Exchange Migration Sanity Check
Hi, Would really appreciate any advice on the following migration plan: We currently have an Exchange 5.5 (SP4) server which is a BDC on a NT4.0 domain - lets call it NT4DOMAIN. We have already created a Windows 2000 domain (W2KDOMAIN) and have migrated about half of the user accounts from the NT4DOMAIN across to the new domain. I have established a two way trust relationship between the domains. Now, we need to migrate the E5.5 environment to E2K. Following is a brief outline of what I plan to do to achieve this: * Install the Exchange 2000 version of the Active Directory Connector on the (new) server that will be built up to be the first E2K server. This will be a member server in the W2K domain. Configure a two way connection agreement between the E5.5 server and W2KDOMAIN; * Run E2K setup (incorporating forestprep and domainprep) on the 'new' server * Configure the server to be a member of the existing E5.5 site; * Migrate a few accounts for testing; * Upon successful testing, migrate remaining accounts; * Leave the E5.5 server in place long enough to ensure that re-direction of all users takes place; * Reconfigure the Internet Mail Connector to use the new server; * De-commission the E5.5 server Thanks in advance for your advice. Greg _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Black List Recommendation
Hi Am currently evaluating GFIs MailEssentials anti-spam product and would like to try the "Black List" functionality. Does anyone have a recommendation for a good black list??? Thanks in advance Greg _ 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]
Shared mail domain with two SBS2000 servers
Hi
Had a friend ring me asking for advice on the following situation:
A company with two sites and a SBS2000 server in each site wants to be able to use the
same mail domain for users at each site. They are both configured to use a dial-up
connection to connect to the internet and the mail for their domain is stored with
thier ISP and is accessible via POP3..
I don't have much (read "any") experience with SBS2000 and would appreciate advice on
whether:
a) it is possible to configure a SBS2000 POP3 connection to only drag down mail from
its specific list of users; and
b) that the servers would not inherently believe that they are responsible for the
xyz.com domain and hence refuse to forward mail out to the internet to a user that has
an xyz.com address but is located at the other SBS2000 site.
I would appreciate any advice/experiences you could offer.
Thanks
Greg
.+-¦-xm¶ÿÃ
,Â)Ür¿ë(º· ýì\
öªٖy²'µêßiǡ¶Úþ)íÙl¥ªä+-r¿råʸ¬¦W§µêÞÅÈZ{f¡ץjx
b²èº{.nÇ+·¦j)m¢W½ç±r§él³ §Ê&!jx .+-i٢X¬µ§f{0Êy ¢
404 Error when attempting to use OWA through a Front End server
Hi Would really love some advice on the following: * had a single Exchange 2000 Ent server (SP3) and confirmed that OWA was working; * installed a new E2K server (SP3) and configured it to be a Front End server; OWA still works if you connect directly to the Back End server but not if you connect to the Front End server. If you go to the FE server, it will prompt you for a username and password, you enter it, then it prompts you again. This happens a total of three times and after the third time, you get a 404 - the page cannot be displayed error. I have seen quite a few newsgroup postings that detail the same problem but cant find a solution for love nor money... One other thing, is the M: drive on the Front End server meant to mount to the Back End server once it has been configured as a FE server? Unfortunately, I have never seen a FE/BE setup working so don't know if what I am seeing is normal. Thanks very much for any advice Greg _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Organization merge (5.5 with 2K)
Hi Would appreciate it if anyone could point me towards some documentation that would help me out with the planning and execution of incorporating a 5.5 organisation into a E2K organisation. I have found some basic documentation but nothing that goes into too much detail Thanks in advance. Greg _ List posting FAQ: http://www.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: ??? OWA with ISA - Publish or create DMZ???
Hi I am currently investigating setting up OWA through ISA server and have seen various recommendations about how to do this. The two obvious options are; * to place the Front-End server in a DMZ and open all required ports to the internal network or; * to publish OWA through ISA server through the incredibly simple OWA Publishing Rule (included in Feature Pack 1 for ISA) I realise that both methods involve compromising security to some degree but have not been able to find any absolute proof that one is more secure than the other. I really would like to be able to implement the second option but am finding it hard to get the concept of a direct (well almost...) connection between external client and our Exchange Front-End server to swallowed by the guys in charge. Any documentation/experiences would be much appreciated. Thanks in advance. Greg _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: OWA in DMZ Zone
Assuming you are talking about E2K, there is a white-paper at http://go.microsoft.com/fliwink/?linid=4721 which lists the ports that are required to be opened at the end of the document. >From my investigations though, it depends very much on what type of firewall you are using as to where to place the OWA server (ie: if you are using ISA server with Feature Release 1, it is probably more secure to publish the OWA server through ISA and leave it on your internal network). Hope that helps. Greg -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, 14 February 2003 08:29 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: OWA in DMZ Zone I'm currently running an OWA with two LAN cards - one on my private network and one on the internet. I would like to move the OWA server to my DMZ and would like to know what ports I have to open on the private side to communicate with my exchange server. I understand that I only have to open port 80 on the public side (actually, 443 for SSL) Thanks! Raul _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: OWA in DMZ Zone
Sorry - that link should be http://go.microsoft.com/fwlink/?linkid=4721 -Original Message- From: Greg Marr Sent: Friday, 14 February 2003 09:43 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: OWA in DMZ Zone Assuming you are talking about E2K, there is a white-paper at http://go.microsoft.com/fliwink/?linid=4721 which lists the ports that are required to be opened at the end of the document. >From my investigations though, it depends very much on what type of firewall you are using as to where to place the OWA server (ie: if you are using ISA server with Feature Release 1, it is probably more secure to publish the OWA server through ISA and leave it on your internal network). Hope that helps. Greg -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, 14 February 2003 08:29 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: OWA in DMZ Zone I'm currently running an OWA with two LAN cards - one on my private network and one on the internet. I would like to move the OWA server to my DMZ and would like to know what ports I have to open on the private side to communicate with my exchange server. I understand that I only have to open port 80 on the public side (actually, 443 for SSL) Thanks! Raul _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
NDR for specific domain
Hi all A couple of days ago, I set up a SMTP connector on my E2K SP3 server so that I can block external email access for some users. I configured it as per the MS document and all seemed to be working fine. Today though, no-one seems to be able to send mail to one particular domain. We have a very standard installation and I have checked every place I can think of to see if someone has configured anything incorrectly but cannot find anything. The message I get is as follows: * Your message did not reach some or all of the intended recipients. Subject: test email - please ignore Sent: 6/03/2003 14:44 The following recipient(s) could not be reached: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' on 6/03/2003 14:51 You do not have permission to send to this recipient. For assistance, contact your system administrator. ... Relaying denied> I thought this might be an issue at their end (as it only seems to be happening for the one domain) but I sent a test message from hotmail and it did not bounce. I know this looks like a permissions issue but as I say, I have checked every setting I can think of. Any ideas Thanks in advance. Greg _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: OWA front end server - licensing and security
We have set up our OWA to require two-factor authentication (SecurID) which eliminates any key-logging concerns but this system is not cheap at approx $300 AU ($160 US) per user. The upside is that you can use the same system to authenticate all of your remote access users (dial-up, VPN, etc) and this is the function that really allows me to sleep well at night. I guess that it all depends on how many people are going to require this functionality and of course, your budget. Greg -Original Message- From: Erick Thompson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, 18 September 2003 10:07 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: OWA front end server - licensing and security We talked about this exact scenario. We decided that given how easy it is to install a key logger, and other malware, on public systems we decided it was too risky. We are planning on using public folders quite heavily with data that we can't risk getting out. Same with the address books. We are trying to figure out a way to give people access to email only from a public terminal. No public folders or address books. If you have any suggestions, that would be great. Erick > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Ed Crowley > Sent: Wednesday, September 17, 2003 4:40 PM > To: Exchange Discussions > Subject: RE: OWA front end server - licensing and security > > > ISA is a better solution in a DMZ because it doesn't > require the plethora of holes in the internal > firewall. > > http://www.microsoft.com/technet/treeview/default.asp?url=/tec hnet/prodtechnol/isa/deploy/isaexch.asp > > Requiring VPN (your other message) is a good idea, > however, you may be coming back to ISA or some other > idea when your users demand to be able to get e-mail > from a coffeehouse kiosk terminal. > > Ed > > --- Erick Thompson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I have to admit to being a little confused, how > > would ISA help, aside from being a proxy? Which > > isn't nothing, but I'm wondering if I'm missing > > something else. > > > > Thanks, > > Erick > > > > > -Original Message- > > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Behalf Of Webb, Andy > > > Sent: Wednesday, September 17, 2003 7:04 AM > > > To: Exchange Discussions > > > Subject: RE: OWA front end server - licensing and > > security > > > > > > > > > Don't forget you also have to fully protect the > > front end server from > > > all the other servers on the DMZ from which it is > > not isolated. > > > > > > Those other systems may have been placed on the > > DMZ in an > > > insecure state > > > with the thought that if anyone broke them, they > > would be > > > isolated from > > > the internal LAN. What happens when you put the > > FE in the DMZ is you > > > break that theory. The DMZ is no longer isolated > > from the LAN. > > > > > > You definitely have to secure the FE, but once you > > have, why > > > not put it > > > inside where it is not at risk from questionable > > systems on the DMZ? > > > > > > Better to put an ISA server in the DMZ as was > > suggested earlier. > > > > > > Regarding IPSEC, Exchange 2003 explicitly states > > that IPSEC is now > > > supported between front end and back end. So if > > you upgrade, that's > > > perhaps an option. Though a lesser one than using > > ISA imho. > > > > > > -Original Message- > > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On > > Behalf Of Leeann > > > McCallum > > > Sent: Tuesday, September 16, 2003 6:32 PM > > > To: Exchange Discussions > > > Subject: RE: OWA front end server - licensing and > > security > > > > > > You could throw an OWA front end server in the > > DMZ, put certificate on > > > as Ed suggests, and then wrap everything up in an > > IPSEC > > > packet that goes > > > between the front end and backend. Between the > > client on the net and > > > the front end, you would use SSL, so just open > > 443. > > > > > > > > > > > > -Original Message- > > > From: Erick Thompson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > Sent: Wednesday, 17 September 2003 11:29 a.m. > > > To: Exchange Discussions > > > Subject: RE: OWA front end server - licensing and > > security > > > > > > > > > Ed, > > > > > > I'm a little confused. You're recommending that I > > put in a front end > > > server, but not in the DMZ? It seems to me that I > > might have to open a > > > bunch of ports, but if the front end server is in > > the LAN, > > > all ports are > > > by default open. > > > > > > Just to clarify, I have one Exchange server which > > lives on my LAN, and > > > there is an SMTP server in my DMZ that relays > > messages to the Exchange > > > server. At the moment, I don't have any other > > Exchange > > > servers running. > > > > > > Thanks, > > > Erick > > > > > > > -Original Message- > > > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Behalf Of Ed Crowley > > > > Sent:
RE: OWA front end server - licensing and security
Sorry, I should have said that it eliminates any key-logging concerns related to authentication - it obviously can't stop the actual recording of keystrokes by key-logging software. It will however, basically eliminate the possibility of someone gaining access to your email system using credentials "left behind" by one of your users which is where we happen to draw the line in terms of functionality/security. Greg -Original Message----- From: Greg Marr Sent: Thursday, 18 September 2003 11:31 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: OWA front end server - licensing and security We have set up our OWA to require two-factor authentication (SecurID) which eliminates any key-logging concerns but this system is not cheap at approx $300 AU ($160 US) per user. The upside is that you can use the same system to authenticate all of your remote access users (dial-up, VPN, etc) and this is the function that really allows me to sleep well at night. I guess that it all depends on how many people are going to require this functionality and of course, your budget. Greg -Original Message- From: Erick Thompson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, 18 September 2003 10:07 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: OWA front end server - licensing and security We talked about this exact scenario. We decided that given how easy it is to install a key logger, and other malware, on public systems we decided it was too risky. We are planning on using public folders quite heavily with data that we can't risk getting out. Same with the address books. We are trying to figure out a way to give people access to email only from a public terminal. No public folders or address books. If you have any suggestions, that would be great. Erick > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Ed Crowley > Sent: Wednesday, September 17, 2003 4:40 PM > To: Exchange Discussions > Subject: RE: OWA front end server - licensing and security > > > ISA is a better solution in a DMZ because it doesn't > require the plethora of holes in the internal > firewall. > > http://www.microsoft.com/technet/treeview/default.asp?url=/tec hnet/prodtechnol/isa/deploy/isaexch.asp > > Requiring VPN (your other message) is a good idea, > however, you may be coming back to ISA or some other > idea when your users demand to be able to get e-mail > from a coffeehouse kiosk terminal. > > Ed > > --- Erick Thompson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I have to admit to being a little confused, how > > would ISA help, aside from being a proxy? Which > > isn't nothing, but I'm wondering if I'm missing > > something else. > > > > Thanks, > > Erick > > > > > -Original Message- > > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Behalf Of Webb, Andy > > > Sent: Wednesday, September 17, 2003 7:04 AM > > > To: Exchange Discussions > > > Subject: RE: OWA front end server - licensing and > > security > > > > > > > > > Don't forget you also have to fully protect the > > front end server from > > > all the other servers on the DMZ from which it is > > not isolated. > > > > > > Those other systems may have been placed on the > > DMZ in an > > > insecure state > > > with the thought that if anyone broke them, they > > would be > > > isolated from > > > the internal LAN. What happens when you put the > > FE in the DMZ is you > > > break that theory. The DMZ is no longer isolated > > from the LAN. > > > > > > You definitely have to secure the FE, but once you > > have, why > > > not put it > > > inside where it is not at risk from questionable > > systems on the DMZ? > > > > > > Better to put an ISA server in the DMZ as was > > suggested earlier. > > > > > > Regarding IPSEC, Exchange 2003 explicitly states > > that IPSEC is now > > > supported between front end and back end. So if > > you upgrade, that's > > > perhaps an option. Though a lesser one than using > > ISA imho. > > > > > > -Original Message- > > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On > > Behalf Of Leeann > > > McCallum > > > Sent: Tuesday, September 16, 2003 6:32 PM > > > To: Exchange Discussions > > > Subject: RE: OWA front end server - licensing and > > security > > > > > > You could throw an OWA front end server in the > > DMZ, put certificate on > > > as Ed suggests, a
RE: OWA front end server - licensing and security
Hi Ed I think you'll find that I followed my initial post with an immediate follow up that stated: "Sorry, I should have said that it eliminates any key-logging concerns related to authentication - it obviously can't stop the actual recording of keystrokes by key-logging software. It will however, basically eliminate the possibility of someone gaining access to your email system using credentials "left behind" by one of your users which is where we happen to draw the line in terms of functionality/security. Greg" -Original Message- From: Ed Crowley [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, 19 September 2003 7:02 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: OWA front end server - licensing and security Perhaps, but that's not what he said. Ed --- Steve Evans <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > It doesn't, but it keeps people from reusing > credentials. At least I > believe that's the posters point. > > > Steve Evans > SDSU Foundation > > -Original Message- > From: Ed Crowley [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Thursday, September 18, 2003 1:40 PM > To: Exchange Discussions > Subject: RE: OWA front end server - licensing and > security > > I don't see how that would stop key-logging. > > Ed > > --- Greg Marr <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > We have set up our OWA to require two-factor > authentication (SecurID) > > which eliminates any key-logging concerns but this > system is not cheap > > > at approx $300 AU ($160 US) per user. > > > > The upside is that you can use the same system to > authenticate all of > > your remote access users (dial-up, VPN, etc) and > this is the function > > that really allows me to sleep well at night. > > > > I guess that it all depends on how many people are > going to require > > this functionality and of course, your budget. > > > > Greg > > > > -Original Message- > > From: Erick Thompson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Sent: Thursday, 18 September 2003 10:07 AM > > To: Exchange Discussions > > Subject: RE: OWA front end server - licensing and > security > > > > We talked about this exact scenario. We decided > that given how easy it > > > is to install a key logger, and other malware, on > public systems we > > decided it was too risky. We are planning on using > public folders > > quite heavily with data that we can't risk getting > out. > > Same with the address > > books. > > > > We are trying to figure out a way to give people > access to email only > > from a public terminal. No public folders or > address books. If you > > have any suggestions, that would be great. > > > > Erick > > > > > -Original Message- > > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Behalf Of Ed Crowley > > > Sent: Wednesday, September 17, 2003 4:40 PM > > > To: Exchange Discussions > > > Subject: RE: OWA front end server - licensing > and > > security > > > > > > > > > ISA is a better solution in a DMZ because it > > doesn't > > > require the plethora of holes in the internal > firewall. > > > > > > > > > http://www.microsoft.com/technet/treeview/default.asp?url=/tec > > hnet/prodtechnol/isa/deploy/isaexch.asp > > > > > > Requiring VPN (your other message) is a good > idea, > > > however, you may be coming back to ISA or some > > other > > > idea when your users demand to be able to get > > e-mail > > > from a coffeehouse kiosk terminal. > > > > > > Ed > > > > > > --- Erick Thompson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > I have to admit to being a little confused, > how > > > > would ISA help, aside from being a proxy? > Which > > > > isn't nothing, but I'm wondering if I'm > missing > > > > something else. > > > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > Erick > > > > > > > > > -Original Message- > > > > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > Behalf Of Webb, Andy > > > > > Sent: Wednesday, September 17, 2003 7:04 AM > > > > > To: Exchange Discussions > > > > > Subject: RE: OWA front end server - > licensing > > and > > > > security > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Don't forget you also have t
Urgent Help - Update
Further info - I can move messages between folders with Outlook and can delete them so it seems that the message "pointers" are fine but I cannot access the content of any new messages. Should I run an eseutil integrity check or just bite the bullet and restore from bacup (would lose about two hours of email)??? Thanks Greg Marr _ Get less junk mail with ninemsn Premium. Click here http://ninemsn.com.au/premium/landing.asp _ 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]
Urgent Issue
Hi This mornign I arrived at work to an Exchange 2000 Server (SP4) that had the FrameworkService exe consuming all of the CPU. A reboot was decided upon and since then, users can still send messages and can open messages recieved prior to the reboot but when they go to open the messages received since the reboot, the get a message which states "Can't open this item". There are no messages in the event log that suggest a cause so I would really apprecaite any advice. Cheers Greg Marr _ Get less junk mail with ninemsn Premium. Click here http://ninemsn.com.au/premium/landing.asp _ 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: Urgent Help - Update
Thanks - I did contact PSS and have had great service in the past but their SLA for a consultant to get back to you is four hours so I thought someone might be able to assist in the interim. Anyway, it seems the issue was related to our AV software. In the early stages, I stopped the AV services but the issue was not resolved until I actually uninstalled the software. Thanks Greg -Original Message- From: Ed Crowley [MVP] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, 28 October 2003 1:39 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Urgent Help - Update For urgent issues contact Microsoft PSS; they have engineers standing by just to help you. 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 Greg Marr Sent: Monday, October 27, 2003 3:33 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Urgent Help - Update Further info - I can move messages between folders with Outlook and can delete them so it seems that the message "pointers" are fine but I cannot access the content of any new messages. Should I run an eseutil integrity check or just bite the bullet and restore from bacup (would lose about two hours of email)??? Thanks Greg Marr _ Get less junk mail with ninemsn Premium. Click here http://ninemsn.com.au/premium/landing.asp _ 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]
