RE: doubletake

[East, Bill]

A small one can do it, with time and determination.

> -Original Message-
> From: Eric Fretz [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Thursday, January 08, 2004 3:10 PM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: RE: doubletake
> 
> 
> That's a huge dog if it can excrete enough wee to flood a beefy mail
> server
> 
> Eric Fretz
> 
> L-3 Communications
> ComCept Division
> 2800 Discovery Blvd.
> Rockwall, TX 75032
> tel:   972.772.7501
> fax:  972.772.7510
> 
> 
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: Kevinm [NY] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
> Sent: Thursday, January 08, 2004 1:39 PM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: doubletake
> 
> 
> What does double take really do for exchange??
> 
> Yeah so I have a bit by bit copy of the store, my dog comes 
> in and pees on
> my primary server, now what will double take do for me? will 
> it change IP
> and Server for me to fail over? How do my users see that 
> there is a double
> take server??
> 
> Any one run this or have it installed that can tell me?? 
> 
> Thanks. 
> 
> 
> _
> List posting FAQ:   http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
> Web Interface:
> http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchange&t
ext_mode=&lang
=english
To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]

To unsubscribe via postal mail, please contact us at: Jupitermedia Corp.
Attn: Discussion List Management
475 Park Avenue South
New York, NY 10016

Please include the email address which you have been contacted with.

_
List posting FAQ:   http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
Web Interface:
http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchange&text_mode=&;
lang=english
To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]

To unsubscribe via postal mail, please contact us at:
Jupitermedia Corp.
Attn: Discussion List Management
475 Park Avenue South
New York, NY 10016

Please include the email address which you have been contacted with.



_
List posting FAQ:   http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
Web Interface: 
http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchange&text_mode=&lang=english
To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]

To unsubscribe via postal mail, please contact us at:
Jupitermedia Corp.
Attn: Discussion List Management
475 Park Avenue South
New York, NY 10016

Please include the email address which you have been contacted with.

RE: Internet Mail Issues

[East, Bill]

It's a disenheartening thought that for individual broadband access most
people now have a choice between the two worst customer-service
organizations in the universe, the phone company and the cable company.

Crista, you don't want to hear me sing and I didn't mean to criticize
you, just to point out some facts that hopefully would help you convince
your client to upgrade their service so that you didn't have to jump
through those hoops.

But here's another useful suggestion, provided free of charge and
without Airplane! references. I just Googled on Outbound mail relaying
service and found in one of the first links 
http://www.tzo.com/MainPageServices/ProductSummaries/13_OMR.html

Since Comcast "seems to be blocking themselves": for $99/year, less than
I pay for my personal home page, you can relay off of these guys and
hopefully get out of the RBL ghetto. I'm sure they could tell you how to
set your Exchange server to do it, too. I haven't used this service, I'm
not affiliated with them and for all I know they sell helpless baby
rabbits to Estee Lauder, but if you look at their service and some
competitors you may be able to find a way to at least temporarily get
the mail flowing again until Comcast can fix their BAS or your client
finds another provider.

As we say here in Philly, Good luck wid it.


p.s.: Do you like movies about gladiators?
> -Original Message-
> From: Crista Murphy [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Wednesday, January 07, 2004 5:17 PM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: RE: Internet Mail Issues
> 
> 
> Hahaha... should we all get together and sing Kumbaya now?
> 
> We are hosting our DNS and there is an MX record for the 
> server, however
> we cannot do reverse DNS because comcast won't let us. While I agree
> comcast is not a 'business ISP', for nice little startups and 
> two person
> home offices (my main client base) it works until you want to add a
> server.  I suggested DSL, but it wasn't available in the area (not to
> mention the bandwidth you're giving up...) so you work with 
> what you can
> when these things happen.
> 
> As far as relaying through the comcast host, I'm trying to 
> figure out how
> to set that up with authentication, but I admittedly have not 
> had a lot of
> time to browse the KB and not sure it would fix it because it seems
> comcast IS blocking themselves because this node was found on 
> a blacklist.
> 
> We have started the proceedings for a static IP from comcast 
> who says we
> will have reverse DNS ability at that time, but we'll see.  
> In the mean
> time I'd still like to know if there's anything else to check 
> in case that
> doesn't fix the issue.
> 
> _
> List posting FAQ:   http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
> Web Interface: 
> http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchange&t
ext_mode=&lang=english
To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]

To unsubscribe via postal mail, please contact us at:
Jupitermedia Corp.
Attn: Discussion List Management
475 Park Avenue South
New York, NY 10016

Please include the email address which you have been contacted with.



_
List posting FAQ:   http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
Web Interface: 
http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchange&text_mode=&lang=english
To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]

To unsubscribe via postal mail, please contact us at:
Jupitermedia Corp.
Attn: Discussion List Management
475 Park Avenue South
New York, NY 10016

Please include the email address which you have been contacted with.

RE: Internet Mail Issues

[East, Bill]

Shirley Comcast will allow you to relay your outbound mail through their
MXed, reverse-DNSed mailhost, right? If so, just point your Exchange
server to relay all outbound mail through them.

If not, ditch Comcast. They're not a business-class ISP in my opinion,
at least.

-- 
be - MOS

Replace repetitive expressions by calls to a common function.


> -Original Message-
> From: Crista Murphy [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Wednesday, January 07, 2004 8:51 AM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: Re: Internet Mail Issues
> 
> 
> I have a client who is migrating away from an ISP hosted POP 
> mail account
> to a newly created exch 2003 box and we're experiencing 
> "5.5.0 smtp;550
> Dynamic IPs/open relays blocked. Contact 
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]", "5.5.0 
> smtp;550-68.37.144.103 blocked by 
> blacklist.mail.ops.asp.att.net." and to aol "Could not 
> deliver the message in the time limit specified."  I've 
> contacted both earthlink and att/comcast and both insist that 
> the new server is not blacklisted and a quick search on ORDB 
> shows we are not blacklisted (The server had only been up 4 
> hours and we were getting this message from att/comcast!)  
> I've locked down the server and we're not allowing relay so 
> I'm thinking it might be reverse dns, but comcast (our isp) 
> won't allow us to host reverse dns or set up an entry for us. 
>  Before we shutdown the server and get an new ISP that will 
> allow reverse dns, does anyone else have an idea?
> 
> _
> List posting FAQ:   http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
> Web Interface: 
http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchange&text_mode=&;
lang=english
To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]

To unsubscribe via postal mail, please contact us at:
Jupitermedia Corp.
Attn: Discussion List Management
475 Park Avenue South
New York, NY 10016

Please include the email address which you have been contacted with.



_
List posting FAQ:   http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
Web Interface: 
http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchange&text_mode=&lang=english
To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]

To unsubscribe via postal mail, please contact us at:
Jupitermedia Corp.
Attn: Discussion List Management
475 Park Avenue South
New York, NY 10016

Please include the email address which you have been contacted with.

RE: Internet Mail Issues

[East, Bill]

>From RFC 2821
550 Requested action not taken: mailbox unavailable
 (e.g., mailbox not found, no access, or command rejected
 for policy reasons)

Alamedanet doesn't want to play with your sender for some reason. You
might have to call them.
-- 
be - MOS

As President I have to go vacuum my coin collection!


> -Original Message-
> From: Davinder Gupta [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Tuesday, January 06, 2004 1:17 PM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: Internet Mail Issues
> 
> 
> Hi Guys, 
> 
> I have an Exchange 5.5 organization with one Exchange 2k 
> server having all
> mailboxes. Internet mail service is running on a 5.5 box in 
> the DMZ. I am
> seeing occasional errors 4031 with source "MSExchangeIMC" and 
> category SMTP
> Interface events. I am concerned the most about the following 
> description:
> 
> The following message could not be delivered to 
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED] >.
> The destination server reported: 550 agree. From: 
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Subject: test sent at 9:49am 
> 
> Any ideas? 
> 
> Thanks 
> Davinder 
> 
> _
> List posting FAQ:   http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
> Web Interface: 
http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchange&text_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=exchange&text_mode=&lang=english
To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]

RE: Outsourcing email?

[East, Bill]

Oh yeah, there was one other thing. Since we'll be pointing both primary
and secondary MXen to the MSP, I no longer will have to worry about
script kiddies and nitwits hammering our SMTP servewr (not and Exchange
box, but still a possible weakness). Only the MSP's MXen will be allowed
to access port 25 on that server.

-- 
be - MOS

The Tree of Learning bears the noblest fruit, but noble fruit tastes
bad.

> -Original Message-
> From: East, Bill 
> Sent: Tuesday, December 23, 2003 2:27 PM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: RE: Outsourcing email?
> 
> 
> We're starting a filtering service with a local MSP in a week or so.
> 
> My reasoning came down to economies of scale. They can afford 
> to have a
> guy watch the recipies full time and tweak them when the spam starts
> coming through. They can afford to have someone watch the mailflow and
> make sure that mailflow-in minus spam equals mailflow out. 
> And whatever
> other companies are using the filtering service will help us by making
> the filtering more efficient.
> 
> I don't particularly worry about the filterer reading our mail; hell,
> how bored would you have to be? And anyone at our ISP, or the 
> sender's,
> can hook up a tap any time they want.
> 
> -- 
> be - MOS
> 
> "Earth is a great, big funhouse without the fun."
>   -- Jeff Berner
> 
> 
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Shotton Jolyon [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Sent: Tuesday, December 23, 2003 10:33 AM
> > To: Exchange Discussions
> > Subject: RE: Outsourcing email?
> > 
> > 
> > I totally appreciate Paul's point of not wanting another 
> > potential delay
> > that you can't control imposed but the data security aspect I don't
> > understand.  Email, if unencrypted, is insecure.  
> > 
> > If you are emailing something unencrypted outside your 
> > organisation you
> > should assume it is public knowledge.  I really don't see 
> that adding
> > another handler makes any difference at all.  It is by 
> > definition no longer
> > "Company Insider" if you've sent it outside the company.
> > 
> > Noone was suggesting that mail between internal sites 
> should be routed
> > through this sort of service (Were they?  Does anyone really have an
> > internal Spam problem?)
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > -Original Message-
> > From: John Matteson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Sent: 23 December 2003 15:03
> > To: Exchange Discussions
> > Subject: RE: Outsourcing email?
> > 
> > Why would you want the control of your un-encrypted, 
> > completely open to
> > reading, mission critical, company insider information, mail 
> > left to someone
> > outside your control? 
> > 
> > Do yourself a great big favor by keeping it in house. 
> > 
> > 
> > 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=exchange&t
ext_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=exchange&text_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=exchange&text_mode=&lang=english
To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]

RE: Outsourcing email?

[East, Bill]

We're starting a filtering service with a local MSP in a week or so.

My reasoning came down to economies of scale. They can afford to have a
guy watch the recipies full time and tweak them when the spam starts
coming through. They can afford to have someone watch the mailflow and
make sure that mailflow-in minus spam equals mailflow out. And whatever
other companies are using the filtering service will help us by making
the filtering more efficient.

I don't particularly worry about the filterer reading our mail; hell,
how bored would you have to be? And anyone at our ISP, or the sender's,
can hook up a tap any time they want.

-- 
be - MOS

"Earth is a great, big funhouse without the fun."
-- Jeff Berner


> -Original Message-
> From: Shotton Jolyon [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Tuesday, December 23, 2003 10:33 AM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: RE: Outsourcing email?
> 
> 
> I totally appreciate Paul's point of not wanting another 
> potential delay
> that you can't control imposed but the data security aspect I don't
> understand.  Email, if unencrypted, is insecure.  
> 
> If you are emailing something unencrypted outside your 
> organisation you
> should assume it is public knowledge.  I really don't see that adding
> another handler makes any difference at all.  It is by 
> definition no longer
> "Company Insider" if you've sent it outside the company.
> 
> Noone was suggesting that mail between internal sites should be routed
> through this sort of service (Were they?  Does anyone really have an
> internal Spam problem?)
> 
> 
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: John Matteson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: 23 December 2003 15:03
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: RE: Outsourcing email?
> 
> Why would you want the control of your un-encrypted, 
> completely open to
> reading, mission critical, company insider information, mail 
> left to someone
> outside your control? 
> 
> Do yourself a great big favor by keeping it in house. 
> 
> 
> 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=exchange&text_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=exchange&text_mode=&lang=english
To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]

RE: Greg's Utterly Fascinating Views on Ethics

[East, Bill]

Tell me you Googled that.

-- 
be - MOS

One more such victory, and we are lost.  --Pyrrus


> -Original Message-
> From: Eric Fretz [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Tuesday, December 23, 2003 1:58 PM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: RE: Greg's Utterly Fascinating Views on Ethics
> 
> 
> It's Nemesis from Shriekback.
> 
> 
> Eric Fretz
> 
> L-3 Communications
> ComCept Division
> 2800 Discovery Blvd.
> Rockwall, TX 75032
> tel:   972.772.7501
> fax:  972.772.7510
> 
> 
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: East, Bill [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
> Sent: Tuesday, December 23, 2003 12:40 PM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: RE: Greg's Utterly Fascinating Views on Ethics
> 
> 
> Name a 80's dance band that successfully used the word 
> "Parthenogenesis" in
> a song, for $5.38 and an ethical conflict from Microsoft.
> 
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Bob Sadler [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Sent: Monday, December 22, 2003 12:40 PM
> > To: Exchange Discussions
> > Subject: RE: Greg's Utterly Fascinating Views on Ethics
> > 
> > 
> > VH1 - Where are they now :)
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > Bob Sadler
> > -Original Message-
> > From: John Matteson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Sent: Monday, December 22, 2003 11:39 AM
> > To: Exchange Discussions
> > Subject: RE: Greg's Utterly Fascinating Views on Ethics
> > 
> > 
> > And just who's survey list did you use to verify this?
> > Billboard or the
> > AT40 list? 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > John Matteson
> > Geac Corporate ISS
> > (404) 239 - 2981
> > Atlanta, Georgia, USA.
> > 
> > 
> > -Original Message-
> > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of 
> Bob Sadler 
> > Posted At: Monday, December 22, 2003 12:33 PM Posted To: Exchange 
> > Discussion List
> > Conversation: Greg's Utterly Fascinating Views on Ethics
> > Subject: RE: Greg's Utterly Fascinating Views on Ethics
> > 
> > 
> > I said TOP 10 Classic Hit :)
> > 
> > Tom M. of Texas is the winner if anyone cares.  The song 
> was "Jessie's 
> > Girl" by Rick Springfield.
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > Bob Sadler
> > 
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Rob Hackney [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Sent: Monday, December 22, 2003 11:31 AM
> > To: Exchange Discussions
> > Subject: RE: Greg's Utterly Fascinating Views on Ethics
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > : Speaking of MOOT, can anyone tell me what top 10 classic 
> rock single 
> > contains the word "MOOT"? Do you mean in the band name, 
> song title or 
> > lyrics?
> > Eg:
> > Moot The Hoople - Ballad of Mott the Hoople (1973)?
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > This email is confidential and intended solely for the use of the
> > individual(s) to whom it is addressed.  It should not be deemed to 
> > constitute a binding contract between TKC Group and the 
> recipient(s) 
> > unless a purchase order number is quoted.  Any views or opinions 
> > presented are solely those of the author and do not necessarily 
> > represent those of TKC Group Ltd.  If you are not the intended 
> > recipient(s), please do not copy or disclose its contents. Please 
> > return it to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] then delete the email.
> > 
> > intY has scanned this email for all known viruses (www.inty.com)
> > 
> > 
> > _
> > List posting FAQ:   http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
> > Web Interface: 
> > http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchange&t
> ext_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=exchange&t
ext_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=exchange&text_mode=&;
lang=english
To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]

_

RE: Greg's Utterly Fascinating Views on Ethics

[East, Bill]

Name a 80's dance band that successfully used the word "Parthenogenesis"
in a song, for $5.38 and an ethical conflict from Microsoft.

> -Original Message-
> From: Bob Sadler [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Monday, December 22, 2003 12:40 PM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: RE: Greg's Utterly Fascinating Views on Ethics
> 
> 
> VH1 - Where are they now :)
> 
> 
> 
> Bob Sadler
> -Original Message-
> From: John Matteson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
> Sent: Monday, December 22, 2003 11:39 AM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: RE: Greg's Utterly Fascinating Views on Ethics
> 
> 
> And just who's survey list did you use to verify this? 
> Billboard or the
> AT40 list? 
> 
> 
> 
> John Matteson
> Geac Corporate ISS
> (404) 239 - 2981
> Atlanta, Georgia, USA.
> 
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Bob Sadler
> Posted At: Monday, December 22, 2003 12:33 PM Posted To: Exchange
> Discussion List
> Conversation: Greg's Utterly Fascinating Views on Ethics
> Subject: RE: Greg's Utterly Fascinating Views on Ethics
> 
> 
> I said TOP 10 Classic Hit :)
> 
> Tom M. of Texas is the winner if anyone cares.  The song was "Jessie's
> Girl" by Rick Springfield.
> 
> 
> 
> Bob Sadler
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: Rob Hackney [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Monday, December 22, 2003 11:31 AM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: RE: Greg's Utterly Fascinating Views on Ethics
> 
> 
> 
> 
> : Speaking of MOOT, can anyone tell me what top 10 classic rock single
> contains the word "MOOT"? Do you mean in the band name, song title or
> lyrics?
> Eg:
> Moot The Hoople - Ballad of Mott the Hoople (1973)?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This email is confidential and intended solely for the use of the
> individual(s) to whom it is addressed.  It should not be deemed to
> constitute a binding contract between TKC Group and the recipient(s)
> unless a purchase order number is quoted.  Any views or opinions
> presented are solely those of the author and do not necessarily
> represent those of TKC Group Ltd.  If you are not the intended
> recipient(s), please do not copy or disclose its contents. 
> Please return
> it to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] then delete the email.
> 
> intY has scanned this email for all known viruses (www.inty.com)
> 
> 
> _
> List posting FAQ:   http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
> Web Interface:
> http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchange&t
ext_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=exchange&text_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=exchange&text_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=exchange&text_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=exchange&text_mode=&lang=english
To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]

RE: Header Info

[East, Bill]

If I understand the question correctly, your message won't have *his*
header information. The SMTP conversation should go something like:

Your Server: Yo, here's this email.
His server: Yo, back the truck up, talk to the hand coz port 25 ain't
listenin'
Your server (to you): He wouldn't let me send it.

So the remote server doesn't modify the header and send the message
back, it just rejects it.

-- 
be - MOS

Never invest your money in anything that eats or needs repainting.


> -Original Message-
> From: Scott Force [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Friday, December 19, 2003 10:21 AM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: Header Info
> 
> 
> Exchange 5.5/4 Win2000/4
> Potentially silly question.  (Technical, non-ethical, sorry)
> If I send an e-mail to external domain and it sits in my outbound IMS
> queue and can't get delivered because of a restriction on the 
> receiving
> domain's e-mail server, my NDR should have header info in right?
> 
> _
> List posting FAQ:   http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
> Web Interface: 
http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchange&text_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=exchange&text_mode=&lang=english
To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]

RE: Best backup software for Exchange

[East, Bill]

I love my Gammy but I won't let her sit on a freshly-upholstered sofa.

-- 
be - MOS
> -Original Message-
> From: Ronald Mazzotta [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Wednesday, December 10, 2003 4:28 PM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: RE: Best backup software for Exchange
> 
> 
> Funny you should say that.  I love my CA Arcserve.
> 
> Ronald R. Mazzotta Jr.
> Director of IT
> Schonbraun Safris McCann Bekritsky & Co. L.L.C.
> 101 Eisenhower pky
> Roseland NJ, 07068
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of 
> John Matteson
> Sent: Wednesday, December 10, 2003 4:27 PM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: RE: Best backup software for Exchange
> 
> Anything not from CA. 
> 
> 
> 
> John Matteson
> Geac Corporate ISS
> (404) 239 - 2981
> Atlanta, Georgia, USA.
> 
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of 
> Tigue Williams
> Posted At: Wednesday, December 10, 2003 1:42 PM
> Posted To: Exchange Discussion List
> Conversation: Best backup software for Exchange
> Subject: Best backup software for Exchange
> 
> 
> We are looking at Networker and NetBackup for enterprise backup
> solutions. We would like to so the usual mailbox backup and also snap
> backups from SAN BCV's. I would like to hear from the members about
> these two products before we actually go ahead with the 
> purchase. We are
> using 5.5 and will likely go with 2000 or 2003. We are migrating to a
> SAN as well. Is there any way to do mailbox backup from the 
> BCV itself? 
> 


_
List posting FAQ:   http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
Web Interface: 
http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchange&text_mode=&lang=english
To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]

RE: Single Use E-Mail?

[East, Bill]

David, if you used a Sendmail server (possibly problematic, as it would
add an extra layer in your mail delivery, you could write a very simple
procmail recipe to do this. Probably the simplest solution would be to
send [EMAIL PROTECTED] to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and write in the first line
in the email "This was sent to [EMAIL PROTECTED]"

I'm not weighing the merits of your plan, just whether it could be done.

> -Original Message-
> From: David Hekimian [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Wednesday, December 03, 2003 5:11 AM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: Single Use E-Mail?
> 
> 
> I'd like to allow my users to create a single use e-mail 
> address to help
> reduce unwanted e-mail.
> 
> - User mailbox '[EMAIL PROTECTED]'
> 
> This user can create any new e-mail address by adding a suffix (with a
> special char '-' for example) such as '[EMAIL PROTECTED]'. All
> suffixes are by default allowed. There would need to be a 
> method that would
> allow the user to blacklist a specific suffix.
> 
> My idea would be to create an EventSink for Exch 2000/2003 that when a
> message is addressed to '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' it would parse 
> the LHS of the @
> and then do a lookup in a table to see if the blacklist 
> existed. If it did,
> then it would return a '550 Mailbox does not exist' error 
> code. If it does
> not exist, then the To: Field would be rewritten to strip out 
> the '-suffix'
> and deliver the mail to the intended recipient '[EMAIL PROTECTED]'
> 
> 
> Questions:
> 1. Does something already exist today that does this? An 
> event sink? 3rd
> Party App (MailMarshal, GFI MailEssentials)? Freeware on Linux, etc?
> 
> 2. I've already coded the basic functionality for the 
> database look and web
> interface to modify the blacklist but the Event Sink is 
> causing me some
> issues. Anyone have experience in Event Sink programming 
> willing to jump in
> an help with the development?
> 
> 3. Is this a crazy idea and I should just abandon it?
> 
> - David
> 
> _
> List posting FAQ:   http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
> Web Interface: 
> http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchange&t
ext_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=exchange&text_mode=&lang=english
To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]

RE: Converting w2k dns to bind

[East, Bill]

I'd just make sure that your allow-update and allow-transfer settings
are copacetic. The DCs, I believe, will get snooty if they can't change
the records.

-- 
be - MOS

La Brea Tar Pits
As seen on the tar channel


> -Original Message-
> From: Pham, Tuan [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Thursday, December 04, 2003 11:52 AM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: Converting w2k dns to bind
> 
> 
> Good morning all! 
> I'm in the process of transfering the DNS role from the 
> current W2K/AD DNS to BIND(compliant version). I have two DCs 
> that point to W2K DNS, and two cluster E2K. Now, when I 
> change the DNS on the DCs and the E2K, is there anything I 
> need to look out for or is it just simple changing the DNS in 
> the TCP/IP Properties and ofcourse reboot too? Thanks!
> TP 
> 
> 
> _
> List posting FAQ:   http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
> Web Interface: 
http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchange&text_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=exchange&text_mode=&lang=english
To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]

RE: Dropping an email into the Sent items of a user

[East, Bill]

Vas, had you thought about sending them (bcc or duplicate) to a public
folder or another mailbox? I could see some advantages; for one, when
the staff member leaves the org you still have the public folder record
of what was sent. You could even make the public folder read-only so
that Bob the Angry Employee can't deny sending the obscenity-laden haiku
to your biggest client.

-- 
be - MOS

Never underestimate the power of stupid people in large groups. 


> -Original Message-
> From: Vas [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Wednesday, November 19, 2003 12:35 PM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: Dropping an email into the Sent items of a user
> 
> 
> 
> Hi all
> 
> Ok this is the situation, hope someone can tell me if this is 
> possible.
> 
> We have SQL 2000, where we create and store in a table an 
> automated email.
> This email is picked up by a service on another server, this 
> service then
> fires this email to currently Exchange 5.5 on an NT4 server 
> (soon to be
> upgraded to Exchange 2000 on Windows 2000).
> 
> This email is fired off to our client, and in the FROM field, 
> our staff
> email name and email address is entered that is allocated for 
> this client.
> These fields are entered in via SQL.
> 
> My question is, is there any way we can drop this email being 
> sent to the
> client, in the SENT items email account of our staff.
> 
> Thanks in advance for all advice and help
> 
> Vas
> 
> _
> List posting FAQ:   http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
> Web Interface: 
http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchange&text_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=exchange&text_mode=&lang=english
To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]

RE: Your PC seized, modem used for LD calls

[East, Bill]

That, and having people avoid surfing pr0n.
http://www.cheesebucketinathong.com/ makes your modem place collect
calls to Liberia then reverses the charges.

-- 
be - MOS

Is it NOUVELLE CUISINE when 3 olives are struggling with a scallop in a
plate of SAUCE MORNAY?


> -Original Message-
> From: Martin Blackstone [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Wednesday, November 12, 2003 12:18 PM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: RE: Your PC seized, modem used for LD calls
> 
> 
> Quite common.
> 
> A combination of good AV and a nice spyware destroyer like 
> Spybot should
> help aliviate the problem. 
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: Orin Rehorst [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
> Sent: Wednesday, November 12, 2003 9:13 AM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: OT: Your PC seized, modem used for LD calls
> 
> Hear of this one? Outsider seizes PC via Internet and places 
> long distance
> calls i.e. to Africa.
> 
> Can't find anything on it.
> 
> Regards, 
> orin rehorst
> 
> 
> _
> List posting FAQ:   http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
> Web Interface:
> http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchange&t
ext_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=exchange&text_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=exchange&text_mode=&lang=english
To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]

RE: Bogus Email

[East, Bill]

Do they still hang people for impersonating military personnel? Can we
get tickets to watch?

-- 
be - MOS

The older you get, the better you realize you were. 


> -Original Message-
> From: Jason Clishe [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Friday, October 31, 2003 4:00 PM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: RE: Bogus Email
> 
> 
> You are being Joe Jobbed.
> 
> Jason 
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Smith Thomas
> Contr 911 SPTG/SC
> Sent: Friday, October 31, 2003 10:47 AM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: Bogus Email
> 
> I have Exchange sever 5.5., and our naming convention is first name.
> last name. There is some one who is emaiing porno to users 
> and is going
> by [EMAIL PROTECTED] How can he do this with out using 
> our naming
> convention ie.. [EMAIL PROTECTED] any help would be
> appreciated.
> 
> _
> List posting FAQ:   http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
> Web Interface:
> http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchange&t
ext_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=exchange&text_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=exchange&text_mode=&lang=english
To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]

RE: ActiveX e-mails

[East, Bill]

As for "is there anything else" I believe that the Internet Explorer
distribution kit will let you set restrictions in IE which will be
inherited by Outlook. At least, that's how I'm protected from scripting
in email.

-- 
be - MOS

Nothing can be done in one trip.  --Snider

> -Original Message-
> From: Jon Hill [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Wednesday, September 03, 2003 11:28 AM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: ActiveX e-mails
> 
> 
> Do any of you block incoming e-mails containing ActiveX 
> references?  I just received a spam that tried to instantiate 
> an object at http:// 
> %363.2%346.%3130.2%30%31%2F%63g%69%2D%62i%6E%2Fa%2E%63%67%69."
>   I translated that to a real URL (http://63.246.130.201 
> /cgi-bin/a.cgi) and let the colo NOC know, but that only goes so far.
> 
> I already have my own Outlook HTML security set to Restricted 
> sites, which protected me in this particular case, but I 
> don't have any means of pushing that to the rest of the 
> firm's Outlook users (yes, I'm thinking about AutoProf; is 
> there anything else?).  I suppose I could try to block "< o b 
> j e c t" at my e-mail gateway (mailsweeper), but that could 
> be defeated but adding extra spaces between the "<" and "object."  
> 
> 
> 
> _
> List posting FAQ:   http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
> Web Interface: 
http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchange&text_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=exchange&text_mode=&lang=english
To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]

RE: Backup Software for Exchange 2000

[East, Bill]

But does it make a beeping noise when it backs up?

OSHA regs, you know.

-- 
be - MOS

L:
The average regulation has a life span one-fifth as long as a
chimpanzee's and one-tenth as long as a human's -- but four
times
as long as the official's who created it.


> -Original Message-
> From: Andy David [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Wednesday, August 06, 2003 4:13 PM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: Re: Backup Software for Exchange 2000
> 
> 
> A fast one.
> 
> - Original Message - 
> From: "Martin Blackstone" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: "Exchange Discussions" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sent: Wednesday, August 06, 2003 4:10 PM
> Subject: RE: Backup Software for Exchange 2000
> 
> 
> > What kind of tape drive do you have?
> >
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Woodruff, Michael [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Sent: Wednesday, August 06, 2003 1:00 PM
> > To: Exchange Discussions
> > Subject: RE: Backup Software for Exchange 2000
> >
> > I can backup at well over a gig a minute, not sure what you 
> are using.
> >
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Paul kondilys [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Sent: Wednesday, August 06, 2003 3:52 PM
> > To: Exchange Discussions
> > Subject: RE: Backup Software for Exchange 2000
> >
> > Yeah have to agree...Veritas 8.6 works great.  Just make 
> sure your IS is
> > not that big or you'll be in for a long backup process
> >
> > Paul
> >
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Thakkar, Nick [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Sent: Wednesday, August 06, 2003 3:39 PM
> > To: Exchange Discussions
> > Subject: RE: Backup Software for Exchange 2000
> >
> > We use Verits Backup Exec 8.6 works wellhave restored 
> Information
> > Stores...does brick level also.
> >
> > Nick Thakkar
> > Network Administrator
> > American Medical Response
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > 209-993-6974
> >
> >
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Bridges, Samantha [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Sent: Wednesday, August 06, 2003 12:36 PM
> > To: Exchange Discussions
> > Subject: Backup Software for Exchange 2000
> >
> > Hello All.
> >
> > What kind of backup software do you use for Exchange 2000?  
> Need to do
> > brick levels too.  I know...management wants the brick 
> levelstried
> > talking them out of it.
> >
> > Thanks
> >
> >
> > _
> > List posting FAQ:   http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
> > Web Interface:
> > 
> http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchange&t
ext_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=exchange&t
ext_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=exchange&text_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=exchange&text_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=exchange&text_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=exchange&text_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=exchange&text_mode=&lang=english
To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]

RE: Internet Header Question

[East, Bill]

Who do you trust is the question.

The first line shows that a machine calling itself 169.139.15.251 (Call
it "B") connected to your mailhost ("A"), but your mailhost saw its IP
address was 210.91.16.8. If you own machine B, or if it's your trusted
ISP, that's fine. Otherwise it was just a spammer at 210.91.168.8 trying
to cover his tracks.

The next line after that points to 157.124.218.229. If you trust machine
B to resolve the address correctly, that's where you should look. But if
you don't it is likely misdirection - a forged header.

210.91.168.8 has a lot of listings in http://rbls.org. If it isn't the
spammer, the owner has a lot of problems. 157.124.218.229 has no
listings of significance.

-- 
be - MOS

Nothing can be done in one trip.  --Snider


> -Original Message-
> From: Jose Manzano [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Wednesday, August 06, 2003 9:05 AM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: Internet Header Question
> 
> 
>  Hello Group,
> 
>I have a question about the Internet headers of an Email. 
> If one looks at
> this Spam Email Header 
> -
>   Received: from 169.139.15.251 (210.91.16.8 [210.91.16.8]) by
> mail.wpbpl.com with SMTP (Microsoft Exchange Internet Mail 
> Service Version
> 5.5.2656.59)
>   id PYC9TG9D; Wed, 6 Aug 2003 07:22:09 -0400
> Received: from [157.124.218.229] by 169.139.15.251 with SMTP; 
> Wed, 06 Aug
> 2003 15:21:11 +0600
> Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> From: "Beckie Yaung" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Reply-To: "Beckie Yaung" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: my pictures are ready now
> Date: Wed, 06 Aug 2003 15:21:11 +0600
> X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200
> MIME-Version: 1.0
> Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
>   boundary="F11140.F0BB5D4"
> X-Priority: 1
> --F11140.F0BB5D4
> Content-Type: text/html;
> Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
> 
> --F11140.F0BB5D4--
> 
> --
> 
> 
>Would the spam be coming from the 210.91.16.8, 
> 169.139.15.251, or the
> 157.124.218.229 IP?
> 
> _
> List posting FAQ:   http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
> Web Interface: 
> http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchange&t
ext_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=exchange&text_mode=&lang=english
To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]

RE: Blocking the Emails that come from yourself

[East, Bill]

Blackhole the sites at your router. It's a courtesy issue to notify the
admins for the IP block. The images almost always link back to the sites
and are not imbedded in the images themselves.

-- 
be - MOS



If God dropped acid, would he see people? -- Steven Wright 


> -Original Message-
> From: Christopher Hummert [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Thursday, July 17, 2003 11:57 AM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: RE: Blocking the Emails that come from yourself
> 
> 
> Since we're on the subject, what have people been doing to counteract
> the p*rn messages their receiving that have images embedded in them?
> Just set up a block on the address or anyone have a more inventive
> solution?
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Bill Kuhl
> Sent: Thursday, July 17, 2003 8:47 AM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: RE: Blocking the Emails that come from yourself
> 
> 
> James, appreciate you trying to think of a solution. It could 
> be anyone
> emailing to work from home in our organization from personal email
> address. Guess I will have to try for a subject block, so far these
> emails have been about home loans.
> 
> The spammers are sure getting clever. The message in the body 
> is graphic
> and then there is a whole bunch of nonsense characters.
> 
> Bill
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: Blunt, James H (Jim) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Thursday, July 17, 2003 10:26 AM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: RE: Blocking the Emails that come from yourself
> 
> 
> Yes...Exchange version?  I'll assume 5.5, since that's the only one I
> can address.
> 
> With Ex5.5, in the properties of your IMS, Connections tab, Message
> filtering... button, add your domain name in there.  You would add
> @luminet.net.
> 
> If you are connected via VPN/dial-up, then you are connected 
> internally
> to the Exchange server, which means any e-mail you send will 
> be sent via
> MAPI internally or OUT through the IMS...it won't be coming in through
> the IMS. And if you aren't connected via VPN/Dial-up, then I would
> assume you would be sending from a personal e-mail address, in which
> case adding your company domain name isn't going to block that either.
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: Bill Kuhl [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
> Sent: Thursday, July 17, 2003 8:06 AM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: Blocking the Emails that come from yourself
> 
> 
> Is there any possible way to block the spam emails that show 
> you in the
> from?  That is block and still be able to send from home 
> account to work
> account.
> 
> 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=exchange&t
ext_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=exchange&text_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=exchange&text_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=exchange&text_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=exchange&text_mode=&lang=english
To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]

RE: Contacts issue

[East, Bill]

Profiles, John Parker. If you've modified a profile it sometimes will
retain links back to the old mailbox's contacts folder. I'm trying to
train our folks here to always add/delete profiles, never modify.

Please be giving my regards to John Bigbootie.

-- 
be - MOS



I want to achieve immortality through not dying.  --Woody Allen


> -Original Message-
> From: John Parker [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Wednesday, July 16, 2003 9:34 AM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: RE: Contacts issue
> 
> 
> I am one who is having this issue and I do not have pesonal 
> folders setup.
> 
> John Parker, MCSE
> IS Admin.
> Senior Technical Specialist
> Digital Display Systems.
> 
> Alpha Video
> 7711 Computer Ave.
> Edina, MN. 55435
>  
> 952-896-9898 Local
> 800-388-0008 Watts
> 952-896-9899 Fax
> 612-804-8769 Cell
> 952-841-3327 Direct
> 
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> "Be excellent to each other"
> ---End of Line---
> 
> 
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: Jeff Beckham [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Wednesday, July 16, 2003 8:27 AM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: RE: Contacts issue
> 
> 
> I'd be thinking a personal folder.  Check to see if the 
> contacts in the
> personal folder is checked to show as an address book.  If it is,
> uncheck it.
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of John Parker
> Posted At: Wednesday, July 16, 2003 8:23 AM
> Posted To: Exchange Discussion List
> Conversation: exmerge
> Subject: Contacts issue
> 
> I think I may have found the issue.
> And you helped me see it Peter. Thanks.
> 
> When my clients begin a new email, and they click the to: button, then
> click the drop down, there are two listings for "Contacts". 
> The problem
> is, when you click on the first one, it states that it is not 
> available,
> yet the second "Contacts" contain the actual contacts.
> Not sure how this happened.  Any idea how to easily clean this up?
> 
> John Parker, MCSE
> IS Admin.
> Senior Technical Specialist
> Digital Display Systems.
> 
> Alpha Video
> 7711 Computer Ave.
> Edina, MN. 55435
>  
> 952-896-9898 Local
> 800-388-0008 Watts
> 952-896-9899 Fax
> 612-804-8769 Cell
> 952-841-3327 Direct
> 
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> "Be excellent to each other"
> ---End of Line---
> 
> 
> _
> List posting FAQ:   http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
> Web Interface:
> http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchange&t
ext_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=exchange&text_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=exchange&text_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=exchange&text_mode=&lang=english
To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]

RE: exmerge

[East, Bill]

We outsourced our SSMs to leverage their synergy with our CRM business
process. It boggles, all right.

-- 
be - MOS

> -Original Message-
> From: Chris Scharff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Tuesday, July 15, 2003 12:42 PM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: Re: exmerge
> 
> 
> If you're logged in as the user, why wouldn't you simply use 
> Outlook to
> export the user's mail? Course, why one would want a SSM 
> using exmerge is
> more boggling.
> 
> On 07/15/03 11:28, "knighTslayer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> 
> > Wonky mouse.
> > 
> > I'm sure you can use exmerege from the desktop logged in as 
> the user to
> > archive the data.
> > 
> > k
> > 
> > -Original Message-
> > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of 
> knighTslayer
> > Sent: 15 July 2003 17:26
> > To: Exchange Discussions
> > Subject: RE: exmerge
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > -Original Message-
> > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of by
> > Sent: 15 July 2003 16:52
> > To: Exchange Discussions
> > Subject: exmerge
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > Dear all,
> > 
> > So far all the articles I have read about "exmerge" is, it requires
> > "Exchange service account" logon to perform the task.
> > 
> > I am trying to setup a standard procedure that desktop 
> support staff can
> > learn using "exmerge" for archiving mailbox data to PST 
> before deleting
> > the exchange mailbox accounts. As I am avoiding informing them the
> > password of "exchange service account" if possible, can 
> somebody advise
> > how to handle the situation?
> > 
> > Thank you.
> > 
> > BYS
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > ---
> > Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
> > Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
> > Version: 6.0.501 / Virus Database: 299 - Release Date: 14/07/2003
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > _
> > List posting FAQ:   http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
> > Web Interface:
> > 
http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchange&text_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=exchange&text_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=exchange&text_mode=&;
lang=e
> nglish
> 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=exchange&text_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=exchange&text_mode=&lang=english
To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]

RE: S/MIME for public folders?

[East, Bill]

Well folks,

In the end I did not find happiness in this problem through Microsoft.
However, we were able to hack together a solution using:
* OpenSSL
* PHPki certificate management software (check Sourceforge for details)
* An ordinary gentleman's handkerchief and 12 milligrams of sodium
bisulfate.

We are generating certs for the public folder using PHPki then sending
the public key to our vendor. Note that the certs appear not to work
within the organization because the Exchange server won't let you send
S/MIME to an address for which it has not generated the certificate.
This is, as my dear Aunt Gladys used to say, enough to piss off the
pope.

But all's well that ends well, right?


S/MIME certs drift out
To our webhost provider
Like snow descending

-- 
be - MOS



"This is turning into one very sexy struggle for the human race."
 -Zapp Brannigan 
> -Original Message-
> From: East, Bill 
> Sent: Monday, July 07, 2003 4:07 PM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: S/MIME for public folders?
> 
> 
> I'm running Exchange 2000 and can issue S/MIME keys for individual
> users. However, I'd really like to issue one for a public folder. Is
> there a simple way to do this that I am missing, or is the feature not
> present?
> 
> I've set up a test folder and unchecked the box "Hide from Exchange
> address lists" - but the folder does not show up as an option in the
> Advanced Security section of the SM.
> 
> -- 
> be - MOS
> 
> 
> 
> I can feel for her because, although I have never been an Alaskan
> prostitute dancing on the bar in a spangled dress, I still get very
> bored with washing and ironing and dishwashing and cooking day after
> relentless day.
> -- Betty MacDonald
> 
> 
> _
> List posting FAQ:   http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
> Web Interface: 
http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchange&text_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=exchange&text_mode=&lang=english
To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]

S/MIME for public folders?

[East, Bill]

I'm running Exchange 2000 and can issue S/MIME keys for individual
users. However, I'd really like to issue one for a public folder. Is
there a simple way to do this that I am missing, or is the feature not
present?

I've set up a test folder and unchecked the box "Hide from Exchange
address lists" - but the folder does not show up as an option in the
Advanced Security section of the SM.

-- 
be - MOS



I can feel for her because, although I have never been an Alaskan
prostitute dancing on the bar in a spangled dress, I still get very
bored with washing and ironing and dishwashing and cooking day after
relentless day.
-- Betty MacDonald


_
List posting FAQ:   http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
Web Interface: 
http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchange&text_mode=&lang=english
To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]

RE: Inserting Logo on Internet emails

[East, Bill]

Are you kidding? Then the admin can randomly change the referenced image
to Yosemite Sam, a landshark, Milla Jovanovich or the animated GIF of
the nitwit son of the CEO starring on COPS.

C'mon Gary, it'll be fun!
-- 
be - MOS



Do not underestimate the power of the Force.


> -Original Message-
> From: Slinger, Gary [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Monday, June 30, 2003 9:16 AM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: RE: Inserting Logo on Internet emails
> 
> 
> But better yet, don't ?  Don't we get enough garbage in 
> emails as it is,
> without having HTML logos shoved down our throats on 
> (presumably) every
> message? 
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: Erik Sojka [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
> Sent: Monday, June 30, 2003 08:42
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: RE: Inserting Logo on Internet emails
> 
> Maybe an event sync where instead of inserting a signature or 
> disclaimer,
> insert some HTML that points to your logo. 
> 
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Ben Schorr [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Sent: Friday, June 27, 2003 3:47 PM
> > To: Exchange Discussions
> > Subject: RE: Inserting Logo on Internet emails
> > 
> > 
> > I guess.  I advised against it, but as usual the PHB's 
> don't want to 
> > hear it.
> > 
> > -Ben-
> > Ben M. Schorr, MVP-OneNote, CNA, MCPx4 Director of Information 
> > Services Damon Key Leong Kupchak Hastert http://www.hawaiilawyer.com
> >  
> > 
> > > -Original Message-
> > > From: Erik Sojka [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
> > > Sent: Friday, June 27, 2003 9:35
> > > To: Exchange Discussions
> > > Subject: RE: Inserting Logo on Internet emails
> > > 
> > > Oy.  Because Email has to be made the *exact* equivalent of 
> > > paper messages, right?  
> > > 
> > > > -Original Message-
> > > > From: Ben Schorr [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > > Sent: Friday, June 27, 2003 3:39 PM
> > > > To: Exchange Discussions
> > > > Subject: RE: Inserting Logo on Internet emails
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > I've been seeing a lot of activity in this area lately.  A 
> > > friend from 
> > > > another firm has been tasked with creating stationery that 
> > > looks like 
> > > > their company letterhead.
> > > > 
> > > > That'll be fun when they have to e-mail somebody who's 
> > mail client 
> > > > doesn't support HTML.  It'll probably make them popular 
> > > with people on 
> > > > dial-up links and who pay for their bandwidth and connect 
> > time, too.
> > > > 
> > > > -Ben-
> > > > Ben M. Schorr, MVP-OneNote, CNA, MCPx4 Director of Information 
> > > > Services Damon Key Leong Kupchak Hastert 
> > http://www.hawaiilawyer.com
> > > >  
> > > > 
> > > > > -Original Message-
> > > > > From: Erik Sojka [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
> > > > > Sent: Friday, June 27, 2003 9:32
> > > > > To: Exchange Discussions
> > > > > Subject: RE: Inserting Logo on Internet emails
> > > > > 
> > > > > Other than shiny things making managers happy, what is the 
> > > > > business thingamabob you're trying to solve with 
> > putting the logo?
> > > > > 
> > > > > > -Original Message-
> > > > > > From: Mark Nold [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > > > > Sent: Friday, June 27, 2003 3:29 PM
> > > > > > To: Exchange Discussions
> > > > > > Subject: RE: Inserting Logo on Internet emails
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > I've thought of that but that then requires touching each 
> > > > > client does 
> > > > > > it not?  Is there a way to force stationary on the 
> > server level?
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > -Original Message-
> > > > > > From: Gill Gilliland [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > > > > Sent: Friday, June 27, 2003 11:29 AM
> > > > > > To: Exchange Discussions
> > > > > > Subject: RE: Inserting Logo on Internet emails
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > Couldn't you just create your own "stationary" that would 
> > > > > include the 
> > > > > > logo?
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > Gill
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > -Original Message-
> > > > > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > > > > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of 
> > > > Mark Nold
> > > > > > Sent: Friday, June 27, 2003 2:12 PM
> > > > > > To: Exchange Discussions
> > > > > > Subject: RE: Inserting Logo on Internet emails
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > Any suggestions as to which 3rd party apps?
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > -Original Message-
> > > > > > From: Pillai, Raj [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > > > > Sent: Friday, June 27, 2003 10:19 AM
> > > > > > To: Exchange Discussions
> > > > > > Subject: RE: Inserting Logo on Internet emails
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > Thanks.
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > -Original Message-
> > > > > > From: Martin Blackstone 
> > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > > > > Sent: Friday, June 27, 2003 11:59 AM
> > > > > > To: Exchange Discussions
> > > > > > Subject: RE: Inserting Logo on Internet emails
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > You will definitely need a 3rd party tool for this. 
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > -Original Message-
> >

RE: Change FQDN in Ex55

[East, Bill]

It looks like you might have to lie to your Exchange server (through a
hosts file, perhaps) to get the headers you want, or, for that matter,
rewrite through a smarthost as sander suggested. But why worry about it?
Let the headers read what they may.

-- 
be - MOS



Professor: Oh, dear. She's stuck in an infinite loop and he's an idiot.
Well, that's love for you.


> -Original Message-
> From: Dave Vantine [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Monday, June 09, 2003 8:58 AM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: RE: Change FQDN in Ex55
> 
> 
> It is not the email address that I want change. Our current 
> addressing is
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>. 
> 
> What I am looking to change is the SMTP header that Exchange 
> is writing. It
> is now writing this based upon the internal DNS information 
> on the Exchange
> Server. 
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: Sander Van Butzelaar [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
> Sent: Monday, June 09, 2003 8:34 AM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: RE: Change FQDN in Ex55
> 
> 
> Do you want to have both .com and .loc as an email address, 
> or only .loc?
> One way would be with a smart host that could rewrite your 
> .loc to .com on
> outgoing mail. 
> 
> Sander
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: Dave Vantine [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
> Sent: 09 June 2003 02:13 PM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: Change FQDN in Ex55
> 
> I recently reconfigured our internal network from .com to 
> .loc in advance of
> our planned migration/upgrade to AD. We are running Ex 5.5 
> Sp4 on W2K Sp3. I
> have found and issue with the SMTP header that now sent out as seen
> here:
> "Received: from challenger.creatcomp.loc 
> (unknown[216.237.98.130]". I have
> reviewed both Robichaux's and McBee's books on Exch 5.5 
> looking for a way to
> change this so it appears to come from an external FQDN but 
> was unable to
> find any reference for this. I have also looked at just about every
> attribute within the Ex5.5 objects especially the IMS but 
> nothing seems to
> be applicable.
> 
> Is there any way to change this?
> 
> Thanks
> -Dave Vantine
> 
> _
> List posting FAQ:   http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
> Web Interface:
> http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchange&t
ext_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=exchange&text_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=exchange&text_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=exchange&text_mode=&lang=english
To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]

RE: Sending emails that can not be altered

[East, Bill]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1

PGP and many other products will at least sign the email so that the
content cannot be changed without invalidating the signature. But
checking signatures requires a PGP client and is much too complicated
for many users. 

- -- 
be - MOS



On the road, ZIPPY is a pinhead without a purpose, but never without
a POINT.


> -Original Message-
> From: Tony Hlabse [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Thursday, June 05, 2003 9:39 AM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: Sending emails that can not be altered
> 
> 
> Due to Martha's problems with altering emails. Someone here 
> asked if there 
> is a way to send and email so that the content can not be 
> altered by the 
> recipient andf then forwarded on

-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: PGP 8.0

iQA/AwUBPt+BRqqlDNusctcpEQJupwCeOG2v+SA6jrSQsO1WK8C+2eUjxb4AoO+s
0nY3CBS/5f1SHISeWOWaMLpU
=GkLt
-END PGP SIGNATURE-


_
List posting FAQ:   http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
Web Interface: 
http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchange&text_mode=&lang=english
To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]

RE: Recovery Help. Request made from a new Exchange Admin.

[East, Bill]

Not me. I was press-ganged. Stupid frickin' British Navy.

-- 
be - MOS



Friends:  People who borrow my books and set wet glasses on them.


> -Original Message-
> From: Roger Seielstad [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Wednesday, June 04, 2003 11:40 AM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: RE: Recovery Help. Request made from a new Exchange Admin.
> 
> 
> Color me crazy then. I picked this life a while ago and would 
> never look
> back.
> 
> 
> 
> --
> Roger D. Seielstad - MTS MCSE MS-MVP
> Sr. Systems Administrator
> Inovis Inc.
> 


_
List posting FAQ:   http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
Web Interface: 
http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchange&text_mode=&lang=english
To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]

RE: Public folders and the user who wouldn't

[East, Bill]

Well, after a day of frustration I disconnected the user from her Exchange mailbox via 
ADU&C, then reconnected her through ESM. I think she'll be all right now, although I 
have a sneaking suspicion that this account is going to be one of those which, ten 
years from now we'll be saying "you know, she warn't never right."


Active Director?
I prefer Zubin Mehta
Not ASDI

-- 
be - MOS



"Die?  I should say not, dear fellow.  No Barrymore would allow such a conventional 
thing to happen to him."
-- John Barrymore's dying words


> -Original Message-
> From: East, Bill 
> Sent: Friday, April 04, 2003 9:11 AM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: Public folders and the user who wouldn't
> 
> 
> So we've gone through a 5.5 --> 2000 upgrade with some minor 
> problems. But this one has me stumped. I have one particular 
> user who cannot be given permissions to any of our public 
> folders. There is no error message recorded and the symptoms 
> are the same regardless of whether I use Outlook or ESM to 
> make the changes. If I open the Client Permissions page, I 
> can click on Add, select the user, and click OK. The user is 
> added to the list (always at the bottom) and I can modify her 
> permissions and/or remove her. But if I then click on OK the 
> change does not take. If I click on Apply, the user 
> immediately disappears from the list of users.
> 
> I've taken the steps in both the original and updated 
> versions of Q31 (I found the old one on Usenet). I've 
> Looked at the user's setup and she appears to be bog 
> standard. I've tried creating new public folders to which to 
> add her. I'm really starting to run out of ideas. I wonder if 
> someone else can propose any troubleshooting hints?
> 
> -- 
> be - MOS
> 
> Tuesday After Lunch is the cosmic time of the week.
> 
> _
> List posting FAQ:   http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
> Archives:   http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp
> To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 

_
List posting FAQ:   http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
Archives:   http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp
To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Public folders and the user who wouldn't

[East, Bill]

So we've gone through a 5.5 --> 2000 upgrade with some minor problems. But this one 
has me stumped. I have one particular user who cannot be given permissions to any of 
our public folders. There is no error message recorded and the symptoms are the same 
regardless of whether I use Outlook or ESM to make the changes. If I open the Client 
Permissions page, I can click on Add, select the user, and click OK. The user is added 
to the list (always at the bottom) and I can modify her permissions and/or remove her. 
But if I then click on OK the change does not take. If I click on Apply, the user 
immediately disappears from the list of users.

I've taken the steps in both the original and updated versions of Q31 (I found the 
old one on Usenet). I've Looked at the user's setup and she appears to be bog 
standard. I've tried creating new public folders to which to add her. I'm really 
starting to run out of ideas. I wonder if someone else can propose any troubleshooting 
hints?

-- 
be - MOS

Tuesday After Lunch is the cosmic time of the week.

_
List posting FAQ:   http://www.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: domain name

[East, Bill]

My sister once almost ran over Kevin Bacon, and my name is Bill, too. So
there's your connection.

-- 
be - MOS



Imitation is the sincerest form of television.
-- Fred Allen


> -Original Message-
> From: Mellott, Bill [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Thursday, March 27, 2003 9:38 AM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: RE: domain name
> 
> 
> well..let's see Ed...ok it's like seven ways to kevin Bacon.
> 
> See months ago Tony asked about installing OWA..IIS ect..I 
> remember He had
> quite the time with it and many questions.
> The I think he got it...then I think there was something he 
> asked about a
> problem about it sometime a month later...
> So then now maybe he is trying to access it from home on his 
> laptop
> now he wants to somehow be able to use his domain name 
> www.domain.com to get
> to his OWA server with out the long drawn out line.
> So now he's testing at home testing his connection to his 
> OWA server at
> his www.domain.com and appears to be having some type of DNS issues
> regarding resolving to his domain
> 
> so we have hopefully establish the connectin to Exchange 
> since OWA relates
> to exchange and DNS issues can relate to both thus Tony's question
> potentiall relates to exchange
> 
> How does it relate to Kevin Bacon?
> I suspect some one at the ISP or Tony company knows somebody 
> that knows
> Kevin Bacon.thus resulting it the final potential 
> connection to Kevin
> Bacon...
> 
> 
> bill
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: Ed Crowley [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Wednesday, March 26, 2003 9:45 PM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: RE: domain name
> 
> 
> And that has to do with Exchange how?
> 
> 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 Nguyen
> Sent: Wednesday, March 26, 2003 2:31 PM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: domain name
> 
> 
> Can some show me where I need to start looking 
> 
> We I connect my laptop to [EMAIL PROTECTED] I could not get to my web page with
> www.domain.com but I could type in the IP address. When I use 
> a dail-up
> account I was able to use www.domain.com. Could this be a DNS 
> problem? 
> 
> Tony Nguyen ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
> System Administrator/DBA
> Senior Aerospace Jet Products
> www.jetproducts.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]

RE: Strange 550 error

[East, Bill]

Actually the name "optonline.net" is misleading, the company I believe is
"Optimum Online" or some such, n'est ce pas? But the name was a point of
discussion, Jeffrey; it appears that the first thing that a spammer does
after bringing the KFC and Schlitz into his trailer is to pick a domain name
with the phrase "opt-in" in it. At the moment I am turfing email from
optinforyou, optindeals, opt-inemail, optinllc, and about 30 other domains
with the word "opt" in them.

-- 
be - MOS

The use of money is all the advantage there is to having money.
-- B. Franklin

> -Original Message-
> From: Jeffrey Dubyn [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Wednesday, February 12, 2003 2:48 PM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: RE: Strange 550 error
> 
> 
> Jim -
> 
> The customer is not on optonline.net, is not listed at 
> ordb.org, there has
> not been any spamming coming from this domain from this 
> server, and the
> problem is sporadic - so I don't think that's the issue.  
> 
> And what's you got against Optonline.net :)  Although the 
> owners won't let
> us watch the Yankees (can't get it on cable here on Long 
> Island!), they give
> kick as* Internet speeds.
> 
> Regards,
> 
> Jeff
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of 
> Blunt, James H
> (Jim)
> Sent: Wednesday, February 12, 2003 2:17 PM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: RE: Strange 550 error
> 
> 
> "...no nothin' - just seems like the email went into a black hole."
> 
> Maybe you just answered your own question.
> 
> Have you checked the RBL's to see if your listed?  Have you 
> been spamming
> this domain to death?  With a domain name like optonline.net, 
> I'd be tempted
> to drop you in a Blackhole list, just on general principles.
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: Chris Scharff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
> Sent: Wednesday, February 12, 2003 7:39 AM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: Re: Strange 550 error
> 
> 
> It means exactly what it says (and 550 isn't terribly generic).
> 
> Domain.com is not a local host on the server you connected to and that
> server is also not a gateway for it. Either your DNS is 
> fscked or one or
> more of their Mx records is improperly configured. Using 
> telnet and the
> basic SMTP commands in RFC821 will allow you to confirm this 
> for yourself if
> you'd like.[1]
> 
> [1] Essential skills to pick up, now is as good a time as any.
> 
> On 2/12/03 7:42, "Jeffrey Dubyn" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> 
> 
> 
> I have an issue with an Exchange 2000 SP3 server where an 
> email sent from 
> inside the Exchange organization is not getting to some 
> recipients in a 
> specific domain.  I have logging turned up, and found a 
> strange message: 
> 
> 550+not+local+host+recipientdomain.com,+not+a+gateway
> 
> The 550 error maps to a generic protocol error (SMTP error), 
> but I can't 
> make heads or tails out of the rest of the message.  
> 
> What is strange is that the domain comes up successfully in 
> nslookup and 
> from the Exchange server, I can connect via telnet to port 
> 25.  The users 
> have had no trouble sending email to this recipient at this 
> domain before or
> 
> since, except for this most important email (or course).   
> There was no NDR,
> 
> no nothin' - just seems like the email went into a black hole. 
> 
> Thanks for any assistance! 
> 
> 
> _ 
> List posting FAQ:   http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm 
> Archives:   http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp 
> To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
> Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _
> List posting FAQ:   http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
> Archives:   http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp
> To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 
> _
> List posting FAQ:   http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
> Archives:   http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp
> To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 
> 
> _
> List posting FAQ:   http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
> Archives:   http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp
> To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 

_
List posting FAQ:   http://www.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 550 error

[East, Bill]

As best as I can guess, the remote server is complaining that the format of
your message does not conform to the format it expects, which would be a
user at a local host in the recipient's domain. The other half of the
message is that it's not a gateway, so it will not pass on what appears to
be a non-local address. If you could give us the address to which you are
sending, even in the format @theaddress.tld, we might be able to
guess a little better. Oh, and did you munge the 550 message at all, or is
that how it appeared verbatim?

FWIW, there has been some discussion of your provider, optonline.com, on
news.admin.net-abuse.email in recent days, with the general concensus (hah!)
being that optonline is not a spammer, just a cable modem provider with a
lot of potentially abusable clients. So there is a small but existing
possiblity that you are being blocked due to your address.

-- 
be - MOS



Yow!  I just went below the poverty line!


> -Original Message-
> From: Jeffrey Dubyn [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Wednesday, February 12, 2003 8:42 AM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: Strange 550 error
> 
> 
> I have an issue with an Exchange 2000 SP3 server where an 
> email sent from
> inside the Exchange organization is not getting to some 
> recipients in a
> specific domain.  I have logging turned up, and found a 
> strange message: 
> 
> 550+not+local+host+recipientdomain.com,+not+a+gateway
> 
> The 550 error maps to a generic protocol error (SMTP error), 
> but I can't
> make heads or tails out of the rest of the message.  
> 
> What is strange is that the domain comes up successfully in 
> nslookup and
> from the Exchange server, I can connect via telnet to port 
> 25.  The users
> have had no trouble sending email to this recipient at this 
> domain before or
> since, except for this most important email (or course).   
> There was no NDR,
> no nothin' - just seems like the email went into a black hole.
> 
> Thanks for any assistance!
> 
> 
> _
> List posting FAQ:   http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
> Archives:   http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp
> To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 

_
List posting FAQ:   http://www.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: Shortcuts to Outlook objects

[East, Bill]

> -Original Message-
> From: Greg Deckler [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Friday, February 07, 2003 3:07 PM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: RE: Shortcuts to Outlook objects
> 
> 
> Haven't seen the majority of your messages because they come 
> through like
> this.
> 
To whom were you speaking?

_
List posting FAQ:   http://www.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: Shortcuts to Outlook objects

[East, Bill]

> -Original Message-
> From: Greg Deckler [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Friday, February 07, 2003 1:30 PM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: RE: Shortcuts to Outlook objects
> 
> 
> I'm not sure how this refutes anything along these lines.
> 
> Going to a trade show and picking up a freebie is one thing. 
> Accepting a
> title and accepting continued compensation is quite another. 
> There is no
> relationship implied with the first, there is with the second.

So where is the line drawn? You had said 
>>  Any form of compensation is a conflict of interest.

But squeezie pigs are unquestionably a form of compensation. So are free
lunches from vendors, or free drinks at MEC, or the title of MVP. Are some
squeezie pigs more equal than others?

> 
> There are very specific things that denote a profession. One 
> is having an
> independent governing body that defines and enforces the "rules" and
> ethics of the profession. The IT industry is a horrible 
> failure in this
> regard.

I've always thought that the W3C did a good job of that, but please note
that I have not yet accepted your proposition that there is an "IT
industry," at least insofar as you seem to mean it. I work in the finance
industry right now and I am beholden to follow the rules and regulations of
the NCUA. I was in the insurance industry for a while and the medical
industry before then.

Mayhap the IT vendors need to get together and form a governing professional
body, but in my case at least the rules and regulations of my employers have
been sufficient to keep me on the straight and narrow.


> And, if you want to get specific, the only real 
> professions that
> meet all of the definitions are military, medical, lawyers 
> and to a lesser
> degree accounting and engineering. If you want to get technical, the
> military is the only profession that truly meets all of the 
> requirements.

Oh, well that's all right then. Doctors, lawyers, accountants, and engineers
aren't professionals.

> In terms of their management of individuals in their 
> profession, they are
> answerable to no one, have their own legal and ethical code 
> of conduct and
> enforce those rules. This is why there is the justice system and the
> military's justice system.

I always thought it was because they had nuclear weapons.
> 
> We work with lawyers all the time. We even host partner 
> companies on our
> Exchange server for free. The lawyers that we work with FORCE 
> us to bill
> them because they cannot ethically accept this service for free.

So, here is a gift that they cannot accept. Does that mean that they cannot
accept any gifts? That specific case doesn't expand to a general rule.
Anyway, they're not a real profession. Just the people with depleted uranium
are.

> It
> creates a conflict of interest for them. Our IT partners have no such
> ethical constraints.
> 
You are confusing ethics with rules of professional conduct here. Whether
they have ethical restraints is moot. 

> Go talk to lawyers, doctors and architects. Talk to them about their
> governing bodies, their ethics, etc. Talk to them about 
> vendors in their
> industry. Getting things for free is viewed as bribery and a 
> conflict of
> interest.

Once again, here is the point that you seem to be missing.

SOME gifts are seen as conflicts of interest. Others are not. Should we look
at the American Bar Association's /Lawyers' Manual on Professional Conduct/?
Section 51 deals with gifts in great detail, setting out guidelines for
which might be acceptable and which might not.

> Getting things for free is viewed as bribery

Yet another absolute statement, that is absolutely wrong. Here's a word that
will help you fix it:

some

> Some of these industries are more lax than others. 
> Look at the
> medical industry and how drug reps are viewed treated. Then 
> compare that
> with IT's views on vendors. The difference is stark. In one, drug reps
> giving away free samples is seen as a huge problem, in IT it is not.
> 
The AMA, the governing body of the medical profession, says:

Any gifts accepted by physicians individually should primarily entail a
benefit to patients and should not be of substantial value. 
(http://www.ama-assn.org/ama/pub/article/4001-4236.html)

The AMA suggests in its guidelines that drug samples should be given to
patients first, family second, but it certainly does not say that 

> giving away free samples is seen as a huge problem

So let's review:

In some fields, receiving gifts that are of certain types or are above
certain values from vendors is not permitted. This includes the field in
which I am employed (Credit Unions) and the one in which certain MVPs are
employed (Cheesebucketing).

This is not the same as 

> And, accepting any form of
> compensation is a fundamental conflict of interest.

> > > -Original Message-
> > > From: Greg Deckler [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > > Sent: Friday, February 07, 2003 12:55 PM
> > > To: Exc

RE: Shortcuts to Outlook objects

[East, Bill]

> -Original Message-
> From: Greg Deckler [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Friday, February 07, 2003 12:55 PM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: RE: Shortcuts to Outlook objects
> 
> 
> You're missing the point Ed. Any form of compensation is a conflict of
> interest. Period.

Nice absolute statement there, but this isn't an absolute subject. I've had
a pink squeezie pig with a Motorola logo on my monitor for six years now.
Sometimes I bounce it against the wall to help me think. But no-one accuses
me of being a Motorola apologist, and I've bought a sum total of $0 worth of
Motorola kit in that time.

As for that making us "tradespeople" and not "professionals," have a look
around your doctor's office next time you go there.

> The discussion is not being advanced in any regard. The view 
> that I have
> is that the IT industry's focus on vendors and tools will keep the IT
> industry from becoming a profession.

What on earth is that supposed to mean? Is there a ISO9001 definition of
"profession" that "the IT industry" has failed to apply for? Some people who
work in the IT field can indeed be seen as tradespeople, others as
professionals - the guy who assembles PCs on the line versus Michael Dell,
for example. But if you try to tell a CTO with an MBA that he's not in a
"profession" s/he will most likely still be laughing by the time the
security people have carried you out of the bulding.


> And, accepting any form of
> compensation is a fundamental conflict of interest.

Sure it is. That's why Congresspeople, doctors, lawyers, or architects
aren't allowed to do it. Oops, they all are, aren't they? Just usually there
is a limit on it.


> In all of 
> the posts,
> nothing refutes theses points.

I hope I've rectified that.


_
List posting FAQ:   http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
Archives:   http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp
To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Haiku Friday (WAS: Shortcuts to Outlook objects)

[East, Bill]

Thread quickly lengthens
The snow falls, deep on 9th Street
BBQ time, Deaned.

_
List posting FAQ:   http://www.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: Virus activity

[East, Bill]

It's like there's a party in my Exchange server and everyone's invited.

-- 
be - MOS



To restore a sense of reality, I think Walt Disney should have a
Hardluckland.
-- Jack Paar


> -Original Message-
> From: John Orban [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Wednesday, January 15, 2003 2:08 PM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: RE: Virus activity
> 
> 
> Yeah, we got banged this weekend. Mostly Klez but some other 
> stuff as well,
> might have been java stuff. I got about 150 alerts from my AV 
> box. Mostly
> Saturday night and Sunday. WAY more than usual.
> 
> John Orban
> System Administrator
> The Country School
> www.countryschool.org
> 
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: Ryan Fennema [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
> Sent: Wednesday, January 15, 2003 11:58 AM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: Virus activity
> 
> 
> Is anyone else out there noticing a higher level of virus 
> activity in the
> last week or so?  Our gateway scanner has been catching an 
> increasing number
> of viruses over the last week.  I am also seeing a few that 
> we haven't seen
> in quite a while.  I am not concerned, just curious if others 
> have noticed
> this also.
> 
> -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]

RE: outlook OT

[East, Bill]

It's probably his POP3 client not recognizing the successful handoff to the
Exchange server. Try having him use IMAP instead. There is no sane MUA that
does POP3 that does not also do IMAP.

-- 
be - MOS



It'll be just like Beggars' Canyon back home.
-- Luke Skywalker


> -Original Message-
> From: Tener, Richard [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Monday, January 13, 2003 12:43 PM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: RE: outlook OT
> 
> 
> I wish he used our VPN
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: Andy David [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Monday, January 13, 2003 12:33 PM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: Re: outlook OT
> 
> 
> Nope.
> Mongo use VPN, Citrix or OWA to connect to Exchange Server.
> 
> 
> - Original Message -
> From: "Tener, Richard" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: "Exchange Discussions" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sent: Monday, January 13, 2003 12:18 PM
> Subject: outlook OT
> 
> 
> > Did anyone ever encounter this problem, I have a user that 
> uses outlook
> > 2002, sends and recieves from our server using pop3 
> account.  Some reason
> > when he sends a message the message gets stuck in his 
> outbox and people
> keep
> > recieving multiple copies.  I recreated a new user account 
> and it still
> > happens.  If anyone has encountered this problem please 
> shed some light.
> >
> > Thanks
> > Richard Tener
> >
> >
> >
> > _
> > List posting FAQ:   http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
> > Archives:   http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp
> > To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >
> 
> 
> _
> List posting FAQ:   http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
> Archives:   http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp
> To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 
> _
> List posting FAQ:   http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
> Archives:   http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp
> To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 

_
List posting FAQ:   http://www.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: Your preference (given the capabilities of each w/cost not af act or)?

[East, Bill]

To do that voodoo you do so well.

-- 
be - MOS



Mater artium necessitas.
[Necessity is the mother of invention].


> -Original Message-
> From: Chris Scharff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Friday, January 10, 2003 2:14 PM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: Re: Your preference (given the capabilities of each 
> w/cost not
> af act or)?
> 
> 
> To do what?
> 
> -- 
> Chris Scharff, MVP-Exchange
> MessageOne
> 
> Exchange Monitoring & Reporting:http://www.messageone.com/MV.asp
> Free Custom OWA Screens:
> http://www.messageone.com/m1owa/index.asp
> 
> 
> On 1/10/03 12:28, "Tim Ault" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> 
> 
> 
> Robomon? 
> Bindview? 
> NetIQ? 
> Quest? 
> 
> 
> 
> _
> List posting FAQ:   http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
> Archives:   http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp
> To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 

_
List posting FAQ:   http://www.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: Opinions on the best message format.

[East, Bill]

In addition to the other objections raised, there are plenty of tricks that
could be done with stylesheets, embedded content, &c. that would
substantially mask or change the content of a message after it had been
received by your lawyers. Plain text makes it much harder to insert small
print.

-- 
be - MOS

> -Original Message-
> From: Darrin J. Carter [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Thursday, January 09, 2003 12:10 PM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: RE: Opinions on the best message format.
> 
> 
> Can anyone think of arguments against using html or RTF? Personally I
> think that plain text is the way to go because of minimum hassle.  But
> I'm dealing with 200 attorneys that like to ask why?
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: Chris Scharff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Thursday, January 09, 2003 9:07 AM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: Re: Opinions on the best message format.
> 
> 
> Plain text.
> 
> On 1/9/03 10:02, "Darrin J. Carter" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> 
> 
> 
> Hi, 
> 
> I wanted to get the groups opinion on the best message format 
> to use in 
> Outlook 98.  
> 
> Text/HTML or RTF. 
> 
> Any pros or cons regarding the types would be most helpful. 
> 
> The backend is Exchange 2000 with SP3. 
> 
> 
> 
> _
> List posting FAQ:   http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
> Archives:   http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp
> To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 
> _
> List posting FAQ:   http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
> Archives:   http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp
> To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 

_
List posting FAQ:   http://www.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: Happy Holiday!

[East, Bill]

And a hoopy Human Rights Day!!1!!

(sorry, 10 days late on that one. I was undecorating my Human Rights Day
boxwood.)

-- 
be - MOS

> -Original Message-
> From: Andy David [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Friday, December 20, 2002 7:44 AM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: Re: Happy Holiday!
> 
> 
> Everybody Wang Chung tonight! 
> 
> - Original Message - 
> From: "Chris Quinn" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: "Exchange Discussions" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sent: Friday, December 20, 2002 6:22 AM
> Subject: RE: Happy Holiday!
> 
> 
> > Have a stunning Saturnalia!
> > 
> > Chris Quinn
> > IT Manager
> > Blue Planet Aquarium 
> > 
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Busby, Jacob [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
> > Sent: 20 December 2002 10:49
> > To: Exchange Discussions
> > Subject: RE: Happy Holiday!
> > 
> > 
> > And a happy new year too!
> > 
> > > -Original Message-
> > > From: Jojo Solis [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > > Sent: 20 December 2002 10:42
> > > To: Exchange Discussions
> > > Subject: Happy Holiday!
> > > 
> > > 
> > > Happy Holiday to everyone!
> > > 
> > > MERRY CHRISTMAS!!!
> > > 
> > > From Manila Philippines
> > > 
> > > 
> > > _
> > > List posting FAQ:   http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
> > > Archives:   http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp
> > > To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > 
> > 
> > _
> > List posting FAQ:   http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
> > Archives:   http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp
> > To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > 
> > _
> > List posting FAQ:   http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
> > Archives:   http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp
> > To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > 
> 
> _
> List posting FAQ:   http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
> Archives:   http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp
> To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 

_
List posting FAQ:   http://www.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: FAST RESTORE?

[East, Bill]

I'm not sure I'd agree 100% with you there. I've seen Klez play havoc on an
Exchange server that had some shares that the infected user could write to.
Defense in depth suggests that you want to virus-protect the system and
application files.

-- 
be - MOS



If I have to lay an egg for my country, I'll do it.
-- Bob Hope


> -Original Message-
> From: Martin Blackstone [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Wednesday, December 04, 2002 10:33 PM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: RE: FAST RESTORE?
> 
> 
> Or the M: drive.
> For that matter, unless you are using the Exch server for 
> something else
> such as a file server, there is no reason at all to run a 
> file level AV on
> it.
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: Martin Blackstone 
> Sent: Wednesday, December 04, 2002 7:31 PM
> To: 'Exchange Discussions'
> Subject: RE: FAST RESTORE?
> 
> 
> YOU NEVER EVER EVER run a file level AV against the \Exchsrvr 
> folders. EVER
> EVER EVER. This is exactly why. If its quarentined, 
> un-quarentine it. You
> cant restore it from a backup, its not the same log.
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: Jojo Solis [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
> Sent: Wednesday, December 04, 2002 7:17 PM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: RE: FAST RESTORE?
> 
> 
> actually are antivirus found a YAHA virus in E00.log then it 
> quarantine the
> E00.log, i tried to restore the log file but still cant mount 
> the mailbox
> store.
> 
> 
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: Tony Hlabse [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Tuesday, December 03, 2002 8:55 AM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: Re: FAST RESTORE?
> 
> 
> How were they deleted?
> 
> - Original Message - 
> From: "Jojo Solis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: "Exchange Discussions" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sent: Monday, December 02, 2002 8:02 PM
> Subject: FAST RESTORE?
> 
> 
> what is the fastest way in restoring a deleted edb logs? 
> E00.log was deleted
> accidentally and then the mailbox store are not mounted.
> 
> E2K SP2
> 
> Thanks!
> 
> jojo
> 
> 
> _
> List posting FAQ:   http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
> Archives:   http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp
> To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 
> _
> List posting FAQ:   http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
> Archives:   http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp
> To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 
> _
> List posting FAQ:   http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
> Archives:   http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp
> To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 
> _
> List posting FAQ:   http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
> Archives:   http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp
> To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 

_
List posting FAQ:   http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
Archives:   http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp
To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Haiku Friday

[East, Bill]

New PFY here
As winter's winds gather strength
Here's your cubicle.

_
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: Emails to clients that are restricted

[East, Bill]

Is somebody forging the headers? Trivially easy to do. Check to see if there
are any SMTP headers in the messages, and if so, find the offender and put
superglue on his or her keycaps.

-- 
be - MOS



You are confused; but this is your normal state.


> -Original Message-
> From: Gonzalez, Alex [mailto:alex.gonzalez@;handleman.com]
> Sent: Friday, November 08, 2002 2:03 PM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: Emails to clients that are restricted
> 
> 
> We have a couple of system accounts that we send email to 
> that no one has access to send back to via delivery 
> restricts.  Well someone actually sent back and it go 
> through.  Any idea's why?
> 
> Thank you,
>  
> Alex Gonzalez
> Senior Systems Administrator
> Handleman Company
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> (248) 362-4400 Ext. 4914
> 
> 
> _
> 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: A question of NDR

[East, Bill]

I would miss your reply, Andy. You're like the little baby buffalo nibbling
around the edges of the Exchange field. And I am the coyote who doesn't want
to get sat on.

-- 
be - MOS

> -Original Message-
> From: Andy David [mailto:davida@;vss.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, November 13, 2002 10:18 AM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: RE: A question of NDR
> 
> 
> Your attitude is apparently by design as well. 
> Like I said, if you send an email from within Outlook in the 
> manner you
> described , I believe it works that way by design .
> If I am wrong, so be it. 
> 
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: Tim Ault [mailto:timault@;westat.com] 
> Sent: Wednesday, November 13, 2002 10:03 AM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: RE: A question of NDR
> 
> 
> of course not.
> and what's with the non-sequitor..?
> 
> in my first post on the issue I question what I believe is 
> unusual behavior.
> you claim the behavior is "by design".
> in my second post, I challenge your claim.
> 
> geez.. if you don't know an answer, it's OK skip the thread, 
> andy. we won't
> miss your reply.
> 
> Tim.
> x3683
> 
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: Andy David [mailto:davida@;vss.com] 
> Sent: Wednesday, November 13, 2002 9:42 AM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: RE: A question of NDR
> 
> 
> If you know all the answers, why are you asking us? 
> 
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: Tim Ault [mailto:timault@;westat.com] 
> Sent: Wednesday, November 13, 2002 9:25 AM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: RE: A question of NDR
> 
> 
> oh come on, andy.. test the accuracy of your reply
> 
> send a message from a mailbox that appears to be from 
> another. monitor the
> inbox of the other mailbox. you'll find an NDR to a bogus 
> address appears in
> the mailbox named in the From field
> 
> 
> 
> Tim.
> x3683
> 
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: Andy David [mailto:davida@;vss.com] 
> Sent: Wednesday, November 13, 2002 8:59 AM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: RE: A question of NDR
> 
> 
> By design I believe.
> 
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: Tim Ault [mailto:timault@;westat.com] 
> Sent: Wednesday, November 13, 2002 8:55 AM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: A question of NDR
> 
> 
> Scenario:
> 
> mailbox1 has "user" permission against mailbox2.
> mailbox1 sends messages from within mailbox1 with "mailbox2" 
> in From field.
> Any subsequent NDR's appear in Inbox of mailbox1 and not mailbox2.
> 
> 
> qué arriba con eso?
> 
> _
> List posting FAQ:   http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
> Archives:   http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp
> To unsubscribe: mailto:leave-exchange@;ls.swynk.com
> Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 
> --
> --
> --
> The information contained in this 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: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]
> 
> --
> --
> --
> 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.
> 
> ==
> ==
> ==
> 
> 
> ___

RE: Virus heads up

[East, Bill]

Funny, an AV rep just recently was quoted as saying

"We don't call everything a virus because when you go to the doctor you
don't want him telling you that every illness you have is a broken leg."



-- 
be - MOS



It is better to give than to lend, and it costs about the same.


> -Original Message-
> From: Couch, Nate [mailto:nate.couch@;eds.com]
> Sent: Friday, November 08, 2002 12:31 PM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: RE: Virus heads up
> 
> 
> I haven't heard of this one myself until today (does that 
> make me a bad
> admin - shoot no.)  I did see info on the FriendGrt.A.  
> 
> As for not being "technically" a virus my only answer to that 
> is . . a rose
> is a rose is a rose, or a virus is a virus is a virus.  
> Whether that be a
> chain letter or a greeting card website taking advantage of 
> myopic users.
> 
> Cheers.
> 
> Nate

_
List posting FAQ:   http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
Archives:   http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp
To unsubscribe: mailto:leave-exchange@;ls.swynk.com
Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]

RE: Postmaster reply address

[East, Bill]

RFC 2821 section 4.5.1:

"Any lowdown horny toad what doesn't have a postmaster address is gonna get
his bottom whupped."

There are exceptions, but they are rare.
-- 
be - MOS



Professor Farnsworth: "Oh my, that steamed carrot was a bit spicy for me." 


> -Original Message-
> From: Tom Meunier [mailto:Tom.Meunier@;courts.state.tx.us]
> Sent: Wednesday, November 06, 2002 6:15 PM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: RE: Postmaster reply address
> 
> 
> No. root@, postmaster@, hostmaster@, abuse@, etc. are just "strongly
> suggested" iirc.
> 
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Drew Nicholson [mailto:DNicholson@;rapidapp.com] 
> > Posted At: Wednesday, November 06, 2002 11:05 AM
> > Posted To: MSExchange Mailing List
> > Conversation: Postmaster reply address
> > Subject: RE: Postmaster reply address
> > 
> > 
> > I don't know if you _can_ change it, but you shouldn't.  
> > Isn't there an RFC that says a system has to have to have 
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED]?
> > 
> > Anyway, just configure your profile (or another one) to look 
> > at that mailbox.
> > 
> > Drew Nicholson
> > Technical Writer
> > Network Engineer
> > LAN Manager
> > RapidApp
> > 312-372-7188 (work)
> > 312-543-0008 (cell)
> > Born To Edit
> > 
> > 
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Woodruff, Michael [mailto:MWoodruff@;inchord.com]
> > Sent: Wednesday, November 06, 2002 8:20 AM
> > To: Exchange Discussions
> > Subject: Postmaster reply address
> > 
> > 
> > Exchange2k SP3
> > 
> > 
> > I am having trouble trying to figure out how to change the
> > postmaster reply address on NDRs sent to internet users.  Is it
> > possible?
> > 
> > 
> > _
> > List posting FAQ:   http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
> > Archives:   http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp
> > To unsubscribe: mailto:leave-exchange@;ls.swynk.com
> > Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > 
> > _
> > List posting FAQ:   http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
> > Archives:   http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp
> > To unsubscribe: mailto:leave-exchange@;ls.swynk.com
> > Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > 
> 
> _
> List posting FAQ:   http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
> Archives:   http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp
> To unsubscribe: mailto:leave-exchange@;ls.swynk.com
> Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 

_
List posting FAQ:   http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
Archives:   http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp
To unsubscribe: mailto:leave-exchange@;ls.swynk.com
Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]

RE: RBL's

[East, Bill]

> -Original Message-
> From: Robert Moir [mailto:rim@;LutonSFC.ac.uk]
> Sent: Thursday, November 07, 2002 4:26 AM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: RE: RBL's
> 
> 
> It's a great example, however, of people jumping all over something
> despite not understanding it much at all, which makes it a 
> good parable
> for computing issues.
> 

Or women.

_
List posting FAQ:   http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
Archives:   http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp
To unsubscribe: mailto:leave-exchange@;ls.swynk.com
Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]

RE: Mail Relaying Originator <>

[East, Bill]

There are tiny evil gremlins in your server that are sending these messages.
But unlike in the movie "Gremlins," (which was excellent if slightly
technically flawed) these ones will shrivel into dust if they are put in
water. Submerge your server in 24 degree (celcius) water for one full hour
*while it is turned on*. I can't tell you how important this last part is.

Alternately, it is perfectly normal behavior that is discussed in the SMTP
RFCs as well as the list posting FAQ, section 3.39.

Choose wisely.

-- 
be - MOS



A computer program does what you tell it to do, not what you want it to do.


> -Original Message-
> From: Dave Morrow [mailto:David.Morrow@;autodata.net]
> Sent: Wednesday, November 06, 2002 10:28 AM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: Mail Relaying Originator <>
> 
> 
> I recently setup my MS Exchange server such that only people 
> connecting from
> a specific set of IP addresses (my company's IP range) and 
> connections to an
> internal IP address are allowed to relay mail.  
> 
> After doing so, I am still noticing mail in the IMC queue that has an
> originator of <>
> 
> 
> David Morrow
> Network Administrator
> Autodata Solutions Company
> Ph: (519) 951-6067 Fax: (519) 451-6615
> mailto: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 
> "Poor planning on your part does not necessitate an emergency 
> on my part."
> 
> This message has originated from Autodata Solutions Company.  
> The attached
> material is not the Confidential and Proprietary Information of Autodata
> Solutions Company. This email and any files transmitted with it are
> not confidential and intended solely for the use of any
> individual or entity. If you have received this email in 
> error please
> delete this message and notify the Autodata system administrator at
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 
> 
> 
> _
> List posting FAQ:   http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
> Archives:   http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp
> To unsubscribe: mailto:leave-exchange@;ls.swynk.com
> Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 

_
List posting FAQ:   http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
Archives:   http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp
To unsubscribe: mailto:leave-exchange@;ls.swynk.com
Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]

RE: Mail blasts

[East, Bill]

There is not much you have to do. Let's look at a test message, sent by an
Outlook 2000 client through a 5.5 IMS.  I'll type the body of the message
interspersed with my comments, marked by "***" And anyone out there who has
a better grasp on this than I can feel free to correct me.

--- begin included message ---
***First, the usual headers, most of which users can't see and don't care
about. I've snipped a lot of them.
Subject: off we go
Date: Thu, 31 Oct 2002 14:45:44 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19)
***The next line is where the MIME content is defined for the recipient's
mailer to read:
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
boundary="_=_NextPart_001_01C28116.1A26A8C0"
X-RazorChecked: Yes
Status: RO
X-Status:
X-Keywords:
X-UID: 1

***The following line is put in to taunt people who don't use MUAs that
can't read MIME. Unfortunately it will sometimes show up regardless.

This message is in MIME format. Since your mail reader does not understand
this format, some or all of this message may not be legible.

***Following is the part with the "plain text". A MIME-aware MUA that is not
displaying HTML for whatever reason will display just this section.
--_=_NextPart_001_01C28116.1A26A8C0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"

now is the time for all good men



-- 
be - MOS



Do not underestimate the power of the Force.


***And here is the HTML-encoded section of the message. A MIME-aware MUA
that displays HTML will present this.
--_=_NextPart_001_01C28116.1A26A8C0
Content-Type: text/html;
charset="iso-8859-1"







now is the time for all good
men
--be - MOSDo not underestimate the power
of
the Force.
_
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]


--_=_NextPart_001_01C28116.1A26A8C0--

--- end included message ---

So that's how Outlook does it, and on the whole it works out pretty well.
The only real problem is that some people, many of them 'way smarter than
either of us, use mailreaders that will display all of the above, or even
will display the HTML code without prettying it up. So those folks will get
a lot of garbage on their screens. The only saving grace is that by now they
are used to it.

If I were sending mail blasts I'd do them in plain text. But then again, I'd
make the message so persuasive that people would buy my goods or services
even _before_ they had opened the message. It would just be that good.

-- 
be - MOS



A committee is a life form with six or more legs and no brain.
-- Lazarus Long, "Time Enough For Love"


> -Original Message-
> From: RBHATIA [mailto:RBHATIA@;AIIM.ORG]
> Sent: Thursday, October 31, 2002 1:44 PM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: RE: Mail blasts
> 
> 
> I would like to use the first method - mail goes out as MIME type
> multipart/alternative. Is there anything special I must do 
> when drafting the
> mail in Outlook 2000 ?
> The mail is an HTML message that is sent in the body of the message as
> inline text and not as an attachment. What am I to do in 
> order to send it as
> a MIME type multipart/alternive ?

RE: automated replies

[East, Bill]

Oh come on, Oh Great One. We know you're evil, demented, and disgusting, but
you still wouldn't help _spammers_.

-- 
be - MOS

> -Original Message-
> From: Great Cthulhu Jones [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Sunday, October 13, 2002 11:07 AM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: RE: automated replies
> 
> 
> I just gather up all their email addresses and sell them in bulk to
> spammers.
> 
> (:=
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of 
> David N. Precht
> Sent: Sunday, October 13, 2002 9:13 AM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: RE: automated replies
> 
> 
> Set up their subscriptions to a public folder
> OR
> Set up to another, non-generating OOO email address
> OR
> Set their status to NOMAIL.
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of William
> Lefkovics
> Sent: Sunday, October 13, 2002 03:07
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: RE: automated replies
> 
> 
> So what do you tell them then?
> 
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of David N.
> Precht
> Sent: Saturday, October 12, 2002 10:00 PM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: RE: automated replies
> 
> 
> Just every one you get Reply back with something like this ...
> 
> "Can you stop OOOs and autoreplies from hitting the discussion list ?
> 
> Thanks."
> 
> Half the time I get a response and most of the time, the people are
> like, "how do I do that?"
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Christopher
> Hummert
> Sent: Friday, October 11, 2002 16:31
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: RE: automated replies
> 
> 
> What do you think you're the only one or something? Hey 
> everyone get off
> the freeway cause
> B. van Ouwerkerk is coming and he demands special treatment.
> 
> 
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of B. van
> Ouwerkerk
> Sent: Friday, October 11, 2002 1:11 PM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: automated replies
> 
> 
> Hi,
> 
> Could you fine ppl please prevent your mailclient from sending out of
> the office replies when the message comes from a list
> 
> The original subject of this messages was out of the office replies..
> but
> that got rejected..
> 
> TIA,
> 
> 
> 
> B.
> 
> 
> _
> List posting FAQ:   http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
> Archives:   http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp
> To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 
> 
> _
> List posting FAQ:   http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
> Archives:   http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp
> To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 
> 
> _
> List posting FAQ:   http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
> Archives:   http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp
> To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 
> 
> _
> List posting FAQ:   http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
> Archives:   http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp
> To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 
> 
> _
> List posting FAQ:   http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
> Archives:   http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp
> To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 
> 
> _
> List posting FAQ:   http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
> Archives:   http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp
> To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 

_
List posting FAQ:   http://www.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: Brightmail

[East, Bill]

I agree that SpamNet has the limitations you mention in architecture. The
client-side software that they put together can't, by its nature, deal with
server-side processing such as MAPI does. Remember that it was designed for
server-side filtering and/or POP3 mailboxes. This is an argument for having
Cloudmark design a gateway or server-based product.

As for whether the community reporting will work, I don't know. Maybe, just
maybe, Dr. EvilSpammer could set it up to blacklist all spam except the
stuff that he sends out - and whitelist that. But he would still have to
generate enough unblock requests to counterbalance all the block requests
that users were sending... The Razor database maintainers aren't dumb
either, and if they were getting unblock requests from a known spamhaus they
might decide to delist that user. I think that the larger the community is,
the less likely that a single spammer will be able to affect the outcome.

As for your example, I guess you need to figure out for yourself what spam
is. I have never agreed to allow someone to sell or give away my email
address, so any time someone tries that line on me Rule 3 applies. Is Kean
really opt-in? Did you request their email? Or are they actually opt-out,
forcing you to unsubscribe from a list you never subscribed to?

In the end I think that the Razor experiment is going to be one worth
watching. It is smarter than dumb filters, and less retributive than
services such as SPEWS. For effectiveness I think it falls somewhere in
between the two as well.

Last but not least, you might want to sign up for one of the Razor lists -
there you'll be talking with the folks working on the code and databases,
although they probably won't help much with questions about the  SpamNet
client.

-- 
be - MOS



I eat swiss cheese. But I only nibble on it. I make the holes bigger. --
Steven 
Wright 


> -Original Message-
> From: Jim Helfer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Tuesday, October 01, 2002 12:39 PM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: RE: Brightmail
> 
> 
> 
>   I've been using the Cloudmark's Spamnet on my system for a 
> few weeks now,
> and it just doesn't seem to do the job very well.
> 
>   First of all, with my MAPI connection, The spam email is 
> sitting there
> waiting for Spamnet when I start Outlook. Spamnet won't 
> automatically scan
> new mail on start up.  It's a couple of clicks to make it 
> scan the Inbox.
> Which it does _slowly_. Also, it checks all mail in the 
> requested folder
> rather than just "Unread" mail.  If you have rules that have 
> moved mail to
> other folders while outlook is running, you'll have to 
> manually check those
> folders for Spam.  In my case, it seems to block _maybe_ 50% 
> of the 15-30
> spam messages that I get eache evening.  Then I have to block 
> them manaully,
> which is also time consuming.  And more often than not, the 
> same Spam from
> the same source (or something slightly similar) is back the 
> next day and I
> start over.   I gather from reading the Cloudmark forums that 
> it has the
> same problem with IMAP clients. It apears that it's really 
> only designed for
> use with POP mailboxes.
> 
>   Spamnet seems to run well during the day, however since 
> this morning, it's
> only 2 for 6 in correctly catching Spam.
> 
>   I also wonder about how well this whole "community 
> reporting" thing is
> going to work.  I religiously report spam everyday, but it 
> seems the same
> stuff comes over and over again. I know that people are going to block
> newsletters, I've done it myself by mistake.  But consider 
> this.  A company
> called "Kean Offers" has my name on their lists and is 
> sending me Spam.
> But, this company just happens to be a legit opt-in company, 
> and they will
> happily take me off their mailing list if I click "Remove".  
> They got my
> name from a purchased mailing list, not from me opting in, 
> but since they
> have a working remove policy, they can legitimately argue 
> that they should
> not be blocked.
>   However, I have no idea whether the "remove" link is legit, 
> or if it's
> just going to get me on more mailing lists!   And isn't it 
> just as easy for
> a spamming compnay to "unblock" itself as it is for users to 
> block them?
> Dr. Evil is evil, not stupid.  Seeing as how the Spam 
> blocking feauture
> doesn't seem all that effective now, I can only imagine that 
> strategies to
> thwart Spamnet are in the works.
> 
>   I'd feel better if the company seemed to be participating 
> in there support
> forums.  Most of the questions and comments on the web pag

RE: Brightmail

[East, Bill]

Actually I've just completed an installation of Razor, which is the
open-source predecessor to Cloudmark's SpamNet. Like SpamNet, Razor uses
consensus votes to determine what is and is not spam, and by using a simple
procmail script I have the software marking spam as described by the
original poster. It is server-based.

Now the tricky part is that the spam nomination agent (razor-report) and the
revocation agent (razor-revoke) are both un*x-based, so the average user is
not going to be able to use them. It might be possible to set up a reporting
mailbox to which the users could forward the spam and have a script report
them, but let's think about that for a moment. They're users. The first
person here who set up SpamNet was using it to report birthday announcements
from our HR department. If you let the users decide what is spam, you'll
break the model that Razor and SpamNet use: responsible reporting. For that
reason alone I would prefer to have a human filter what users think is spam
before reporting it.

(As a side note, they are now weighing nominations and cancellations so that
as a user you get a "reputation." People who falsely report spam eventually
will just get ignored.)

Now me, I'd suggest that we as Exchange admins lobby Cloudmark to develop a
server-side, NT-based version of SpamNet with the possibility for
client-side nominations. I've already emailed them about this and they say
that their plans are indefinite. But if they see a market for it I suspect
they will go in that direction.

If you are comfortable with un*ces, go to http://razor.sourceforge.net/ to
check out the package. It's quite nice. I am also an advocate of SpamNet on
the client side (http://www.cloudmark.com/).

Cheers all,

-- 
be - MOS

I want the presidency so bad I can already taste the hors d'oeuvres.


> -Original Message-
> From: Reiss, Peter [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Monday, September 30, 2002 1:57 PM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: RE: Brightmail
> 
> 
> Actually, we are researching spam prevention products right 
> now and have
> found that in fact there are _not_ a lot of such products 
> (i.e. products
> that work the way Abby describes below, which also happens to 
> be the way we
> are trying to accomplish this).  There are are a lot of 
> products that try to
> solve the  spam problem, but few to none work in this way 
> (which seems like
> the proper way to work in an enterprise environment).
> 
> I do have a question for people using client-side software: 
> what happens
> when the user doesn't leave outlook open?  Doesn't that mean that mail
> received while outlook is closed will not be filtered?
> 
> One problem with server-side software is that (I think) the 
> admins will have
> to maintain whitelists rather than the users, which is annoying.
> 
> There is a lot of room for improvement in this software space.
> 
> Peter
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: Andrey Fyodorov [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Tuesday, September 24, 2002 5:44 PM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: RE: Brightmail
> 
> 
> There are a lot of such products. Google is your friend.
> 
> I wonder if Brightmail has anything to do with recent Hotmail 
> not so hot
> performance.
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: ITS.Teams.TNT.Mailing-Lists.MailingList
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Tuesday, September 24, 2002 5:37 PM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: Brightmail
> 
> 
> We're currently investigating anti-spam products and are particularly
> interested in any products that allow the end user the 
> ability to have some
> control over what is considered spam and what is not.  
> Ideally, we'd like a
> product that places suspected spam into a separate folder within the
> clients' mailboxes where they can then deal with it themselves.  In
> addition, we'd like for this to be a completely server-based 
> solution.  I
> know some products allow you to append a phrase to the 
> subject of suspected
> spam messages so that users can then set up rules in Outlook 
> to move those
> messages to a folder, but we'd prefer to have this happen 
> automatically
> (without user intervention).   The only product I've seen so 
> far that can do
> this is Brightmail.  Is anyone using Brightmail for Exchange? 
>  Are there any
> other products out there that would accomplish our goals?  
> We're running
> Exchange 2000 SP2 and have about 2000 users.
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Abby
> 
> _
> List posting FAQ:   http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
> Archives:   http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp
> To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 

_
List posting FAQ:   http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
Archives:   http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp
To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL

RE: IMAP and Relaying issues

[East, Bill]

Buy? Find a 486 or better, load your favorite Linux distro on it and you are
set for the foreseeable future.

And if you don't have any spare 486s, I'll send you a truckload.

-- 
be - MOS



All great discoveries are made by mistake.  --Young


> -Original Message-
> From: Gonzalez, Alex [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Wednesday, August 28, 2002 3:17 PM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: RE: IMAP and Relaying issues
> 
> 
> We'll they do access the Internet and certain apps on the 
> Intranet.  They will send email internally all day no problem 
> is sending out to the Internet that is the issue.  I have 
> thought of the second SMTP server idea but no one wants to 
> buy another system.  What I was hoping for is to find a way 
> to have these units authenticate to the SMTP server so that 
> could send out to the Internet. 
> 
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: Joe Pochedley [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
> Sent: Wednesday, August 28, 2002 2:37 PM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: RE: IMAP and Relaying issues
> 
> Are these devices going to be on your Intranet or on the Internet?
> 
> If these are Intranet only, then you could set up a secondary 
> SMTP server
> for them to send their messages to and give that server 
> permission to relay
> through your Exchange box...
> 
> Just a thought.
> 
> Joe Pochedley
> "In the end, if you have cables like
> spaghetti on the floor and things only
> connect when you swear at them, your
> network is perfectly normal." - James Gaskin
> 
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: Durkee, Peter [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
> Sent: Wednesday, August 28, 2002 2:03 PM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: RE: IMAP and Relaying issues
> 
> 
> Turn on relaying, but require authentication. Hopefully, the wireless
> devices can authenticate.
> 
> -Peter
> 
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: Gonzalez, Alex [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Wednesday, August 28, 2002 9:20
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: IMAP and Relaying issues
> 
> 
> We are currently looking into a wireless solution that will 
> utilize IMAP4.
> We currently have open relaying shut off on our SMTP Server.  
> The devices
> are not able to send email via the SMTP server with it shut off.  The
> devices don't have static IP addresses so I can't add them to 
> the allowed
> machines lists.  Any idea's
> 
> Thank you,
>  
> Alex Gonzalez
> Senior System Administrator
> Handleman Company
> (248) 362-4400 ext. 4914
> 
> 
> _
> List posting FAQ:   http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
> Archives:   http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp
> To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 
> __
> This message is private or privileged.  If you are not the
> person for whom this message is intended, please delete it
> and notify me immediately, and please do not copy or send
> this message to anyone else. 
> 
> 
> 
> _
> List posting FAQ:   http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
> Archives:   http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp
> To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 
> _
> List posting FAQ:   http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
> Archives:   http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp
> To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 
> _
> List posting FAQ:   http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
> Archives:   http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp
> To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 

_
List posting FAQ:   http://www.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: Undeliverable

[East, Bill]

> -Original Message-
> From: Andrea Coppini [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Friday, August 30, 2002 5:35 AM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: RE: Undeliverable
> 
> 
> Do you really want to do that?  I wouldn't bring it down to a 
> few hours.  As
> far as I know the accepted standard is 48 hours, bare minimum 
> is 24 hours,
> since SMTP tends to have amongst the lowest precedence on the 
> internet.
> 

I'll add that it is not always under your control, either. If a message is
accepted for relaying by another host (a common occurrance when a primary MX
goes down), that host will try re-sending the message for as long as it is
set to do so.

-- 
be - MOS



Noone ever built a statue to a critic.



> -Original Message-
> From: Tony McCarthy [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
> Posted At: 30 August 2002 00:56
> Posted To: Swynk Exchange List
> Conversation: Undeliverable
> Subject: Undeliverable
> 
> 
> Hi Everyone,
> 
> One of our staff has just received an Undeliverable notification re an
> external e-mail that was sent 3 days ago. I'm just wondering where the
> settings for the delivery timeout and notifications are 
> buried. I'd like to
> set notifications re undeliverable e-mail to alert users 
> within a couple of
> hours of delivery failure. I'm running Exchange 5.5 on a 2K 
> Server box.
> 

_
List posting FAQ:   http://www.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: RE: Can't view HTML emails

[East, Bill]

Does this mean that I'll have to give up another kidney to get another set
of letters?

I don't think the tub of ice helped at all.

-- 
be - MOS

> -Original Message-
> From: Great Cthulhu Jones [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Wednesday, August 21, 2002 6:57 PM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: RE: RE: Can't view HTML emails
> 
> 
> With new certification programs coming soon!
> 
> That is all you can know. For now.
> 
> (:=
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Harmon,
> Michelle M.
> Sent: Wednesday, August 21, 2002 9:11 AM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: RE: RE: Can't view HTML emails
> 
> 
> And he's all over that like a donkey on a waffle.
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: East, Bill [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
> Sent: Wednesday, August 21, 2002 9:09 AM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: OT: RE: Can't view HTML emails
> 
> 
> Holy hairy frickin' jumping albino radioactive 
> post-pliestocene catfish!
> 
> CJ's back!
> 
> -- 
> be - MOS
> 
> 
> 
> "Grover Cleveland spanked me on two non-consecutive occasions!"
>   - Abe Simpson
> 
> 
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Great Cthulhu Jones [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > Sent: Tuesday, August 20, 2002 10:06 PM
> > To: Exchange Discussions
> > Subject: RE: Can't view HTML emails
> > 
> > 
> > Then cut and paste the code into a web page editor. Do a
> > preview of the page
> > and enjoy the email. Duh.
> > 
> > (:=
> > 
> > -Original Message-
> > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of 
> Orin Rehorst
> > Sent: Tuesday, August 20, 2002 8:53 AM
> > To: Exchange Discussions
> > Subject: Can't view HTML emails
> > 
> > 
> > Can't view HTML emails. They just show as html code.  Have
> > Word 2000 as
> > editor. Have IE settings at default.
> > 
> > TIA,
> > 
> > Regards,
> > Orin
> > 
> > Orin Rehorst
> > Port of Houston Authority
> > (Largest U.S. port in foreign tonnage)
> > e-mail:  [EMAIL PROTECTED] <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > Phone:  (713)670-2443
> > Fax:  (713)670-2457
> > TOPAS web site:  > <http://www.homestead.com/topas/topas.html> >
> > 
> > 
> > _
> > List posting FAQ:   http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
> > Archives:   http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp
> > To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > 
> > 
> > _
> > List posting FAQ:   http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
> > Archives:   http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp
> > To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > 
> 
> _
> List posting FAQ:   http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
> Archives:   http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp
> To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 
> _
> List posting FAQ:   http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
> Archives:   http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp
> To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 
> 
> _
> List posting FAQ:   http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
> Archives:   http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp
> To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 

_
List posting FAQ:   http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
Archives:   http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp
To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]

OT: RE: Can't view HTML emails

[East, Bill]

Holy hairy frickin' jumping albino radioactive post-pliestocene catfish!

CJ's back!

-- 
be - MOS



"Grover Cleveland spanked me on two non-consecutive occasions!"
- Abe Simpson


> -Original Message-
> From: Great Cthulhu Jones [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Tuesday, August 20, 2002 10:06 PM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: RE: Can't view HTML emails
> 
> 
> Then cut and paste the code into a web page editor. Do a 
> preview of the page
> and enjoy the email. Duh.
> 
> (:=
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Orin Rehorst
> Sent: Tuesday, August 20, 2002 8:53 AM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: Can't view HTML emails
> 
> 
> Can't view HTML emails. They just show as html code.  Have 
> Word 2000 as
> editor. Have IE settings at default.
> 
> TIA,
> 
> Regards,
> Orin
> 
> Orin Rehorst
> Port of Houston Authority
> (Largest U.S. port in foreign tonnage)
> e-mail:  [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
> Phone:  (713)670-2443
> Fax:  (713)670-2457
> TOPAS web site:   >
> 
> 
> _
> List posting FAQ:   http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
> Archives:   http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp
> To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 
> 
> _
> List posting FAQ:   http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
> Archives:   http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp
> To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 

_
List posting FAQ:   http://www.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: Titanium (aka: Exchange 2003)?

[East, Bill]

Upgrade or do not
As the summer comes slowly
Just buy Advantage

-- 
be - MOS



Now that I have my "APPLE", I comprehend COST ACCOUNTING!!


> -Original Message-
> From: Andy David [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Friday, July 19, 2002 9:01 AM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: RE: Titanium (aka: Exchange 2003)?
> 
> 
> It comes with a built-in Waffle Maker.
> 
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: Woodruff, Michael [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
> Sent: Friday, July 19, 2002 8:57 AM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: Titanium (aka: Exchange 2003)?
> 
> 
> Anything new that is worth upgrading for?
> 
> personalmail
> 
> _
> List posting FAQ:   http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
> Archives:   http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp
> To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 
> --
> 
> The information contained in this email message is privileged 
> and confidential information intended only for the use of the 
> individual or entity to whom it is addressed.  If the reader 
> of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby 
> notified that any dissemination, distribution or copy of this 
> message is strictly prohibited.  If you have received this 
> email in error, please immediately notify Veronis Suhler 
> Stevenson by telephone (212)935-4990, fax (212)381-8168, or 
> email ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) and delete the message.  Thank you.
> 
> ==
> 
> 
> 
> _
> List posting FAQ:   http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
> Archives:   http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp
> To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 

_
List posting FAQ:   http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
Archives:   http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp
To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]

RE: Determining Klez.H.Worm Origin

[East, Bill]

SMTP headers, ducks. At the very least they'll tell you where the
originating system was. Then you can say to the recipient, "hey, do you know
anyone from WeSendVirses.com?" and take it from there.

The other option is to contact the postmaster at the sending domain. I've
had mixed success with that.

-- 
be - MOS



It's not so hard to lift yourself by your bootstraps once you're off the
ground.
-- Daniel B. Luten


> -Original Message-
> From: Jeffrey Dubyn [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Thursday, July 18, 2002 11:10 PM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: Determining Klez.H.Worm Origin
> 
> 
> On an Exchange 5.5 SP4 box, NAVMSE antivirus is catching and
> quarantining about 50 Klez emails/day.  There are only 10 workstations
> in the environment and all of them have checked out clean with NAVCE.
> NAVMSE only says "origin unknown" on each of the emails.  Any 
> tricks to
> find where the virus is coming from?  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: Backup MX Record for Alternate Exchange 5.5 Server

[East, Bill]

Cost is not usually considered in relation to timing, if that is what you
mean. You could have the second MX set to 10,000 and the individual MTA will
still deal with it according to its preferences.

Ideally if the MTA cannot reach the primary for whatever reason, it will
immediately fall over to the second. RFC 2821, section 5.

-- 
be - MOS



I never cheated an honest man, only rascals.  They wanted something for
nothing.  I gave them nothing for something.
-- Joseph "Yellow Kid" Weil


> -Original Message-
> From: Rob Berger [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Thursday, July 18, 2002 3:36 PM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: Re: Backup MX Record for Alternate Exchange 5.5 Server
> 
> 
> > How long will mail be attempted to be delivered to 
> mail.mycompany.com
> > before it is automatically sent to mail2.mycompany.com 
> instead?  Is this
> > something that I can control or does it depend on the sender's mail
> > server?
> 
> Sorry, brain working faster than hands.  I should have 
> mentioned that I'm
> going to have the MX records as follows:
> mail.mycompany.com x.x.x.x cost=10
> mail2.mycompany.com y.y.y.y cost=20
> 
> -Rob
> 
> _
> List posting FAQ:   http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
> Archives:   http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp
> To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 

_
List posting FAQ:   http://www.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: CLEVER SPAM EMAIL

[East, Bill]

And yet, Baldric^WRobert, there are administrators out there who would not
recognize a clever spam email if it danced up and down in front of them
singing "Clever Spam Emails are Here Again."

Which is (partially) why SMTP has continued to work, since it was designed
to run without too much interference from the administrators; it is also why
the likes of use continue to find employment, since when it does break it is
usually a doozy.

-- 
be - MOS



A man paints with his brains and not with his hands.

> -Original Message-
> From: Robert Moir [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Wednesday, July 17, 2002 5:27 AM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: RE: CLEVER SPAM EMAIL
> 
> 
> 
> 
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Chris Scharff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
> > Sent: 16 July 2002 18:13
> > To: Exchange Discussions
> > Subject: RE: CLEVER SPAM EMAIL
> > 
> > 
> > Reading those docs makes troubleshooting e-mail issues so 
> > much easier. Printing out RFC821 and trying to send e-mail 
> > from a telnet session (to duplicate what's being done in the 
> > RFCs) takes only a day, but the benefits will last much longer.
> 
> I don't see how anyone could call themselves an email system 
> administrator
> if they can't do this. It scares me that I might be exposing 
> my poor email
> servers to people who think this is new news...
> 
> -- 
> This e-mail is intended for the addressee shown. It contains 
> information
> that is confidential and protected from disclosure. Any review,
> dissemination or use of this transmission or its contents by 
> persons or
> unauthorized employees of the intended organisations is 
> strictly prohibited.
> 
> The contents of this email do not necessarily represent the views or
> policies of Luton Sixth Form College, its employees or students.
> 
> _
> List posting FAQ:   http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
> Archives:   http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp
> To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 

_
List posting FAQ:   http://www.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: Reverse DNS and Exchange

[East, Bill]

> -Original Message-
> From: Pfefferkorn, Pete (PFEFFEPE) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Friday, July 12, 2002 2:38 PM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: Reverse DNS and Exchange
> 
> 
> Exchange 5.5
> 
> I'm a little confused on Reverse DNS.  I kind of understand 
> the concept that
> with Reverse DNS enabled the Mail from: entry must resolve to 
> a valid domain
> or it will get rejected.  Some I have some basic questions:
> 
> I take it Exchange 5.5 does not support Reverse DNS?

Spot on.

> How about Exchange 2000?

Some enterprising folks may be able to write an event sink for this, I don't
know.

> How effective is Reverse DNS to help the control of Spam?
Not very. A lot of spam comes through legitimate relays, and a lot of valid
mail may come from places without Reverse DNS properly set up. In some
cases, ISPs won't even set up reverse DNS properly for their customers.

> What problems/issues will we encounter if we do implement 
> reverse DNS in
> some for on front end servers whatever it may be?

Can you rephrase this in the form of a question?

> What about users who have POP and have their return address set to be
> something other than their ISP but they use the ISP as the relay?

Usually you check the HELO against the reverse DNS. So if the relay says
HELO relay.company.com and the reverse DNS matches, no worries.

> When they state the Mail From: they mean the From: in the 
> display area and
> not all the routes?

Often the From: is not checked there. 

> If you have a front end relay like PMDF/VMS which relays 
> first.last@domain
> to a messaging system, reverse DNS will not prevent spam to 
> the receiving
> systems since it will also validate from the relay?
> 

Probably not.

Reverse DNS
A springtime admin's daydream
Nice try, think again

_
List posting FAQ:   http://www.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: While at Baja Fresh

[East, Bill]

Sophmoric humor
In the summer heat falls flat
Wait, it's Thursday, I don't have to use haiku to respond

-- 
be - MOS



I BET WHAT HAPPENED was they discovered fire and invented the wheel on the
same day.  Then that night, they burned the wheel.
-- Jack Handley, The New Mexican, 1988.

> -Original Message-
> From: Dumb Guy [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Thursday, July 11, 2002 3:57 PM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: While at Baja Fresh
> 
> 
> I noticed something at lunch.
> 
> Why isn't the phrase "chopping [one's] meat" a double-entendre?
> 
> Were the guido making the burrito innards using a different 
> implement--a
> mallet rather than a cleaver, for instance--much snickering 
> would ensue;
> e.g., "see that guy over there beating his meat". Guffaw.
> 
> As it were, he was merely "chopping his meat". Utterance of this
> observation did not elicit even a slight chortle from those 
> at the table.
> Only stoic acknowledgement of fact.
> 
> 
> GET INTERNET ACCESS FROM JUNO!
> Juno offers FREE or PREMIUM Internet access for less!
> Join Juno today!  For your FREE software, visit:
> http://dl.www.juno.com/get/web/.
> 
> _
> List posting FAQ:   http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
> Archives:   http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp
> To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 

_
List posting FAQ:   http://www.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: Best practices for backing up Exchange 5.5

[East, Bill]

> -Original Message-
> From: Martin Blackstone [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Thursday, July 11, 2002 11:03 AM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: RE: Best practices for backing up Exchange 5.5
> 
> 
> 1) Stop doing BLB. You know yourself that they don't work. Just use an
> Exchange aware backup program (I use BackupExce) and backup 
> the whole thing
> at one time. You will continue to have nothing but problems 
> no matter what
> software you use to do it.
> 2) Setup Deleted Item Retention. Choose how long you want to 
> save deleted
> emails and make that the policy on recovering them. We do 30 days.

3) Follow the Ed Crowley Never Restore Method. It works better than New
Math, and is easier than learning Greek.

> 
> -Original Message-
> From: Karon Miller [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
> Sent: Thursday, July 11, 2002 8:00 AM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: Best practices for backing up Exchange 5.5
> 
> 
> My company prefers to backup individual mailboxes (brick 
> level backups) and
> we're using the latest version of Backup Exec.  It seems to 
> put a load on
> the server though and occassionally gives us problems.  We 
> aren't even able
> to get a full backup every night of the whole server but just 
> the .EDB files
> due to the mailboxes being so large.  You see, we don't 
> enforce limits on
> mailboxes however, I've tried to convince management otherwise.
> 
> What's the best practice for backing up an Exchange 5.5 
> system?  What's the
> best backup software?  Also we have to occassionally restore 
> mailboxes on
> the server and will get "Access denied to directory" errors 
> and a reboot is
> the only way to fix that.  I'm told this is due to no physical memory
> available because the store eats it all up but from the 
> research I've done,
> this isn't what that error is from.  Any help, advice, or 
> suggestions would
> be great.
> 
> Karon Miller
> Systems Administrator
> Blackwell Sanders Peper Martin
>  
> 
> _
> List posting FAQ:   http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
> Archives:   http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp
> To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 
> _
> List posting FAQ:   http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
> Archives:   http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp
> To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 

_
List posting FAQ:   http://www.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: Message filtering

[East, Bill]

Yes you can, at least up to a limit.

I usually go to 
http://www.arin.net/whois/
first, although you might skip this step since you already probably know
they are in Asia. You could skip straight to 
http://www.apnic.net/ 
and go into their Whois feature to look up the owner of the IP address
203.199.81.81. That will tell you that the message is definitely coming from
vsnl.net.

Beyond that, you will have to contact vsnl's admins and ask them which user
has that IP address.

-- 
be - MOS



Academy:  A modern school where football is taught.


> -Original Message-
> From: RBHATIA [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Tuesday, July 09, 2002 1:28 PM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: RE: Message filtering
> 
> 
> 
> I do have anti-virus software and it is trapping and quarantining the
> messages. But that doesn't stop the spoofed email from coming in.
> I would like to find out the source of the infection - who is 
> the user who
> has been infected. Can I tell from the message header 
> attached below ? 
> 
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: Chris Scharff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Tuesday, July 09, 2002 1:25 PM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: RE: Message filtering
> 
> 
> First I'd change my DL SMTP addresses to something 
> non-obvious. Then I'd
> implement an antivirus solution which could be configured to 
> drop worms. 
> 
> > -Original Message-
> > From: RBHATIA [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > Sent: Tuesday, July 09, 2002 11:28 AM
> > To: Exchange Discussions
> > Subject: Message filtering
> > 
> > 
> > We're being hit big time by the KLEZ virus. Here is one of 
> the messages
> > that
> > was sent. I've checked everyone's machines and everyone 
> seems clear. So
> > I'm
> > guessing it's someone who works closely with our company as 
> we have emails
> > floating back and forth between staff who claim they never 
> sent each other
> > email.
> > What if I set up the message filtering option on the Internet Mail
> > Connector
> > to block the domain smtp02.vsnl.net and smtp03.vsnl.net 
> since those seem
> > to
> > be the 2 main sources from where the emails are originating.
> > Also, how do I insert the entry ? Do I enter it as 
> @smtp02.vsnl.net ?
> > 
> > 
> > Received: from smtp02.vsnl.net ([203.197.12.8]) by 
> myserver.mycompany.com
> > with SMTP (Microsoft Exchange )
> > id 31VYJYRC; Mon, 8 Jul 2002 04:14:50 -0400
> > Received: from Qrvlyi ([203.199.81.81]) by smtp02.vsnl.net
> > (Netscape Messaging Server 4.15) with SMTP id GYX8GJ00.Z9D for
> > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Mon, 8 Jul 2002 13:49:31 +0530
> > From: staff [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Subject: .
> 
> 
> _
> List posting FAQ:   http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
> Archives:   http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp
> To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 
> _
> List posting FAQ:   http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
> Archives:   http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp
> To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 

_
List posting FAQ:   http://www.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?

[East, Bill]

Nuke 'em from orbit. It's the only way to be sure.

-- 
be - MOS



If God didn't mean for us to juggle, tennis balls wouldn't come three to a
can.


> -Original Message-
> From: Couch, Nate [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Monday, July 08, 2002 11:26 AM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: RE: New Virus?
> 
> 
> Ditto. Who cares if a user wants to get an AVI file from 
> home.  I say kill
> em all.
> 
> > --
> > From:   Kevin Miller
> > Reply To:   [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Sent:   Monday, July 8, 2002 10:06
> > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Subject:RE: New Virus?
> > 
> > I love not caring what comes out. Just knowing that I am covered.
> > 
> > --Kevinm KMAP-SR, M, WLKMMAS, UCC+WCA, And Beyond
> > http://www.daughtry.ca/ For Graphics and WebDesign, GO here!
> > 
> > 
> > -Original Message-
> > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Martin
> > Blackstone
> > Sent: Monday, July 08, 2002 8:00 AM
> > To: Exchange Discussions
> > Subject: RE: New Virus?
> > 
> > 
> > Trend has it covered
> > 
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Erik Vesneski [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
> > Sent: Monday, July 08, 2002 7:52 AM
> > To: Exchange Discussions
> > Subject: RE: New Virus?
> > 
> > 
> > Hi,
> > 
> > Rightfully so.  I wanted to verify if others can deem it 
> 'wild' since
> > that is the report I have received.
> > 
> > Erik L. Vesneski
> > www.epicentric.com
> > 
> > 
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Kevin Miller [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > Sent: Monday, July 08, 2002 7:51 AM
> > To: Exchange Discussions
> > Subject: RE: New Virus?
> > 
> > 
> > Nope. I block both those extensions. 
> > 
> > --Kevinm KMAP-SR, M, WLKMMAS, UCC+WCA, And Beyond
> > http://www.daughtry.ca/ For Graphics and WebDesign, GO here!
> > 
> > 
> > -Original Message-
> > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of 
> Erik Vesneski
> > Sent: Monday, July 08, 2002 7:49 AM
> > To: Exchange Discussions
> > Subject: New Virus?
> > 
> > 
> > Hi,
> > 
> > There is a new virus supposedly in the wild:
> > 
> > Attachment:
> > LILAC-WHAT-A-WONDERFULNAME.avi.exe
> > 
> > Anyone seen it yet?
> > 
> > 
> > Thanks,
> > Erik L. Vesneski
> > www.epicentric.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:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 

_
List posting FAQ:   http://www.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: KLEZ or Sleaze

[East, Bill]

Probably a sleazy spammer (sorry, that's redundant). It's quite common to
forge the from address.

If your antivirus isn't going off you can know for sure.

-- 
be - MOS



You can't have everything.  Where would you put it?  -- Steven Wright

> -Original Message-
> From: Orin Rehorst [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Monday, July 08, 2002 10:14 AM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: KLEZ or Sleaze
> 
> 
> Getting KLEZ-like emails. The From is spoofed employee 
> address. Subject is
> "Mortgage Rates Have Never Been Lower." Email body is 
> legitimate-looking ad.
> 
> 
> Is this KLEZ or an incredibly underhanded advertiser?
> 
> TIA,
> 
> Regards,
> Orin
> 
> Orin Rehorst
> Port of Houston Authority
> (Largest U.S. port in foreign tonnage)
> e-mail:  [EMAIL PROTECTED]  
> Phone:  (713)670-2443
> Fax:  (713)670-2457
> TOPAS web site:   >
> 
> 
> _
> List posting FAQ:   http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
> Archives:   http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp
> To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 

_
List posting FAQ:   http://www.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 Security Logging

[East, Bill]

Check your Event Viewer, Application Log for Event 1016s.

You will need to do some research to see which of these are false alarms,
however.

-- 
be - MOS



If you ever fall off the Sears Tower, just go real limp, because maybe
you'll look like a dummy and people will try to catch you because, hey, free
dummy.

> -Original Message-
> From: Andrew Stewart [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Friday, July 05, 2002 9:03 AM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: Exchange Security Logging
> 
> 
> Hi,
> 
> I require to configure an Exchange 5.5 server to record unsuccessful
> mailbox logon attempts, i.e. when a user tries to access 
> through Webmail
> and uses the wrong password.
> 
> How do I set up this sort of logging?
> 
> Thanks in advance,
> 
> Andy 
> 
> 
> 
>  
>  
> 
> _
> List posting FAQ:   http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
> Archives:   http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp
> To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 

_
List posting FAQ:   http://www.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: Will this keep viruses from sending email through the address boo k ?

[East, Bill]

http://www.snopes.com/computer/virus/quickfix.htm 

However, it is true that if you look in the mirror and say "Crowleyman"
three times all of your brick backups will be deleted.

-- 
be - MOS



If I lived back in the wild west days, instead of carrying a six-gun in my
holster, I'd carry a soldering iron. That way, if some smart-aleck cowboy
said something like "Hey, look. He's carrying a soldering iron!" and started
laughing, and everybody else started laughing, I could just say, "That's
right, it's a soldering iron. The soldering iron of justice." Then everybody
would get real quiet and ashamed, because they had made fun of the soldering
iron of justice, and I could probably hit them up for a free drink.


> -Original Message-
> From: RBHATIA [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Tuesday, July 02, 2002 1:35 PM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: Will this keep viruses from sending email through the address
> boo k ?
> 
> 
> I recently read an article about a way to keep mass emailing 
> viruses from
> using your address book to infect other systems.
> Create an entry in the Global Address book on Exchange or on 
> your personal
> address book such AAA - In the window below where it 
> prompts you to
> enter 
> the new email address, type in [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> The "name" AAA will be placed at the top of your address 
> book as entry
> #1. This will be where the worm will start in an effort to 
> send itself to
> all your friends. But when it tries to send itself to 
> AAA, it will be
> undeliverable because of the phony email address you entered
> ([EMAIL PROTECTED]). If the first 
> attempt fails (which it will because of the phony address), 
> the worm goes no
> further and your friends will not be infected. 
> Will this trick work ?
> 
> _
> List posting FAQ:   http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
> Archives:   http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp
> To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 

_
List posting FAQ:   http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
Archives:   http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp
To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]

RE: Mailbox Privacy

[East, Bill]

We've seen this when people inherit old boxen and change (as opposed to
deleting and creating a new one) the profile on the machine. Some hooks to
the old mailbox remain and the event is generated when the user starts up
Outlook.

I agree with the rest of the crowd, though - turn off the disclaimer, at
least when you are conversing with civili[s/z]ed folk.
-- 
be - MOS



 "C'mon, it's just like making love. Y'know, left, down, rotate sixty-two
degrees, engage rotors" -Bender 


> -Original Message-
> From: Taylor, Mal [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Tuesday, June 25, 2002 11:13 AM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: Mailbox Privacy
> 
> 
> 
> One of our users (userA) accuses userB of attempting to read 
> his email.
> The evidence is:-
> 1 Within Exchange admin, in the mailbox resources window, 
> the Windows
> NT account is displaying userB.
> 2 An event log id 1016 occurred stating userB logged onto userA
> mailbox and is not the primary user.
> 
> UserB categorically denies attempting to access the mailbox.
>  
> Any reasons as to how this could happen assuming userB is 
> telling the truth
> 
> Exchange 5.5 SP4 Windows 2000 SP2
> 
> 
> 
> **
> *
> This e-mail and its attachments are intended for the above named 
> recipient(s) only and are super-dooper and may be painted orange.
> If they have come to you in error you must take no action based 
> on them, nor must you copy or disclose them or any part of 
> their contents to any person or organisation except Santa Claus; please
notify the 
> sender immediately and delete this e-mail and its attachments from 
> your computer system, or have a choccie.
> 
> Please note that Internet communications are not necessarily secure 
> and may be changed, intercepted or corrupted. We advise that 
> you understand and observe this lack of security when e-mailing us 
> and we will accept any liability for any such changes, 
> interceptions or corruptions. 
> 
> Although we have taken steps to ensure that this e-mail and its 
> attachments are free from any virus, we advise that in keeping 
> with good computing practice the recipient should ensure they 
> are actually virus free. Practice safe sex. Wear sunscreen. Remember
> the Alamo. Cherchez la femme.
> 
> Copyright in this e-mail and attachments created by us belongs 
> to the King of Belgium. 
> 
> Littlewoods takes steps to transmit offensive, 
> obscene or discriminatory material.  If this message contains 
> appropriate material please forward the e-mail intact to 
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] and it will be drooled over. 
> Statements and opinions contained in this e-mail may not 
> necessarily represent those of Littlewoods, unless they are very 
> good and finish their supper first.
> 
> Please note that e-mail communication may be monitored.
> 
> Registered office: 
> Littlewoods Retail Limited, 
> Sir John Moores Building, 
> 100 Old Hall Street, 
> Liverpool,
> L70 1AB,
> England
> The United Kingdom
> Near Europe
> The Western Hemisphere
> Earth
> The Sol System
> The Milky Way 
> Registered no: 421258 
> 
> http://www.littlewoods.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: How to block UCE at MSX55-IMC level

[East, Bill]

To all - 

I've not researched this too carefully, but there was an announcement
earlier this week about a product from cloudmark.com that will enable your
end-users to better handle their own spam. I'm not associated with them and
I really cannot say whether it will work as advertised, but from what I read
on thier site it may be worth a look. It works with Outlook 2000 and XP (do
you use Outlook?)

-- 
be - MOS

> -Original Message-
> From: Smith, Ronni [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Friday, June 21, 2002 3:57 PM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: RE: How to block UCE at MSX55-IMC level
> 
> 
> I'm in although the amount of $ I could contribute is quite 
> limited. I only
> have about 25 users and only about 5 of them get that much junk so the
> company doesn't see it as much of a priority compared to 
> other things. Like
> getting the server room its own A/C. A point on which I have 
> to say I agree
> 500%.
> 
> Ronni
> 
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Holt, Miles [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > Sent: Friday, June 21, 2002 12:01 PM
> > To: Exchange Discussions
> > Subject: RE: How to block UCE at MSX55-IMC level
> > 
> > 
> > I agree, I like that feature set as we are currently looking 
> > for anti spam tools for exchange too. Maybe we should see who 
> > else likes em and split the
> > dev costs. :-)
> > 
> > --- 
> > Miles Holt 
> > Network Engineer 
> > Summit Marketing Group 
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
> > 770-303-0426 
> > --- 
> > "Show me a completely smooth operation and I'll show you 
> > someone who's covering mistakes. Real boats rock." - Frank 
> > Herbert, "Chapterhouse: Dune"  
> > 
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Martin Blackstone [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
> > Sent: Friday, June 21, 2002 2:31 PM
> > To: Exchange Discussions
> > Subject: RE: How to block UCE at MSX55-IMC level
> > 
> > 
> > I was thinking the same thing about the reqs. They are all 
> > actually nice features, but I don't see them anywhere as of now.
> > 
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Chris Scharff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
> > Sent: Friday, June 21, 2002 11:02 AM
> > To: Exchange Discussions
> > Subject: RE: How to block UCE at MSX55-IMC level
> > 
> > 
> > A very specific set of requirements that I'm not aware any 
> > products currently meet. What's your budget? I'll whip one up 
> > for the right price.
> > 
> > > -Original Message-
> > > From: Microsoft Exchange List Server
> > > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > > Sent: Friday, June 21, 2002 12:51 PM
> > > To: Exchange Discussions
> > > Subject: How to block UCE at MSX55-IMC level
> > > 
> > > Hi All,
> > > 
> > > MSX 5.5+SP4
> > > 
> > > We are looking for a product that helps out to stop UCE, 
> > this product
> > > should allow the users to send (via email) a particular UCE 
> > received 
> > > to the product-database for this database to block future 
> incoming 
> > > messages with same sender/subject, also the users should 
> receive a 
> > > report of all messages
> > > blocked in a weekly basis.
> > > 
> > > Hope you can share your experiences with the list.
> > > 
> > > tia
> > > -er
> > > 
> > > _
> > > List posting FAQ:   http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
> > > Archives:   http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp
> > > To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > 
> > _
> > List posting FAQ:   http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
> > Archives:   http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp
> > To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > 
> > _
> > List posting FAQ:   http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
> > Archives:   http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp
> > To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > 
> > _
> > List posting FAQ:   http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
> > Archives:   http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp
> > To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > 
> 
> _
> List posting FAQ:   http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
> Archives:   http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp
> To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 

_
List posting FAQ:   http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
Archives:   http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp
To unsubscribe: mailto

RE: STORE.EXE--CONSUMING TOO MUCH MEMORY

[East, Bill]

Listen to him, he's pre-med.

-- 
be - MOS



The decision doesn't have to be logical; it was unanimous.


> -Original Message-
> From: Chris Scharff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Friday, June 21, 2002 10:31 AM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: RE: STORE.EXE--CONSUMING TOO MUCH MEMORY
> 
> 
> Suggesting the removal of McAfee products from a server is 
> among the most
> helpful responses I could possibly think of. It's solved 
> pesky problems for
> thousands of administrators over the years.
> 
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Randal, Phil [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > Sent: Friday, June 21, 2002 8:23 AM
> > To: Exchange Discussions
> > Subject: RE: STORE.EXE--CONSUMING TOO MUCH MEMORY
> > 
> > What a helpful response...
> > 
> > This might be more helpful.
> > 
> > What versions of Virusscan & Groupshield?
> > 
> > If GS 4.5, is hotfix 7 applied?
> > 
> > I'd recommend upgrading to GS 5.0 if you're stuck with 
> McAfee (we are :-(
> > )
> > 
> > Phil
> > 
> > -
> > Phil Randal
> > Network Engineer
> > Herefordshire Council
> > Hereford, UK
> > 
> > > -Original Message-
> > > From: Andy David [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > > Sent: 21 June 2002 14:11
> > > To: Exchange Discussions
> > > Subject: RE: STORE.EXE--CONSUMING TOO MUCH MEMORY
> > >
> > >
> > > Friggin Remove them and find out.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > -Original Message-
> > > From: Aristotle Zoulas [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > > Sent: Friday, June 21, 2002 9:00 AM
> > > To: Exchange Discussions
> > > Subject: STORE.EXE--CONSUMING TOO MUCH MEMORY
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > We are running Exchange 5.5 with the latest service packs and
> > > updates. Our
> > > message store consumes more and more memory until is it 
> shut down by
> > > Exchange. This just started happening recently. When it
> > > happens, all users
> > > are prevented from connecting via Windows Outlook Client.
> > >
> > >
> > > What could cause something like this? We are running MacAfee
> > > Virus scan and
> > > GroupShield on this machine. Could that have any effect?
> > >
> > >
> > > TIA
> > >
> > > _
> > > List posting FAQ:   http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
> > > Archives:   http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp
> > > To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > >
> > > --
> > > 
> > > The information contained in this email message is privileged
> > > and confidential information intended only for the use of the
> > > individual or entity to whom it is addressed.  If the reader
> > > of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby
> > > notified that any dissemination, distribution or copy of this
> > > message is strictly prohibited.  If you have received this
> > > email in error, please immediately notify Veronis Suhler
> > > Stevenson by telephone (212)935-4990, fax (212)381-8168, or
> > > email ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) and delete the 
> message.  Thank you.
> > >
> > > ==
> > > 
> > >
> > >
> > > _
> > > List posting FAQ:   http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
> > > Archives:   http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp
> > > To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > >
> > 
> > _
> > List posting FAQ:   http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
> > Archives:   http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp
> > To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 
> _
> List posting FAQ:   http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
> Archives:   http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp
> To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 

_
List posting FAQ:   http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
Archives:   http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp
To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]

FW: Monitoring application for Exchange

[East, Bill]

Dangit. I don't know what key I hit.

Anyway,

dumpel -f c:\scratch\fred.txt -l system|application -m /youreventsource/ -e
/youreventnumber/
grep /youreventnumber/ c:\scratch\fred.txt
if not errorlevel 1 /your command-line mailer commands/
del c:\scratch\fred.txt

I've only tested it a little, but of course you could do a bunch of
different tests with grep each time.

-- 
be - MOS



People in general do not willingly read if they have anything else to amuse
them.
-- S. Johnson


> -Original Message-
> From: East, Bill 
> Sent: Tuesday, June 18, 2002 8:38 AM
> To: 'Exchange Discussions'
> Subject: RE: Monitoring application for Exchange
> 
> 
> That was fun.
> 
> You will need:
> The NT Resource Kit
> Scissors (ask your parents!)
> A cookie (optional)
> A command-line mailer (blat, wsendmail, what have you).
> 
> Using the at facility, schedule a regular dump of the Event 
> Log using the dumpel utility, then grep for the string you want.
> 
> dumpel -f c:\scratch\fred.txt -l system -m
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> be - MOS
> 
> 
> 
> Nonsense.  Space is blue and birds fly through it.  --Heisenberg
> 
> 
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Ken Cornetet [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > Sent: Friday, June 14, 2002 4:00 PM
> > To: Exchange Discussions
> > Subject: RE: Monitoring application for Exchange
> > 
> > 
> > Do you have any unix/linux servers about? There is a free 
> > program out there
> > (name escapes me at the moment) that sends event log entries 
> > to syslog on a
> > unix box. On the unix side, it's pretty simple to configure 
> > syslog to send
> > email on receipt of given events.
> > 
> > If memory serves, there is also an event log reader program 
> in the NT4
> > reskit. You could use that, combined with at, findstr and 
> > blat (SMTP mailer)
> > to do what you want to do.
> > 
> > Lastly, this would be pretty simple in Perl.
> > 
> > If you want it written for you, send me the requirements 
> > directly, and I'll
> > send a quote. 
> > 
> > -Original Message-
> > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > Sent: Friday, June 14, 2002 1:00 PM
> > To: Exchange Discussions
> > Subject: Monitoring application for Exchange
> > 
> > 
> > Is there is a product out there that will monitor the
> > application/system/security NT logs on exchange servers and 
> > e-mail certain
> > errors? 
> > 
> > 
> > _
> > List posting FAQ:   http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
> > Archives:   http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp
> > To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > 
> > _
> > List posting FAQ:   http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
> > Archives:   http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp
> > To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > 
> 

_
List posting FAQ:   http://www.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: Monitoring application for Exchange

[East, Bill]

That was fun.

You will need:
The NT Resource Kit
Scissors (ask your parents!)
A cookie (optional)
A command-line mailer (blat, wsendmail, what have you).

Using the at facility, schedule a regular dump of the Event Log using the
dumpel utility, then grep for the string you want.

dumpel -f c:\scratch\fred.txt -l system -m



-- 
be - MOS



Nonsense.  Space is blue and birds fly through it.  --Heisenberg


> -Original Message-
> From: Ken Cornetet [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Friday, June 14, 2002 4:00 PM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: RE: Monitoring application for Exchange
> 
> 
> Do you have any unix/linux servers about? There is a free 
> program out there
> (name escapes me at the moment) that sends event log entries 
> to syslog on a
> unix box. On the unix side, it's pretty simple to configure 
> syslog to send
> email on receipt of given events.
> 
> If memory serves, there is also an event log reader program in the NT4
> reskit. You could use that, combined with at, findstr and 
> blat (SMTP mailer)
> to do what you want to do.
> 
> Lastly, this would be pretty simple in Perl.
> 
> If you want it written for you, send me the requirements 
> directly, and I'll
> send a quote. 
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Friday, June 14, 2002 1:00 PM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: Monitoring application for Exchange
> 
> 
> Is there is a product out there that will monitor the
> application/system/security NT logs on exchange servers and 
> e-mail certain
> errors? 
> 
> 
> _
> List posting FAQ:   http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
> Archives:   http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp
> To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 
> _
> List posting FAQ:   http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
> Archives:   http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp
> To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 

_
List posting FAQ:   http://www.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: What a lag . . .

[East, Bill]

That's nothing. I have library books that have been overdue for three weeks
now.

> -Original Message-
> From: Chris H [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Thursday, June 13, 2002 3:15 PM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: What a lag . . .
> 
> 
> WOW . . . the posts about job hunting and Wal Mart that just 
> showed up a few
> minutes ago were posted via the website 2 days ago . . . .
> 
> 
> _
> List posting FAQ:   http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
> Archives:   http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp
> To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 

_
List posting FAQ:   http://www.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: stupid disclaimers

[East, Bill]

I'm taking action on your message. I'm taking action on it right now. Nyah
nyah nyah nyah nyah.

Tell your lawyers to get their $49.95 back from "J.D.'s 'R' Us."

-- 
be - MOS



Noone ever built a statue to a critic.


> -Original Message-
> From: Woodruff, Michael [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Wednesday, June 05, 2002 1:31 PM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: RE: stupid disclaimers
> 
> 
> Do think this was my design?  Our lawyers think we need this.  Like it
> actually performs some kind of function.
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: Chris Scharff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
> Sent: Wednesday, June 05, 2002 1:23 PM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: stupid disclaimers
> 
> 
> I think I might just start blocking messages with moronic 
> disclaimers before
> they even get to my system. I feel dumber just for having read the
> disclaimer below.
> 
> > This message (including any attachments) contains
> > confidential information intended for a specific individual 
> > and purpose, and is protected by law.  If you are not the 
> > intended recipient, you should delete this message.  Any 
> > disclosure, copying, or distribution of this message, or the 
> > taking of any action based on it, is strictly prohibited.
> 
> _
> List posting FAQ:   http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
> Archives:   http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp
> To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 
> 
> **
> **
> 
> This message (including any attachments) contains 
> confidential information intended for a specific individual 
> and purpose, and is protected by law.  If you are not the 
> intended recipient, you should delete this message.  Any 
> disclosure, copying, or distribution of this message, or the 
> taking of any action based on it, is strictly prohibited.
> 
> **
> **
> 
> 
> _
> List posting FAQ:   http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
> Archives:   http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp
> To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 

_
List posting FAQ:   http://www.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: Outlook 97 Notification

[East, Bill]

You're new here, aren't you?

Slipstick is a good answer. Aternatively, if you felt like it you could whip
up a POP3 notifier, even something like xfaces to scan the second box.

I thought I remembered a Java implementation:
http://gate.cruzio.com/~jthomas/mailfaces/
-- 
be - MOS



Competitive fury is not always anger.  It is the true missionary's courage
and zeal in facing the possibility that one's best may not be enough. 
-- Gene Scott


> -Original Message-
> From: Darren Ash [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Wednesday, June 05, 2002 10:28 AM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: RE: Outlook 97 Notification
> 
> 
> we appear to be moving away from the original question here !
> 
> > -Original Message-
> > From:   Tony Hlabse [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > Sent:   05 June 2002 03:23
> > To: Exchange Discussions
> > Subject:Re: Outlook 97 Notification
> > 
> > Is it pronounced the same? like tomato, process, schedule etc.
> > - Original Message - 
> > From: "Ward, Stuart" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > To: "Exchange Discussions" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > Sent: Wednesday, June 05, 2002 10:19 AM
> > Subject: RE: Outlook 97 Notification
> > 
> > 
> > > Surely 'authorize' is the variant and the true English spelling is
> > > 'authorise'
> > > 
> > > Stu
> > > 
> > > -Original Message-
> > > From: Setmajer, Jerzy [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > > Sent: Wednesday, June 05, 2002 10:06 AM
> > > To: Exchange Discussions
> > > Subject: RE: Outlook 97 Notification
> > > 
> > > 
> > > Boy this list is educational.
> > > Now I know that "authorise" is a British variant of AUTHORIZE.
> > > Very cool.
> > > 
> > > 
> > > -Original Message-
> > > From: Chris Scharff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > > Sent: Wednesday, June 05, 2002 8:34 AM
> > > To: Exchange Discussions
> > > Subject: RE: Outlook 97 Notification
> > > 
> > > 
> > > Sure. What's your budget?
> > > 
> > > > -Original Message-
> > > > From: Darren Ash [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > > > Sent: Wednesday, June 05, 2002 3:57 AM
> > > > To: Exchange Discussions
> > > > Subject: Outlook 97 Notification
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > I have users that look at 2 mailboxes. They have ol set up to
> > > > display a message when new mail arrives however, this does
> > > > not work on the secondary mailbox ??? I guess this is the way
> > > > it is supposed to work but does anyone know how to make it
> > > > work on both  NT4 Sp6a, Ex 5.5 SP4, OL97
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Coolchain LtdCoolchain Ltd
> > > > London Road  Henley Road
> > > > Teynham  Paddock Wood
> > > > Kent Kent
> > > > ME9 9PR  TN12 6DN
> > > >
> > > > Tel: 01795 523200Tel: 01892 831400
> > > > Fax: 01795 523241Fax: 01892 831451
> > > >
> > > > All business is conducted in accordance with the company's
> > > > terms and conditions, a copy of which is available on
> > > > request. For the avoidance of doubt, all orders initiated
> > > > by ourselves must be signed by an authorised signatory of
> > > > this company.
> > > >
> > > > 
> _
> > > > List posting FAQ:   
> http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
> > > > Archives:   
> http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp
> > > > To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > > Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > >
> > > 
> > > _
> > > List posting FAQ:   http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
> > > Archives:   http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp
> > > To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > 
> > > _
> > > List posting FAQ:   http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
> > > Archives:   http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp
> > > To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > 
> > > _
> > > List posting FAQ:   http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
> > > Archives:   http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp
> > > To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > 
> > 
> > _
> > List posting FAQ:   http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
> > Archives:   http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp
> > To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > 
> > 
> > 
> Coolchain LtdCoolchain Ltd 
> London Road  Henley Road 
> Teynham 

RE: Cable Modems

[East, Bill]

How come on the hoagie-ordering systems there's no option for yuzu-fruit?

-- 
be - MOS



I like to go to art museums and name the untitled paintings... Boy With
Pail...Kitten On Fire...  -- Steven Wright


> -Original Message-
> From: Erik Sojka [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Monday, June 03, 2002 4:55 PM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: RE: Cable Modems
> 
> 
> How come there's no Wawa near my house?
> 
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Garrish, Robert B. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
> > Sent: Monday, June 03, 2002 4:54 PM
> > To: Exchange Discussions
> > Subject: RE: Cable Modems
> > 
> > 
> > Dear Martin and Don,
> > 
> > If you are that good, I could get both of you jobs on 
> > the Network
> > and Communications Team here at Wawa.  The VPN Project at 
> > Wawa was (and is)
> > not easy.
> > Think about it, you could drink all of the Wawa brand drinks for
> > free, all work day long, and have access to all the 
> Scrapple you could
> > eat
> > 
> > 
> > Rob Garrish
> > Exchange Administrator
> > Wawa Inc.
> > 610-558-8371
> > 
> > 
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Martin Blackstone [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > Sent: Monday, June 03, 2002 02:35 PM
> > To: Exchange Discussions
> > Subject: RE: Cable Modems
> > 
> > 
> > Putting the rack mount brackets on
> > 
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Ely, Don [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
> > Sent: Monday, June 03, 2002 11:23 AM
> > To: Exchange Discussions
> > Subject: RE: Cable Modems
> > 
> > 
> > It takes you that long???  Or are you including removing it 
> > from the box? :P
> > 
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Martin Blackstone [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
> > Sent: Monday, June 03, 2002 2:25 PM
> > To: Exchange Discussions
> > Subject: RE: Cable Modems
> > 
> > 
> > I think it depends on the VPN. A Cisco VPN device can be 
> > configured in about
> > 5 minutes.
> > 
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Garrish, Robert B. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
> > Sent: Monday, June 03, 2002 11:22 AM
> > To: Exchange Discussions
> > Subject: RE: Cable Modems
> > 
> > 
> > Dear Dot,
> > 
> > I apologize.  I have misled you.  VPN is not easy.
> > VPN is not easy, but it can accomplish what you are 
> > looking to do.
> > 
> > 
> > Rob Garrish
> > Exchange Administrator
> > Wawa Inc.
> > 610-558-8371
> > 
> > 
> > -Original Message-
> > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > Sent: Monday, June 03, 2002 01:56 PM
> > To: Exchange Discussions
> > Subject: RE: Cable Modems
> > 
> > 
> > Thanks for the responses, it looks as though the VPN route is 
> > going to be
> > the easiest to implement for us.
> > 
> > Dot
> > 
> > > -Original Message-
> > > From: John Matteson [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > > Sent: Monday, June 03, 2002 12:44 PM
> > > To:   Exchange Discussions
> > > Subject:  RE: Cable Modems
> > > 
> > > VPN. Secure, authenticated. Just like at the office.
> > > 
> > > John Matteson; Exchange Manager
> > > Geac Corporate Infrastructure Systems and Standards
> > > (404) 239 - 2981
> > > 
> > > Defeat is a state of mind. No one is ever defeated until 
> defeat has 
> > > been accepted as a reality. To me, defeat in anything is merely 
> > > temporary, and its punishment is but an urge for me to 
> > greater effort 
> > > to achieve my goal. Defeat simply tells me that something 
> > is wrong in 
> > > my doing; it is a path leading to success and truth. --Bruce Lee
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > -Original Message-
> > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > > Sent: Monday, June 03, 2002 8:29 AM
> > > To: Exchange Discussions
> > > Subject: Cable Modems
> > > 
> > > 
> > > With the current wave of cable modems and DSL links offered by 
> > > Ameritech, AT&T and, of late, DirecTV our users are asking 
> > for access 
> > > to their email via these services.  Our mail server is 
> not publicly 
> > > accessible.  Does any one have a good way of handling these 
> > requests?
> > > Personally, I don't want to enable access to my mail servers via 
> > > Ameritech.net or whatever.
> > > 
> > > Your thoughts would be greatly appreciated.
> > > 
> > > Dot Harris
> > > William Blair & Company
> > > [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > 
> > > _
> > > List posting FAQ:   http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
> > > Archives:   http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp
> > > To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > 
> > > _
> > > List posting FAQ:   http://www.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: Speed

[East, Bill]

Yo.

If you back off a step, are there other options apart from consolidating the
9 Exchange servers into 1? Can you move the smaller offices onto the central
server but leave servers at the bigger sites? Can you have several hub
sites, where small local offices have dedicated lines into large local
offices (design it right and you'll save on telco charges).

For what it is worth, we have one central server for several remote sites,
each of which has between 8 and 16 channels of a T. But we also run a great
deal of other traffic over those lines, and since all our sites are within
city limits the line costs are minimal.

Centralization
Is a bean-counter's delight
But autumn's leaves disperse

-- 
be - MOS



Avoid gunfire in the bathroom tonight.

> -Original Message-
> From: Rob Moore [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Thursday, May 23, 2002 8:24 AM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: Speed
> 
> 
> I'm new to this organization. Currently we have nine Exchange 
> 5.5 servers
> (450 users) scattered around the country. They're all connected to the
> Exchange server at our headquarters in Philadelphia. All 
> Internet mail goes
> through the Philadelphia connection. All the remote sites are 
> connected to
> us, through the Internet, at various speeds, the fastest 
> being some level of
> DSL.
> 
> We're just at the beginning stages of moving our NT- and 
> Exchange 5.5-based
> network to Win2k and Ex2k. One of the ideas being considered is to
> consolidate the 9 different Exchange servers into one server housed in
> Philadelphia. So my questions are: 1. What is the minimum 
> speed you would
> suggest the remote sites be connected to us? (They'll be 
> using Outlook.) 2.
> Is it a good idea?
> 
> We're trying to lower the administrative overhead, and 
> simplify the network.
> 
> Thanks for your input,
> Rob
> -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
> Rob Moore, MCSE
> American Friends Service Committee
> IT Department
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 
> _
> List posting FAQ:   http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
> Archives:   http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp
> To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 

_
List posting FAQ:   http://www.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: Drive m:????

[East, Bill]

Plus, ever since I was partonized I've had to buy new shirts.

-- 
be - MOS



Support your local church or synagogue.  Worship at Bank of America.


> -Original Message-
> From: Thomas Di Nardo [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Wednesday, May 22, 2002 10:02 AM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: RE: Drive m:
> 
> 
> Sarcasm is the word you need to become familiar with.
> 
> Tom.
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: Felicity Smith [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
> Sent: Wednesday, May 22, 2002 8:30 AM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: RE: Drive m:
> 
> pardon me for sounding so partonizing, but the M drive is the
> installable
> file system that ships with exchange.  As you know all internet
> protocols
> (http, smtp, nntp, pop, imap) are now server by the same engine that
> does
> IIS.  IIS consults the Exhcange store and a file handle to 
> the item you
> are looking for in the Exchange store is returned.
> 
> This is a true NTFS file handle and is provided by the EPoxy or EXIPC
> mechanism which masquarades exchange items as NTFS file 
> handles using an
> asynchornous work queue which is extremely fast and provides little
> context switching.  Think of it as another file system driver just the
> same as FAT, NTFS, CDFS, HPFS.
> 
> The reason some of you do and some of you don't see an M drive is
> because
> IIS launches (specifically the W3svc service) before your 
> exchange store
> service completes it start up process.  Hence no M drive.  
> All you do is
> bounce your w3svc service and you will have an M Drive.
> 
> I chose to change
> HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SYSTEM\CurrentControlSet\Services\W3SVC and make
> DependOnService have the value of MSExchangeIS.
> 
> You can change the drive letter by editing the following registry key.
> HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SYSTEM\CurrentControlSet\Services\EXIFS\Parameters 
> On the Edit menu, click Add Value, and then add the following registry
> value:
> Value Name: DriveLetter Data Type: REG_SZ Value: P
> NOTE: If the DriveLetter value already exists, double-click the value,
> and
> then change the drive to n: or another letter.
> 
> One more point about the EXIFS (Exchange Installable File System) -
> there
> are three methods of application deployment - xcopy from the file
> system,
> ftp, or email or sending data to an exchange public folder.  NT admins
> like xcopy, web admins like ftp or webdave, exchange admins like to
> deploy
> to public folders.  EXIFS provides a mechisim to keep everyone happy.
> 
> --Felicity
> 
> 
> 
> _
> List posting FAQ:   http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
> Archives:   http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp
> To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 
> _
> List posting FAQ:   http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
> Archives:   http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp
> To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 

_
List posting FAQ:   http://www.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: Bubbye

[East, Bill]

Anyone who hasn't spanked the intern yet, please put your name on the signup
sheet.

-- 
be - MOS


> -Original Message-
> From: Erik Sojka [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Tuesday, April 30, 2002 12:47 PM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: RE: Bubbye
> 
> 
> Can you get me some coffee on your way out?
> 
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Chris Levis [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
> > Sent: Tuesday, April 30, 2002 12:41 PM
> > To: Exchange Discussions
> > Subject: Bubbye
> > 
> > 
> > Well, this co-op semester has come to an end.  Thanks for all 
> > your help.
> > These lists have been an invaluable resource, and they made 
> > me appear much
> > smarter than I really am  =)
> > 
> > Next co-op, first thing I'm doing is signing back onto the list.
> > 
> > Peace.
> > 
> > _
> > List posting FAQ:   http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
> > Archives:   http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp
> > To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > 
> 
> _
> List posting FAQ:   http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
> Archives:   http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp
> To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 

_
List posting FAQ:   http://www.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: Z

[East, Bill]

Mondo frickin' fins
The gas cap is well hidden
Springtime, chick magnet.

-- 
be - MOS


> -Original Message-
> From: Chris Levis [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Friday, April 26, 2002 9:52 AM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: RE: Z
> 
> 
> just got a `59 caddy =)
> 
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Woodruff, Michael [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > Sent: Friday, April 26, 2002 9:51 AM
> > To: Exchange Discussions
> > Subject: Z
> > 
> > 
> > To lighten up the discussion on Friday,  does anybody know of 
> > any 74,75,76 z
> > cars for sale?
> > 
> > _
> > List posting FAQ:   http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
> > Archives:   http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp
> > To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > 
> 
> _
> List posting FAQ:   http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
> Archives:   http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp
> To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 

_
List posting FAQ:   http://www.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: Database and Drives size

[East, Bill]

All I know is that if you can't measure a piece of string you can't manage a
piece of string.

-- 
be - MOS



The sun never sets on those who ride into it.
-- RKO


> -Original Message-
> From: Louis Joyce [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Thursday, April 11, 2002 11:34 AM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: RE: Database and Drives size
> 
> 
> Twice as long as half a piece of string.
> 
> :)
> 
> Regards
> 
> Mr Louis Joyce
> Data Support Analyst
> BT Ignite eSolutions
> 
> 
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: Chris Scharff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: 11 April 2002 16:21
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: RE: Database and Drives size
> 
> 
> How long is a piece of string?
> 
> > -Original Message-
> > From: wade robinson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
> > Sent: Thursday, April 11, 2002 6:48 AM
> > To: Exchange Discussions
> > Subject: Database and Drives size
> > 
> > 
> > Is it acceptable to put Exchange 2000 information stores on a 
> > set of mirrored 72 GB drives?
> 
> _
> List posting FAQ:   http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
> Archives:   http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp
> To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 
> _
> List posting FAQ:   http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
> Archives:   http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp
> To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 

_
List posting FAQ:   http://www.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: Comm Check

[East, Bill]

Mmmm defirbillated busts.

-- 
be - MOS



Troglodytism does not necessarily imply a low cultural level.


> -Original Message-
> From: Stevens, Dave [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Friday, March 29, 2002 1:45 PM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: RE: Comm Check
> 
> 
> I knew I'd get busted on that...
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: John Matteson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
> Sent: Friday, March 29, 2002 1:40 PM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: RE: Comm Check
> 
> 
> It's defibrillator. You need to update your spellchecker.
> 
> John Matteson; Exchange Manager 
> Geac Corporate Infrastructure Systems and Standards 
> (404) 239 - 2981
> Be not afraid of growing slowly, be afraid only of standing 
> still. --Chinese
> Proverb
> 
> 
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: Stevens, Dave [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Friday, March 29, 2002 1:30 PM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: RE: Comm Check
> 
> 
> quick, grab the defibullator!
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: John Matteson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
> Sent: Friday, March 29, 2002 1:25 PM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: Comm Check
> 
> 
> This list seems to have died off this afternoon.
> 
> John Matteson; Exchange Manager 
> Geac Corporate Infrastructure Systems and Standards 
> (404) 239 - 2981
> Be not afraid of growing slowly, be afraid only of standing 
> still. --Chinese
> Proverb
> 
> 
> 
> _
> List posting FAQ:   http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
> Archives:   http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp
> To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 
> _
> List posting FAQ:   http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
> Archives:   http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp
> To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 
> _
> List posting FAQ:   http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
> Archives:   http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp
> To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 
> _
> List posting FAQ:   http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
> Archives:   http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp
> To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 

_
List posting FAQ:   http://www.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: synchronizing OWA with OST or PST

[East, Bill]

I know a site where they have pictures of Boeing employees administering
mail systems.

-- 
be - MOS



A system meant for common use should rarely need uncommon knowledge.
--Redford


> -Original Message-
> From: William Lefkovics [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Thursday, March 21, 2002 7:28 PM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: RE: synchronizing OWA with OST or PST
> 
> 
> As in aroused?  Me too.
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-
> From: East, Bill [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Thursday, March 21, 2002 6:25 AM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: RE: synchronizing OWA with OST or PST
> 
> 
> Jumping Jiminey. I guess I am.
> 
> It's just that Dupler fellow. I get all excited.
> 

_
List posting FAQ:   http://www.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: synchronizing OWA with OST or PST

[East, Bill]

> -Original Message-
> From: Dupler, Craig [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Thursday, March 21, 2002 12:32 PM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: RE: synchronizing OWA with OST or PST
> 
> 
> Well I thought this had died with everyone having made their 
> points, but
> apparently not.  I thought that last response to my post was 
> so off the
> point that it only underscored what I had said.  

Well isn't that flattering.
> 
> I think this is where systems architects and operations folks 
> have their
> most difficult problems in communicating with each other.  It 
> is ok for an
> operations view to be pressed that suggests that given the current
> technology using a specific approach is a best practice.  
> However, that does
> not translate into where it is best to take the product.
> 
Agreed.

> MAPI is a painful legacy at this point.  I don't think anyone 
> is suggesting
> that it should be ported to any other platform, including the 
> Pocket PC and
> Windows CE families.  We don't want it, and neither does 
> Microsoft.  That
> creates an interesting situation.  Should the services in MAPI that go
> beyond what is currently in IMAP4 and OWA be extended to 
> other platforms or
> not, and if so, how?
> 
Well of course. Dropping MAPI without providing more functionality would be
just silly.


> This is where I got bent.  There was a rabid non-thinking 
> defense of the
> status quo: a sort of I'm not giving up my MAPI until you 
> pull my cold dead
> fingers from my keyboard" approach.   That attitude is not defensible.
> About the only technology arguments that I respect less than 
> those that
> start "Linux is best . . ." or "Apple is best . . ." are the 
> ones that start
> "Microsoft is best . . ."  Exchange is a superior product 
> because it is
> mostly very pragmatic in its design.  When this stops to be true, it's
> roadkill, and so are the sys admins that make their living 
> off of it.  I
> don't think that is in the best interests of anyone on this list.

Well I hope you don't think I feel that way. I tend to be fairly
platform-neutral, although I will admit that so far Microsoft has written
the best client for Exchange.

> 
> Evolving trends in security systems suggest that the one high 
> level protocol
> that looks like it has the best shot at transiting the 
> greatest number of
> transport links, and being useful for the widest possible number of
> non-streaming media applications is http.  Similarly, the 
> well equipped
> browser has displaced all other offerings and attempts to 
> build platform
> neutral systems that still work well with market-centric systems (i.e.
> Wintel).

Interesting perspective, but I don't see the basis for your conclusions.
Sure, port 80 is passed by most firewalls, but it is also highly insecure,
stateless, and has significant overhead (SSL, of course, still has the
latter two problems with even more overhead). Similarly, the "well-equipped
browser" has so far failed to replace certain applications - word
processors, spreadsheets, and mailtools among them. The average browser does
not have facilities built into it which can do local storage or indexing,
and these are things that you need. I find it significant that Microsoft has
_not_ tried to fold their mailtool into Internet Explorer, instead bundling
it as a seperate application (Outlook Express). So I would have to say that
both http and Web browsers have too many historical restraints to
effectively do what you want.


> This can only lead to one conclusion.  MAPI clients are not 
> strategic.  They
> have at best a limited future.  The premier client protocol 
> for Exchange, if
> it is to survive, has to be http.  Get over it.  Adapt and thrive.
> 

I'd be willing to bet you a dollar that the successor to MAPI will not be
http. Microsoft may decide to embrace and extend IMAP, or may design a new
protocol from the ground up. And the client will run as a seperate process,
not in the browser (unless it's as an ActiveX component).

I'd say actually that we are starting to move away from the "run everything
in a browser" mentality. I'm finally starting to see some exceptional
programming done in Java although of course if you want speed and
reliability you still stick with one of the C variants. Browsers are great
for applets - I appreciate the capability to interface with a router through
one - but in the end are a bit too Procrustean for my tastes. 
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: East, Bill [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Thursday, March 21, 2002 6:25 AM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: RE: synchronizing OWA with OST or PST
> 
> 
&g

RE: Eseutil and isinteg

[East, Bill]

The best I can do is guess. But the process could be going like this:

Disk: here's your data.
CPU:OKOKIGOTITI'MDONEWRITEITOUTGIMMEMORENOWGIMMEGIMME
Disk: Um, hang on a second.

Understand that this is not an exact transcription of the process. But I'm
sure you get the idea. The system has to write and read in chunks; obviously
it won't load all 72GB of your store into your 384 MB of RAM.

-- 
be - MOS



Save a little money each month and at the end of the year you'll be
surprised at how little you have.
-- Ernest Haskins


> -Original Message-
> From: Poole, Timothy F. - SCO [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Thursday, March 21, 2002 3:03 PM
> To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]'
> Subject: RE: Eseutil and isinteg
> 
> 
> Bill-
> 
> We're running a test doing an offline recovery.  The test box 
> is a Pentium
> IV 1.5 GHZ, 384 MB RAM, with a Maxtor ATA100 120GB hard 
> drive.  OS is Win2K
> server w/ Exchange 5.5 SP4.
> 
> Nothing else is running on the system.
> 
> Priv.edb is about 72 GB.  I understand this should take a 
> while, I'm just
> curious why the repair apps aren't maxing out the CPU.
> 
> Tim
> 
> And I've fixed the triple e-mail thing
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: East, Bill [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Thursday, March 21, 2002 2:55 PM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: RE: Eseutil and isinteg
> 
> 
> Possibility 1: There are other limiting factors, such as disk 
> speed, that
> are keeping the utilities from using all of your CPU.
> Possibility 2: Your CPU is too busy sending triple copies of 
> all of your
> email.
> 
> -- 
> be - MOS
> 
> 
> 
> The trouble with opportunity is that it always comes 
> disguised as hard work.
>   -- Herbert V. Prochnow
> > -Original Message-
> > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > Sent: Thursday, March 21, 2002 8:18 AM
> > To: Exchange Discussions
> > Subject: Eseutil and isinteg
> > 
> > 
> > Why do neither of these utilities use the full processor 
> > capability of the
> > system?  I'm only seeing 7 - 10% CPU utilization when repairing the
> > information store.
> > 
> > _
> > List posting FAQ:   http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
> > Archives:   http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp
> > To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > 
> 
> _
> List posting FAQ:   http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
> Archives:   http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp
> To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 

_
List posting FAQ:   http://www.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: Eseutil and isinteg

[East, Bill]

Possibility 1: There are other limiting factors, such as disk speed, that
are keeping the utilities from using all of your CPU.
Possibility 2: Your CPU is too busy sending triple copies of all of your
email.

-- 
be - MOS



The trouble with opportunity is that it always comes disguised as hard work.
-- Herbert V. Prochnow
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Thursday, March 21, 2002 8:18 AM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: Eseutil and isinteg
> 
> 
> Why do neither of these utilities use the full processor 
> capability of the
> system?  I'm only seeing 7 - 10% CPU utilization when repairing the
> information store.
> 
> _
> List posting FAQ:   http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
> Archives:   http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp
> To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 

_
List posting FAQ:   http://www.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: synchronizing OWA with OST or PST

[East, Bill]

Jumping Jiminey. I guess I am.

It's just that Dupler fellow. I get all excited.

-- 
be - MOS



"This is Vergon 6." -Professor 
 "Bah." -Amy 
 "It's a sunny little doomed planet, inhabited by a number of frisky little
doomed animals." -Professor 


> -Original Message-
> From: Soysal, Serdar [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Wednesday, March 20, 2002 5:58 PM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: RE: synchronizing OWA with OST or PST
> 
> 
> A little behind on your reading Bill?
> 
> Serdar Soysal
> 
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: East, Bill [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
> Sent: Wednesday, March 20, 2002 3:43 PM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: RE: synchronizing OWA with OST or PST
> 
> 
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Dupler, Craig [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > Sent: Tuesday, February 05, 2002 1:33 PM
> > To: Exchange Discussions
> > Subject: RE: synchronizing OWA with OST or PST
> > 
> > 
> > Yes, it works well.  That was never the point.  But, just 
> like a MAPI 
> > session, you should be able to do a synch while in browse 
> mode on OWA.
> > 
> I'm puzzled by this approach, Craig.
> 
> Let's say you're at an airport kiosk. You're going to 
> download the synch
> file, then what? Copy it to a floppy? What if it's more that 
> 1.44MB? What if
> the kiosk doesn't have a floppy drive? If you're using a PDA, 
> how do you
> transfer the file to there?
> 
> OTOH, let's say you're hooked into a WLAN in the Executive 
> Lounge from your
> own laptop or PDA. You can then fire up your VPN software, 
> connect into your
> LAN and synch using the copy of Outlook on your PC. If you don't use
> Outlook, as many others have pointed out, you can use an IMAP client.
> 
> Synchronization to an OST presumes that you have Outlook 
> installed, so why
> re-create the wheel? OWA was built to be run from any browser 
> anywhere (I
> can even convince Opera to load it if I work at it), but like 
> most Web-based
> services, presumes a connection for the duration of the session.
> 
> 
> > I don't get it.  Why are you guys arguing in favor of keeping
> > a small and
> > extremely useful feature out of the product?  Is it a "we're 
> > tough, we can
> > take it" sort of thing, or what?
> > 
> 
> Implementation of this isn't trivial, and there already exist multiple
> better ways to do what you want. So why would Microsoft spend money
> developing another one?
> 
> > Or maybe it is that you've bought into the view that small 
> > machines should
> > only be used as companions to "real" machines.
> 
> Well, no. If you have an IMAP/MAPI client and a Web browser 
> on your handheld
> you're in good shape. But your Web browser sucks as a 
> mailtool, so why not
> use the IMAP/MAPI client?
> 
> >   Sheesh, I 
> > thought that
> > attitude died back in the 80's when the mainframe crowd tried 
> > to convince
> > everyone that OV, HP Desk and All-In-1 were the "real" 
> > workgroup messaging
> > systems, and that LAN mail should be relegated to simple 
> departmental
> > messaging only tasks.
> > 
> > It's amazing.  The PC guys have grown up to become the 
> > dinosaurs that they
> > displaced.
> > 
> 
> I resent that implication. I have not become a PDP/11.
> 
> _
> List posting FAQ:   http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
> Archives:   http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp
> To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 
> 
> _
> List posting FAQ:   http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
> Archives:   http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp
> To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 

_
List posting FAQ:   http://www.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: synchronizing OWA with OST or PST

[East, Bill]

> -Original Message-
> From: Dupler, Craig [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Tuesday, February 05, 2002 1:33 PM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: RE: synchronizing OWA with OST or PST
> 
> 
> Yes, it works well.  That was never the point.  But, just like a MAPI
> session, you should be able to do a synch while in browse 
> mode on OWA.  
> 
I'm puzzled by this approach, Craig.

Let's say you're at an airport kiosk. You're going to download the synch
file, then what? Copy it to a floppy? What if it's more that 1.44MB? What if
the kiosk doesn't have a floppy drive? If you're using a PDA, how do you
transfer the file to there?

OTOH, let's say you're hooked into a WLAN in the Executive Lounge from your
own laptop or PDA. You can then fire up your VPN software, connect into your
LAN and synch using the copy of Outlook on your PC. If you don't use
Outlook, as many others have pointed out, you can use an IMAP client.

Synchronization to an OST presumes that you have Outlook installed, so why
re-create the wheel? OWA was built to be run from any browser anywhere (I
can even convince Opera to load it if I work at it), but like most Web-based
services, presumes a connection for the duration of the session.


> I don't get it.  Why are you guys arguing in favor of keeping 
> a small and
> extremely useful feature out of the product?  Is it a "we're 
> tough, we can
> take it" sort of thing, or what?
> 

Implementation of this isn't trivial, and there already exist multiple
better ways to do what you want. So why would Microsoft spend money
developing another one?

> Or maybe it is that you've bought into the view that small 
> machines should
> only be used as companions to "real" machines.

Well, no. If you have an IMAP/MAPI client and a Web browser on your handheld
you're in good shape. But your Web browser sucks as a mailtool, so why not
use the IMAP/MAPI client?

>   Sheesh, I 
> thought that
> attitude died back in the 80's when the mainframe crowd tried 
> to convince
> everyone that OV, HP Desk and All-In-1 were the "real" 
> workgroup messaging
> systems, and that LAN mail should be relegated to simple departmental
> messaging only tasks.
> 
> It's amazing.  The PC guys have grown up to become the 
> dinosaurs that they
> displaced.
> 

I resent that implication. I have not become a PDP/11.

_
List posting FAQ:   http://www.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 digest: March 06, 2002

[East, Bill]

Rosa Esquivel is no longer talking with Janelle Kessler. If you happen to
speak with Janelle (you'll know her by the obvious hair extensions), please
tell her that Rosa would like her Tupperware back. Janelle can drop it off
at the front desk on her way home to her empty apartment for another night
alone.

-- 
be - MOS

> -Original Message-
> From: Blunt, James H (Jim) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Thursday, March 07, 2002 1:44 PM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: RE: exchange digest: March 06, 2002
> 
> 
> I don't think Andy David is the only one...
> 
> Jim Blunt
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: Andy David [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
> Sent: Thursday, March 07, 2002 5:09 AM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: RE: exchange digest: March 06, 2002
> 
> 
> Andy David is annoyed by these.
> 
> 
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Thursday, March 07, 2002 7:59 AM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: RE: exchange digest: March 06, 2002
> 
> 
> Janelle Kessler is out of the office until 3/11/02.  If you need an
> immediate
> response or action today, please forward your email to Rosa 
> Esquivel or call
> her
> @ (415) 554-5408.  Rosa's email address is [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 
> 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]
> 
> --
> --
> --
> 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.
> 
> ==
> ==
> ==
The information contained in this message has been sanitized for your
convenience. It is intended to be read only by people with no vowels in
their last names. If you received this message in error, please delete this
message and hit your head as hard as possible against a nearby hard object
in order to induce short-term memory loss.

_
List posting FAQ:   http://www.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: OT outlook ops

[East, Bill]

This could be a fun project for someone with a little scripting skill.

First, move all of the messages into an otherwise empty Inbox folder.
Second, count the messages.
Third, write a script that will do a POP3 connection with the server and
RETR each message. Save the results to a text file.
Fourth, grep the text file for the From: headers to get the addresses out to
a list file.
Fifth, do a sed script to remove duplicates from the file.

There are scripting gurus who could knock this out in an afternoon. But
there are also people who could make this five-step process the single goal
to accomplish by the time they retire and still not come up with a solution.
I tend toward the latter.

-- 
be - MOS



Who is D.B. Cooper, and where is he now?

> -Original Message-
> From: Kim Schotanus [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Tuesday, March 05, 2002 3:26 AM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: OT outlook ops
> 
> 
> Hi 
> I have a user who forgot to check two inboxes assigned to her and she
> would now like to send an appology to the about 2000 people that sent
> emails to those addresses.  Is there a way she can 
> automatically send a
> message to all the mails in a specific folder?  She is using OL98.
> 
> 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]

RE: Blocking javascript email?

[East, Bill]

If you set IE to prompt you whether you want to run scripts, Outlook will
prompt you for it as well. It also cuts down on the annoying jumping
signatures, not to mention the popup disclaimers and other Stupid Outlook
Tricks.

The downside is that you will see a lot of prompts when browsing. 

-- 
be - MOS



The key to building a superstar is to keep their mouth shut.  To reveal an
artist to the people can be to destroy him.  It isn't to anyone's advantage
to see the truth.
-- Bob Ezrin, rock music producer

> -Original Message-
> From: Stevens, Dave [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Friday, March 01, 2002 9:23 AM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: Blocking javascript email?
> 
> 
> To the list:
> Is there a way in exchange (or Outlook), without being an 
> admin, to reject
> emails that contain javascript?  I am on a bunch of porn 
> mailing lists. I
> have effectively stopped most of it by adding rules in that 
> look for key
> words. I just got one this morning where the message is 
> blank, there is no
> attachment, but there is a javascript embedded in the body. It then,
> apparently tries to do a redirect.  Thanks for the help.
> 
> _
> List posting FAQ:   http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
> Archives:   http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp
> To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 

_
List posting FAQ:   http://www.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: Alternative to UNIX procmail in Exchange

[East, Bill]

Hey Tom, you're going to feel kind of dumb high-centered on a log in that
Ferrari. Sendmail is just as powerful and far more flexible than Exchange -
in certain areas. Chaining a Sendmail server in front of an Exchange server
is a valid solution, as is Ed's idea.

To Samir, the original poster, you might also look at Slipstick.com and see
if any of the solutions there will help. Rules-based spam filtering is
getting more and more desirable as an add-on for all of us.
-- 
be - MOS



Today I...No, that wasn't me.  -- Steven Wright


> -Original Message-
> From: Tom Meunier [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2002 4:41 PM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: RE: Alternative to UNIX procmail in Exchange
> 
> 
> Yeah, install MercuryMail on their workstations. 
> 
> Have you reminded them that Sendmail is merely a shadow of 
> what Exchange
> can do?  I mean, shoot, I can't go off-roading in my Ferrari 
> like I did
> in my Jeep Wrangler.   Can you jack up my Ferrari and put big knobby
> wheels on it?
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: Ed Crowley [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
> Posted At: Thursday, February 21, 2002 2:32 PM
> Posted To: MSExchange Mailing List
> Conversation: Alternative to UNIX procmail in Exchange
> Subject: RE: Alternative to UNIX procmail in Exchange
> 
> 
> You can also configure mail-enabled users or contacts and 
> route mail to
> those who insist on keeping procmail instead of giving them a mailbox.
> 
> Ed Crowley MCSE+Internet MVP kcCC+I
> Tech Consultant
> Compaq Computer Corporation
> Protecting the world from PSTs and Bricked Backups!
> 
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Yanek Korff
> Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2002 12:08 PM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: RE: Alternative to UNIX procmail in Exchange
> 
> 
> Considering that the Outlook Rules Wizard is merely a shadow of what
> procmail can do, I suggest setting up a separate sub-domain 
> with its own
> MX and routing mail there on a per user basis.  That system 
> can continue
> to use Sendmail.
> 
> Dunno your environment/infrastructure though so it may not 
> work well in
> your company.
> 
> -Yanek.
> 
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Samir Arora [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2002 12:58 PM
> > To: Exchange Discussions
> > Subject: Alternative to UNIX procmail in Exchange
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > Gurus,
> > 
> > We have moved our messaging environment from Sendmail to 
> Exchange and
> > lot of unix users believe that they have lost capability of 
> procmail 
> > in new environment . The Procmail is used to preprocess the email
> or
> > trigger any programs on arrival of email .Alternatively it 
> is used for
> 
> > filtering the emails which can be done thru rules wizard on outlook.
> > The Detailed Information about procmail can be found at 
> > http://www.procmail.org Please suggest your experiences or 
> > alternatives available
> > 
> > 
> > Thanks
> > 
> > Samir
> > 
> > _
> > List posting FAQ:   http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
> > Archives:   http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp
> > To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > 
> 
> _
> List posting FAQ:   http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
> Archives:   http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp
> To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 
> 
> _
> List posting FAQ:   http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
> Archives:   http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp
> To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 
> _
> List posting FAQ:   http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
> Archives:   http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp
> To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 

_
List posting FAQ:   http://www.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: Antivirus Suite recommendations

[East, Bill]

> -Original Message-
> From: Ed Crowley [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Thursday, January 24, 2002 10:02 PM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: RE: Antivirus Suite recommendations
> 
> 
> Maybe, but these are products which absolutely require maintenance.  A
> month-old pattern file is worthless--you're paying for currency.
> 

You know somewhere where we can get free currency?

-- 
be - MOS



I don't want to achieve immortality through my work.  I want to achieve
immortality through not dying.
-- Woody Allen


_
List posting FAQ:   http://www.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: Name Resolution problems

[East, Bill]

1) Who is the WINS server? If it has the name stuck in its cache I suppose
that could be a problem...

2) Can you sniff the port for traffic relating to the name resolution? You
might be able to tell whether to look at DNS, WINS, or a local setting for
the information.

-- 
be - MOS



The shortest distance between two points is under construction.
-- Noelie Alito


> -Original Message-
> From: John Matteson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Thursday, January 24, 2002 2:37 PM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: RE: Name Resolution problems
> 
> 
> The node type is "hybrid". There is no difference between 
> using the short
> name or the FQDN of the server when I ping.
> 
> It's strange because when I ping from another server, I get the right
> information. It's when I'm on this server's console that I 
> get the wrong
> information.
> 
> John Matteson; Exchange Manager 
> Geac Corporate Infrastructure Systems and Standards 
> (404) 239 - 2981
> 
> He who would learn to fly one day must first learn to stand 
> and walk and run
> and climb and dance; One cannot fly into flying. -- Friedrich 
> Nietzsche
> 
> 
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: East, Bill [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Thursday, January 24, 2002 2:29 PM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: RE: Name Resolution problems
> 
> 
> When you try to ping, are you using just the server name 
> ("foo") or the FQDN
> ("foo.bar.baz")? Do you see different results with either one 
> of those?
> 
> Under ipconfig -all, what is the node type?
> 
> -- 
> be - MOS
> 
> 
> 
> Logic doesn't apply to the real world.  --Marvin Minsky
> 
> 
> > -Original Message-
> > From: John Matteson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > Sent: Thursday, January 24, 2002 12:07 PM
> > To: Exchange Discussions
> > Subject: RE: Name Resolution problems
> > 
> > 
> > Nope. Wins is not installed on this machine.
> > 
> > However, IP forwarding has been enabled, and NetBEUI 
> protocol has been
> > installed as well.
> > 
> > The server also has IIS ver 3.0 installed.
> > 
> > John Matteson; Exchange Manager 
> > Geac Corporate Infrastructure Systems and Standards 
> > (404) 239 - 2981
> > 
> > He who would learn to fly one day must first learn to stand 
> > and walk and run
> > and climb and dance; One cannot fly into flying. -- Friedrich 
> > Nietzsche
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Neil Hobson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > Sent: Thursday, January 24, 2002 11:53 AM
> > To: Exchange Discussions
> > Subject: RE: Name Resolution problems
> > 
> > 
> > You've got WINS installed on the server, and it's registered with
> > itself?
> > 
> > Neil Hobson
> > 
> > Silversands
> > http://www.silversands.co.uk
> > Microsoft Gold Certified Partner
> > For Enterprise Systems
> > For Collaborative Solutions
> > 
> > -Original Message-
> > From: John Matteson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
> > Posted At: 24 January 2002 16:38
> > Posted To: Exchange Mailing List
> > Conversation: Name Resolution problems
> > Subject: RE: Name Resolution problems
> > 
> > 
> > No. 
> > 
> > There are no LMHOSTS or HOSTS file entries for this server on the
> > server.
> > 
> > John Matteson; Exchange Manager 
> > Geac Corporate Infrastructure Systems and Standards 
> > (404) 239 - 2981
> > 
> > He who would learn to fly one day must first learn to stand 
> > and walk and
> > run and climb and dance; One cannot fly into flying. -- Friedrich
> > Nietzsche
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Chris Scharff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > Sent: Thursday, January 24, 2002 11:07 AM
> > To: Exchange Discussions
> > Subject: RE: Name Resolution problems
> > 
> > 
> > Does it have a hosts file entry for itself with the old IP 
> address by
> > chance?
> > 
> > Chris
> > -- 
> > Chris Scharff
> > Senior Sales Engineer
> > MessageOne
> > If you can't measure, you can't manage! 
> > 
> > 
> > > -Original Message-
> > > From: John Matteson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > > Sent: Thursday, January 24, 2002 10:00 AM
> > > To: Exchange Discussions
> > > Subject: Name Resolution problems
> > > 
> > > 
> > > Good morning to you all:
> > &g

RE: Name Resolution problems

[East, Bill]

When you try to ping, are you using just the server name ("foo") or the FQDN
("foo.bar.baz")? Do you see different results with either one of those?

Under ipconfig -all, what is the node type?

-- 
be - MOS



Logic doesn't apply to the real world.  --Marvin Minsky


> -Original Message-
> From: John Matteson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Thursday, January 24, 2002 12:07 PM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: RE: Name Resolution problems
> 
> 
> Nope. Wins is not installed on this machine.
> 
> However, IP forwarding has been enabled, and NetBEUI protocol has been
> installed as well.
> 
> The server also has IIS ver 3.0 installed.
> 
> John Matteson; Exchange Manager 
> Geac Corporate Infrastructure Systems and Standards 
> (404) 239 - 2981
> 
> He who would learn to fly one day must first learn to stand 
> and walk and run
> and climb and dance; One cannot fly into flying. -- Friedrich 
> Nietzsche
> 
> 
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: Neil Hobson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Thursday, January 24, 2002 11:53 AM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: RE: Name Resolution problems
> 
> 
> You've got WINS installed on the server, and it's registered with
> itself?
> 
> Neil Hobson
> 
> Silversands
> http://www.silversands.co.uk
> Microsoft Gold Certified Partner
> For Enterprise Systems
> For Collaborative Solutions
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: John Matteson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
> Posted At: 24 January 2002 16:38
> Posted To: Exchange Mailing List
> Conversation: Name Resolution problems
> Subject: RE: Name Resolution problems
> 
> 
> No. 
> 
> There are no LMHOSTS or HOSTS file entries for this server on the
> server.
> 
> John Matteson; Exchange Manager 
> Geac Corporate Infrastructure Systems and Standards 
> (404) 239 - 2981
> 
> He who would learn to fly one day must first learn to stand 
> and walk and
> run and climb and dance; One cannot fly into flying. -- Friedrich
> Nietzsche
> 
> 
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: Chris Scharff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Thursday, January 24, 2002 11:07 AM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: RE: Name Resolution problems
> 
> 
> Does it have a hosts file entry for itself with the old IP address by
> chance?
> 
> Chris
> -- 
> Chris Scharff
> Senior Sales Engineer
> MessageOne
> If you can't measure, you can't manage! 
> 
> 
> > -Original Message-
> > From: John Matteson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > Sent: Thursday, January 24, 2002 10:00 AM
> > To: Exchange Discussions
> > Subject: Name Resolution problems
> > 
> > 
> > Good morning to you all:
> > 
> > I am currently working on a problem that has me pulling
> > out what little hair I have left.
> > 
> > The situation is this:
> > 
> > An Exchange server was moved from one physical location
> > to another, a different network address, different DNS 
> > server, but everything else is pretty much the same. The only 
> > changes on the Exchange side were SMTP addresses of the users 
> > (adding GEAC.COM to their address lists) and the domain of 
> > the server itself (from paris.geac.com to FR.GEAC.COM).
> > 
> > DNS information was changed to reflect the update,
> > there is no HOSTS or LMHOSTS file. When I do a lookup on the 
> > default DNS server (as listed with the "ipconfig /all") all 
> > the information is correct.
> > 
> > I can ping the name of the server from other sites and
> > get the correct IP address. HOWEVER, when I ping the server 
> > name FROM THE CONSOLE OF THE SERVER, the previous IP address 
> > gets returned.
> > 
> > The server has been booted several times and I am at a
> > loss to explain this.
> > 
> > Can anyone provide any help?
> > 
> > John Matteson; Exchange Manager
> > Geac Corporate Infrastructure Systems and Standards 
> > (404) 239 - 2981
> > 
> > He who would learn to fly one day must first learn to stand
> > and walk and run and climb and dance; One cannot fly into 
> > flying. -- Friedrich Nietzsche
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > _
> > List posting FAQ:   http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
> > Archives:   http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp
> > To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > 
> 
> _
> List posting FAQ:   http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
> Archives:   http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp
> To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 
> _
> List posting FAQ:   http://www.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: Off Topic - Encryption

[East, Bill]

Bill, 
http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/default.asp?url=/library/en-us/dnw2kmag01/
html/NT4_0Encryption.asp

(link may wrap)

makes a good read about this. You are getting encryption free of charge with
RPC.

-- 
be - MOS



I remember a bigger, older guy we called "Dad." We'd eat some stuff, or not,
and 
then I think we went home. I guess some things never leave you.


> -Original Message-
> From: William Rettig [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Thursday, January 17, 2002 10:57 AM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: Off Topic - Encryption
> 
> 
> I am quite new to Exchange and Exchange Clients like Outlook.
> We are using Exchange 5.5.  Any documentation I've seen 
> talks about the need to configure with secure RPC if encryption
> is desired between the client and server.
> 
> Here is what puzzles us.  We have not selected any 
> form of encryption. However, when we read email from the
> inbox we notice that there is no human readable text
> within the packets on the LAN.
> 
> Can someone please explain.
> 
> 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: Backup

[East, Bill]

Ed, I should note that Reuters reports that eating more than 400 Euro notes
at once may prove to be toxic. Please be careful.

-- 
be - MOS


> -Original Message-
> From: Ed Crowley [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Tuesday, January 15, 2002 12:00 AM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: RE: Backup
> 
> 
> Lime Jell-O.  I believe that's the theme ingredient on next 
> week's Iron
> Chef.
> 
> Ed Crowley MCSE+I MVP
> Tech Consultant
> Compaq Computer
> "There are seldom good technological solutions to behavioral 
> problems."
> 
> 
> -Original Message-----
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of East, Bill
> Sent: Monday, January 14, 2002 6:21 AM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: RE: Backup
> 
> 
> Don't worry Ed, you'll get your cut. I don't need another 
> round of your
> thugs pouring lime Jello in my fishtank.
> 
> --
> be - MOS
> 
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Ed Crowley [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > Sent: Saturday, January 12, 2002 12:12 AM
> > To: Exchange Discussions
> > Subject: RE: Backup
> >
> >
> > Pretty cheap.  That's what, about US$27.50?
> >
> > Ed Crowley MCSE+Internet MVP kcCC+I
> > Tech Consultant
> > Compaq Computer Corporation
> > Protecting the world from PSTs and Bricked Backups!
> >
> >
> > -Original Message-
> > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of East, Bill
> > Sent: Friday, January 11, 2002 6:49 AM
> > To: Exchange Discussions
> > Subject: RE: Backup
> >
> >
> > As others have pointed out, you don't need a server-class
> > machine for a
> > recovery server.
> >
> > For that matter, I have never needed to use a recovery 
> server. Why? I
> > use the Ed Crowley(tm) Never Restore(c) Method(sm)!
> >
> > For full details on this method, send 150 Euros and an 
> unused thong to
> > the address at the bottom of your screen. Or read the FAQ. Or just
> > Google for it.
> >
> >
> > Cheers,
> >
> > --
> > be - MOS
> >
> >
> >
> > Houston, Tranquillity Base here.  The Eagle has landed.  --Neil
> > Armstrong
> >
> >
> > > -Original Message-
> > > From: Steck, Steffen M. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > > Sent: Friday, January 11, 2002 2:55 AM
> > > To: Exchange Discussions
> > > Subject: WG: Backup
> > >
> > >
> > > You are right friends, I am doing a brick level backup. I
> > > also backup DS and
> > > IS. The key in here is that I have *not* an adequate test
> > machine for
> > > recovering single mailboxes. So, correct me if I'm wrong or
> > > if I oversee
> > > something relevant, brick level backup is the only way for
> > > me, isn't it?!
> > > And, no unfortunately I won't get the bucks for a similar
> > > test machine ;-(((
> > > Greetings
> > > Steffen
> > >
> > > -Ursprüngliche Nachricht-
> > > Von: Steck, Steffen M. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > > Gesendet: Donnerstag, 10. Januar 2002 08:24
> > > An: Exchange Discussions
> > > Betreff: Backup
> > >
> > >
> > > Hi there,
> > > I am having probs with the backup of my XCNG 5.5 Sp4 on
> > > NT4Sp6. I have a
> > > priv.edb of approximately 23 GB size. Besides is only the OS
> > > and little more
> > > (antivirus etc) on the machine. The machine itself is a P3
> > > Xeon with 500 Mhz
> > > and 512 MB RAM. It has an DLT 80 and uses backup software
> > > Veritas Backup
> > > Exec Multiserver 7.3.
> > > The problem: The backup of the Exchange Mailboxes lasts 12
> > > hours, the whole
> > > filesystem (27 GB) is being taped in half an hour. Why does
> > > take so long to
> > > read out the mailboxes of the information store?
> > > Anybody seen this or any idea?
> > > Thx in advance
> > > Steffen
> > >
> > >
> > > _
> > > List posting FAQ:   http://www.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: Backup

[East, Bill]

Don't worry Ed, you'll get your cut. I don't need another round of your
thugs pouring lime Jello in my fishtank.

-- 
be - MOS

> -Original Message-
> From: Ed Crowley [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Saturday, January 12, 2002 12:12 AM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: RE: Backup
> 
> 
> Pretty cheap.  That's what, about US$27.50?
> 
> Ed Crowley MCSE+Internet MVP kcCC+I
> Tech Consultant
> Compaq Computer Corporation
> Protecting the world from PSTs and Bricked Backups!
> 
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of East, Bill
> Sent: Friday, January 11, 2002 6:49 AM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: RE: Backup
> 
> 
> As others have pointed out, you don't need a server-class 
> machine for a
> recovery server.
> 
> For that matter, I have never needed to use a recovery server. Why? I
> use the Ed Crowley(tm) Never Restore(c) Method(sm)!
> 
> For full details on this method, send 150 Euros and an unused thong to
> the address at the bottom of your screen. Or read the FAQ. Or just
> Google for it.
> 
> 
> Cheers,
> 
> -- 
> be - MOS
> 
> 
> 
> Houston, Tranquillity Base here.  The Eagle has landed.  --Neil
> Armstrong
> 
> 
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Steck, Steffen M. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > Sent: Friday, January 11, 2002 2:55 AM
> > To: Exchange Discussions
> > Subject: WG: Backup
> > 
> > 
> > You are right friends, I am doing a brick level backup. I
> > also backup DS and
> > IS. The key in here is that I have *not* an adequate test 
> machine for
> > recovering single mailboxes. So, correct me if I'm wrong or 
> > if I oversee
> > something relevant, brick level backup is the only way for 
> > me, isn't it?!
> > And, no unfortunately I won't get the bucks for a similar 
> > test machine ;-(((
> > Greetings
> > Steffen
> > 
> > -Ursprüngliche Nachricht-
> > Von: Steck, Steffen M. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > Gesendet: Donnerstag, 10. Januar 2002 08:24
> > An: Exchange Discussions
> > Betreff: Backup
> > 
> > 
> > Hi there,
> > I am having probs with the backup of my XCNG 5.5 Sp4 on 
> > NT4Sp6. I have a
> > priv.edb of approximately 23 GB size. Besides is only the OS 
> > and little more
> > (antivirus etc) on the machine. The machine itself is a P3 
> > Xeon with 500 Mhz
> > and 512 MB RAM. It has an DLT 80 and uses backup software 
> > Veritas Backup
> > Exec Multiserver 7.3.
> > The problem: The backup of the Exchange Mailboxes lasts 12 
> > hours, the whole
> > filesystem (27 GB) is being taped in half an hour. Why does 
> > take so long to
> > read out the mailboxes of the information store?
> > Anybody seen this or any idea?
> > Thx in advance
> > Steffen
> > 
> > 
> > _
> > List posting FAQ:   http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
> > Archives:   http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp
> > To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > 
> > _
> > List posting FAQ:   http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
> > Archives:   http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp
> > To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > 
> 
> _
> List posting FAQ:   http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
> Archives:   http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp
> To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 
> 
> _
> List posting FAQ:   http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
> Archives:   http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp
> To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 

_
List posting FAQ:   http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
Archives:   http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp
To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]