RE: Greg's Utterly Fascinating Views on Ethics
Maybe he turned down the MVP thing so he could accept gifts from MS without being consumed by guilt... Jeff Hague Anyone up for a sprited debate about brick level backups? -Original Message- From: Ed Crowley [MVP] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, December 22, 2003 12:38 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Greg's Utterly Fascinating Views on Ethics Actually, I recall (perhaps inaccurately, though) that he claims he was offered an MVP but he refused it. I do not know any actual facts other than his own claims on this matter, however. 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 Bob Sadler Sent: Monday, December 22, 2003 9:31 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Greg's Utterly Fascinating Views on Ethics I get this strange idea that someone wasn't chosen to be an MVP and is very very angry about it :) Bob Sadler -Original Message- From: Ed Crowley [MVP] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, December 22, 2003 11:30 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Greg's Utterly Fascinating Views on Ethics So how fundamentally different is paying Microsoft to be a Partner than being an MVP? It's true that I don't pay actual money to be an MVP, but I do work for it. Don't you have to sign lots of agreement papers to be a Partner? Do you give all your customers copies of those papers so they can assess the level of conflict of interest? So if I send Microsoft a dollar for my MVP status, the conflict of interest ends? You still haven't proven your assertion that my accepting the small gratuity and title associated with MVP constitutes a conflict of interest. Your only proof so far is along the lines of, It's obvious, or It is because I say it is. Perhaps it's because you can't prove it? 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 Deckler Sent: Monday, December 22, 2003 8:51 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Greg's Utterly Fascinating Views on Ethics First, you have no credibility on the point. You find the phrase I finish them (fights) offensive but not someone being called a liar, stupid, idiot, wife beater. You simply have zaro credibility. Second, as for your other two points, our customers and potential customers are made well aware of any and all potential conflicts of interest. We practice full disclosure. In addition, meeting with a vendor to talk about their new products is in no way even CLOSE to accepting a title or gift from said vendor. But, there is no point to even debating this with you because you are never going to see it because you are going to deny the obvious. Yes, I have to deal with vendors just like everyone else in this industry. It is a fact of life. But, I don't have to like it and no, generally, I almost NEVER meet with vendors and when I do, it is for specific purposes, I get in, get the information and get out. Finally, you have obviously shown your bias by claiming that I claim to be the all ethical sort. And to my knowledge, I have no ethics test that I have created. This is a blatant mis-characterization and exposes your bias. I am not, nor ever will be all ethical and holier than thou. I have *different* ethics apparently than many on this board, but I have never claimed to be perfect or that my ethics are the end all, be all. Yes, I have paid to attend conventions, I have paid to be a Microsoft partner. In some strict ethical vaccuum those may be considered unethical, but this is the real world. And besides that, there is a clear, bright line between paying a vendor to attend a convention and accepting a pure gift from a vendor. That bright line is what I have been talking about, but you are never going to see it because you will never admit to the obvious and just want to pick a fight. And yes, for all of you out there, I am nearly certain that, in my youth, I accepted direct gifts from vendors. I cannot recall any particular occassion, but I'm willing to bet that it probably occurred. And guess what? I stopped that long, long, long ago because IT IS WRONG. So, to sum it up, you have no credibility that you have been offended in any way because there have been lots more offensive stuff said that you have not said boo about. And, you are in self-denial about the DISTINCT difference between accepting a pure gift from a vendor and PAYING that vendor to attend a convention, etc. Here's a hint. One costs you money, the other doesn't. I am not quibbling with what you said, I'm instead taking offense at what you said. You see, you can't claim to be the all ethical sort you want, if you can't even pass the ethics test of your own making. I didn't post any of those points on your website, someone from
RE: Impact of sending attachment to many recipients?
Correct me if Im wrong (and I know you will.), unless the actual attachment itself is altered, Exchange still stores just 1 copy of the attachment for all 1000 recipients plus a copy of the original email, now shared by 999 recips, and 1 altered copy of the email stored by the person who modified it - unless the recipients live on multiple servers or in multiple stores on the same server in which case there are copies per store or server. Does anyone know how a storage group would affect this? Does Exchange store it once per store (database) or once per storage group? Im thinking once per store... Jeff Hague -Original Message- From: Robert Moir [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, December 15, 2003 5:33 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Impact of sending attachment to many recipients? As Tony says, search under Single Instance Storage (aka SIS) for the techie explanation. In the case your friend cites, he's wrong. What will happen is that your mail gets sent to 1000 people, and there is one copy of it. Now if one of them opens that mail and annotates it with their thoughts on what you said, and then saves it, then the server will hold one copy of his altered mail for him and 1 other copy for the other 999 people. -- Robert Moir Microsoft MVP Senior IT Systems Engineer Luton Sixth Form College RM Eunt Domus -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 14 December 2003 10:55 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Impact of sending attachment to many recipients? Hi, Let's say a user sends a 1Mb attachment by email to 1000 people, does it add 1000Mb to the Exchange Database? I put out a post like this before the replies were negative. But now a friend pointed out that a recipient who has a mailbox on the Exchange Server could for example open this email change it. Then save it (i.e. the email was changed). So he's saying that this shows that each person gets their personal copy of the email. Therefore, the 1Mb attachment in the email to 1000 people DOES increase the Exchange Database size by 1000Mb. Pls. can you shed some light on this discussion for us? I'd appreciate some official article from Microsoft (e.g. Technet) to prove my point. Help! Thanks in advance. Pls. Cc all replies to me on: [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=exchanget 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=exchangetext_mode=lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Sources of outages
Apathy - 75% -Original Message- From: David, Andy [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, December 15, 2003 2:13 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Sources of outages Poor Admin Practices : 90% -Original Message- From: Orin Rehorst [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, December 15, 2003 2:12 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: OT: Sources of outages Regarding general sources of corporate computing outages, these figures seem to be accurate. Agree? Communication lines and services 80 percent Servers 14 percent Routers and switches 1 percent Regards, Orin _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang =english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Mail Processing by Exchange vs. SendMail
That's obviously absurd - Sendmail probably does process more mail than Exchange on similar hardware but that's pretty much all sendmail does. It doesn't provide the additional features that Exchange has out of the box particularly if you are an Active Directory shop. Besides, what difference does it make as long as whatever platform you choose handles the volume of mail you need it to? The apparent advantage of sendmail is price - if you run it on Linux. If you put it in front of Exchange, that goes out the window anyway... Also, the administration involved compared to Exchange is very high even if you do have Unix\Linux admins on staff - that gets worse the more features you add like a web interface calendaring, whatever Public Folders equivalent there might be, etc. If you are an AD shop, it's really a no-brainer - have you ever tried to create an AD account with a sendmail mailbox with the same logon and permissions at the same time? Does this guy just hate Bill Gates like most of the folks I've met who make statements like that or does he just think he needs to know nothing about Exchange yet still draw comparisons? Jeff Hague MCSE Network Manager Randolph-Macon College Ashland, VA -Original Message- From: Sean Faust [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, December 12, 2003 9:20 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Mail Processing by Exchange vs. SendMail Good Morning All, I have a Unix/Linux admin that is just wearing me out with regards to Exchanging being 3rd rate. Given all of the variables including memory, processors, etc. How much mail traffic can Exchange process in an hour/day and what is the advantage if any of putting SendMail in front of Exchange? His last statement was that SendMail can process more mail in one minute than Exchagne can process in a day. Thanks, Sean _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=; lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Mail Processing by Exchange vs. SendMail
And how does sendmail (or any other SMTP server for that matter) differ as far as allowing someone to send email to someone in a different domain - relaying? Jeff -Original Message- From: Ken Cornetet [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, December 12, 2003 12:24 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Mail Processing by Exchange vs. SendMail I thing Greg is saying that a POP3/SMTP user can't send mail OUTSIDE the organization without relaying (with authentication) turned on. Which is another good reason to NOT expose Exchange SMTP to the outside world. It is now apparently common knowledge among spammers that Exchange defaults to allowing authenticated relaying. If you have this box checked (Q310380 Q321825 advises to turn it on), then you are opening up your domain accounts to dictionary attacks. Even if it isn't turned on, spammers will STILL try when their scan shows your SMTP host is Exchange, eating up your bandwidth. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Fyodorov, Andrey Sent: Friday, December 12, 2003 12:10 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Mail Processing by Exchange vs. SendMail Hey there always will be people that don't like POP3. I perfectly understand how Exchange works by the way. I also perfectly understand SMTP. Believe me, most SMTP servers out there (Exchange, iMAIL, SendMail, etc.) accept Anonymous connections. It does not meant that they relay mail for Anonymous connections. Also trust me, unless you have misconfigured something on your Exchange server, Exchange will not relay mail from an anonymous source. But it will accept ***inbound*** mail from an anonymous source because that's what it is supposed to do, being an RFC compliant SMTP server et all. Sincerely, Andrey Fyodorov, Exchange MVP Systems Engineer Messaging and Collaboration Spherion -Original Message- From: Greg Deckler [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, December 12, 2003 12:00 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Mail Processing by Exchange vs. SendMail Yes, you were lucky. I have seen this exact scenario happen a couple times now. Fydora or whoever apparently did not understand this scenario but it is a fairly common scenario in small office environments with people on the road connecting their laptops to hotel networks and the like. Yes, OWA is available, but there are lots of people in this world that are always going to hate something like OWA. OWA in 2003 is pretty sweet, I must say, but there will always be people that don't like. It's been a while since I've supported POP3 clients on Exchange (5.5) but, as I recall, I had no issues with anonymous relaying. I believe that Exchange 5.5 allowed anonymous SMTP inbound connections (that is, connections for mail to be delivered locally) and would allow relaying by authenticated users only. Or maybe I was just luckily that the spammers different find this server? Aaron -Original Message- From: Greg Deckler [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, December 12, 2003 11:30 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Mail Processing by Exchange vs. SendMail While I am not sure that the Greg in this post was directed at me or whether this is some new form of abuse and sarcasm, it is pretty much irrelevant as I do have some things to say on this issue. The biggest problem that I have had with Exchange on the outside of the SMTP mail chain is anti-spam in a small office environment. It is not that anti-spam functionality does not exist in Exchange, but it is in its native implementation. The issue actually revolves around POP3 users. For your Exchange server to serve as the end-point for SMTP connections from anywhere, you generally have to turn on Anonymous Authentication. This allows any SMTP server to connect to yours to send email. Now, let's say you have POP3 users that might be connecting from anywhere they please on just about anyone's network. To allow these people to send email, you have to generally turn go into Relay Restrictions and turn on Allow all computers which successfully authenticate to relay... The problem with this is that Anonymous Authentication is also on, so guess what? Spammers can anonymously authenticate and relay spam, because, apparently in the Microsoft world Anonymous Authentication is just as good as any other Authentication. Oh well. And yes, you can turn this checkbox off and set up specific computers, but if they are POP3 clients connecting from anywhere, you are hosed there and if you set up this by domain, you have a whole other set of problems, not the least of which is that this forces a reverse DNS lookup. What really needs to happen with this is that Microsoft needs to simply add a checkbox that says something along the lines of Anonymous Authentication can only send inbound messages and not relay. But, I guess since I am not an MVP the likelihood of this happening is
RE: Mail Processing by Exchange vs. SendMail
We have a few of those around campus - mostly Mac heads though. 22 years old is all you had to say... We have a 22 year old Mac Tech who is also very bright and really knows his stuff but has the anti-MS attitude from hell as well. We have tried to get him to see that he has a great opportunity here. Were 95% MS, the Macs are used by a few Faculty and the Math department. He could become one of those rare people who really know how to deal with Mac in a Windows environment but he just wont let himself learn anything about Windows... A lost cause. Jeff -Original Message- From: Sean Faust [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, December 12, 2003 1:21 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Mail Processing by Exchange vs. SendMail Oh, let me tell you, he hates Bill, Microcrap comes out of his mouth far too often. He's only 22 years old and a genius kid, good natured, knows his stuff. He is also an MCSE only because he was forced into it. The fact that someone develops a product to sell and then gets rich really pisses the Linux crowd off (some of them). That's obviously absurd - Sendmail probably does process more mail than Exchange on similar hardware but that's pretty much all sendmail does. It doesn't provide the additional features that Exchange has out of the box particularly if you are an Active Directory shop. Besides, what difference does it make as long as whatever platform you choose handles the volume of mail you need it to? The apparent advantage of sendmail is price - if you run it on Linux. If you put it in front of Exchange, that goes out the window anyway... Also, the administration involved compared to Exchange is very high even if you do have Unix\Linux admins on staff - that gets worse the more features you add like a web interface calendaring, whatever Public Folders equivalent there might be, etc. If you are an AD shop, it's really a no-brainer - have you ever tried to create an AD account with a sendmail mailbox with the same logon and permissions at the same time? Does this guy just hate Bill Gates like most of the folks I've met who make statements like that or does he just think he needs to know nothing about Exchange yet still draw comparisons? Jeff Hague MCSE Network Manager Randolph-Macon College Ashland, VA -Original Message- From: Sean Faust [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, December 12, 2003 9:20 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Mail Processing by Exchange vs. SendMail Good Morning All, I have a Unix/Linux admin that is just wearing me out with regards to Exchanging being 3rd rate. Given all of the variables including memory, processors, etc. How much mail traffic can Exchange process in an hour/day and what is the advantage if any of putting SendMail in front of Exchange? His last statement was that SendMail can process more mail in one minute than Exchagne can process in a day. Thanks, Sean _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=3Dexchangetext_mode =3D= lang=3Denglish To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=; lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Internet.com...
I just received 3... Jeff Hague -Original Message- From: Blunt, James H (Jim) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, November 06, 2003 4:43 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Internet.com... Well, it looks like Internet .com is flipping out again...just received 14 rejection messages from their server, some from messages over a month old. _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Tumbleweed
Anyone know offhand what a Tumbleweed appliance would cost (roughly) for 1500 mailboxes? Jeff Hague Network Manager MCSE Randolph-Macon College Ashland, VA -Original Message- From: John Q Jr. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, October 26, 2003 10:05 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Re: Tumbleweed Yes. Exchange 2K FE/BE Topology 900 users - Original Message - From: internet.com [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, October 26, 2003 4:53 PM Subject: Tumbleweed Has anyone used tumbleweed with Exchange 2000? Thanks Richard Tracy _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Tumbleweed
So in todays-money, I can excpect 3 Ferrari's and maybe a Mercedes rag-top or two? I think I have them laying around Physical Plant. Maybe I can keep 1 of the Mercs if I scrub the support... Jeff -Original Message- From: Fyodorov, Andrey [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, October 29, 2003 9:45 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Tumbleweed Back in 1998 when we implemented it for 20,000 users at Credit Suisse, Tumbleweed with the SEC-compliant Message Archival cost roughly a couple of Ferraris (including support) Sincerely, Andrey Fyodorov Systems Engineer Messaging and Collaboration Spherion -Original Message- From: Hague, Jeff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, October 29, 2003 9:34 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Tumbleweed Anyone know offhand what a Tumbleweed appliance would cost (roughly) for 1500 mailboxes? Jeff Hague Network Manager MCSE Randolph-Macon College Ashland, VA -Original Message- From: John Q Jr. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, October 26, 2003 10:05 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Re: Tumbleweed Yes. Exchange 2K FE/BE Topology 900 users - Original Message - From: internet.com [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, October 26, 2003 4:53 PM Subject: Tumbleweed Has anyone used tumbleweed with Exchange 2000? Thanks Richard Tracy _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=; lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=; lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=; lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Tumbleweed
I like to have some idea before unleashing any sales pitches these days. Over the last year I have inquired on about 5 different products (spam, backup, file management - different things) and every one of them is way beyond our reach bit I cant get the damn salespeople to stop calling me! I really dont have time for it. If its gonna be 10grand plus, I know we wont buy it so Id rather have some idea upfront before unleashing the dogs of Sales... Jeff -Original Message- From: Schwartz, Jim [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, October 29, 2003 9:57 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Tumbleweed IIRC they've changed their pricing structure from per seat to per proc. Huge difference. Why don't you call them and find out. -Original Message- From: Hague, Jeff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, October 29, 2003 9:50 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Tumbleweed So in todays-money, I can excpect 3 Ferrari's and maybe a Mercedes rag-top or two? I think I have them laying around Physical Plant. Maybe I can keep 1 of the Mercs if I scrub the support... Jeff -Original Message- From: Fyodorov, Andrey [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, October 29, 2003 9:45 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Tumbleweed Back in 1998 when we implemented it for 20,000 users at Credit Suisse, Tumbleweed with the SEC-compliant Message Archival cost roughly a couple of Ferraris (including support) Sincerely, Andrey Fyodorov Systems Engineer Messaging and Collaboration Spherion -Original Message- From: Hague, Jeff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, October 29, 2003 9:34 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Tumbleweed Anyone know offhand what a Tumbleweed appliance would cost (roughly) for 1500 mailboxes? Jeff Hague Network Manager MCSE Randolph-Macon College Ashland, VA -Original Message- From: John Q Jr. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, October 26, 2003 10:05 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Re: Tumbleweed Yes. Exchange 2K FE/BE Topology 900 users - Original Message - From: internet.com [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, October 26, 2003 4:53 PM Subject: Tumbleweed Has anyone used tumbleweed with Exchange 2000? Thanks Richard Tracy _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=; lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=; lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=; lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang =english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang =english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Outlook error for Mac.
I have seen this error on our Exchange Server for several (all Mac, I think) clients as well and what I have read says that the Outlook client is set as both a POP3 and a MAPI client - check the users settings to see if he has it set up both ways. It says to go back through setting up the connection to Exchange and choose Corporate and Exchange Server only. I havent bothered to fix it here because it seems to just be an annoyance - the users are getting their mail. Jeff Hague MCSE Network Manager Randolph-Macon College -Original Message- From: John Strongosky [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, October 20, 2003 3:44 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Outlook error for Mac. The MAC is on OS 10.2 and is using the latest Outlook for MAC 2001. They are connected to our lan via tcpip. He has 2 macs running outlook, 1 a desktop and 1 a laptop. This error shows up at odd times sometimes its 4 times a second then its then it skips 2 or 3 seconds.. john -Original Message- From: Couch, Nate [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, October 20, 2003 9:56 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Outlook error for Mac. Can you give me more detail on this error? What Mac OS is the user using? What Outlook client? Do they use Appletalk or TCPIP to connect to the server? Are they physically connected to your network or are they VPN'ing into it? Nate Couch EDS Messaging -- From: John Strongosky Reply To: Exchange Discussions Sent: Monday, October 20, 2003 11:25 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Outlook error for Mac. I have a mac user who is showing a event id 1132, Source:MSExchange POP3 An error (0x80070057) occurred while rendering a message for download on mailbox The only KB Article I can find is KB Article 187869 and all it says it to load the latest service pack, well this server is at Exchange 5.5 SP4. In conversation with this user outlook it not installed a pop3 client. Any Mac users out there that can give me any help. john _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=la ng=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang =english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
email distribution management software
The Admissions Department for the College has decided that they have to do something to get a better handle on mass email distributions. About 5 or 6 times per year they will send an e-mail to 40,000 plus recipients trying to recruit the new Freshman class. In the past they have managed their distribution lists in a home grown Access database and then sent the mailings in small pieces because we used to be limited hardware-wise on the Exchange Server and our Internet pipe wasnt all that big. Those 2 issues are no longer a problem. Doing it this way gives them no real feedback on how many bad addresses there were, if anyone read the mailing, etc. They have talked with several companies that offer these as services but they are looking at $7,000 and up every time they put out a mailing. Im thinking we can find software that does these things for less than $42,000 per year? Does anyone know of apps that do these things that will work in an Exchange 2000 environment? Thanks! Jeff Hague Network Manager Randolph-Macon College _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Port 135 and Exchange Issue
Unless your on a flight with wireless Internet access, that laptop would be just as useful for e-mail whether your using MAPI, POP3 or Terminal... There are certainly ways to work offline regardless of the type of connection you use when your online. Jeff -Original Message- From: Andy David [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, August 26, 2003 8:14 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Re: Port 135 and Exchange Issue Other than offline mail, there really is no difference. I dont know too many laptop users who have a TS or Citrix client installed and nothing else. - Original Message - From: Martin Blackstone [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, August 26, 2003 8:08 AM Subject: RE: Port 135 and Exchange Issue But now that nice laptop you use to do your work on a plane or when you are offline is just a terminal, and you have no offline mail or anything I'm not saying TS doesn't have its place, I'm just mentioning that for someone who is used to taking their office with them may not appreciate those changes. -Original Message- From: Andy David [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, August 26, 2003 4:49 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Re: Port 135 and Exchange Issue From within Citrix, its simply a matter of copying over the file you need to work on to your local drive on the laptop. - Original Message - From: Chris Scharff [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, August 25, 2003 10:11 PM Subject: Re: Port 135 and Exchange Issue Makes laptop use a little tough though. From: Hague, Jeff [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Mon, 25 Aug 2003 11:23:15 -0400 To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: Port 135 and Exchange Issue Definitely more costly but it really works well. The setup and configuration aspects alone (client-side anyway) are much simpler and the performance is probably much better than a straight VPN solution. I think if you look it at all the factors there is a positive ROI. Jeff -Original Message- From: Martin Blackstone [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, August 24, 2003 9:43 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Port 135 and Exchange Issue That's certainly an option, but a much more costly one IMHO. -Original Message- From: Hague, Jeff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, August 24, 2003 5:43 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Port 135 and Exchange Issue Have you considered Terminal Server or (better yet) Citrix? This works wonders for us - full Outlook Exchange as well as all the other apps we run. We only have a dozen or so users so far but my understanding is that Terminal by itself on one decent server (dual Xeon 2.0GHz/1.5GB RAM) is fine for 20 or so clients simultaneously. Beyond that, Citrix on top of Terminal is the way to go. Citrix also provides better support for local printers, sound cards, etc plus a host of additional functionality. Either 1 requires only a single port through the firewall which hasnt been blocked by any ISPs (yet?) and the traffic is already encrypted although I dont imagine its as tight as most VPN solutions. The other thing we found so convenient is the Advanced Terminal client which is simply a web page that loads the client software through an ActiveX control in an IE session. The directions to get our clients set up was litterally go to .whatever.com and follow the instructions. There is some work to do getting the apps set up properly but common apps like Outlook, Word and Excel are very well documented. Getting our custom apps running wasnt near as difficult as I had expected either. The big trick for us is handling profiles because some of our clients can not have access to certain apps that other clients need so we had to modify some profiles manually but with so few clients it hasnt been a big deal. Jeff Hague MCSE Network Manager Randolph-Macon College Ashland, VA -Original Message- From: Hank [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, August 24, 2003 3:18 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Port 135 and Exchange Issue We are trying to recover from ISPs closing down port 135. We have an dedicated Exchange Server at a hosting company. 20 of our 23 people scattered around the country can not use the full functionality of Outlook/Exchange because of this problem. We are a classic case study of how a company has suceeded in business by using most of the functionality of Outlook/Exchange. We built our 3 year old company's communications, task management, and database using the Exchange Platform, including extensive use of custom 'forms' that track hundreds of tasks
RE: Port 135 and Exchange Issue
If you dont have an Internet or RAS connection your not getting anywhere regardless of your e-mail client. You have to copy files to your local drive to work on them in any case and thats not really an issue with Terminal anymore and its very simple with Citrix. Jeff -Original Message- From: Martin Blackstone [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, August 25, 2003 10:45 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Port 135 and Exchange Issue That's what I kept thinking -Original Message- From: Chris Scharff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, August 25, 2003 7:11 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Re: Port 135 and Exchange Issue Makes laptop use a little tough though. From: Hague, Jeff [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Mon, 25 Aug 2003 11:23:15 -0400 To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: Port 135 and Exchange Issue Definitely more costly but it really works well. The setup and configuration aspects alone (client-side anyway) are much simpler and the performance is probably much better than a straight VPN solution. I think if you look it at all the factors there is a positive ROI. Jeff -Original Message- From: Martin Blackstone [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, August 24, 2003 9:43 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Port 135 and Exchange Issue That's certainly an option, but a much more costly one IMHO. -Original Message- From: Hague, Jeff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, August 24, 2003 5:43 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Port 135 and Exchange Issue Have you considered Terminal Server or (better yet) Citrix? This works wonders for us - full Outlook Exchange as well as all the other apps we run. We only have a dozen or so users so far but my understanding is that Terminal by itself on one decent server (dual Xeon 2.0GHz/1.5GB RAM) is fine for 20 or so clients simultaneously. Beyond that, Citrix on top of Terminal is the way to go. Citrix also provides better support for local printers, sound cards, etc plus a host of additional functionality. Either 1 requires only a single port through the firewall which hasnt been blocked by any ISPs (yet?) and the traffic is already encrypted although I dont imagine its as tight as most VPN solutions. The other thing we found so convenient is the Advanced Terminal client which is simply a web page that loads the client software through an ActiveX control in an IE session. The directions to get our clients set up was litterally go to .whatever.com and follow the instructions. There is some work to do getting the apps set up properly but common apps like Outlook, Word and Excel are very well documented. Getting our custom apps running wasnt near as difficult as I had expected either. The big trick for us is handling profiles because some of our clients can not have access to certain apps that other clients need so we had to modify some profiles manually but with so few clients it hasnt been a big deal. Jeff Hague MCSE Network Manager Randolph-Macon College Ashland, VA -Original Message- From: Hank [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, August 24, 2003 3:18 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Port 135 and Exchange Issue We are trying to recover from ISPs closing down port 135. We have an dedicated Exchange Server at a hosting company. 20 of our 23 people scattered around the country can not use the full functionality of Outlook/Exchange because of this problem. We are a classic case study of how a company has suceeded in business by using most of the functionality of Outlook/Exchange. We built our 3 year old company's communications, task management, and database using the Exchange Platform, including extensive use of custom 'forms' that track hundreds of tasks and our workflow. The ISP's closing out port 135 has brought us to our knees. We are scambling just trying to stay on schedule with our committments to our clients. I have no hope that the ISPs will turn open up 135 again, so I also need an alternative way to connect to the *full* functionality we had before, or be forced to migrate completely off exchange and rebuild our entire infrastructure using another platform. We have tried to implement a VPN solution, but now realize that unless we run the connection on our client and have a full internet connection at the same time, this will not work for us. We do not know how to do this. We must have full access to the internet and exchange at the same time because of the nature of our service we provide. Any ideas? Regards, Hank _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang =english
RE: Port 135 and Exchange Issue
Have you considered Terminal Server or (better yet) Citrix? This works wonders for us - full Outlook Exchange as well as all the other apps we run. We only have a dozen or so users so far but my understanding is that Terminal by itself on one decent server (dual Xeon 2.0GHz/1.5GB RAM) is fine for 20 or so clients simultaneously. Beyond that, Citrix on top of Terminal is the way to go. Citrix also provides better support for local printers, sound cards, etc plus a host of additional functionality. Either 1 requires only a single port through the firewall which hasnt been blocked by any ISPs (yet?) and the traffic is already encrypted although I dont imagine its as tight as most VPN solutions. The other thing we found so convenient is the Advanced Terminal client which is simply a web page that loads the client software through an ActiveX control in an IE session. The directions to get our clients set up was litterally go to .whatever.com and follow the instructions. There is some work to do getting the apps set up properly but common apps like Outlook, Word and Excel are very well documented. Getting our custom apps running wasnt near as difficult as I had expected either. The big trick for us is handling profiles because some of our clients can not have access to certain apps that other clients need so we had to modify some profiles manually but with so few clients it hasnt been a big deal. Jeff Hague MCSE Network Manager Randolph-Macon College Ashland, VA -Original Message- From: Hank [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, August 24, 2003 3:18 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Port 135 and Exchange Issue We are trying to recover from ISPs closing down port 135. We have an dedicated Exchange Server at a hosting company. 20 of our 23 people scattered around the country can not use the full functionality of Outlook/Exchange because of this problem. We are a classic case study of how a company has suceeded in business by using most of the functionality of Outlook/Exchange. We built our 3 year old company's communications, task management, and database using the Exchange Platform, including extensive use of custom 'forms' that track hundreds of tasks and our workflow. The ISP's closing out port 135 has brought us to our knees. We are scambling just trying to stay on schedule with our committments to our clients. I have no hope that the ISPs will turn open up 135 again, so I also need an alternative way to connect to the *full* functionality we had before, or be forced to migrate completely off exchange and rebuild our entire infrastructure using another platform. We have tried to implement a VPN solution, but now realize that unless we run the connection on our client and have a full internet connection at the same time, this will not work for us. We do not know how to do this. We must have full access to the internet and exchange at the same time because of the nature of our service we provide. Any ideas? Regards, Hank _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Port 135 and Exchange Issue
Definitely more costly but it really works well. The setup and configuration aspects alone (client-side anyway) are much simpler and the performance is probably much better than a straight VPN solution. I think if you look it at all the factors there is a positive ROI. Jeff -Original Message- From: Martin Blackstone [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, August 24, 2003 9:43 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Port 135 and Exchange Issue That's certainly an option, but a much more costly one IMHO. -Original Message- From: Hague, Jeff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, August 24, 2003 5:43 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Port 135 and Exchange Issue Have you considered Terminal Server or (better yet) Citrix? This works wonders for us - full Outlook Exchange as well as all the other apps we run. We only have a dozen or so users so far but my understanding is that Terminal by itself on one decent server (dual Xeon 2.0GHz/1.5GB RAM) is fine for 20 or so clients simultaneously. Beyond that, Citrix on top of Terminal is the way to go. Citrix also provides better support for local printers, sound cards, etc plus a host of additional functionality. Either 1 requires only a single port through the firewall which hasnt been blocked by any ISPs (yet?) and the traffic is already encrypted although I dont imagine its as tight as most VPN solutions. The other thing we found so convenient is the Advanced Terminal client which is simply a web page that loads the client software through an ActiveX control in an IE session. The directions to get our clients set up was litterally go to .whatever.com and follow the instructions. There is some work to do getting the apps set up properly but common apps like Outlook, Word and Excel are very well documented. Getting our custom apps running wasnt near as difficult as I had expected either. The big trick for us is handling profiles because some of our clients can not have access to certain apps that other clients need so we had to modify some profiles manually but with so few clients it hasnt been a big deal. Jeff Hague MCSE Network Manager Randolph-Macon College Ashland, VA -Original Message- From: Hank [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, August 24, 2003 3:18 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Port 135 and Exchange Issue We are trying to recover from ISPs closing down port 135. We have an dedicated Exchange Server at a hosting company. 20 of our 23 people scattered around the country can not use the full functionality of Outlook/Exchange because of this problem. We are a classic case study of how a company has suceeded in business by using most of the functionality of Outlook/Exchange. We built our 3 year old company's communications, task management, and database using the Exchange Platform, including extensive use of custom 'forms' that track hundreds of tasks and our workflow. The ISP's closing out port 135 has brought us to our knees. We are scambling just trying to stay on schedule with our committments to our clients. I have no hope that the ISPs will turn open up 135 again, so I also need an alternative way to connect to the *full* functionality we had before, or be forced to migrate completely off exchange and rebuild our entire infrastructure using another platform. We have tried to implement a VPN solution, but now realize that unless we run the connection on our client and have a full internet connection at the same time, this will not work for us. We do not know how to do this. We must have full access to the internet and exchange at the same time because of the nature of our service we provide. Any ideas? Regards, Hank _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang =english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang =english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin
RE: Any issues with W2k RPC patch on Exchange 2000?
I put the RPC patch on our Win2K SP3, Exch2K SP3 box about 3 weeks ago and havent had any issues. Jeff Hague MCSE Network Manager Randolph-Macon College -Original Message- From: Chinnery, Paul [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, August 22, 2003 1:06 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Any issues with W2k RPC patch on Exchange 2000? I haven't seen any issues when I installed it some time ago (Ex2K). Paul Chinnery Network Administrator Mem Med Ctr -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, August 22, 2003 11:59 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Any issues with W2k RPC patch on Exchange 2000? Has anyone applied the Blaster RPC patch to a W2k (SP3) Exch 2k (SP3) machine? If so, how did it go? Has anyone heard of any issues with Exchange 2000 and this patch? Thanks. _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: 3 Layers of Virus protection.
3 layers - We run a Fortinet firewall at the edge which scans SMTP, POP3, IMAP, HTTP and FTP for viruses (at the packet level which is really cool), CA (I know...) on Exchange box and CA on the desktops. I beleive we use the VET engine on Exchange and InoculateIT on the desktops... Jeff Hague -Original Message- From: Martin, Jon [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, August 20, 2003 4:07 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: 3 Layers of Virus protection. One note related to this. It seems to me that having more than one vendor is as important as having multiple layers. If you have three or four layers of 'insert your AV vendor here' products and they miss the boat on some virus, then all of those layers are irrelevant. Jon -Original Message- From: Tony Hlabse [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, August 20, 2003 5:39 AM Posted To: exchange - new Conversation: 3 Layers of Virus protection. Subject:3 Layers of Virus protection. I was curious how many have 3 layers of protection for their email systems. My current assignment has me at a place where they are comfortable with desktop and a set of SMTP servers doing virus and spam. Desktop is Symantec and Trend on the SMTP servers. My gut feeling is to also protect the IS stores too. How many have 3 levels. _ bGet MSN 8/b and help protect your children with advanced parental controls. http://join.msn.com/?page=features/parental _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Several questions on E2k and Active Directory
Thanks Ed! Ill try to use more paragraphs in the future. Good point about DC functionality going down on the Exchange box. I found that if I put the GC role back on the box running Veritas that it was happy again even though Veritas said the GC should be the Exchange box. Hopefully this wont be an issue again when I retire that box because Ill be putting Veritas on another DC / GC. What is the purpose of the Config DC? Jeff -Original Message- From: Ed Crowley [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, August 01, 2003 6:57 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Several questions on E2k and Active Directory You really ought to learn about the concept of paragrpahs. Call Veritas and don't accept the answer that the Exchange server should also be a GC. Yes, installing Exchange on a DC requires you do to more to get it operating than if it were a member server. What happens if the DC function on your Exchange server fails and requires you to rebuild it? Your e-mail could be down for a while! If the DC is a separate box, and another is available, you can simply rebuild it and practically nobody will notice. There is never more than one Configuration domain controller. Exchange will select domain controllers in the same site. If there are no available domain controllers in the site, then after a delay of about 15 minutes (a guess based on observation) it will work from a list of some number of domain controllers (is it 20?) in the organization without regard to any proximity calculations. Just because you make your box a domain controller doesn't mean it will use itself for that purpose if there are other domain controllers in the same site. 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 Hague, Jeff Sent: Friday, August 01, 2003 9:19 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Several questions on E2k and Active Directory Single Exch2K SP3, Win2K AD Domain, several DCs/GCs in place. I am replacing a Win2K DC which happens to be 1 of 2 GCs and holds all FSMO roles (among other things). Earlier this week, I set up the replacement server, installed AD and transferred all FSMO except PDC emulator. Yesterday I set the new DC as a GC and removed GC from the old one. Apparently this has caused Veritas Backup Exec (which also runs on the machine that used to be a GC) to fail when trying to connect to the E2K box for individual mailbox backups. Veritas suggests making sure that the E2K machine itself is a GC which of course means installing AD on it. They dont seem to offer any other suggestions... As I got to thinking about it I figured that would actually fit into my server layout pretty well. Anyway, I have searched the knowledge base articles, read the resource kit and searched back through a year of posts to this discussion list and it looks like the cons for this arrangement are performance and recovery. I dont have any performance issues - the E2K box CPU peaks at 5% occaisionally but is generally barely breathing and there is on average nearly a gig of available RAM. Drive performance is hardly utilized as well so that only leaves the recovery issue. Is this simply that it is more difficult to recover a server that does several things or is there something specific to E2K that makes recovery more difficult if it is also a DC? Also, When I view the DCs on the Directory Access Tab of my E2K servers properties, it list 1 machine as the Configuration Domain Controller. I noticed that changed when I removed GC from the original server. Does E2K pick that machine from the closest DC or what? Will that change to the E2K box itself if I make it a GC? Last question - Does anyone know of anything to look out for if I do decide to make my E2K box a DC? Thanks! Jeff Hague MCSE Network Manager Randolph-Macon College _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang =english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Several questions on E2k and Active Directory
Single Exch2K SP3, Win2K AD Domain, several DCs/GCs in place. I am replacing a Win2K DC which happens to be 1 of 2 GCs and holds all FSMO roles (among other things). Earlier this week, I set up the replacement server, installed AD and transferred all FSMO except PDC emulator. Yesterday I set the new DC as a GC and removed GC from the old one. Apparently this has caused Veritas Backup Exec (which also runs on the machine that used to be a GC) to fail when trying to connect to the E2K box for individual mailbox backups. Veritas suggests making sure that the E2K machine itself is a GC which of course means installing AD on it. They dont seem to offer any other suggestions... As I got to thinking about it I figured that would actually fit into my server layout pretty well. Anyway, I have searched the knowledge base articles, read the resource kit and searched back through a year of posts to this discussion list and it looks like the cons for this arrangement are performance and recovery. I dont have any performance issues - the E2K box CPU peaks at 5% occaisionally but is generally barely breathing and there is on average nearly a gig of available RAM. Drive performance is hardly utilized as well so that only leaves the recovery issue. Is this simply that it is more difficult to recover a server that does several things or is there something specific to E2K that makes recovery more difficult if it is also a DC? Also, When I view the DCs on the Directory Access Tab of my E2K servers properties, it list 1 machine as the Configuration Domain Controller. I noticed that changed when I removed GC from the original server. Does E2K pick that machine from the closest DC or what? Will that change to the E2K box itself if I make it a GC? Last question - Does anyone know of anything to look out for if I do decide to make my E2K box a DC? Thanks! Jeff Hague MCSE Network Manager Randolph-Macon College _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Several questions on E2k and Active Directory
I actually waited about 18 hours (before I found the KB article that said you had to) and then rebooted it... Jeff -Original Message- From: Jason Clishe [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, August 01, 2003 12:40 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Several questions on E2k and Active Directory When you made the new DC a GC, did wait at least 5 minutes and then reboot it? Jason -Original Message- From: Hague, Jeff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, August 01, 2003 12:19 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Several questions on E2k and Active Directory Single Exch2K SP3, Win2K AD Domain, several DCs/GCs in place. I am replacing a Win2K DC which happens to be 1 of 2 GCs and holds all FSMO roles (among other things). Earlier this week, I set up the replacement server, installed AD and transferred all FSMO except PDC emulator. Yesterday I set the new DC as a GC and removed GC from the old one. Apparently this has caused Veritas Backup Exec (which also runs on the machine that used to be a GC) to fail when trying to connect to the E2K box for individual mailbox backups. Veritas suggests making sure that the E2K machine itself is a GC which of course means installing AD on it. They dont seem to offer any other suggestions... As I got to thinking about it I figured that would actually fit into my server layout pretty well. Anyway, I have searched the knowledge base articles, read the resource kit and searched back through a year of posts to this discussion list and it looks like the cons for this arrangement are performance and recovery. I dont have any performance issues - the E2K box CPU peaks at 5% occaisionally but is generally barely breathing and there is on average nearly a gig of available RAM. Drive performance is hardly utilized as well so that only leaves the recovery issue. Is this simply that it is more difficult to recover a server that does several things or is there something specific to E2K that makes recovery more difficult if it is also a DC? Also, When I view the DCs on the Directory Access Tab of my E2K servers properties, it list 1 machine as the Configuration Domain Controller. I noticed that changed when I removed GC from the original server. Does E2K pick that machine from the closest DC or what? Will that change to the E2K box itself if I make it a GC? Last question - Does anyone know of anything to look out for if I do decide to make my E2K box a DC? Thanks! Jeff Hague MCSE Network Manager Randolph-Macon College _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchanget ext_mode=lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Another badmail question
Is there any way to recover e-mail from the badmail folder? I dont know that Id ever need to but it seems that there would be some way to actually read one of them after it has been sentenced to the badmail folder... Jeff Hague MCSE Network Manager Randolph-Macon College _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: HOWTO: Block messages at server-side
I dont see how to enable or disable the filter on the SMTP virtual server - Exch2K, SP3. Jeff -Original Message- From: Jeff Beckham [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, July 22, 2003 9:51 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: HOWTO: Block messages at server-side Be sure to enable the filter on the SMTP virtual server Jeff -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Johansson Patrick Posted At: Tuesday, July 22, 2003 6:19 AM Posted To: Exchange Discussion List Conversation: HOWTO: Block messages at server-side Subject: RE: HOWTO: Block messages at server-side Open exchange system manager, open global settings and right click on message delivery and choose properties. You should see a tab called filtering and you can then add the sender there. Hth, Patrick -Original Message- From: Rui Silva [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 22. heinäkuuta 2003 13:48 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: HOWTO: Block messages at server-side OPS, sorry. Exchange 2000 Server + SP3 The clients are using Outlook 2000 and XP. -Original Message- From: Johansson Patrick [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, July 22, 2003 11:43 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: HOWTO: Block messages at server-side What version of exchange are you using? -Patrick -Original Message- From: Rui Silva [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 22. heinäkuuta 2003 13:22 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: HOWTO: Block messages at server-side Hi all I would like to block messages from someone at server-side (Exchange). I tried to use an Outlook Rule to permanently delete messages from someone, but this kind of rule is a client-only rule. Is there another way I can do this? I just want to stop receiving annoying messages from someone without receiving them in Outlook. Thanks. _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang =english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang =english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang =english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: HOWTO: Block messages at server-side
small and obscure indeed. Thanks! Jeff -Original Message- From: Presley, Steve [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, July 22, 2003 11:45 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: HOWTO: Block messages at server-side Open ESM and browse to the SMTP VS of the server that receives inbound SMTP (or the SMTP VS to which you want the filter to be applied to) and open the properties of the SMTP VS. On the General Tab, next to the IP address: field there is an Advanced button. Click that and then select the network interface you want to apply the filter to (if there is no specific IP defined then you will see All Unassigned). Select that and click Edit and presto..you have a small and obscure check box that says Apply Filter. Enjoy. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Hague, Jeff Sent: Tuesday, July 22, 2003 6:55 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: HOWTO: Block messages at server-side I dont see how to enable or disable the filter on the SMTP virtual server - Exch2K, SP3. Jeff -Original Message- From: Jeff Beckham [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, July 22, 2003 9:51 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: HOWTO: Block messages at server-side Be sure to enable the filter on the SMTP virtual server Jeff -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Johansson Patrick Posted At: Tuesday, July 22, 2003 6:19 AM Posted To: Exchange Discussion List Conversation: HOWTO: Block messages at server-side Subject: RE: HOWTO: Block messages at server-side Open exchange system manager, open global settings and right click on message delivery and choose properties. You should see a tab called filtering and you can then add the sender there. Hth, Patrick -Original Message- From: Rui Silva [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 22. heinäkuuta 2003 13:48 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: HOWTO: Block messages at server-side OPS, sorry. Exchange 2000 Server + SP3 The clients are using Outlook 2000 and XP. -Original Message- From: Johansson Patrick [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, July 22, 2003 11:43 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: HOWTO: Block messages at server-side What version of exchange are you using? -Patrick -Original Message- From: Rui Silva [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 22. heinäkuuta 2003 13:22 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: HOWTO: Block messages at server-side Hi all I would like to block messages from someone at server-side (Exchange). I tried to use an Outlook Rule to permanently delete messages from someone, but this kind of rule is a client-only rule. Is there another way I can do this? I just want to stop receiving annoying messages from someone without receiving them in Outlook. Thanks. _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang =english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang =english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang =english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode
RE: weird logon issue with OWA
You have to add the URL for your OWA box to the local intranet site within Internet Explore on the client machine in order for it to pass the login info. We have been playing with this for both OWA and for restricted access to certain files on our website and that seems to be the trick... Jeff Hague Network Manager Randolph-Macon College Ashland, VA -Original Message- From: Sharma, Shshank [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, July 18, 2003 6:02 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: weird logon issue with OWA I am facing the same problem. Trying to implement single sign-on. Having the user logged in once to an AD domain, the web-app should not prompt the user again. I have Integrated Windows Authentication (IWA) enabled, and all others disabled. On web application invokation, I see the login prompt. If I understand correctly, that is not what is supposed to happen. Any clues on something we are doing wrong ? -Original Message- From: Fyodorov, Andrey [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, July 18, 2003 12:11 PM To: Exchange Discussions Since I am already logged onto the domain, I should not be prompted to log onto the website that runs in the same domain, if the website's security is set to use integrated windows authentication. No? -Original Message- From: Tony Hlabse [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, July 18, 2003 2:52 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: weird logon issue with OWA It's a feature From: Fyodorov, Andrey [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: weird logon issue with OWA Date: Fri, 18 Jul 2003 14:45:24 -0400 I tested from my Win2K Pro desktop. Logged onto windows as the user. Started OWA - got prompted. -Original Message- From: Walt Brannon [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, July 18, 2003 2:36 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: weird logon issue with OWA What desktop operating system are your users on? That could be your clue. Walt -Original Message- From: Fyodorov, Andrey [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Posted At: Friday, July 18, 2003 1:15 PM Posted To: Exchange Discussion Conversation: weird logon issue with OWA Subject: weird logon issue with OWA Hello again. Sorry for asking too many questions today. Our Exchange 2000 OWA is set up to use windows integrated authentication. Some users are reporting that when they go to OWA from their PC at work, they get prompted to enter their logon credentials. We have checked to make sure that their PCs were members of the windows domain - they are. The users don't have any problems logging onto the domain. What could be tripping IE to think that they need to authenticate? (we can reproduce this behavior when we log in as them on a different PC) _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi- bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchanget 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=exchanget ext_mode= lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ Protect your PC - get McAfee.com VirusScan Online http://clinic.mcafee.com/clinic/ibuy/campaign.asp?cid=3963 _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchanget ext_mode= lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchanget ext_mode=lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface:
RE: domain name
Not that it has anything to do with the list but, what the heck... If you can't get there by name but you can get there by IP address, it's a DNS issue - TCP-IP 101... Of course it could be a severely misguided VLAN issue too so you're on your own on this one unless the [EMAIL PROTECTED] tech support folks are simply stellar. Jeff Hague PS - I can get to www.domain.com just fine. Maybe you should call End User Support. Just how did you manage to register www.domain.com in the first place? I have wanted that address since before Al Gore invented the Internet! ;) -Original Message- From: Ely, Don [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, March 26, 2003 9:32 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: domain name He was looking for us to Exchange answers with him... ;o) -Original Message- From: Ed Crowley [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, March 26, 2003 9:45 PM To: Exchange Discussions 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: Nt 4.0 dns
Its been a while since I played with NT4 but I don't believe that it does anything automatically (except the occasional BSoD, of course). It definitely doesn't automatically create the reverse zones themselves (I don't know of any implementation of DNS that does) and NT's DNS server does not support dynamic update which is required for a forward zone to update or create PTR records in a reverse zone. Jeff Hague MCSE, MCT Randolph-Macon College -Original Message- From: Matt [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, February 20, 2003 11:21 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Nt 4.0 dns Should not NT 4.0 dns upon first creation..create ptr's and reverse dns automatically? _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Removing NAV from E2K
Does anyone have any experience or know of any issues related to removing Norton Antivirus for Exchange from an Exch2K server (Win2K AS SP2, Exch2K Ent SP2 - only Exch server in the orginization)? Thanks! Jeff Hague Network Manager Randolph-Macon College [EMAIL PROTECTED] (804) 752-3710 _ List posting FAQ: http://www.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: Removing NAV from E2K
Symantec AntiVirus/Filtering for Microsoft(r) Exchange 2000 Version: 3.01.10.93. We are switching to RAV antivirus. -Original Message- From: Gonzalez, Alex [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, February 06, 2003 10:58 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Removing NAV from E2K Which version? I have removed it in the past without any issues. Are you upgrading? Alex Gonzalez Sr. Systems Administrator Handleman Company [EMAIL PROTECTED] (248) 362-4400 Ext. 4914 -Original Message- From: Hague, Jeff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, February 06, 2003 9:34 AM To: Exchange Discussions Does anyone have any experience or know of any issues related to removing Norton Antivirus for Exchange from an Exch2K server (Win2K AS SP2, Exch2K Ent SP2 - only Exch server in the orginization)? Thanks! Jeff Hague Network Manager Randolph-Macon College [EMAIL PROTECTED] (804) 752-3710 _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.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: Removing NAV from E2K
Thanks but I didn't ask HOW to uninstall it, I asked if anyone knew of any issues to look out for WHILE uninstalling it. I know how to do it - Start Run CMD enter format c: yes enter - right? Jeff -Original Message- From: Jim Helfer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, February 06, 2003 5:09 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Removing NAV from E2K http://tinyurl.com/5gi1 Strangely enough, it was the FIRST LINK when I typed the word uninstall into the (strangely enough) knowledge base at (strangely enough) Symantec. I sometimes look in these crazy places that nobody else would think of. I'm a maverick like that. Stop it. You're scaring me. _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.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: Can anyone recomend a good networking list
RMCs campus is 1500 (1000 belong to students) machines in 40+ buildings wired with fiber and copper. There is 1 main distribution point where the servers and routers are. When I took over a year ago the entire campus was 3Com. A 3Com layer3 switch for routing and 3Com layer 2 switches and hubs for distribution. I added a low cost 3Com layer3 switch to separate the admin network from the residential network but I am kind of unhappy with it. I am looking for a good modular layer 3 4 switch with GB copper and 100BaseFX fiber capability. So far I have spec'd out the HP Procurve 5300 series and as soon as I have 10 or 12 hours to figure out all the parts, I want to look into Cisco's offerings. I think Cisco will be far more expensive than I can afford though. I was wondering if anyone can share experience with HP's gear and their service. I am also hoping that I can get some recommendations on other manufacturers who have this type of gear. The only ones I know of in this area are 3Com, HP and Cisco but I know there must be others. Thanks! Jeff Hague -Original Message- From: Ely, Don [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Saturday, January 18, 2003 11:36 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Can anyone recomend a good networking list This list isn't too bad for that, what kind of questions do you have. I can also point you to a couple of folks who also run campus networks that you could interface with... -Original Message- From: Hague, Jeff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, January 17, 2003 11:25 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: OT: Can anyone recomend a good networking list I am re-engineering my campus network and need user opinions on networking gear. Does anyone know of a good list like this one that deals with routers switches, etc? Jeff Hague _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.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: Can anyone recomend a good networking list
I am re-engineering my campus network and need user opinions on networking gear. Does anyone know of a good list like this one that deals with routers switches, etc? Jeff Hague _ List posting FAQ: http://www.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: CE / Pocket Outlook and Exch2K
Just in case you ever see this I found that if I set the POP3 properties to convert to plain text for this 1 user account, Pocket Outlook can open things just fine... Jeff -Original Message- From: Hague, Jeff Sent: Friday, January 10, 2003 9:59 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: CE / Pocket Outlook and Exch2K We have 1 user in our organization who uses Windows CE 3.0 with Pocket Outlook 3.0 to access e-mail on our Exchange2K box when he travels. Normally I wouldn't allow it because we have no techs trained in CE but this guy is the President of the college so he uses what he wants. Anyway heres the issue. When he opens a message from someone outside of our e-mail domain, no problems. When he opens a message from inside ([EMAIL PROTECTED]), he can read the header info - sender, subject, etc, but the body of the message is gone and it says Unsupported text or character set removed. It doesn't seem to matter if the sender uses plain text, Rich text or HTML as the format and changing the font doesn't matter either. I believe the standard font is Times New Roman and that is installed on his little box and works in Pocket Word and Pocket Excel. Does anyone know of any issues between the CE/Pocket Outlook client and Exchange 2000? The MS Knowledge base doesn't have anything. Jeff Hague MCSE, MCT Network Manager Randolph-Macon College _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
CE / Pocket Outlook and Exch2K
We have 1 user in our organization who uses Windows CE 3.0 with Pocket Outlook 3.0 to access e-mail on our Exchange2K box when he travels. Normally I wouldn't allow it because we have no techs trained in CE but this guy is the President of the college so he uses what he wants. Anyway heres the issue. When he opens a message from someone outside of our e-mail domain, no problems. When he opens a message from inside ([EMAIL PROTECTED]), he can read the header info - sender, subject, etc, but the body of the message is gone and it says Unsupported text or character set removed. It doesn't seem to matter if the sender uses plain text, Rich text or HTML as the format and changing the font doesn't matter either. I believe the standard font is Times New Roman and that is installed on his little box and works in Pocket Word and Pocket Excel. Does anyone know of any issues between the CE/Pocket Outlook client and Exchange 2000? The MS Knowledge base doesn't have anything. Jeff Hague MCSE, MCT Network Manager Randolph-Macon College _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Going native in AD Exck2K
I have finally eradicated the last of my NT4 DCs and am thinking about native mode AD. I am starting to get the feeling though that making the switch may have an impact on my GAL and distribution lists. (I know it will have an impact on what I can do with dist lists but some comments in reading various Exchange resources indicate that it will affect my existing GAL and groups. I am running a single Exch2K server which is in Exch mixed mode as well. I have completed the migration from 5.5 (a couple of months ago) so I guess I could go Exchange native too. Am I reading something wrong? Do any of you know of anything I should look out for? Jeff Hague Network Manager Randolph-Macon College _ List posting FAQ: http://www.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: Going native in AD Exck2K
I believe that most of them were Exch5.5 Dist lists that got converted to AD Universal Dist groups in the migration to Exch2K. The only groups that appear in the GAL are in a folder called distribution lists inside the users container in AD - that was created by the ADC before the migration. I may have several that were created as Win2K Universal Dist groups as well but it seems to me that I have to put them in that folder before they show up in the GAL - does that sound right?. Thanks! Jeff -Original Message- From: Tony Hlabse [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, January 03, 2003 1:27 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Re: Going native in AD Exck2K What type of groups are your DL's? I know you meant User Groups. I think if you go to Native and your groups are not a certain type you may have some issues administrating them. I would have to look but I thought there was something regarding that. - Original Message - From: Hague, Jeff [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, January 03, 2003 12:51 PM Subject: Going native in AD Exck2K I have finally eradicated the last of my NT4 DCs and am thinking about native mode AD. I am starting to get the feeling though that making the switch may have an impact on my GAL and distribution lists. (I know it will have an impact on what I can do with dist lists but some comments in reading various Exchange resources indicate that it will affect my existing GAL and groups. I am running a single Exch2K server which is in Exch mixed mode as well. I have completed the migration from 5.5 (a couple of months ago) so I guess I could go Exchange native too. Am I reading something wrong? Do any of you know of anything I should look out for? Jeff Hague Network Manager Randolph-Macon College _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.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 the RBL thread never end????
I think it will end when spam ends and when pigs fly... Jeff -Original Message- From: Steven A. Christensen [mailto:hawkinoz;hotmail.com] Sent: Friday, November 08, 2002 10:33 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Will the RBL thread never end Subject says it all. _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:leave-exchange;ls.swynk.com Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ 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: Why is this coming up???
The Windows 2000 Domain name does not have to match the name of the Internet-registered domain or the Netbios name (Pre-Windows2000 compatible name). In fact, many Admins feel that it is a bad idea for them to match from a security standpoint. What is the Internet registered domain name (from an e-mail or www. standpoint) right now? You can leave that as it is or register whatever you want (as long as its available) and then name your Win2K Active Directory Forest whatever you want. Also, When you upgrade your PDC to AD, simply leave the Netbios name as IM_DOM1 and give your Win2K Active Directory Forest whatever name you like. This way your pre-Win2K clients won't need to be reconfigured and your WINS servers wont need to be rebuilt. If the Forest name does not match your Internet name, you will probably want to add an alternate UPN suffix within AD so your user accounts will match their e-mail addresses. All of this info is available from the Win2K web pages and is pretty well documented in most of the books out there. I don't know that you'll find an RFC related to it though as Active Directory isn't exactly an IETF standard in and of itself. Also, make absolutely sure that your DNS records are straight before you upgrade to Win2K especially if the names are different. You will need separate DNS zones for your internal and external records. This is (BTW) the reason separate namespaces are preferred from a security standpoint. Otherwise, if you use the same internal and external namespace, you either have to run a split-DNS setup or make all of your internal naming addressing available to the Internet - the latter is a very bad idea... Jeff Hague MCSE, MCT -Original Message- From: David McSpadden [mailto:davidm;imcu.com] Sent: Sunday, October 27, 2002 7:28 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Re: Why is this coming up??? This stupid domain name (IM_DOM1) is going to kill me when I go to Active Directory and E2K, isn't it. This is the domain I took over the Net Admin job with. I told myself and the Mgr of the dept that it wasn't/isn't a FQDN but there hasn't been a need until W2K Active directory to even think about FQDN's in this domain. So before I go Active Directory I need to change my domain name to something that meets industry standards. I know this is OT but is there an RFC I can print and give to the VP's and Mgr's to back up my claim or am I making an assumption on my part? Thank you again for looking into this issue. - Original Message - From: Ed Crowley [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, October 27, 2002 1:27 AM Subject: RE: Why is this coming up??? I missed it the first time but a little fairy pointed out to me that the From: address appears to be malformed. Ed Crowley MCSE+Internet MVP kcCC+I Tech Consultant hp Services Protecting the world from PSTs and Bricked Backups! -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:bounce-exchange-94760;ls.swynk.com] On Behalf Of David McSpadden Sent: Friday, October 25, 2002 1:36 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Why is this coming up??? A mail message was not sent due to a protocol error. 553 Could not parse sender address The message that caused this notification was: To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:leave-exchange;ls.swynk.com Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:leave-exchange;ls.swynk.com Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:leave-exchange;ls.swynk.com Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:leave-exchange;ls.swynk.com Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: RBL's - Please Get over it
Absolutely - a reply with a link or just a single word is a wonderful thing if it actually helps and folks should take some initiative on their own. I am only commenting on some of the posts that are downright rude and uncalled for - the playful banter can be kind of interesting though. Jeff -Original Message- From: B. van Ouwerkerk [mailto:ouwerkerk92;zonnet.nl] Sent: Thursday, October 24, 2002 6:35 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: RBL's - Please Get over it I don't think this or any other tech related list is hostile towards newcomers. On Linux related lists (about 98% of all lists I'm subscribed to) it's usually enough to tell what you did to solve your problem. Explain you did search the archives, used google, searched the M$ KB (for M$ related topics) and you really did what you could to find information. Seriously, a question with detailed information and showing you did your best to solve your problem is getting a better answer then one showing you didn't do a thing. Remember.. it's mostly your problem and you search for help from other admins who don't get any payment. Nobody should feel offended if the answer is just a link to the information you're looking for. Read the following information. It's written by a guy who codes on Linux.. but this information is also interesting for others. http://www.tuxedo.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html I think I saw it in another reply too. Just my EUR 0,02 Bye, B. At 01:34 24-10-02 -0400, you wrote: I too have enjoyed this list and have learned a lot from it but only after deleting the several hundred posts that are absolute drivel (kind of like the last 10 or so). I have only been subscribed for a little over a month and I am absolutely overwhelmed by the sheer number of posts that I simply have to ignore before I see one that actually answers a question. Its almost as bad as spam to be quite honest. Many of you seem to think that every answer has been answered and therefore every single person within a few hundred yards of an Exchange Server should already know that answer. You also seem to assume that every person subscribed to this list eats, breathes and farts Exchange Server - if it didn't sound like such a boring existence I would love that - unfortunately I also have to administer an entire network of other servers, switches, routers, firewalls, etc. I spend a great deal of time with TechNet and the Knowledgebase as well as their equivalents from other companies. I also read a lot of very thick (and very droll) books but quite often, I need to know something that isn't necessarily in a book or is explained in very limited or in poor detail by the vendor responsible. That is when I turn to these lists and hope to learn something from those of you who in the know and who are gracious enough to spend your time answering questions. I find it very unfortunate that some of you are so negative and hostile toward some of the questions posted here. If it is such a bother, then just stop - you can very easily unsubscribe and go on about your lives without having to worry about the rest of us. We will muddle through. I wish this post could have had some meaningful question that couldn't be answered by the great and powerful google.com or that it had contained an answer as worthy but I'm really getting tired of the bickering - please stop. SNIPPING a low of stuff. _ 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: Viruses via email
I know of several organizations who don't use an Exchange virus scanner but they generally use some sort of gateway virus filtering at the perimeter. Jeff -Original Message- From: William Lefkovics [mailto:william;techsanctuary.org] Sent: Thursday, October 24, 2002 6:22 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Viruses via email Heck ya! Lots. William -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:bounce-exchange-104116;ls.swynk.com] On Behalf Of Greg Heywood Sent: Thursday, October 24, 2002 3:08 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Viruses via email Just wondering if there are many companies out there that do NOT use a virus protection product that links into exchange? Instead relying on desktop av? Cheers Greg Heywood Technology Project Manager International Power PLC Phone +44 20 7320 8672 Fax +44 20 7320 8725 www.ipplc.com [EMAIL PROTECTED] *** Please note that neither International Power plc nor the sender accepts any responsibility for any viruses that may be contained in this e-mail or its attachments. It is therefore your responsibility to ensure that your systems have adequate protection against virus infection. The information contained in this e-mail is intended only for the use of the intended recipient at the e-mail address to which it has been addressed. If the reader of this message is not an intended recipient, you are hereby notified that you have received this document in error and that any review, dissemination or copying of the message or associated attachments is strictly prohibited. If you have received this e-mail in error please contact the sender by return e-mail or call +44 207 320 8600 and ask for the sender and then delete it immediately from your system. *** _ 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 - Please Get over it
Thank you for a post that really sums up what a group like this ought to be - I really appreciate it! Jeff -Original Message- From: Dupler, Craig [mailto:craig.dupler;boeing.com] Sent: Thursday, October 24, 2002 12:09 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: RBL's - Please Get over it Dear Jeff, To get any value out of this list, you have to assume that massive deletes without reads is the norm. Use a rule to move everything coming in from the list to a single folder. Sort that folder by subject. Don't even try to interact with a thread without using a tripane viewer/reader. Finally, you have to accept that techies go through a number of socialization phases on their way toward becoming true experts. One of them lasts for a while after they begin to understand enough to actually start helping others. It has similarities to post adolescence. If you have ever taught classes to people in the age ranges of either middle school (12-14) or college sophomore to about 35, then you clearly understand the entertainment opportunities. But gee, in order to get to the other side of anything, one does have to pass through it. Don't worry about either offending or being offended. You will - both. It is a normal part of the journey. I get to say that, since my hair is grey and I was here before all but about three others, back when Peter first started the list to replace the original Bravehearts group, which goes back to well before Exchange was called Exchange. One other thing - it's ok to come and go. Everyone has. CD -Original Message- From: Hague, Jeff [mailto:jhague;rmc.edu] Sent: Thursday, October 24, 2002 8:34 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: RBL's - Please Get over it I am sorry that you misunderstood my rants - let me explain. First - I am not directing this at any one individual in particular - your right Generally Chris and the rest of the members of this list are correct or at least informative in many of the posts I have read. Second - I really don't care if your rude - you can all be total flaming a-holes as far as Im concerned as long as you don't work in my building it doesn't bother me a bit. Third - as stated, I enjoy the banter as well and a little humor always helps to get through the day. Fourth - the person who originally posted this message did know what the term meant and is probably quite capable of installing and using the technology. It wasn't until 6 or 7 replies in that someone asked what the term meant and from that point on the whole thread just went to hell - I don't see what good came out of it. This in itself wouldn't bother me too much but its not exactly an isolated case. Fifth - Im not even going to bother with your comment regarding my abilities as an admin because im too serious as it has no relevance to one's ability to do anything except, possibly, standup comedy. (OK, so I guess I did bother...). Finally, what really strikes me as interesting is that some of you post more replies complaining about people with stupid questions than there are posts of that nature in the first place. Add to that the humorous or off-topic posts and I think the percentage of posts that are in fact Exchange related and helpful drops to somewhere around 50% or less. Furthermore, some of you seem to think that a simple (and perhaps a stupid) question wastes your time but responding to that question in a rude manner does not - I just don't get it. What bothers me about this is that I have to pour through all of this crap looking for the wisdom of those of you who have already been there and done that which is why I subscribe to these lists in the first place. As I've stated, the fun stuff is OK too but lets at least try to keep most of this stuff relevant. Jeff -Original Message- From: B. van Ouwerkerk [mailto:ouwerkerk92;zonnet.nl] Sent: Thursday, October 24, 2002 9:50 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: RBL's - Please Get over it Although some of these replies sound a bit rude to you, I would still consider some of them to the point. Really.. how would you install/maintain the usage of RBL if you don't even know what it means.. How would you be able to decide which one to use.. At this point Chris Scharff is right.. a bit rude perhaps.. but right.. At some other points he was a bit rude too but I think he was right again.. He made me laugh.. I think you're taking it to serious to be an admin.. It's a hell of a job and humor is the only way to survive. For ppl who aren't admins some of the talk on this or any other list sounds rude.. but I guess it's not that bad at all. Or perhaps I'm just working in this field to long to know how ppl should talk to each other. If the posting has something to do about pets then I'm using the delete button.. So even that button has a perpose :-) Have fun, B. At 08:42 24-10-02 -0400, you wrote: Absolutely - a reply with a link or just a single word is a wonderful thing if it actually helps
RE: RBL's - Please Get over it
I am sorry that you misunderstood my rants - let me explain. First - I am not directing this at any one individual in particular - your right Generally Chris and the rest of the members of this list are correct or at least informative in many of the posts I have read. Second - I really don't care if your rude - you can all be total flaming a-holes as far as Im concerned as long as you don't work in my building it doesn't bother me a bit. Third - as stated, I enjoy the banter as well and a little humor always helps to get through the day. Fourth - the person who originally posted this message did know what the term meant and is probably quite capable of installing and using the technology. It wasn't until 6 or 7 replies in that someone asked what the term meant and from that point on the whole thread just went to hell - I don't see what good came out of it. This in itself wouldn't bother me too much but its not exactly an isolated case. Fifth - Im not even going to bother with your comment regarding my abilities as an admin because im too serious as it has no relevance to one's ability to do anything except, possibly, standup comedy. (OK, so I guess I did bother...). Finally, what really strikes me as interesting is that some of you post more replies complaining about people with stupid questions than there are posts of that nature in the first place. Add to that the humorous or off-topic posts and I think the percentage of posts that are in fact Exchange related and helpful drops to somewhere around 50% or less. Furthermore, some of you seem to think that a simple (and perhaps a stupid) question wastes your time but responding to that question in a rude manner does not - I just don't get it. What bothers me about this is that I have to pour through all of this crap looking for the wisdom of those of you who have already been there and done that which is why I subscribe to these lists in the first place. As I've stated, the fun stuff is OK too but lets at least try to keep most of this stuff relevant. Jeff -Original Message- From: B. van Ouwerkerk [mailto:ouwerkerk92;zonnet.nl] Sent: Thursday, October 24, 2002 9:50 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: RBL's - Please Get over it Although some of these replies sound a bit rude to you, I would still consider some of them to the point. Really.. how would you install/maintain the usage of RBL if you don't even know what it means.. How would you be able to decide which one to use.. At this point Chris Scharff is right.. a bit rude perhaps.. but right.. At some other points he was a bit rude too but I think he was right again.. He made me laugh.. I think you're taking it to serious to be an admin.. It's a hell of a job and humor is the only way to survive. For ppl who aren't admins some of the talk on this or any other list sounds rude.. but I guess it's not that bad at all. Or perhaps I'm just working in this field to long to know how ppl should talk to each other. If the posting has something to do about pets then I'm using the delete button.. So even that button has a perpose :-) Have fun, B. At 08:42 24-10-02 -0400, you wrote: Absolutely - a reply with a link or just a single word is a wonderful thing if it actually helps and folks should take some initiative on their own. I am only commenting on some of the posts that are downright rude and uncalled for - the playful banter can be kind of interesting though. Jeff -Original Message- From: B. van Ouwerkerk [mailto:ouwerkerk92;zonnet.nl] Sent: Thursday, October 24, 2002 6:35 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: RBL's - Please Get over it I don't think this or any other tech related list is hostile towards newcomers. On Linux related lists (about 98% of all lists I'm subscribed to) it's usually enough to tell what you did to solve your problem. Explain you did search the archives, used google, searched the M$ KB (for M$ related topics) and you really did what you could to find information. Seriously, a question with detailed information and showing you did your best to solve your problem is getting a better answer then one showing you didn't do a thing. Remember.. it's mostly your problem and you search for help from other admins who don't get any payment. Nobody should feel offended if the answer is just a link to the information you're looking for. Read the following information. It's written by a guy who codes on Linux.. but this information is also interesting for others. http://www.tuxedo.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html I think I saw it in another reply too. Just my EUR 0,02 Bye, B. At 01:34 24-10-02 -0400, you wrote: I too have enjoyed this list and have learned a lot from it but only after deleting the several hundred posts that are absolute drivel (kind of like the last 10 or so). I have only been subscribed for a little over a month and I am absolutely overwhelmed by the sheer number of posts that I simply have to ignore before I see one
RE: RBL's - Please Get over it
I too have enjoyed this list and have learned a lot from it but only after deleting the several hundred posts that are absolute drivel (kind of like the last 10 or so). I have only been subscribed for a little over a month and I am absolutely overwhelmed by the sheer number of posts that I simply have to ignore before I see one that actually answers a question. Its almost as bad as spam to be quite honest. Many of you seem to think that every answer has been answered and therefore every single person within a few hundred yards of an Exchange Server should already know that answer. You also seem to assume that every person subscribed to this list eats, breathes and farts Exchange Server - if it didn't sound like such a boring existence I would love that - unfortunately I also have to administer an entire network of other servers, switches, routers, firewalls, etc. I spend a great deal of time with TechNet and the Knowledgebase as well as their equivalents from other companies. I also read a lot of very thick (and very droll) books but quite often, I need to know something that isn't necessarily in a book or is explained in very limited or in poor detail by the vendor responsible. That is when I turn to these lists and hope to learn something from those of you who in the know and who are gracious enough to spend your time answering questions. I find it very unfortunate that some of you are so negative and hostile toward some of the questions posted here. If it is such a bother, then just stop - you can very easily unsubscribe and go on about your lives without having to worry about the rest of us. We will muddle through. I wish this post could have had some meaningful question that couldn't be answered by the great and powerful google.com or that it had contained an answer as worthy but I'm really getting tired of the bickering - please stop. Jeff Hague MCSE, MCT Network Manger Randolph-Macon College [EMAIL PROTECTED] (That's right Ed - I'm from a .edu). -Original Message- From: Ed Crowley [mailto:curspice;pacbell.net] Sent: Thursday, October 24, 2002 12:51 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: RBL's Believe me on this: I very much appreciate it that you read this list. Not everyone does. For example, we get this guy who has popped in every month or so for the past five or more years to ask questions that have been hashed out dozens of times in excruciating detail. You'd think that after five years he'd have learned the basics from this list. But Noo!, to quote John Belushi. So please understand that I very much respect those who learn something here. Learning new stuff is one of the primary reasons I stay here--that and the occasional chance to fan a flame war. (This guy's from a .edu, the one that has the domain name that my alma mater, berkeley.edu, should by all rights have. I'm not too worried about him seeing this since he obviously never reads the list except to scan for a reply to his query.) Ed Crowley MCSE+I MVP Technical Consultant hp Services There are seldom good technological solutions to behavioral problems. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:bounce-exchange-94760;ls.swynk.com] On Behalf Of Gregory Householder Sent: Wednesday, October 23, 2002 5:27 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: RBL's Typically I just sit here and read the posts and I have to admit I've learn a lot from the discussions. I can tell there are some experienced Admins here too, but there are some of us that work for smaller companies and we don't have the time to learn everything there is to know about Exchange administration. I consider myself a pretty good admin. I may not know everything there is to know about Exchange Administration, but I know where the knowledge bases and these kind of discussion lists are. A lot of us are trying to learn to be good Email Admins. I admit that there are some pretty bad questions that come across this list. I've said my two cents.. I don't care if anyone likes it or doesn't. I remember just getting into Exchange and trying to make sure I did everything just right so it didn't cause me serious headaches down the road. Thanks for listening.. Greg Householder [EMAIL PROTECTED] -Original Message- From: Hutchins, Mike [mailto:mhutchins;amr-corp.com] Sent: Wednesday, October 23, 2002 5:43 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: RBL's Well, it has been my experience that over 35% of the questions asked have been answered with something like the following, which tells me there are people that REFUSE to do ANY research before posting.. I myself think it is getting old.. EXAMPLES OF ACTUAL ANSWERS: Quote Search technet for open relay exchange 2000, follow the directions and make sure you aren't an open relay when you get it working. My guess is that your server will be an open relay after reading some of the previous posts. /Quote Quote I assume your talking about incoming mail.
RE: RBL's - Please Get over it
and I'm getting closer to that solution all the time... Jeff -Original Message- From: Ed Crowley [mailto:curspice;pacbell.net] Sent: Thursday, October 24, 2002 1:42 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: RBL's - Please Get over it Sorry, but this list is nothing like Spam. For one thing, it's not commercial. For another, you subscribed. To the latter, there's a solution. Ed Crowley MCSE+I MVP Technical Consultant hp Services There are seldom good technological solutions to behavioral problems. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:bounce-exchange-94760;ls.swynk.com] On Behalf Of Hague, Jeff Sent: Wednesday, October 23, 2002 10:34 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: RBL's - Please Get over it I too have enjoyed this list and have learned a lot from it but only after deleting the several hundred posts that are absolute drivel (kind of like the last 10 or so). I have only been subscribed for a little over a month and I am absolutely overwhelmed by the sheer number of posts that I simply have to ignore before I see one that actually answers a question. Its almost as bad as spam to be quite honest. Many of you seem to think that every answer has been answered and therefore every single person within a few hundred yards of an Exchange Server should already know that answer. You also seem to assume that every person subscribed to this list eats, breathes and farts Exchange Server - if it didn't sound like such a boring existence I would love that - unfortunately I also have to administer an entire network of other servers, switches, routers, firewalls, etc. I spend a great deal of time with TechNet and the Knowledgebase as well as their equivalents from other companies. I also read a lot of very thick (and very droll) books but quite often, I need to know something that isn't necessarily in a book or is explained in very limited or in poor detail by the vendor responsible. That is when I turn to these lists and hope to learn something from those of you who in the know and who are gracious enough to spend your time answering questions. I find it very unfortunate that some of you are so negative and hostile toward some of the questions posted here. If it is such a bother, then just stop - you can very easily unsubscribe and go on about your lives without having to worry about the rest of us. We will muddle through. I wish this post could have had some meaningful question that couldn't be answered by the great and powerful google.com or that it had contained an answer as worthy but I'm really getting tired of the bickering - please stop. Jeff Hague MCSE, MCT Network Manger Randolph-Macon College [EMAIL PROTECTED] (That's right Ed - I'm from a .edu). -Original Message- From: Ed Crowley [mailto:curspice;pacbell.net] Sent: Thursday, October 24, 2002 12:51 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: RBL's Believe me on this: I very much appreciate it that you read this list. Not everyone does. For example, we get this guy who has popped in every month or so for the past five or more years to ask questions that have been hashed out dozens of times in excruciating detail. You'd think that after five years he'd have learned the basics from this list. But Noo!, to quote John Belushi. So please understand that I very much respect those who learn something here. Learning new stuff is one of the primary reasons I stay here--that and the occasional chance to fan a flame war. (This guy's from a .edu, the one that has the domain name that my alma mater, berkeley.edu, should by all rights have. I'm not too worried about him seeing this since he obviously never reads the list except to scan for a reply to his query.) Ed Crowley MCSE+I MVP Technical Consultant hp Services There are seldom good technological solutions to behavioral problems. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:bounce-exchange-94760;ls.swynk.com] On Behalf Of Gregory Householder Sent: Wednesday, October 23, 2002 5:27 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: RBL's Typically I just sit here and read the posts and I have to admit I've learn a lot from the discussions. I can tell there are some experienced Admins here too, but there are some of us that work for smaller companies and we don't have the time to learn everything there is to know about Exchange administration. I consider myself a pretty good admin. I may not know everything there is to know about Exchange Administration, but I know where the knowledge bases and these kind of discussion lists are. A lot of us are trying to learn to be good Email Admins. I admit that there are some pretty bad questions that come across this list. I've said my two cents.. I don't care if anyone likes it or doesn't. I remember just getting into Exchange and trying to make sure I did everything just right so it didn't cause me serious headaches down the road. Thanks for listening.. Greg Householder [EMAIL PROTECTED
Curious Event viewer messages
I have been getting some entries in the event viewer for my Exch2K box (Win2K SP2, Exch2K SP1 member server)lately that I don't understand. Has anyone seen this? First I will see a warning - Source is MSExchangeSA, category is General and Event ID is 9186 - it states: Microsoft Exchange System Attendant has detected that the local computer is not a member of group 'cn=Exchange Domain Servers,cn=Users,dc=rmc,dc=edu'. System Attendant is going to add the local computer into the group. The current members of the group are 'CN=RMCMX1,OU=Servers,OU=Rmccomputers,DC=rmc,DC=edu; CN=NAV for Microsoft Exchange-TITAN,CN=Users,DC=rmc,DC=edu; '. The local computer is RMCMX1 and the message says that machine IS a member of the group. What the? Next I get the following error message - Source is MSExchangeSA, category is General and Event ID is 9187: Microsoft Exchange System Attendant failed to add the local computeras a member of the DS group object 'cn=Exchange Domain Servers,cn=Users,dc=rmc,dc=edu'. Please stop all the Microsoft Exchange services, add the local computer into the group manually and restart all the services. When I search the knowledge base I get 1 document that simply states that the Exchange server wont function properly if its not in the Exchange Domain Servers group. The computer account is in that group and I haven't noticed any e-mail problems but I really don't like these messages. I have received these every 15 minutes since October 7. I believe that is the day that I created the OU that the server account is now in. Until then it was in the default computers container but I want to implement uniform auditing and event viewer property policies (through GPOs) on all of my servers so I created the OU referenced in the logs. Has anyone seen this? Is it anything to worry about? Can it be fixed? Thanks all! Jeff Hague Network Manager Randolph-Macon College _ List posting FAQ: http://www.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: Curious Event viewer messages
I haven't yet but what the heck... Ill give it a shot and see what happens. Jeff -Original Message- From: Ed Crowley [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, October 14, 2002 11:31 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Curious Event viewer messages Have you tried removing and adding it to the group again? Ed Crowley MCSE+Internet MVP kcCC+I Tech Consultant hp Services Protecting the world from PSTs and Bricked Backups! -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Hague, Jeff Sent: Monday, October 14, 2002 7:17 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Curious Event viewer messages I have been getting some entries in the event viewer for my Exch2K box (Win2K SP2, Exch2K SP1 member server)lately that I don't understand. Has anyone seen this? First I will see a warning - Source is MSExchangeSA, category is General and Event ID is 9186 - it states: Microsoft Exchange System Attendant has detected that the local computer is not a member of group 'cn=Exchange Domain Servers,cn=Users,dc=rmc,dc=edu'. System Attendant is going to add the local computer into the group. The current members of the group are 'CN=RMCMX1,OU=Servers,OU=Rmccomputers,DC=rmc,DC=edu; CN=NAV for Microsoft Exchange-TITAN,CN=Users,DC=rmc,DC=edu; '. The local computer is RMCMX1 and the message says that machine IS a member of the group. What the? Next I get the following error message - Source is MSExchangeSA, category is General and Event ID is 9187: Microsoft Exchange System Attendant failed to add the local computeras a member of the DS group object 'cn=Exchange Domain Servers,cn=Users,dc=rmc,dc=edu'. Please stop all the Microsoft Exchange services, add the local computer into the group manually and restart all the services. When I search the knowledge base I get 1 document that simply states that the Exchange server wont function properly if its not in the Exchange Domain Servers group. The computer account is in that group and I haven't noticed any e-mail problems but I really don't like these messages. I have received these every 15 minutes since October 7. I believe that is the day that I created the OU that the server account is now in. Until then it was in the default computers container but I want to implement uniform auditing and event viewer property policies (through GPOs) on all of my servers so I created the OU referenced in the logs. Has anyone seen this? Is it anything to worry about? Can it be fixed? Thanks all! Jeff Hague Network Manager Randolph-Macon College _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.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: Curious Event viewer messages
This one - 'CN=RMCMX1,OU=Servers,OU=Rmccomputers,DC=rmc,DC=edu; ? That is the correct DN. -Original Message- From: Ed Crowley [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, October 14, 2002 11:43 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Curious Event viewer messages The reason I asked is because the distinguishedName shown in the event log doesn't match the OU to which you said you moved the server. Ed Crowley MCSE+Internet MVP kcCC+I Tech Consultant hp Services Protecting the world from PSTs and Bricked Backups! -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Hague, Jeff Sent: Monday, October 14, 2002 8:37 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Curious Event viewer messages I haven't yet but what the heck... Ill give it a shot and see what happens. Jeff -Original Message- From: Ed Crowley [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, October 14, 2002 11:31 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Curious Event viewer messages Have you tried removing and adding it to the group again? Ed Crowley MCSE+Internet MVP kcCC+I Tech Consultant hp Services Protecting the world from PSTs and Bricked Backups! -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Hague, Jeff Sent: Monday, October 14, 2002 7:17 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Curious Event viewer messages I have been getting some entries in the event viewer for my Exch2K box (Win2K SP2, Exch2K SP1 member server)lately that I don't understand. Has anyone seen this? First I will see a warning - Source is MSExchangeSA, category is General and Event ID is 9186 - it states: Microsoft Exchange System Attendant has detected that the local computer is not a member of group 'cn=Exchange Domain Servers,cn=Users,dc=rmc,dc=edu'. System Attendant is going to add the local computer into the group. The current members of the group are 'CN=RMCMX1,OU=Servers,OU=Rmccomputers,DC=rmc,DC=edu; CN=NAV for Microsoft Exchange-TITAN,CN=Users,DC=rmc,DC=edu; '. The local computer is RMCMX1 and the message says that machine IS a member of the group. What the? Next I get the following error message - Source is MSExchangeSA, category is General and Event ID is 9187: Microsoft Exchange System Attendant failed to add the local computeras a member of the DS group object 'cn=Exchange Domain Servers,cn=Users,dc=rmc,dc=edu'. Please stop all the Microsoft Exchange services, add the local computer into the group manually and restart all the services. When I search the knowledge base I get 1 document that simply states that the Exchange server wont function properly if its not in the Exchange Domain Servers group. The computer account is in that group and I haven't noticed any e-mail problems but I really don't like these messages. I have received these every 15 minutes since October 7. I believe that is the day that I created the OU that the server account is now in. Until then it was in the default computers container but I want to implement uniform auditing and event viewer property policies (through GPOs) on all of my servers so I created the OU referenced in the logs. Has anyone seen this? Is it anything to worry about? Can it be fixed? Thanks all! Jeff Hague Network Manager Randolph-Macon College _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RAV Antivirus products
I have been told about an anti virus product called RAV. They have a lot of different mail server products (incl. Exch5.5 and 2K) as well as desktop products etc, and I have been told that they are very good. The pricing is unbelievably low compared with the big names. I was wondering if anyone had any experience with it. Jeff Hague Network Manager Randolph-Macon College [EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.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: No OWA
It may be an authentication thing. We found for a lot of clients that they had to put in their username as domain\username instead of just the user name. If your Exch server only hosts 1 e-mail domain you can set that as the default domain under the OWA site properties in IIS and then you don't need to add the Domain name at logon. Jeff Hague -Original Message- From: Amos Eka [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, October 07, 2002 12:33 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: No OWA Hi, I have just conpleted an installation of exchange 2000. Basically, a member server residing within a w2k domain. The problems are: - Outlook client seems to be working fine, however OWA does not work from a client machine, get the three attempts before getting an Access Denied error. However if I try this logged into the exchange server everything seems ok. I have applied all the necessary patches,without sucess. Has anyone expereinced thsi problem before. Amos. /'^'\ ( o o ) ---oOOO-OOOo-- _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Need help access denied in OWA
We had a similar issue when we went from 5.5 to 2K. I found that if the users put in
their username in the old NT4 fashion - domain\username - they got in. I also found
later that you can assign a default domain to the OWA website using the IIS admin
tool.
Jeff
-Original Message-
From: Daniel Chenault [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Thu 10/3/2002 7:23 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Cc:
Subject: Re: Need help access denied in OWA
2000 does indeed have a logon screen unless someone has hacked it out.
- Original Message -
From: Andrey Fyodorov [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, October 03, 2002 5:18 PM
Subject: RE: Need help access denied in OWA
2000 does not have a logon screen
-Original Message-
From: Tony Hlabse [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Friday, October 04, 2002 2:37 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: Re: Need help access denied in OWA
A little more info needed. Are you saying they get the logon screen then
immediately goes to access denied screen without any input?
- Original Message -
From: Todd Youngbauer [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, October 03, 2002 11:34 AM
Subject: Need help access denied in OWA
I am having issues where I can not get anyone logged into OWA on a new
Exchange 2000 server. I have compared all of the settings on it to other
servers I have that are working and can not find any differences. It is
and Exchange 2000 Enterprise server that is running on W2k as a member
server. When you log in you get 3 prompt and then it goes to access is
denied. Any thoughts?/
Thanks
Todd
_
List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp
To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
_
List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp
To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
_
List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp
To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
_
List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp
To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Ëi¢Ëb@Bm§ÿðà 0w ¢oëzÊ.Ç¿{!}ª¡¶`+r¯zÈm¶ÿÃ
,Ã)är¿²+^±æ«r ìyªÜ
«)N§²æìr¸zf¢Ú%y«Þ{!jx Ë0Êy ¢a1r§ââ²Ö)åËZvh§³ §Ê
RE: OWA and IIS do not like the ampersand symbol
You need to edit the [DenyURLSequences] section of urlscan.ini - keep in mind that these are in the urlscan.ini to prevent things like Code Red and Nimda so do so at your own peril. I have been looking into a good SMTP (and POP3 would be nice) gateway to try to catch stuff at the perimeter so I can ease up the urlscan.ini a bit. Jeff Hague -Original Message- From: Todd Raymond [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, September 30, 2002 2:34 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: OWA and IIS do not like the ampersand symbol There is a urlscan.ini file that you edit accordingly. Very easy... -Todd -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Tom.Gray Sent: Monday, September 30, 2002 11:28 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: OWA and IIS do not like the ampersand symbol Well, in my continuing saga of upgrading from Exchange 5.5 to Exchange 2000 I have found yet another interesting snag. Exchange 2000 Windows 2000 Server IIS 5 Outlook Web Access URLSCAN and IIS Lockdown tool applied to the OWA server (using the OWA template!) If a user has a message with the ampersand ( ) in the subject line and tries to read that message using outlook web access, the user gets the nasty FILE NOT FOUND error in their browser. Why? Because URLSCAN will reject the %26 character (which is the hex number for that symbol)! Yuck. I'm sure there is a way to configure URLSCAN to let this one by, just haven't gone to figure it out yet. I'l let you know when/if I do. Just thought y'all might want to know this. Tom Gray, Network Engineer All Kinds of Minds The Center for Development and Learning University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill Internet: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ATT Net: (919)960- _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.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: W32/Bugbear-A spreading rapidly
http://www.trendmicro.com/vinfo/virusencyclo/default5.asp?VName=WORM_BUG BEAR.A Try this: Jeff Hague -Original Message- From: Scott Force [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, September 30, 2002 3:35 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: W32/Bugbear-A spreading rapidly I haven't seen it yet either and I can't find anything on it yet. Anyone have any info on it, (is it an attachment)?? I haven't seen any yet either, but Messagelabs already has it in 3rd place behind Klez and Yaha, so they are out there. -Peter -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, September 30, 2002 12:26 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: W32/Bugbear-A spreading rapidly Same here; none yet. Bill Lambert Endoxy Healthcare 847-941-9206 [EMAIL PROTECTED] -Original Message- From: Couch, Nate [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, September 30, 2002 2:18 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: W32/Bugbear-A spreading rapidly No sign of it yet on any of our customers. Nate Couch EDS Messaging -- From: John Q Jr. Reply To: Exchange Discussions Sent: Monday, September 30, 2002 14:09 To: Exchange Discussions Subject:W32/Bugbear-A spreading rapidly Anyone getting hit with this. Sophos sent a high alert warning of a unprecedented distribution. I have not been alerted to one infected message yet. Just curious. - John Q _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.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]
RE: Tools for Maintaining Active Directory
I was told by MS that it was free but I had to hire Microsoft Consulting Services in order to use it. I need to sync several databases including AD and it sounded like a good way of doing it. Unfortunately, the salesperson from MS I talked to wanted to turn it in to some huge project including a reporting module and something to do with BizTalk - it sounded extremely expensive. Luckily she never called back. We are now thinking about hiring a full time programmer to tackle this and several other little projects we have. Jeff Hague -Original Message- From: Julian Stone [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Saturday, September 21, 2002 7:19 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Tools for Maintaining Active Directory I'm not too sure where you got that info from, as I'm running it quite happily on a standard server, and yes I've done the training course, and are an M$ gold partner. Yours, Julian Stone -Original Message- From: Mark Rowlands [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 21 September 2002 10:44 am To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Re: Tools for Maintaining Active Directory -Original Message- From: Andrey Fyodorov [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 20 September 2002 19:43 pm To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Tools for Maintaining Active Directory I think you have to sign some kind of pact with Microsoft in order to get your hands on Metadirectory Services. That's what I read on the MMS website. On Fri September 20 2002 21:24, Julian Stone wrote: It's a free product, but you must be trained in it's use, otherwise you can cause havoc or even worse... Yours, Julian Stone Given that it requires Advanced Server or Datacenter to run on, you have an interesting definition of free. so long as you engage MCS or other qualified partner Microsoft will let you have MMS for nothing :-) _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Badmail folder
Is there any kind of maintenance that should be done periodically on an Exch2K Badmail folder? I have 128,000+ files in there - I think its about 600MB. Jeff Hague _ List posting FAQ: http://www.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: Badmail folder
Something like that. Does Exchange handle that periodically or will it eventually fill up my drive? Jeff Hague -Original Message- From: Andy David [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, September 20, 2002 4:42 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Badmail folder Maintenance as in deleting them? :) -Original Message- From: Hague, Jeff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, September 20, 2002 4:35 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Badmail folder Is there any kind of maintenance that should be done periodically on an Exch2K Badmail folder? I have 128,000+ files in there - I think its about 600MB. Jeff Hague _ List posting FAQ: http://www.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: It all started with a lie - Q313819
I manage a network on a college campus and have to create 500+ accounts/mailboxes every fall. I also have to delete that many and I have to do a whole lot of security group/distribution group management and housekeeping as well. I used a heavily modified addusers.vbs this term to create my accounts but found that it was much easier to go into AD Users and Computers and create my mailboxes in bulk after the user accounts were done. That is one of the very few things that you can still do in bulk. I have not had much time to play with it (maybe a week now) but I just found a little toy called ADVantage from Javelina Software that has a lot of Active Directory bulk modification features (it also does a lot of reporting and management on Win2K ACLS). I don't see any Exch2K features yet but it is version 1.0 so that may be forthcoming. I have downloaded a 1 month trial version to play with and I am going to keep a close eye on where they go with it because it could be extremely useful. Jeff Hague Network Manager Randolph-Macon College -Original Message- From: Moore, David K [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, September 19, 2002 4:17 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: It all started with a lie - Q313819 So, I write this to test the waters and see how others have managed this issue - For many years, going back to 4.0, we used CSV files to create/manage/delete mailboxes within Exchange and this worked well. Then comes along Exchange 2000, which with it's integration of Active Directory and the requirement to use LDIFDE. Ok, no problem I can learn new tools and I learn the silly new LDIF import format and I make it do what I want it to do - mailbox enable an existing AD account. All is well until a few weeks following the mailbox enabling of the accounts, our users discover access to public folders (along with free/busy, off-line address book, etc) can not be had. A call to Microsoft produces the answer that, the attribute of msExchUserAccountControl had not been properly populated into AD. Microsoft writes a script for us that uses CDOEXM to re-set the permissions and while this does resolve the problem for existing users it doesn't resolve the on-going problems. So, Microsoft transferred me between a few groups (it's hard I guess to know what is what when you've got half of your mail system managed by another non-communicative group - Active Directory support) where I landed with an LDIFDE support engineer. This engineer then proceeded to explain that it was not possible to create mailbox enabled AD accounts with LDIFDE and pointed me to an article Q324353 [XADM: Users Cannot Access Public Folders or Delegate Mailboxes on a Separate Server] which states: If you want to use LDIFDE/ADSI to create users, Microsoft recommends that you use LDIFDE/ADSI to create only the user accounts, and then use Active Directory Users and Computers to create the mailboxes. to which I replied that Microsoft does support it and the answer can be found in Q313819 - [HOW TO: Create Mailbox-Enabled Account Using LDIFDE in Exchange 2000 Server] and after a bit of discussion Microsoft decided that it really sucks. It all seems to boil down to the fact that no one knows how the encoding of msExchUserAccountControl is done (in PSS that is) and without the ability to set that attribute at creation time, the RUS does not properly setup the account and Microsoft has no intentions to support this, even with the Q article on how to do it. So, my question? Simple - has anyone managed to use LDIFDE to create and mailbox enable or just to mailbox enable an existing account in AD and had it work properly, namely the use of public folders? I don't know about others that have a long history with Exchange but, do some of you feel that Exchange has made some real steps backward from the functionality that Exchange 5.5 had? And a word of warning to those still on 5.5 - if it aint' broken, don't fix it. Thanks, david moore Chevron Phillips Chemical _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
