction of this message or the information contained in this message or the taking of any action in reliance on it is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful. Thank you for your cooperation. ** _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To
RE: How do I explain NDRs Question
A nickels worth from the peanut gallery. I have found that a phone number analogy works quite well with the Non-Technical. They can associate with a wrong number, and number not in service, and circuit overloads (all phones lines busy), it's a picture they understand quite well. Plus it is very easy to draw the picture using non-technical terms. Best of luck Scott We may be in an E-Mail world, but phonology seems to be an instinctive trait in humans yet. -Original Message- From: Dupler, Craig [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, January 06, 2003 9:45 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: How do I explain NDRs Question I did a delete of the thread and then thought that perhaps the data should be expanded. But, note that the comments including Daniel's were right on. Explaining how mail delivery works to non-experts is not easy. It involves explaining address resolution both within NT domains and in the DNS world. It also involves explaining the role of relay hosts and any address rewriting that is going on. For most people, words are not going to cut it. Years ago our Exchange team faced the same problem and developed a system of very simple charts that show a check list of each system or handshake that has to occur, and then a separate chart explaining exactly how each one works, packet by packet. They called these happy charts. Now admittedly, even these are not telling the truth, in that the role of caches in the switches and routers is left out, and it is assumed that things like DNS resolution actually hit the DNS servers every time, but that's a level of complexity (or honesty) that is not really necessary to get your points across. I think you would do well to draw your happy charts. They will make explaining the shorthand a lot easier. My hesitation in mentioning this stems from the fact that it is in the archives maybe a dozen times, but periodic repetition is not a bad thing I guess. _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: SSL and OWA
You need the correct DNS name here. If you don't do this part of the setup right, you users will receive a certificate error popup, saying the name does not match the certificate. Up to you, though most people like to see it with all 3 nice green check marks or not at all. Scott -Original Message- From: Mike Newell [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, December 30, 2002 11:14 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: SSL and OWA Hello, I'm in the process of buying a certificate to secure an Outlook web access page and part of the process is entering a site name. This site has no dns site name, it's accessed via a link on our company web page that's hosted by our ISP. Should I assign a dns name for this server or should I put in the netbios name of the server? I'm just looking for some suggestions as this is the first server I'm securing with SSL. Thanks again, Mike. _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: E-mail in to China
I have seen many fax solutions come and ago, most will do the job. The issue for most companies comes down to cost. Faxination is pretty decent in that you license by the user. If you have a small base of people who need to send faxes then this is a good route to go. If you have a large base of users that need to send faxes, then something more like RightFax would do the trick. The entire user base is enabled and you license by the number of Fax lines. You add more lines to handle the load. Others fax solutions work more or less the same, though these are probably the two best out there that I have seen. So the basic difference is your start up cost. In the end it more or less comes out in the wash. My nickel there. Scott -Original Message- From: Drew Nicholson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, December 23, 2002 10:29 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: E-mail in to China Trials and Tribulation? Admittedly, this was several years ago, but I tested about four different fax-server products that integrated into exchange, the best (in my opinion) was Faxination... Drew Nicholson Technical Writer Network Engineer LAN Manager RapidApp 312-372-7188 (work) 312-543-0008 (cell) Born To Edit -Original Message- From: William Lefkovics [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, December 23, 2002 12:18 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: E-mail in to China Bertha Venation? -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Drew Nicholson Sent: Monday, December 23, 2002 9:51 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: E-mail in to China Faxination. Drew Nicholson Technical Writer Network Engineer LAN Manager RapidApp 312-372-7188 (work) 312-543-0008 (cell) Born To Edit -Original Message- From: Aguet, Pierre [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, December 23, 2002 4:16 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: E-mail in to China For all our business in China, after loosing hundreds of e-mails without any logical explanation other than Chinese Gvt filters, we made a policy to our sales persons to FAX ALL documents as well as they are sent to .CN recipients. Actually we are looking for a fax server to automate this process. HTH. Rgds Peter -Original Message- From: Ryan Fennema [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, December 20, 2002 8:46 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: E-mail in to China I was wondering if anyone else is having issues sending and receiving emails with China (.cn) addresses. We have had several addresses over the last 4-6 months that we cannot send/receive email with. I watch it leave my server with no issues, we receive no errors, but the recipient never receives it. The same goes when they send to us, no errors, it leaves there server, but never arrives here, again no error on either end. The only way we have found to get around the issue for business to continue is to use a hotmail/yahoo account to correspond with them. Has anyone run into this? Does anyone have a suggestion of where to look next? Thanks, Ryan N. Ryan Fennema, MCSE Network Administrator X-Rite Incorporated - Grandville, MI Phone: (616) 257-2165 Fax: (616) 257-2165 [EMAIL PROTECTED] www.XRite.com _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:
RE: E-mail in to China
I would probably be looking for a ORB or RBL that is likely involved some where along the way. Scott -Original Message- From: Ryan Fennema [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, December 20, 2002 11:46 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: E-mail in to China I was wondering if anyone else is having issues sending and receiving emails with China (.cn) addresses. We have had several addresses over the last 4-6 months that we cannot send/receive email with. I watch it leave my server with no issues, we receive no errors, but the recipient never receives it. The same goes when they send to us, no errors, it leaves there server, but never arrives here, again no error on either end. The only way we have found to get around the issue for business to continue is to use a hotmail/yahoo account to correspond with them. Has anyone run into this? Does anyone have a suggestion of where to look next? Thanks, Ryan N. Ryan Fennema, MCSE Network Administrator X-Rite Incorporated - Grandville, MI Phone: (616) 257-2165 Fax: (616) 257-2165 [EMAIL PROTECTED] www.XRite.com _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Retired Exchange 5.5 Servers
Setup a DL with no one in it. Assign it the SMTP addresses for the people who are no longer with you. End of story. :o) -Original Message- From: Doug Kassay [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, December 09, 2002 9:37 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Retired Exchange 5.5 Servers This is probably a simple question to most of you, but the answer eludes me. I am the exchange server administrator (that means that I don't necessarily know how to fix it, but I get all the inbound failure mail). We have a few accounts that were deleted due to employees leaving, getting fired, etc. I deleted their user/email accounts, but they are on a bunch of junk mail lists. So I am getting around 50 - 70 emails a day to those few addresses. It is so many that I am not able to read through the inbound failures to look for legitimate emails that were sent incorrectly. I have tried using the rules wizard in outlook, but for some reason it does not catch these mails. Is there a way to do this at the server level? I read a couple articles on the turf directory but don't know how to add entries to it. I specifically want the exchange server to delete any mail sent to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and not send me a notification of inbound failure. Thanks. Doug -Original Message- From: Bowles, John L. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, December 09, 2002 12:14 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Retired Exchange 5.5 Servers I've found some as well. But I haven't found anything on how to get them out of ESM. Thanks, __ John Bowles Exchange Administrator Enterprise Support Engineering Celera Genomics [EMAIL PROTECTED] -Original Message- From: David N. Precht [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, December 09, 2002 12:09 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Retired Exchange 5.5 Servers I found some KBs on support.microsoft.com for Event 9318 MSExchangeMTA. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Bowles, John L. Sent: Monday, December 09, 2002 12:02 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Retired Exchange 5.5 Servers Yes, I've done that procedure. But they still show up in the E2K (white Icon) in the site. Also, I'm getting warning RPC messages that is shown below on all my E2K servers. It seems they're still trying to send directory updates to these servers. Event Type: Warning Event Source: MSExchangeMTA Event Category: Interface Event ID: 9318 Date: 12/9/2002 Time: 11:56:43 AM User: N/A Computer: E2K Server Description: An RPC communications error occurred. Unable to bind over RPC. Locality Table (LTAB) index: 55, Windows 2000/MTA error code: 1722. Comms error 1722, Bind error 0, Remote Server Name 5.5 Exch Server [MAIN BASE 1 500 %10] (14) For more information, click http://www.microsoft.com/contentredirect.asp. __ John Bowles Exchange Administrator Enterprise Support Engineering Celera Genomics [EMAIL PROTECTED] -Original Message- From: Neil Hobson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, December 09, 2002 11:55 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Retired Exchange 5.5 Servers By 'ghosted out' do you mean just a white icon? If so, that's how they normally look. The process for removing them that I perform is to use the 5.5 admin program on the E2k server, connecting to the server running SRS. You then delete the 5.5 server from the site as you'd normally do. Is that what you did? Neil -Original Message- From: Bowles, John L. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Posted At: 09 December 2002 16:52 Posted To: Swynk Exchange List Conversation: Retired Exchange 5.5 Servers Subject: Retired Exchange 5.5 Servers All, I have a question for everyone. I've retired 5.5 servers from our Organization by following a MS Q article that shows you how to accomplish this. Now, when I look in ESM on E2K. It still shows the Exch 5.5 servers listed in there. Granted they are ghosted out. But how do I get rid of them as well. I also have a situation like this for a site that I removed from the Organzation, where it's still listed as an Administrative Group in E2K. Anyone have any ideas how I can get rid of these servers? Thank you, __ John Bowles Exchange Administrator Enterprise Support Engineering Celera Genomics [EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] * This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual to whom it is addressed. Any view or opinions presented are solely
RE: eseutil
I think the important thing to note here is that you really not do this sort of action unless you are talking with MS PSS and are doing so at the Techs instructions with an open incident. This is something you should not be doing out on your own. And if you are, you better make sure your backups are in good order before proceeding with any of this. A closer look at the Disaster Recovery document could be a good idea while you're at it. My nickels worth Scott -Original Message- From: Tony Nguyen [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, December 05, 2002 8:16 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: eseutil Thank everyone for the help. PSS has given instructions to run eseutil /p and it working. Here is the step from PSS for anyone who need it. It looks like your database has gotten corrupt. You will need to do a hard repair of the databases. I have listed the steps to follow below: 2) Stop all services 3) go to a command prompt and switch to the exchsrvr\bin directory 4) Run the eseutil /p against the Priv.edb (eseutil /p c:\exchsrvr\mdbdata\priv.edb) 5) Run the eseutil /p against the Pub.edb (eseutil /p c:\exchsrvr\mdbdata\pub.edb) 6) Check the consistency state of both databases (eseutil /mh) 7) Start the IS. If it errors out with a -1011error. 8) Run ISINTEG -patch only if you get a 1087 or 1011 error. 9) Start IS 10) If IS starts, then stop the service again, leave the System Attendant and Directory running. 11) Run ISINTEG -pri -fix -test alltests. Run this command until it reports 0 errors 0 fixes or the same number of fixes and error twice. 12) Run ISINTEG -pub -fix -test alltests. Run this command until it reports 0 errors 0 fixes or the same number of fixes and error twice. 13) Start IS 14) At this point, we will need to defrag the databases before putting it back into a production environment. (eseutil /d /ispriv then esetuil /d /ispub from the exchsrvr/bin directory) This utility takes 3- 6 GB per hour -Original Message- From: Ed Crowley [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 03, 2002 11:07 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: eseutil Well, that would figure when you copy a corrupted database to another machine. Bring up another new machine in the same site, and move all the mailboxes you can to it. After you have all the data out that you can get out of it, decide whether the old machine, especially the disk subsystem, is worthy of Exchange. Ed Crowley MCSE+I MVP Technical Consultant hp Services There are seldom good technological solutions to behavioral problems. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Tony Nguyen Sent: Tuesday, December 03, 2002 8:26 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: eseutil Now I am working off the recovery server and it giving me the same error as the production server. -Original Message- From: Martin Blackstone [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 03, 2002 8:19 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: eseutil And? -Original Message- From: Tony Nguyen [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 03, 2002 8:16 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: eseutil I have backup but I don't know when was the last good backup on tape. Just found this error a couple of week ago. They have ask me to build a recovery server and run eseutil /d /ispriv. -Original Message- From: Chris Scharff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 03, 2002 8:06 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: eseutil Have they asked you to restore from last known good backup and replay the logs or move the users to a new machine and delete the information store from this one and then move the users back? Or, more specifically what have they suggested? -Original Message- From: Tony Nguyen [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 03, 2002 10:03 AM To: Exchange Discussions I did call PSS, I try everything they ask me to do but I still get the same error. -Original Message- From: Andy David [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 03, 2002 7:59 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Re: eseutil How many weeks are you going to ask us this before you call PSS? - Original Message - From: Tony Nguyen [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, December 03, 2002 10:55 AM Subject: eseutil Can someone help me with this error. When I run eseutil /d /ispriv and after about 10% I get this error. Operation terminated with error -1019 (JET_errPageNotInitialized, Repair Only: Read an unused page) after 384.52 seconds. Thank Tony N. _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:
RE: Strange Incoming Mail Problem
If you have a PIX (Cisco) firewall this would be in the Mail Conduit make sure they have it configured properly. -Original Message- From: Greg Deckler [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, November 26, 2002 8:57 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Re: Strange Incoming Mail Problem Check to make sure that somebody didn't reconfigure the firewall to block port 25 inbound to your Exchange server. This would explain why it was working one day and not the next without you making any changes. Exchange 2000, SP3, W2K SP3. I'm afraid I can't provide a great deal of informatiuon here since there just isn't any! Basically, one day I have a perfectly working mail system then suddenly it stops receiving incoming mail. Outgoing is absolutely fine. There is nothing in the event viewer to suggest a problem and all DNS records appear to be OK. I have three domain names housed on the same box, bondyweb.com, simonbond.com and sacredlondon.co.uk. Bondyweb.com is the main one that is used and I have temporarily forwarded this to another address. However, the other addresses have the same problem and I have left these pointing to my exchange box for testing purposes. Any slightest hint of a suggestion is more than welcome. Cheers Simon _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Stop NDR
Most of us create either a dummy mailbox or Public Folder. Then assign the addresses in question to said mailbox or pf and set it to auto delete into never never land. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:kwenger;centershift.com] Sent: Wednesday, November 13, 2002 9:53 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Stop NDR I have a number of employees that are no longer with our company and I receive a large number of NDR's for mailing lists, SPAM, etc. that they signed up for. What is the best way to eliminate these? I am running Exch 2K. Any help would be greatly appreciated. _ 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: somewhat OT
You hit the nail on the head on this answer. I would like to add one more word to it. Control If it is in-house you have (at least perceptional) better or more control over what is happening with what has become a critical business application. Scott -Original Message- From: Roger Seielstad [mailto:roger.seielstad;inovis.com] Sent: Friday, November 08, 2002 11:15 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: somewhat OT Simple. Its not cost effective to outsourse at the levels they target. They missed the boat from day one. There is a relative break even point for having your own IT staff, generally in the 25-75 user range, depending on what your company actually does. More than 100 or so, and you really need someone. Once you've got someone inhouse, they tend to have to be a jack-of-all-trades type, and do a lot of fumbling through. But the job gets done. Traditionally, an NT box with Exchange 5.5 Standard wasn't really that expensive - you could probably do that for $10k. Win2k with E2k has raised the prices a bit, but not exhorbinantly such. With leasing options, that server could be a few hundred a month. Like any service provider, the good fruit is in the middle of the tree, not the low hanging stuff. SO they tended to target 500 person plus orgs. This 600-ish person company has 8 sysadmins - we have enough time to manage Exchange. Without it, maybe we'd have one less headcount, but I'd bet that the headcount loss isn't drastically different than the cost of 600 users' outsourced mail needs. Now, the other side of this equation is that email is a core business need for most companies, and isn't that hard to at least get running[1]. More specialized things, like e-commerce and line of business apps make more sense in a managed environment. Email never did. -- Roger D. Seielstad - MCSE Sr. Systems Administrator Inovis - Formerly Harbinger and Extricity Atlanta, GA [1] Running well is a different question, but running and running well aren't the issue here. -Original Message- From: Greg Deckler [mailto:greg;infonition.com] Sent: Friday, November 08, 2002 12:25 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Re: somewhat OT You've hit the major players. The entire email hosting business has pretty much flopped and consolidated. Critical Path handed over its hosted corporate messaging services to HP. United Messaging was acquired by Agilera. Commtouch sold its hosted Exchange business to TeleComputing. USA.NET and Mi8 are still hanging in there, for now. But this entire market space has just been decimated of late. I still think that the business case is there for outsourced messaging, but apparently not enough people have the same attitude that I do. Anyone else care to comment on why they think that this market space has flopped? One would think that in a time of economic hardship, companies would really be looking to outsource anything and everything they can in order to lower costs. If outsourced corporate messaging can't make it in today's economy, I have serious doubts that it will ever make it. But the question is why? Outsourced messaging holds the promise of lower costs, flexibility and the ability to focus on one's core business. In addition, many of the outsourced providers can put together systems that have a mix of high-end and low-end mailbox services that are all tied together as a single system. This means that companies can have Exchange mailboxes for those that need it and low-cost IMAP/POP mailboxes for everyone else and the outsourcer ties it all together to look like a single email system. So why did this market fail? Who all is left in the Hosted E2K (asp-model) game?=20 USA.NET? MI8?=20 Critical Path? others?=20 j Regards,=20 John Henley _ 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: 3 Questions about Exchange
The steps are pretty straight forward here. 1. Backup (make sure you back is good). Insert disk and run the upgrade, will not mess up current system. Well the proverbial should not, which is of course why you have the first part. Have a good backup. 2. Flush (you have that answer already) 3. Why are you moving these files? If you try to move them you will have lots of extra steps involved with ISInteg and so forth. -Original Message- From: Daniel Chenault [mailto:danielc;dc-resources.net] Sent: Wednesday, October 30, 2002 8:27 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: 3 Questions about Exchange 1. Good for you Buying it and doing a good amount of research Yes, thus the research 2. Research 3. 5.5 Optimizer -Original Message- From: Manderino, Mike [mailto:mmanderino;destinyhealth.com] Sent: Wednesday, October 30, 2002 9:42 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: 3 Questions about Exchange 1) Need to upgrade to Exchange 5.5 Enterprise. What is involved? Will this mess up my current exchange 5.5? 2) How do clean(flush)the deleted retention at any time I want? 3) How do we safely move the database files? (Priv.edb, pub.edb ect...) Thanks Mike *** Confidentiality Note: This E-mail is intended only for the person or entity to which it is addressed and may contain information that is privileged, confidential or otherwise protected from disclosure. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this E-mail or the information herein by anyone other than the intended recipient, or an employee or agent responsible for delivering the message to the intended recipient, is prohibited. If you have received this E-mail in error, please call the Mgr. of Information Technology at 301.222.0330 and destroy the original message and all copies. _ 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 Note: This E-mail is intended only for the person or entity to which it is addressed and may contain information that is privileged, confidential or otherwise protected from disclosure. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this E-mail or the information herein by anyone other than the intended recipient, or an employee or agent responsible for delivering the message to the intended recipient, is prohibited. If you have received this E-mail in error, please call the Mgr. of Information Technology at 301.222.0330 and destroy the original message and all copies. _ 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: Appointments.
Unless you have modified the default settings on the calendar, this is not possible in the first place. The default permission settings for each users calendar is for, Default No access. So unless privileges have been granted by user a or for user a, User B cannot place an item on User A's calendar without a meeting request and User A accepting it. I don't think you can stop a meeting request from being delivered. In any case User B cannot place a meeting on User A's calendar unless User A has granted this privilege to User B. Scott -Original Message- From: Hunter, Lori [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, June 25, 2002 1:30 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Appointments. You can't stop them from trying, you can only stop them from succeeding. You are talking about SENDING an appointment REQUEST, aren't you? It's a request, not a mandate. -Original Message- From: McCready, Robert [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, June 25, 2002 3:09 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Appointments. Outlook 98, Exchange 5.5 SP4, NT 4.0 SP6a. Is it possible to block User 1 from trying to make an appointment on User 2's calendar? We have a few management employees (User 2) that do not put EVERYTHING they do on their calendar, and they would prefer not to have other people trying to make an appointment on their calendar, thinking that they are free, when actually they aren't. Yes, the easiest thing to do is to deny the request, but is there a way to block their calendar from even showing up when someone tries to request a meeting? Thanks. Robert _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Test
It's nice to see that name again here. Hi there Ed! :o) -Original Message- From: Ed Crowley [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, May 28, 2002 10:04 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Test Because it is there. Ed Crowley hp Services --- Dean Cunningham [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: no, because they can.. -Original Message- From: Martin Tuip [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, 28 May 2002 5:57 a.m. To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Re: Test Because they want to ? -- Martin Tuip MVP Exchange Exchange2000 List owner www.exchange-mail.org www.sharepointserver.com -- - Original Message - From: Filipe Joel de Almeida [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, May 25, 2002 7:55 PM Subject: RE: Test LoL... Why in God's name do ppl insist in sending test messages to mailing lists? Filipe Joel de Almeida -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Tony Hlabse Sent: sabado, 25 de Maio de 2002 5:25 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Re: Test You passed now get out and enjoy the weekend - Original Message - From: Arch Willingham [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, May 25, 2002 11:49 AM Subject: Test Test _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] ** This email is not an official statement of the Waikato Regional Council unless otherwise stated. Visit our website http://www.ew.govt.nz ** _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] __ Do You Yahoo!? Yahoo! - Official partner of 2002 FIFA World Cup http://fifaworldcup.yahoo.com _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Archive
In today's world when it comes to this stuff, your only way to look at this is LEGAL. Check with your legal department and see what they want done, of course you may need to educate them first. After that your scheme be easy to deploy, but not necessarily easy to live with. :o) Scott -Original Message- From: Tim [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, May 28, 2002 10:25 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Archive How long do most of you hold tapes? We are looking to establish a standard on how long to keep tapes in archived before reintroducing them back into the tape rotation to be overwritten. I know there are many differnent ways to look at this as far as cost per tape, storage space, legal aspects, and disaster recovery and wanted to know what people thought was a good period _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Word as your E-mail editor (OL98)
Not to mention several known viral exploits for you to spread and wreak havoc among your systems by using Word as the E-Mail editor. The more complex they make the plumbing the easier it is to plug them up or something the affect. Borrowed from Scotty of the Star Ship Enterprise. Scott -Original Message- From: Erik Sojka [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, April 30, 2002 6:45 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Word as your E-mail editor (OL98) You're not looking hard enough. Search for word as email editor. There are numerous problems, and the consensus is that there are too many bugs in that setup. Don't use Word, use the builtin RTF/HTML editing tools in Outlook (You may want to upgrade to OL2K; it is free with a valid Ex55 CAL, and is infinitely more stable than OL98). * * Erik Sojka, MOS, MCSE * * Manager, Network Services * * [EMAIL PROTECTED] * * -Original Message- From: McCready, Robert [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, April 29, 2002 7:53 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Word as your E-mail editor (OL98) Exchange 5.5 SP4, NT 4.0 SP6a, OL98. Has anybody had problems using Word as your E-mail editor? I've got a user that frequently has Word freeze up when she has one document open, and then tries to open another one via an attachment through E-mail. I'm pretty sure I had documentation on this at one time, but I can't seem to find it in Technet. Thanks. Robert _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Full access
Yikes I'm with Missy on this one. I have been doing exchange since it was a fledgling beta called 4.0 I have never had any reason to do an ExMerge on a production box. -Original Message- From: William Lefkovics [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, April 11, 2002 3:27 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Full access My guess is she has minions do it. -Original Message- From: David Strome [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, April 11, 2002 2:49 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Full access You have the great fortune of knowing what you're doing... -Original Message- From: Missy Koslosky [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, April 11, 2002 1:20 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Re: Full access Sometimes? Sometimes when? I have NEVER needed to use exmerge on a production box, and I have a been around Exchange for years and years. - Original Message - From: Andrey Fyodorov [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, April 11, 2002 4:16 PM Subject: RE: Full access Sometimes you need to export everyone's mail with ExMerge. That's when you need to have full access to everyone's mailbox. -Original Message- From: Chris Scharff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, April 11, 2002 1:01 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Full access Runs counter to several things I would consider best practices. 1. Domain Admin accounts should not be mailbox enabled. 2. Users should be logging in as domain admin accounts for day to day work. 3. All Domain Admins might also be Exchange Admins, but that doesn't mean that the rights should be applied to that group, rather those users should be part of an Exchange admins group. 4. Users with the ability to log into mailboxes should be limited to the smallest group of users possible. I'm sure there are others, but I'm hungry and headed out for lunch. -Original Message- From: Woodruff, Michael [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, April 11, 2002 11:56 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Full access Why is this a bad design? -Original Message- From: Chris Scharff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, April 11, 2002 12:52 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Full access Asked and answered at least once this week already I think. Q258183. I'll skip the diatribe on what a bad design that particular question implies. -Original Message- From: Woodruff, Michael [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, April 11, 2002 11:46 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Full access What is the best way to give Domain Admins full access to all PFs and Mailboxes in Exchange2k? _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To
RE: Moving Exchange 5.5 to new hardware
5:15pm: Break in because problem account crashed IS when it tried to move it. 5:04pm: You do the above because you remember the key is locked inside. hehe Don't get me wrong I love the ECMSM works great, and is less filling. However; I did have several accounts that did the above last time I did the ECMSM. I don't think you can set it and forget it, some baby sitting is required. -Original Message- From: Andy David [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, April 03, 2002 7:58 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Moving Exchange 5.5 to new hardware 5:04 PM: Remember you left server room door key inside server room. -Original Message- From: Chris Scharff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, April 03, 2002 10:54 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Moving Exchange 5.5 to new hardware I've moved 1800 users from one server to another before using the ECMSM and when measuring the amount of my time that it took to complete the move vs. doing a backup and restore there is no comparison.. The ECMSM wins hands down. 5:00 PM: Fire up the Exchange Admin on the destination server 5:01 PM: Select 500 mailboxes from the GAL 5:02 PM Choose Tools | Move Mailbox and select destination server 5:03 PM Close door to server room on way out. -- Chris Scharff MVP, MCSE MessageOne 512-652-4500 x244 When the country falls into chaos, patriotism is born. --Tao Te Ching -Original Message- From: Rowell, John (AFIT) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, April 03, 2002 1:52 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Moving Exchange 5.5 to new hardware No, I work 8x5 like the rest of the 4000 staff in my organization and so opportunities to move mailboxes are in a small window in the mornings between 7am and 8am, before users arrive. That does not give a lot of time to move users, and moving a mailbox of, say, 100 MB can take some time. Try moving 500 mailboxes with an average of 30 MB each and I think you'll find it takes longer than a backup and restore. -Original Message- From: Chris Scharff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 28 March 2002 16:57 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Moving Exchange 5.5 to new hardware Do you work 24x7? Because assuming a 12 hour window on a Friday and Saturday night I could probably move around 30-40GB on a LAN and actual impact to any single user would likely be only a matter of minutes. -Original Message- From: Rowell, John (AFIT) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, March 28, 2002 8:25 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Moving Exchange 5.5 to new hardware Over 500. Mailboxes can't be moved during working hours -Original Message- From: Andy David [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 26 March 2002 20:12 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Moving Exchange 5.5 to new hardware Months to move? How many mailboxes are we talking here? -Original Message- From: Rowell, John (AFIT) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, March 26, 2002 8:32 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Moving Exchange 5.5 to new hardware While the Ed Crowley Server Move method is very effective, I would not discount the backup and restore method, where you do the whole move within one day. I've used the Ed Crawley Server Move method and it works fine, but the downside is that it can take months to move the mailboxes, if you have a lot of them, and if they are big. As a result, recently I used the server move method, and had great success, it was finished in one day and was much cleaner. I wouldn't say it's that risky, as long as you know how to back out of it. There are also two types of move, i) using one-line backup restore, ii) using off-line backup restore, and I found the latter easier. -Original Message- From: Roger Seielstad [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 25 March 2002 18:14 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Moving Exchange 5.5 to new hardware I suggest rebuilding your plan from the ground up. Read the FAQ (Link is below) - there is a well developed set of steps to doing it the right way. -- Roger D. Seielstad - MCSE Sr. Systems Administrator Peregrine Systems Atlanta, GA -Original Message- From: Sebastian, Didy [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, March 25, 2002 4:21 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Moving Exchange 5.5 to new hardware I have to move my existing Exchange 5.5 to new hardware. I am restoring from an online backup and will basically install everything from CD - NT4, Service Pack 6, Exchange 5.5, Exchange
RE: NAS support for Exchange 2000
The Knowledge Base articles can be found at the following links: http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;en-us;Q317173 http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;en-us;Q317172 -Original Message- From: RB [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, March 27, 2002 2:22 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: NAS support for Exchange 2000 Has Microsoft changed it's stance on NAS attached devices for Exchange at all? My understanding was that any NAS attached storage for Exchange 2000 is not supported as all Exchange 2000 data needs to be local to the server (i.e. Local disks or a SAN via a dedicated connection is supported). If this is still the case does anyone have a reference to a web page that makes this statement about NAS. If it has changed a reference to this would be appreciated also. Regards _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: NAS support for Exchange 2000
). Another thing to keep in mind is that NAS devices have multiple single points of failure (fans, processors, etc.) and as the size of the NAS increases your probabilities of multiple disc failures in the same RAID set increases. Also bear in mind that all data transfers must ride the network stack; I would be very concerned with database integrity in this scenario (even if you are directly attaching the NAS to Exchange via fiber) - no matter what your vendor says, it's not the same as SCSI or SAN. I would be very careful if you are thinking of doing this. Tom. -Original Message- From: Akerlund, Scott [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, March 27, 2002 5:25 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: NAS support for Exchange 2000 The Knowledge Base articles can be found at the following links: http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;en-us;Q317173 http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;en-us;Q317172 -Original Message- From: RB [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, March 27, 2002 2:22 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: NAS support for Exchange 2000 Has Microsoft changed it's stance on NAS attached devices for Exchange at all? My understanding was that any NAS attached storage for Exchange 2000 is not supported as all Exchange 2000 data needs to be local to the server (i.e. Local disks or a SAN via a dedicated connection is supported). If this is still the case does anyone have a reference to a web page that makes this statement about NAS. If it has changed a reference to this would be appreciated also. Regards _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: BE 8.6
Have you installed the Exchange administrator and SP on the system doing the backups? A poorly documented gottcha. -Original Message- From: Daniel Chenault [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, March 27, 2002 3:50 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: BE 8.6 I have to admit I'm kinda stumped here. BackupExec v8.6 running latest driver package using a Seagate/Archive autoloaded (OEMed by Compaq). Works fine doing file-level backups but when I create a job to backup Exchange 5.5 SP4 it gives directory not responding and store not responding yet all Exchange services are up and running, merrily servicing clients. I tried adding the backupexec service account to org, site and config as service account but no change. Both MS' and Veritas websites are no help. Anyone seen this before? _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Vauge OWA Error
Have you checked to make sure this user has Logon Locally privileges to the machine running OWA? Sounds like a security issue on these few users. -Original Message- From: Wynkoop, John [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, March 26, 2002 8:19 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Vauge OWA Error When trying to access a mailbox via OWA (Exch 5.5 sp4) with a user's account, I get the following error: OWA was unable to get to your inbox. However, if I use the Username/PW of the Administrator, I can open the mailbox fine. This problem seems isolated to only a couple of users and I've deleted their accounts and re-created them with no change. I gather that this is a default message, however I can't seem to find any other problems in the IIS logs or Event Viewer. I'm quite frustrated at this point and any help would be appreciated. Thanks, John _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Move Mailbox
They will disconnected until they close out of Outlook and re-open. Or so the experience has been here when I had to do that. In a few cases the user never even knew it happened if they were away from their desk long enough. Scott -Original Message- From: Chris Haaker [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, March 22, 2002 8:06 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Move Mailbox Does anyone know the impact of moving a user's mailbox while they hae it open in Outlook? I am sure it is not preferred, but we have one user we cannot get ahold of . . . It is the province of knowledge to speak, and it is the privilege of wisdom to listen. Oliver Wendell Holmes, Sr. (1809-94); U.S. writer, physician. _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Exchange with 2 domains
Yes Yes You could do that too. -Original Message- From: Jason [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, March 22, 2002 7:03 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Exchange with 2 domains Would it be possible for my organization to use 1 Exchange server for 2 domains? If so would they be able to share the same @domainname.com? or would I need to purchase another domain name to come after the @ on one of the Windows domains? _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Building an Exchange 5.5 server
Fair... Turn off circular logging, put the mail from the users pst's back in the information store as that is why it exists, turn on the deleted recovery dumpster for at least 10 days, and lastly I wish you the best with Arcserve for backups. Have a great weekend. I am going home now. :o) footnote: 1 PST=BAD 2 Arcserve = BAD get BackupExec for Veritas instead. as per the majority of users on this List. -Original Message- From: Kevin Miller [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Saturday, March 16, 2002 8:41 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Building an Exchange 5.5 server Yahoo groups goes down, and all of the offline comedy gets focused here. This is going to be a fun weekend. OK I have a new server that I just installed, I turned on circular loggined, run eseutil every Friday, then ghost the server to have a backup. I have 800 users all with PSTs, all of them are stored on the email server, how am I doing with my first exchange install. I just bought Arcserve and inoculateIT --Kevinm M, WLKMMAS, UCC+WCA, And Beyond Verio can Burn in hell, While Qwest.net can bite my ARSE -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Edgington, Jeffrey Sent: Saturday, March 16, 2002 6:38 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Building an Exchange 5.5 server If you fake it, Dell will break it, then you will yell. -Original Message- From: Andy David [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Saturday, March 16, 2002 8:28 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Building an Exchange 5.5 server If you want to fake it, buy a Dell. -Original Message- From: Martin Blackstone [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Saturday, March 16, 2002 9:22 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Building an Exchange 5.5 server If you break it, they will yell. -Original Message- From: Andy David [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Saturday, March 16, 2002 6:16 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Building an Exchange 5.5 server If you build it, they will come. -Original Message- From: Patrick [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, March 15, 2002 8:44 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Building an Exchange 5.5 server Anyone know of any good sites (besides TechNet) for getting some info on building an Exchange server. Thanks _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] --- - -- The information contained in this email message is privileged and confidential information intended only for the use of the individual or entity to whom it is addressed. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copy of this message is strictly prohibited. If you have received this email in error, please immediately notify Veronis Suhler Stevenson by telephone (212)935-4990, fax (212)381-8168, or email ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) and delete the message. Thank you. === = == _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] --- --- The information contained in this email message is privileged and confidential information intended only for the use of the individual or entity to whom it is addressed. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copy of this message is strictly prohibited. If you have received this email in error, please immediately notify Veronis Suhler Stevenson by telephone (212)935-4990, fax (212)381-8168, or email ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) and delete the message. Thank you. === === _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: If I delete an email is it really gone?
Now there is a loaded question. The answer truly is it depends. The message is (to my understanding) not really deleted and hence gone until ALL pointers to that message in the IS are deleted. If the message exists in one inbox, outbox, sent items or folder stored on the mail system then technically the message is not gone and could be recovered at some point in time. I could be wrong and I am sure that if I am, some one will be more than happy to point it out. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, March 15, 2002 12:57 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: If I delete an email is it really gone? Exchange 5.5 SP4, 10 Exchange servers, 1 site Outlook 2000 clients I was tasked with the following and need some help finding the answers. I need to be assured that when an item is deleted from a mailbox, it is really gone. We currently have the dumpster feature enabled which I plan to disable. My question is, if a mail item is deleted and the dumpster is turned off, is the item really unrecoverable? If it is recoverable, how can I change our configuration so that it is unrecoverable? Is that even possible? Could someone reconstruct that data in any way even though it has been deleted? On a side note, I know that backups play into this and that will be addressed later. Thanks everyone Jeff _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Network Error During Host Resolution
I would like to add some additional evidence to this post. At first look I would say that this persons (account) does not exist at this system. However; I have this exact same problem with accounts I know to exist, in fact if I bring up my MSN account and send to the identical address it works, as it did from Yahoo, Hotmail, Juno and AOL. So I know this part of the error to be false. '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' on 3/12/02 1:01 PM The recipient name is not recognized It seems that Exchange is falling back on the most reasonable answer it can provide even though it is not correct. It's not the first time a software product has returned a incorrect and misleading error. My system seems to be very happy delivering messages all over the place. What I have observed in the past several months, is that on some messages with complicated addresses the SMTP delivery fails. Many of mine that fail have addresses like these. [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Far more complex that [EMAIL PROTECTED] If I recall (though I haven't been able to find the Q or other supporting evidence) earlier versions of the IMC/IMS had some problems with certain characters in the SMTP addresses they did not support. I wonder if we are seeing some lingering traces of this. After reading some of the follow up post, yes I have done NSLookups, and Telnet testing successfully, from my workstation and the Exchange Server. So by everything I know they should work, but all the same they continue to fail. Besides how do you explain successful delivery to the identical address from another mail system? Regards Scott -Original Message- From: Joe Pochedley [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, March 13, 2002 8:40 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Network Error During Host Resolution Kind ladies and gentlemen of the list. I am sending this message again in hopes that someone will be able to help me. I'm not intending to spam the list, just looking for some assistance. I've heard from a few people off list that they've also experienced similar problems, but none of them have / had a solution and were hoping that I had found something with yesterday's inquiry... If anyone out there can help, or at least give me another direction to explore I would greatly appreciate it. (I know about MS PSS and it is my final option, but I'd rather not go there). My Exchange Server is v5.5 SP4 Problem is as follows: -Begin Quoted Error Message- Your message did not reach some or all of the intended recipients. Subject: RE: Durr Industries Sent: 3/10/02 1:11 PM The following recipient(s) could not be reached: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' on 3/12/02 1:01 PM The recipient name is not recognized The MTS-ID of the original message is: c=US;a= ;p=namfg;l=SEQUOYAH-020310181103Z-71 MSEXCH:IMS:namfg:cleveland:SEQUOYAH 3499 (000B09AA) network error during host resolution [EMAIL PROTECTED] on 3/12/02 1:01 PM The recipient name is not recognized The MTS-ID of the original message is: c=US;a= ;p=namfg;l=SEQUOYAH-020310181103Z-71 MSEXCH:IMS:namfg:cleveland:SEQUOYAH 3499 (000B09AA) network error during host resolution -End Quoted Error Message- I'm getting this error when trying to send to de.durr-usa.com, and have in the past had this error on a few other addresses, but the message has always eventually gone through in the past. This time though, I can't get anything to go through to de.durr-usa.com. Supposedly, we have been able to send to these recipients in the past, but it's only been in the past two months that there have been any problems that the end user has complained about... No changes have been made to our Exchange Server or DNS servers for at least the past 4-6 months. I am able to look up de.durr-usa.com using the same DNS server that the exchange server is using, so it's not that the DNS server can't resolve the host name... I looked up durr-usa.com's DNS records and there is no MX record for the sub domain 'de' but there is an A record, so theoretically the Exchange SMTP service should use the A record in place of the MX record, correct? I am at a loss. Thanks in advance. Joe Pochedley _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Network Error During Host Resolution
::laughing:: That is all well and good, except I have to convince you to put an MX on your system. And you telling me it works fine for everyone else. So No!, I'm not going to change it. Did we get anywhere? -Original Message- From: Kevin Miller [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, March 13, 2002 10:45 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Network Error During Host Resolution From experience: the RFC and real life are a bit off. with out an MX record exchange will look at the root of your FQDN, so it will look at durr-usa.com and see that IP. It will not go any deeper to a machine name. Just add an MX record and solve the problem. --Kevinm M, WLKMMAS, UCC+WCA, And Beyond Did I just say that out loud? -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Joe Pochedley Sent: Wednesday, March 13, 2002 10:16 AM To: Exchange Discussions Cc: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' Subject: RE: Network Error During Host Resolution They shouldn't need an actual MX record if they have an A record. (I know it's proper to have an MX record, but it's not absolutely necessary.) Since de.durr-usa.com DOES have an A record, Exchange SMTP SHOULD be able to locate it From RFC 2821 Section 3.6 3.6 Domains Only resolvable, fully-qualified, domain names (FQDNs) are permitted when domain names are used in SMTP. In other words, names that can be resolved to MX RRs or A RRs (as discussed in section 5) are permitted, as are CNAME RRs whose targets can be resolved, in turn, to MX or A RRs. Local nicknames or unqualified names MUST NOT be used. There are two exceptions to the rule requiring FQDNs: - The domain name given in the EHLO command MUST BE either a primary host name (a domain name that resolves to an A RR) or, if the host has no name, an address literal as described in section 4.1.1.1. - The reserved mailbox name postmaster may be used in a RCPT command without domain qualification (see section 4.1.1.3) and MUST be accepted if so used. From Section 5 Once an SMTP client lexically identifies a domain to which mail will be delivered for processing (as described in sections 3.6 and 3.7), a DNS lookup MUST be performed to resolve the domain name [22]. The names are expected to be fully-qualified domain names (FQDNs): mechanisms for inferring FQDNs from partial names or local aliases are outside of this specification and, due to a history of problems, are generally discouraged. The lookup first attempts to locate an MX record associated with the name. If a CNAME record is found instead, the resulting name is processed as if it were the initial name. If no MX records are found, but an A RR is found, the A RR is treated as if it was associated with an implicit MX RR, with a preference of 0, pointing to that host. If one or more MX RRs are found for a given name, SMTP systems MUST NOT utilize any A RRs associated with that name unless they are located using the MX RRs; the implicit MX rule above applies only if there are no MX records present. If MX records are present, but none of them are usable, this situation MUST be reported as an error. Still Looking Joe Pochedley I like deadlines, cartoonist Scott Adams once said. I especially like the whooshing sound they make as they fly by. -Original Message- From: Roger Seielstad [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, March 13, 2002 12:56 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Network Error During Host Resolution They don't have an MX record, so you can't find a server to which you can deliver mail: bash-2.04$ dig de.durr-usa.com mx ; DiG 9.1.2 de.durr-usa.com mx ;; global options: printcmd ;; Got answer: ;; -HEADER- opcode: QUERY, status: NOERROR, id: 37004 ;; flags: qr rd ra; QUERY: 1, ANSWER: 0, AUTHORITY: 1, ADDITIONAL: 0 ;; QUESTION SECTION: ;de.durr-usa.com. IN MX ;; AUTHORITY SECTION: durr-usa.com. 7200IN SOA ns1.ameritech.net. postmaster.ameritech.net. 200111271 3600 900 604800 7200 ;; Query time: 361 msec ;; SERVER: 66.92.212.61#53(66.92.212.61) ;; WHEN: Wed Mar 13 12:52:37 2002 ;; MSG SIZE rcvd: 97 -- Roger D. Seielstad - MCSE Sr. Systems Administrator Peregrine Systems Atlanta, GA -Original Message- From: Joe Pochedley [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, March 13, 2002 11:40 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Network Error During Host Resolution Kind ladies and gentlemen of the list. I am sending this message again in hopes that someone will be able to help me. I'm not intending to spam the list, just looking for some assistance. I've heard from a few people off list that they've also experienced similar problems, but none of them have / had a solution and were hoping that I had found something with yesterday's
RE: Autoforwarding Rules.
This all sounds to me like you're getting very close to a Mail Loop disaster. Been there done that. Scott -Original Message- From: Gary Aiston [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, February 04, 2002 1:36 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Autoforwarding Rules. why not use the 1st rule to forward on to the other mailbox instead of to another folder? -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of McCready, Robert Sent: 04 February 2002 21:28 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Autoforwarding Rules. Outlook 98, Exchange 5.5. I have a user who has a rule setup to deliver specific mail to a particular folder. The question is, can another rule be setup to automatically forward any mail coming into this folder only, to be forwarded to another user? This user says that somebody else had it setup, but I can't find a rule like that anywhere. The only rules I see are ones to deliver mail to a particular folder, not to automatically forward mail onto another user. The alternate recipient thing won't work because then ALL the users E-mail would be forwarded, not just mail from the specified folder. Has anybody else done this? Thanks. Robert _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Slightly OT: PST policies
I agree pretty much with this layout. I have beaten this horse and still it rides. I have managed to at least get most of my people to create a pst for basically each year. Some have gone to more frequent than this, quarterly for a couple. The reason for this? Large PST's corrupt much easier than small ones. This has kept them from getting to big in most cases. If you can't beat them with Technological Solutions then you have to pound them with education and knowledge. Scott -Original Message- From: Thomas Di Nardo [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, January 10, 2002 10:54 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Slightly OT: PST policies Have the users keep them on their local hard drive. Put together a written policy documenting what you propose and why. Be detailed. Document everything. It will come back to you. It might take six months, it might take six years, but it will come back to you. Get legal to sign-off that the users may be violating any existing, or future, email/document retention policy the company has. You might want to explain how much data can be kept in a PST and how long it can be kept there, since most lawyers don't have a clue about the technical aspects. You might also want to mention what would be involved in providing those PSTs to a Plaintiff's lawyer should a discovery request ever be made. Get management signoff on the fact that any data stored in PST files will be stored on the local users' machine and will not be backed up. Don't let them store PST files on file servers; if the data is important enough to be on a server, it should be in an Exchange database. Explain what SIS is. Explain how much more disk space will be used if PST's are allowed on file severs versus an Exchange database. There's a bunch more, but you get the gist. My $.02. Tom. -Original Message- From: Cook, David A. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, January 10, 2002 1:24 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Slightly OT: PST policies After much complaining about PST usage on our network I have finally been asked to give my recommendation on PST files. My recommendation of not allowing them at all was shot down as not possible. I now turn to you guys to find out what you do about PST usage. I would like to limit the size of the PST files that we use but the only way I know of that I can do this is based on quotas on the drives where they are stored. The only other way to enforce this would be to monitor it and yell at the people that get large PSTs. I think I'm running into what I have read many times on this list and I will probably get it wrong. There is no technological solution to a behavioral problem Dave Cook Exchange Administrator Kutak Rock, LLP 402-231-8352 [EMAIL PROTECTED] ## The information contained in this electronic mail transmission (including any accompanying attachments) is intended solely for its authorized recipient(s), and may be confidential and/or legally privileged. If you are not an intended recipient, or responsible for delivering some or all of this transmission to an intended recipient, you have received this transmission in error and are hereby notified that you are strictly prohibited from reading, copying, printing, distributing or disclosing any of the information contained in it. In that event, please contact us immediately by telephone (402)346-6000 or by electronic mail at [EMAIL PROTECTED] and delete the original and all copies of this transmission (including any attachments) without reading or saving in any manner. Thank you. ## _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Sarcasm makes this list great (Not)
And you're not dead yet? Sheessh JK -Original Message- From: Don Ely [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, January 08, 2002 9:00 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Sarcasm makes this list great (Not) I'm fricken hilarious! I kill me sometimes! D -Original Message- From: Martin Blackstone [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, January 08, 2002 9:00 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Sarcasm makes this list great (Not) I think I'm damn funny! -Original Message- From: Doug Hampshire [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, January 08, 2002 8:52 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Sarcasm makes this list great (Not) Someone needs to get laid... Actually, I'm not a wanna be comedian, I'm officially one. My title includes word manager and as many can testify that automajikally makes me a comedian. -Original Message- From: Kevin [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, January 08, 2002 8:18 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Sarcasm makes this list great (Not) You've got to be kidding... The excessive sarcasm is what ruins this list. This list contains far too many wannabee comedians and scornful nerds.. - Previously from Thomas Nardo: If you can't hack the sarcasm, you might consider a different list (maybe the carebears one). The sarcasm is what makes this list great in my opinion. Everyone who is anyone in the Exchange world is here. Did you run home with your ball when the other kids noticed you had highwaters? --- .+--xm ,)r(ື \檆b=!6 0 zǚ1r,:.˛ m隊[hy\z[,)rɄZ Zvh'+-i٢2 G( _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Install trouble
Yikes! You need to read some more before embarking on this cruise ship. You need to have Active Directory running in your W2K domain, and you will need to run the Forest Prep for Exchange 2000 before you will get very far. Best of luck! Scott -Original Message- From: Dean Clark [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, January 08, 2002 6:47 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Install trouble I have just been given the task of setting up the companies exchange server. (Exchange 2000 on Win 2k server) Having never done it before I thought I'd give it a crack. Upon entering the setup screen I started going through the installation options and I got this error:- Microsoft Exchange Messaging and collaboration Services depends on Microsoft Exchange domain preperation, which has an install problem. Any ideas?? All knowledgebase stuff I can find relates to DNS of Master Domain controller - which is fine. TIA Dean Clark Database Administrator Calaba Ltd (+44) 0207 258 8462 07790 853 688 [EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: changing port
Well the straight stuff, be careful in here. On your exchange server go to the winnt\system32\drivers\etc folder. Edit the services file you will find here. Find the line for SMTP and change the port designation. Remember to stop and restart the IMC/IMS Done -Original Message- From: Smith Thomas Contr 911 SPTG/SC [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, January 04, 2002 1:31 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: changing port We are using Mail Marshall and the reason port 25 needs to be change is because Mail Marshall uses this port(97) for mail and sends mail to Exchange Server, instead of Exchange recieving it first. Mail Marshall is acting like a mail security gateway for Exchange. _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Give access to another users tasks and calander only?
Yes, Provide access at the mailbox level or you can't even seen the other folders to begin with. Then simply provide the access you need this person to have to only the Calendar and Task folders. On persons workstation add the mailbox to their Client. On the Tools menu go down to Services, Double click on Microsoft Exchange Server Click on the Advanced Tab at the top. Select the Add button on the right Type mailbox name. OK, OK. From folder view you now have this mailbox but they only have access to the folders you provided access to from above. Done -Original Message- From: Dustin Krysak [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, December 20, 2001 11:56 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Give access to another users tasks and calander only? Hi there... Is there a way to give access to a user to access another users colander and tasks only? I know they can use the file open another users folder - but I don't want them to have access to the inbox it self. Thanks! Dustin _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: stripping attachments
I like to look at it this way, the lesser of two evils. On the one hand it is more work for me to have to pull items from quarantine. On the other hand, it is even MORE work for me to rid the entire network of a virus. Far better for the users to get a message letting them know something came for them, and that it was quarantined for some reason, than to blindly move attachments to their mailboxes. They can then request the file and as long as it is not of viral nature and moderately work related we then give it to them. Because of this the users trust the IS department more, and I can block pretty much all attachments, including the incoming Word Excel documents with the macros too. How does that old adage go? Fool me once shame on you, fool me twice shame on me.. Fool me three times I better find something else to do. Something like that. -Original Message- From: Hunter, Lori [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 7:51 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: stripping attachments OK, I guess one man's meat is another man's poison. I actually like that they get scared and call in. I MUCH prefer that scenario to the scenario at ADS whereby the CEO and VP of IT repeatedly launch virii such as love letter and melissa because they stubbornly refuse to purchase any antivirus for their mail. -Original Message- From: Hurst, Paul [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 9:37 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: stripping attachments Generates a lot of Helpdesk calls from users that report that they have an attachment in a Email that has reference to Viruses (they never read the email properly). Cheers Paul Standards are like toothbrushes, everybody agrees you should have one, but no one wants to use yours -Original Message- From: Hunter, Lori [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 3:17 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: stripping attachments Why not? I'm curious; bad experiences? It's working fine for me here. My people are even afraid to open the virus_detected_and_removed.txt file. I'm so proud. :) -Original Message- From: Hurst, Paul [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 9:14 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: stripping attachments You do't want to do that. Cheers Paul Standards are like toothbrushes, everybody agrees you should have one, but no one wants to use yours -Original Message- From: Pfefferkorn, Pete (PFEFFEPE) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 2:17 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: stripping attachments Doesn't Scan Mail allow you to replace the attached infected message with a replacement text file? I just upgraded and I though I saw that feature. -Original Message- From: Chris Scharff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 8:40 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: stripping attachments Did this behavior happen prior to the application of E2K SP2? -Original Message- From: Kim Schotanus To: Exchange Discussions Sent: 12/18/2001 4:07 AM Subject: RE: stripping attachments Trend Scanmail (183) for exchange 2000, Exch 2K SP2 -Original Message- From: Chris Scharff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 18 December, 2001 4:44 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: stripping attachments AV version? Server version and SP? -Original Message- From: Kim Schotanus To: Exchange Discussions Sent: 12/17/2001 7:32 AM Subject: stripping attachments Hi, Some virus infected mails get sstripped by Trend scanmail, but users'Outlook crashes when they have the preview pane open, how can I stop this? Kim _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] ** The information contained in this message or any of its attachments may be confidential and is intended for the exclusive use of the addressee(s). Any disclosure, reproduction, distribution or other dissemination or use of this communication is strictly prohibited without the express permission of the sender. The views expressed in this email are those of the individual and not necessarily those of Sony or Sony affiliated companies. Sony email is for business use only. This email and any response may be monitored by Sony UK. (04)
RE: Custom recipients in a DL?
Add them to the DL, then Hide them. Works great. -Original Message- From: Jesse Rink [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, December 17, 2001 8:48 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Custom recipients in a DL? Scenario: I would like to setup a Distribution List that contains about 500-1000 people. These people would not Exchange email accounts, but just regular SMTP accounts. I figured I could just create 500 custom recipient email accounts and add all those accounts to a DL, which works, but, then my GAL fills up with 500 smtp email accounts that I do NOT want to show up. Is it possible to HIDE a custom recipient account from the GAL but still use it in a DL? I tried hiding them from the GAL, but then I couldn't add them to the DL anymore. Thanks... _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: New Virus outbreak
We are here, and EXE, and PIF, and VBS and so on If they want it, they have to talk to me first. POWER! -Original Message- From: Martin Blackstone [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 04, 2001 9:05 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: New Virus outbreak We are all blocking .SCR files anyway...right kids? -Original Message- From: Hurst, Paul [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 04, 2001 8:15 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: New Virus outbreak Please note that there is a new Email virus out with an attachment Gone.scr Cheers Paul Standards are like toothbrushes, everybody agrees you should have one, but no one wants to use yours ** 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 UK. (05) ** _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Badtrans and SirCam
Well you have to look at this in the entire perspective. Taking the spin on your analogy. To be honest the car and computer are both useable of the lot, or out of the box more often than not. However most people don't drive the car without. Insurance (incase of accidents)recurring cost here. Checking the Tires from time to time Checking the OIL, and other fluids.. Wipers, Brakes, Tune ups? All on-going maintenance to be safe and have trouble free operations as much as possible. The virus scanner, personal firewall, and such for the computers are basically the same thing in our current world. Don't you think? -Original Message- From: John Matteson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, December 03, 2001 9:27 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Badtrans and SirCam Boy can I identify with that. And to some extent, it is understandable. When a user goes out and buys a car, other than for tags, they really don't have to go anywhere else or purchase anything else to make it usable or safe. Everything needed to make it usable is included when you take delivery. It's rather hard to explain just WHY they need a personal firewall, virus protection and a set of system utilities if it's just for home/kid/fun use. John Matteson; Exchange Manager Geac Corporate Infrastructure Systems and Standards (404) 239 - 2981 Believe nothing because it is written in books. Believe nothing because wise men say it is so. Believe nothing because it is religious doctrine. Believe it only because you yourself know it to be true. -- Buddha -Original Message- From: Randal, Phil [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, December 03, 2001 12:17 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Badtrans and SirCam I had fun explaining to a naive-user in the weekend why antivirus software was essential. If it is that essential, why doesn't it come with Windows XP? Phil - Phil Randal Network Engineer Herefordshire Council Hereford, UK p.s. I do part time Internet consulting with a U.S. ISP with over 130,000 users, on average I speak to 100 users a weekend with about 80% expressing the above attitude. 95% of WinME users express their frustration. And try explaining why Windows XP that they just bought needs 'security updates' (besides the fact that the Connexant modem that came with the system, will only keep them connected for less than 10 minutes sheesh _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: New Groupshield install.
You need to download and setup the Name Resolver utility that is a part of this. I believe this only works if you are quarantining to the Database option and not a folder. -Original Message- From: Bean, Rick [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, December 03, 2001 12:57 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: New Groupshield install. We just installed McAfee GroupShield 4.5SP1 on our Exchange 5.5 server. When we receive an attachment that had a virus it is deleted and we get a notification message. However when we look at it the only information present is the ticket number and the virus type. The intended recipient, sender, and subject fields are all listed as unknown. Is this normal behavior? Or is there some patches that we don't know about? It seems to me to be kind of silly not to let the admin know who the infected message was going to. Details: NT 4.0 SP6a Exchange 5.5 SP 4 GroupShield 4.5 SP1 Thank for any help. -Rick B Rick Bean [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://grove.ufl.edu/~rickb Network Administrator: UF Dept. of Ob/Gyn _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Back Up Exec
Whole lot of presumption going on here. /presumption on BackUpExec Current Version 8.6 You bought the Exchange Module to go with it /presumption off WAG here, is that you have not loaded the Exchange Administrator on the station you want to back Exchange up from This is required, it does not have to be running but it has to be present. Scott -Original Message- From: Chinnery Paul [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, November 30, 2001 11:44 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Back Up Exec What are you looking for, Tom? We've used Veritas for some time with the drive and console being separate. When you create the backup job, there's a separate tab for Exchange. Paul Chinnery Network Administrator Mem Med Ctr -Original Message- From: Tom [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, November 30, 2001 2:27 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Back Up Exec Can anyone direct me to some good info on setting up Back Up exec for Exchange 5.5? Drive and console are on a seperate machine from the exchange server, same domain though. I've been trying to get info off of the the Veritas list, but no one seems to know of any that are decent. Any help would be appreciated. Tom _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Quick Survey; Support vs No. or users/servers
1 Exchange Server 5 additional servers connecting to Exchange, 3 fax, 1 SMTP Virus Scanner, 1 VPN/OWA server 2500+ Clients 39GB store. Also I am Domain Admin, Backup Admin, IIS Admin (both Inter, Intra), Printers, General all around Focal point for anything NT related. Never bored here. Um... No to you last question. -Original Message- From: Monteleone-Haught Matt - Millville [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, November 26, 2001 11:33 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Quick Survey; Support vs No. or users/servers 17 sites Some days I feel like I could use a hand. -Original Message- From: Monteleone-Haught Matt - Millville [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, November 26, 2001 2:31 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Quick Survey; Support vs No. or users/servers 19 Exchange servers 25-1000 users/server 1 Exchange admin (ME)...Also the NT_admin, AD_design guy, the anything Microsoft guy -Original Message- From: Antonietti, Bob P. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, November 22, 2001 11:34 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Quick Survey; Support vs No. or users/servers Hello. I'd like to do a quick survey if I may...and thank anyone for taking the time to respond. I'd like to know the ratio of Exchange Support personnel to number of end users on the system, or total servers supported. Do you feel you have adequate resources with this ratio? Thank you. Bob P. Antonietti _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: View all Private Meetings of other users...
Hum... Just tested that same setup here, and I get Can't open previous item. I also tested it going the other way. Can't open next item. Must be something about your setup that is not right some where. Exchange 5.5 Sp4 W2K Sp2 Outlook 2000. -Original Message- From: Black, Nathan [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, November 02, 2001 9:44 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: View all Private Meetings of other users... Exchange 5.5 SP4 NT 4.0 SP6a Outlook 2000 When reviewer permissions are set on a calendar, you can't open a private appointment directly but you can view appointments marked private by navigating up or down using the arrows for previous/next meetings. Is this a feature? Example: User A uses 'File open-other-users-folder Calendar' for user B. The permissions on User B's calendar has everyone as reviewer. User A finds appointment at 11 and tries to open it. He can't its marked private. However, there is also an appointment scheduled for 10:30 that he can open so he does. Then clicks on the down arrow and up pops the full details of the appointment marked 'private'. (although he can't change the 'private' status) Follow? That isn't supposed to happen right? Didn't see anything in TechNet (November '01) that related. Any ideas? (besides removing reviewer permissions...) Thanks for any deliberations, Nathan Black Exchange Server Support Wisconsin Department of Transportation _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Strange Error
See Q155430 in Technect it appear relevant to your problem. -Original Message- From: Bowles, John L. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, September 26, 2001 8:42 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Strange Error No she's not sending an attachment. But if she was mail is still getting to some of the receipients but not the two listed. John Bowles Exchange Administrator Enterprise Support Engineering Celera Genomics [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] -Original Message- From: Martin Blackstone [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, September 26, 2001 10:49 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Strange Error Is she sending an attachment with the message? I have seen this error when sending attachments that are over the receivers limit. An example would be this is what you get when sending to large of an attachment to @Home. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Bowles, John L. Sent: Wednesday, September 26, 2001 7:38 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Strange Error All, One of my users is getting this strange problem when trying to email certain people. If I send email to this person he receives it just fine. But when she sends it she receives this message. Any ideas? We are using Exchange 5.5 w/SP 4 on NT 4.0 w/SP6a. The following recipient(s) could not be reached: 'Cain, Chris' on 9/26/01 8:51 AM No transport provider was available for delivery to this recipient. 'Coonley, Charles' on 9/26/01 8:51 AM No transport provider was available for delivery to this recipient. Thanks, John Bowles Exchange Administrator Enterprise Support Engineering Celera Genomics [EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: MSN
My clients are reporting similar Server Down or Unreachable NDR's coming back from MSN, Juno, and many others. I think some servers have just been buried under the load of mail with reports from Tuesday. -Original Message- From: Darryl J Roberts [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, September 14, 2001 3:41 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: MSN Messages that were queued for several days were delivered this morning. The MX records quoted below showed up this morning. They were quite different yesterday with several cpimsmtp* hosts listed that are no longer in the MX records. Some of my customers are also reporting other DNS problems delivering mail to other domains. -- Darryl J. Roberts, MCSE, MCP+I, MCT, CTT+ Software Engineering Unlimited, Microsoft Certified Partner, 3Com Focus Partner Ventura, CA, USA mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] You Spam Me, I Report You. It's That Simple. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Ken Cornetet Sent: Friday, September 14, 2001 11:31 AM To: Exchange Discussion Subject: MSN Is anyone else having problems sending mail to msn.com today? An MX lookup for msn.com returns: cpimssmtpa12.msn.com smtp-gw-4.msn.com I can't seem to establish an SMTP connection to either. _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Encryption
I suggest looking at something like PGP www.pgp.com Or some thing else like it, there are several others out there. -Original Message- From: Mark Peoples [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, September 12, 2001 4:24 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Encryption Many, many Good points. Allow me to elaborate... CEO of company has ants in the pants about encryption all of a sudden. He wants his mail and the mail of the top exec's to be encrypted for both internal and external mail. As most CEO's do, He wants it yesterday but the people that need to know find out today. He also wants the ability to encrypt files. I will treat this as a side issue and not in the scope of this discussion because this has wider implications that need to be discussed internally before a solution can be sought. In fact the whole damn topic needs to be discussed off line... but I'll take care of that. I wholly with you agree about the security policy - that should come first and set the stage for the implementation. I guess what I am asking is, for e-mail encryption (that is my primary concern at this stage) is it better for client based encryption via PGP addin to Outlook (or digital ID), or server based encryption? I see Mail Essentials from www.GFI.com have a server based solution. If we can, we would like to avoid having a Key Mgmt server... but if we need to get one then I am happy to take that course of action too. Our desktop support group have managed to crash 2 of 3 machines while testing Outlook PGP plugin. we are not looking too favourably on that solution at the moment. Verisign digital ID's for the exec's seems to be the way to go at the moment... If it helps, we are running Win2k and E2k server. Mail clients are running either Win2k Professional or NT4 and OL 2000. Thanks for your assistance so far... VERY VERY helpful and encouraging! MP -Original Message- From: Jon Lucas [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, 13 September 2001 2:12 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Encryption Well, since it appears this thread has taken a turn for the obscure, I will respond to your original post. I usually just listen to this list, but this is actually something of which I have some level of knowledge. I won't discuss my affiliation with VeriSign except to say that I do not work for them. It is my opinion that VeriSign has the best solution for implementing a managed PKI solution for Exchange. We can discuss that in subsequent emails since I am now getting ahead of the encryption discussion. Where any discussion of PKI starts is with clearly defined organizational objectives. You simply do not want to try to deploy PKI as your solution. That is not a clearly defined objective. You need to identify what it is that you are interested in securing; you external communications with partners, your internal communications between employees and HR, your network communication, authentication, building access etc. Your organization needs to have a security policy. This involves your entire enterprise, not just your Exchange organization. It may sound like a rant, but by implementing a method of encryption, you can potentially undermine other objectives such as protecting your company from viruses. For example, you may decide to implement a solution that gives every employee a digital ID and ensures that it gets inserted into the Exchange GAL or Active Directory. This enables any employee to simply sign and/or encrypt email to others in the directory. You may also as part of your security policy, require employees to sign all email messages by default. Should that employee receive a virus in email, most likely the virus will proliferate with signed messages. Other employees will undoubtedly produce further infections. But wait, you have antivirus software correct? Your antivirus software may be unable to effectively disinfect a signed message. It will most definitely be unable to disinfect if this happens with an encrypted message. Not likely? I have seen it happen using Exchange and x.509 certificates and Groupshield. This is a little secret that no one is talking about right now. Sooner or later someone is going to write a virus that takes advantage of this type of configuration. Right now I wouldn't expect it, but as more people deploy this kind of solution, I would expect a virus writer to alter their code. Understanding the implications of encryption and having clearly defined objectives will save your backside when the fecal mass hits that thing that thing you just turned on in your office to cool you off because you're sweating while you rush to manually clean out signed lovebugs from your information store and hope none of your users open and execute the attachment on an email message that just came from a fellow employee, signed with a
Tragic....
What is truly tragic here, is how few, can make so many, hate and fear, so fast! Please lets not have this group degenerate into hatefulness towards each other too. We have enough of that before us today, that we need to absorb and learn to live with. I weep for those that had their lives ripped away, I grieve for those who have to learn to live with those that died, I sorrow for those who live on asking why, I am numb of heart and feeling, I am pained to see others take up the sword of hatred, to further the cause for yet another round! I saw, this is horrific(I am wordless) nothing truly describes this. Truly this is of utmost tragic proportions. And the most truthful thing I can say is to be scared of what comes after. The very basic freedoms of what our Country is, and has been and represents is under attack. The very freedoms that allowed this to come to fruition, are the very same freedoms that will be under attack when this is over. Freedom is what America is all about. It is our duty to ourselves and our fore fathers to protect those liberties that make us what and who we are. And personally those who would do this sort of atrocity in the name of GOD are very sick to say the least. My heart, thoughts and prayers are will all of you. Scott Akerlund Sr. Network Administrator Spokane County Information Systems _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Mailbox move rates
I just finished my Ed Crowley server move method here. From an older dual Intel 450 and 1gb of RAM to my new razzu quad 700 with 4gb of RAM. It was taking about 15 to 20 minutes to move a gigabyte give or take a little from the old system to the new system. Both were on 100MB switched ports. It was hard to keep time as I ran into several of the larger mailboxes that would actually crash the information store when I tried to move them. That was frustrating as I could never tell which would or would not crash the system. So I ended up baby sitting it much more than I would have liked. I did see that HP is buying up Compaq. So will that mean any thing to you Ed or will it just be a difference in who signs the pay checks? :o) Scott -Original Message- From: Ed Crowley [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, September 04, 2001 2:11 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Mailbox move rates Assuming relatively contemporary target system hardware and relatively aged source system hardware, and a 100MB LAN in between, what average data rates are y'all seeing in terms of megabytes per hour when moving mailboxes from an Exchange 5.5 to Exchange 2000? Thanks, Ed Crowley MCSE+Internet MVP Tech Consultant Compaq Computer Corporation (soon to be HP) All your base are belong to us. _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
