RE: outsource!?
I'd like to know what you (Jon) aren't being told (so would you I bet). No one calls IBM in for less than half a server's worth of mail outsourcing. What else have you got knocking about? Any heavyweight OS/390 apps around? You might want to be looking for invisible ink on that meeting agenda. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Bubba G Sent: 17 November 2003 13:22 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: outsource!? and if there are only 250 users/350 mailboxes then I doubt you are talking about multiple staff members or sites who are effected. This is just: 1 staff member 1 site 1 server Correct? The selling point on your side at that point will be the great deviation in IBM price that will occur if your company needs to deviate from the standard pricing. For that small a site, IBM's cost will grow exponentially with each change. Look for reasons to need to deviate and how out sourcing will compromise overall user experience and executive staff features. BG -Original Message- From: Mark Arnold [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, November 16, 2003 2:41 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: outsource!? You'll find that IBM are fully au-fait with all the security, regulatory, recovery and performance aspects. You are up against IBM who, along with EDS (Whom I just left), CGEY and a pile of others who have done this inside out and upside down and more times than you've had hot dinners. Put all, and I mean all, of your technical aspects to one side. If IBM are at proposal stage it means they're nowhere near the technical nitty gritty. That comes with the Due Diligence phase where you will have the opportunity to lay all the cards on the table and where IBM adjust their cost model to suit what you say you want versus what they say you really want and, this is a biggy, what that say they can provide from cheap Leveraged resources and what they can provide from dedicated resources. The more they can provide from Leveraged resources the cheaper it'll become and the less viable an internal solution becomes. All of your bullet points will be met with indifference since they're pretty run of the mill. You will most likely find that IBM taking over the servers does not necessarily mean taking them into their own data centres. It could just as easily mean that they transition some of you employees into IBM (making some redundant later) and manage the boxes on your current sites. The reason IBM are coming in is that your CIO wants the same job done cheaper, not necessarily better, just cheaper. Better is a luxury Your best hope is to conduct a root and branch review of exactly what you have got, what you can get rid of and consolidate, how many staff you can afford to lay off as part of internal cost savings, and finally what your cost savings will be as a result of the internal rationalisations. You will be onto a loser in the long run since it's a foot in the door to total IT outsourcing and business process re-engineering. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Jon Hill Sent: 16 November 2003 03:57 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: outsource!? My CIO has asked me to attend a meeting in which IBM is going to propose outsourcing our e-mail services, taking over for our 350 Exchange 2000 mailboxes. I'm looking for arguments to marshal against outsourcing. So far, what I've got is: * security: We use Clearswift MIMEsweeper to block incoming (and outgoing) messages containing viruses or executable files (.bat, .exe, etc.). This being IBM, I'm sure they can protect against viruses, though. * disaster recovery: Our disaster site is updated in real time. During the blackout in August e-mail was up twenty minutes after I arrived at the DR site. Again, probably not a potent line item against IBM. * regulatory: we have some regulatory requirements for keeping all records (including e-mail) on site for seven years. * integration: Our CRM solution integrates directly into Exchange, adding contacts directly to the users' mailboxes. * performance: I have trouble seeing how performance would be adequate when the mail server is off site. * price: 250 users. 350 mailboxes. 140GB/month (according to the Journal folders). That can't be cheap. * legacy: Seven years of preexisting e-mail, spread out among mailboxes and pst files. About 200GB all told. What else am I missing? _ 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] This message has been appended by MailEssentials Verion 9
RE: outsource!?
You'll find that IBM are fully au-fait with all the security, regulatory, recovery and performance aspects. You are up against IBM who, along with EDS (Whom I just left), CGEY and a pile of others who have done this inside out and upside down and more times than you've had hot dinners. Put all, and I mean all, of your technical aspects to one side. If IBM are at proposal stage it means they're nowhere near the technical nitty gritty. That comes with the Due Diligence phase where you will have the opportunity to lay all the cards on the table and where IBM adjust their cost model to suit what you say you want versus what they say you really want and, this is a biggy, what that say they can provide from cheap Leveraged resources and what they can provide from dedicated resources. The more they can provide from Leveraged resources the cheaper it'll become and the less viable an internal solution becomes. All of your bullet points will be met with indifference since they're pretty run of the mill. You will most likely find that IBM taking over the servers does not necessarily mean taking them into their own data centres. It could just as easily mean that they transition some of you employees into IBM (making some redundant later) and manage the boxes on your current sites. The reason IBM are coming in is that your CIO wants the same job done cheaper, not necessarily better, just cheaper. Better is a luxury Your best hope is to conduct a root and branch review of exactly what you have got, what you can get rid of and consolidate, how many staff you can afford to lay off as part of internal cost savings, and finally what your cost savings will be as a result of the internal rationalisations. You will be onto a loser in the long run since it's a foot in the door to total IT outsourcing and business process re-engineering. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Jon Hill Sent: 16 November 2003 03:57 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: outsource!? My CIO has asked me to attend a meeting in which IBM is going to propose outsourcing our e-mail services, taking over for our 350 Exchange 2000 mailboxes. I'm looking for arguments to marshal against outsourcing. So far, what I've got is: * security: We use Clearswift MIMEsweeper to block incoming (and outgoing) messages containing viruses or executable files (.bat, .exe, etc.). This being IBM, I'm sure they can protect against viruses, though. * disaster recovery: Our disaster site is updated in real time. During the blackout in August e-mail was up twenty minutes after I arrived at the DR site. Again, probably not a potent line item against IBM. * regulatory: we have some regulatory requirements for keeping all records (including e-mail) on site for seven years. * integration: Our CRM solution integrates directly into Exchange, adding contacts directly to the users' mailboxes. * performance: I have trouble seeing how performance would be adequate when the mail server is off site. * price: 250 users. 350 mailboxes. 140GB/month (according to the Journal folders). That can't be cheap. * legacy: Seven years of preexisting e-mail, spread out among mailboxes and pst files. About 200GB all told. What else am I missing? _ 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] This message has been appended by MailEssentials Verion 9, www.gfi.co.uk The message has been scanned by Norman, Bitdefender, Macfee eTrust 6. It is hopefully free of virus's Date: 16/11/2003 Sender: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Recipient: [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: Fax
Faxination's a great one for the Enterprise level. Another good one is Message Manager from www.syssol.com.au which we've just implemented. It's does everything faxination does and also delivers inbound faxes to a network share, which was the reason we chose one over the other (we've got a requirement to bring 10,000 faxes per week into an image workflow solution as well as the normal exchange based inbound outbound) -Original Message- From: Brett Wesoloski [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 29 January 2003 17:11 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Fax I have used Fenestrae's Faxination and it worked great. -Original Message- From: McCready, Robert [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, January 29, 2003 11:08 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Fax Anybody using a faxing product with there Exchange Server? I'm reviewing Captaris Right Fax and GFI FAXMaker. Anybody have any positive/negative feedback on either of these products? Thanks. Robert _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: RBL Article
Behave, They'll still ask, and because the answer will be a simple and easy Q (oops) article you'll end up with more bleedin' follow up questions from people who have decided to put it into production rather than giving it up for lost in development. Be careful what you wish for, as the old saying goes. M Mark [EMAIL PROTECTED] -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 31 December 2002 20:57 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Re: RBL Article On Tue, 31 Dec 2002, at 2:33pm, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I have read that Titanium will have some sort of RBL feature. But will it have customizable NDRs and Storage Limit Warnings? lol How about a feature to automatically append text to every message? That can already be had for a pittance. I don't want to do it. I just want Exchange to have the feature so we don't have people asking how to do it three times a week on this list. ;-) -- Ben Scott [EMAIL PROTECTED] | The opinions expressed in this message are those of the author and do not | | necessarily represent the views or policy of any other person, entity or | | organization. All information is provided without warranty of any kind. | _ List posting FAQ: http://www.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: Any benefits to multiple NICs in Ex5.5?
I'd be surprised if setting up a VLAN for your inter exchange traffic would reduce the user LAN loading by anything much more than a trickle. Of course, LAN cards and switch ports are cheap but add a level of complexity to your environment that your LAN and NT support people might not want to cope with. Get some stats off the LAN guys before you decide to VLAN off. If your LAN guys were worth their salt and were worried about the traffic from point to point they'd probably have brought it up already. -Original Message- From: Pillai, Raj [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 20 September 2002 23:50 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Any benefits to multiple NICs in Ex5.5? Load balancing and /or redundancy ? -Original Message- From: Parrnelli GS11 Ben T [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, September 18, 2002 1:48 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Any benefits to multiple NICs in Ex5.5? Scenario: NT 4.0 SP6a SRP Exchange 5.5 SP4 10/100 NIC ATM NIC I've got two NICs in every exchange server and would like to put them to good use. I initially thought I would try to route all replication traffic through the Ethernet nic that's connected to all the other exchange servers via a switch. Then allow all other traffic to flow through the ATM NIC. However, I've found no documentation on how to make this happen. So having said all that, my question again; would there be any benefits to using both NICs? Thanks. Ben Parrnelli Network Administrator Comm Data Directorate MAGTF Training Command 29 Palms, CA 92278 _ List posting FAQ: http://www.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: GFI Mail Essentials
GFI used to be really good at Tech Support in EMEA. I have head they've gone downhill somewhat of late. MimeSweeper is still in a strong position over here. Mark Arnold, MVP(Exchange) -Original Message- From: Steven A. Christensen [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 29 August 2002 00:28 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Re: GFI Mail Essentials Used several versions with Exchange 5.5. Found the released versions to be of beta quality and reliability. Found the tech support to be shabby at best (I think they had two people total handling all the calls). It was a real pain in the rear to administer - and had limitations which made it all the more difficult. I've seen others suggest Mail Marshal, but don't have any personal experience as to whether it is a better product. Good luck. Steve C. - Original Message - From: Jason Coleman [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, August 28, 2002 6:07 PM Subject: GFI Mail Essentials | My company needs a product to block by domain, sender. We must also be | able to block spam, email attachments. We are currently using software | called eSafe which is less than what we had hoped for and we are looking | for another option. Any recommendations. We are looking at this software | from GFI called Mail Essentials. Has anyone heard about them or used the | product. Thanks all. _ List posting FAQ: http://www.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: Joining Exchange 5.5 SBS to Exhange 2000
Exchange 2000 would probably allow itself to be added to the SBS/E5.5 but you are likely to have problems. I have tried linking SBS to real 5.5 several times in a lab environment but always had the MTA take offence after a short while. I don't think it's worth the risk, better to start afresh. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 17 July 2002 23:32 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Joining Exchange 5.5 SBS to Exhange 2000 I am new to Exchange 2000 and I am looking to join an existing Exchange 5.5 Small Business edition to an existing Exchange 2000 organization. Is this possible? _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Message filtering
That might be the answer, but what is the question -Original Message- From: Martin Blackstone [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 09 July 2002 19:16 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Message filtering 42 -Original Message- From: Chris Scharff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, July 09, 2002 11:13 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Message filtering 203.199.81.81 -Original Message- From: RBHATIA [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, July 09, 2002 12:28 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Message filtering I do have anti-virus software and it is trapping and quarantining the messages. But that doesn't stop the spoofed email from coming in. I would like to find out the source of the infection - who is the user who has been infected. Can I tell from the message header attached below ? -Original Message- From: Chris Scharff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, July 09, 2002 1:25 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Message filtering First I'd change my DL SMTP addresses to something non-obvious. Then I'd implement an antivirus solution which could be configured to drop worms. -Original Message- From: RBHATIA [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, July 09, 2002 11:28 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Message filtering We're being hit big time by the KLEZ virus. Here is one of the messages that was sent. I've checked everyone's machines and everyone seems clear. So I'm guessing it's someone who works closely with our company as we have emails floating back and forth between staff who claim they never sent each other email. What if I set up the message filtering option on the Internet Mail Connector to block the domain smtp02.vsnl.net and smtp03.vsnl.net since those seem to be the 2 main sources from where the emails are originating. Also, how do I insert the entry ? Do I enter it as @smtp02.vsnl.net ? Received: from smtp02.vsnl.net ([203.197.12.8]) by myserver.mycompany.com with SMTP (Microsoft Exchange ) id 31VYJYRC; Mon, 8 Jul 2002 04:14:50 -0400 Received: from Qrvlyi ([203.199.81.81]) by smtp02.vsnl.net (Netscape Messaging Server 4.15) with SMTP id GYX8GJ00.Z9D for [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Mon, 8 Jul 2002 13:49:31 +0530 From: staff [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: . _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.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: Unlimited Quotas
When asked this question I've always gone with what Ed has said only less blunt, the business must decide what it wants to or can afford to fork out for and then the business must be told what it will get for its money. The Exchange designer must present all the available options to the business which will then decide, often by inference rather than specifically what the answer will be. In the case of Exchange the options spread to the workstations, the support teams and the file servers, something often overlooked when options are being submitted. On occasion there have been situations where the business has been told that £/$x,000 will buy them x MB per user and anything over that would need to be stored on the file server or local machines in PSTs. The file server has then started creaking with people storing their PSTs and PSTs have gone west causing additional support calls which quickly ended up costing more than a bigger/more server(s). Often it is a failure in the Exchange Designer or Administrator to fully document the ramifications of the business not spending the appropriate amount of money on an Exchange Server. Often it is a failure of the users ever to hit the delete key. Usually it's a failure of both. We never get the money we want for our Exchange servers and the users never get the storage they want in their mailboxes. -Original Message- From: John Steniger [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 05 July 2002 20:17 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Unlimited Quotas Not to get into a war of words (as this appears to be something near and dear to your heart), often IT is put in the position to have to: A) Save money by not spending any, period (on Exchange or any other type of upgrades, or disk, or what have you..) B) Provide virtually unlimited service (unlimited file share, unlimited email storage, etc) These two opposing conditions are imposed on us by those far more important than myself in an organization. In an organization, the fact that it is sometimes impossible to meet these two criteria at the same time if often lost on those who make these decisions. It happened in our organization, and it was decided that limits should be imposed. Did we run out of space directly because we had no limits to begin with? I happen to believe no limits encourages lazy usage (storing everything, to the point where you can't remember if you need it, so you keep it) - I certainly may be mistaken. It seems clear to me that if reasonable limits are imposed, and adjusted as needs change, one can get much more use out of a system. To speak to another of your points, sometimes more disk drives don't do the trick. Exchange (not Enterprise) imposes a software limit on the information store. Disk won't help if you hit that. I agree with you that you won't necessarily run out of space if you restrict storage. However, I would say its rather likely, from my experience. It may not happen within a week, or even a year, but users aren't typically concerned with keeping their file and email storage neat and clean so to not fill up the server - they have their own jobs to worry about. Maybe the users in your organization are different. John J. Steniger -Original Message- From: Woodrick, Ed [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, July 05, 2002 2:32 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Unlimited Quotas Why do you pretend to be arrogant enough to be able to dictate the needs of others? You don't seem to have any business drivers to justify your actions. And who is to say that getting additional disk drives for the user email storage isn't out of the question? And as to storage, it has nothing to do with processor and RAM. And most importantly, just because you don't restrict the users storage, doesn't mean that you will run out of space. That's absolutely hogwash, a justification of why many IT shops get such a bad reputation. Your job is to SUPPORT your users, not be a dictator. In the whole scheme of things, a few thousand dollars for some disk space and maybe an upgrade in Exchange editions is petty cash. The BUSINESS driver should not be an IT limit. Exchange really is able to support most business drivers with little difficulty. In the limitation of storage, that should be completely dictated by you organizations Document Retention Policy, which should be dictated by the lawyers. And it shouldn't even be an IT function to enforce, even if you can. -Original Message- From: James Liddil [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Posted At: Friday, July 05, 2002 9:18 AM Posted To: Microsoft Exchange Conversation: Unlimited Quotas Subject: Unlimited Quotas I am being asked to justify why I have set quotas for users on our E2K server with 25 users. Things that come to mind are that if we give users unlimited stores, we will have to buy more disk space in time. Also we have a single
RE: Sent header information ?
The IMC/SMTP services receive the message with the time zone attached (if you look at the message header) but I know of no way to have Exchange take that information and insert it into the message. -Original Message- From: Kully [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 25 June 2002 15:25 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Sent header information ? Does anyone know if it possible to have the following added in an email timestamp below: Current email -Original Message- From: Lname, Fname Sent: Tuesday, June 25, 2002 9:33 AM To: Surname, Firstname Subject: Question about Timezones What we want to do is have: - please note the extra EDT . -Original Message- From: Lname, Fname Sent: Tuesday, June 25, 2002 9:33 AM EDT (Eastern Daylight Time) To: Surname, Firstname Subject: Question about Timezones _ List posting FAQ: http://www.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: Kill new e-mail messages to previous employees personalmail
Rather than set a mailbox and fill it with smtp addresses from ex employees do the same with a distribution list and assign no members. This way the mails will just disappear into oblivion. -Original Message- From: Eve Jimah [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 26 June 2002 09:15 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Kill new e-mail messages to previous employees personalmail I am having a similar problem, I have created a new mailbox and I made myself the owner, my question now is how to set the rule to delete messages delivered to this mailbox. In the past I have not been able to set a rule that applies to a secondary mailbox. I can set rules through outlook 2000 rule wizard to apply to may main box but not to a secondary one ie one setup for the above purpose. My platform is NT4 and exchange 5.5. service pack 6. Thanks __ Do You Yahoo!? Everything you'll ever need on one web page from News and Sport to Email and Music Charts http://uk.my.yahoo.com _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Catch All
There ought to be someone who has the [EMAIL PROTECTED] smtp address, the mail will drop there, defaulted to the person who installed the first server. If not, assign it to yourself. -Original Message- From: Gary Duckman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 26 June 2002 15:41 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Catch All Hi Guys, I have not been on the list for over a year so excuse me if I have missed the threads on this Can I re-route all inbound unknown recipient mail to a single mailbox in Exchange 2000? (I known how to do it in 5.5) At the moment it goes into the badmail directory. This is for people who mispell addresses etc. Cheers, Gary _ List posting FAQ: http://www.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: Catch All
Isn't that for all mails to a single domain going to a specific user? We got this a little while ago and I quote from the summary This article describes how to create an event sink to capture all e-mail messages that are sent to a particular domain, and then direct them to a single mailbox. I read the question as where to send mails for all unrecognised inbound recipients like in the old days on the IMS. M -Original Message- From: Andy David [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 26 June 2002 15:48 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Catch All http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;en-us;Q324021SD=MSKB; -Original Message- From: Gary Duckman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, June 26, 2002 10:41 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Catch All Hi Guys, I have not been on the list for over a year so excuse me if I have missed the threads on this Can I re-route all inbound unknown recipient mail to a single mailbox in Exchange 2000? (I known how to do it in 5.5) At the moment it goes into the badmail directory. This is for people who mispell addresses etc. Cheers, Gary _ List posting FAQ: http://www.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: Public folders delivering mail?!
This is done in exchange admin. -Original Message- From: matt [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 26 June 2002 16:31 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Public folders delivering mail?! Is this done via the outlook client or at the 5.5 server. The issue being I have users who have folders close to their email address. If sender misspells email address Mail goes directly to folder. User complains she is missing email. She wants all mail to come to inbox then after read she will move to whatever public folder she wants. -Original Message- From: Drewery, Anthony [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, June 26, 2002 11:17 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Public folders delivering mail?! You can remove the SMTP address from the public folder. Ant. -- Anthony Drewery MCSE Messaging Services CP Ships, Crawley, UK -Original Message- From: matt [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 26 June 2002 16:18 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Public folders delivering mail?! Hi quick question Exchange 5.5 sp3 on NT 4.0 sp6. If I set up a public folder and then email to to this folder it accepts the email. IE.. I have a mailbox setup for [EMAIL PROTECTED] I made a public folder called johnsmith. I can email the folder by [EMAIL PROTECTED] And it gets delivered to this folder. How can I stop this from happening? This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and are intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. This communication represents the originator's personal views and opinions, which do not necessarily reflect those of Canada Maritime. If you are not the intended recipient or the person responsible for delivering the email to the intended recipient, be advised that you have received this email in error, and that any use, dissemination, forward, printing, or copying of this email is strictly prohibited. If you received this email in error, please immediately notify the Canmar/Cast Help Desk on +44 (0) 1293 582 800 _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Outlook/Exchange Problems
Ouch Nate, bad day in Plano ? Mark Arnold MCSE MVP EDS UK -Original Message- From: Couch, Nate [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 31 May 2002 12:19 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Outlook/Exchange Problems What has changed in your environment? Things don't just happen? There is a reason and usually something changed (a setting, a service pack was added, etc.). What, if anything, do the Event Logs show? What about user permissions (have you checked the permissions on the Calendars)? Can you, as the Administrator get in and do anything? What about the overall performance of your server? Nate Couch EDS Messaging -- From: Christopher Hummert Reply To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, May 30, 2002 18:58 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Outlook/Exchange Problems Yesterday just all of the sudden everyone on my network started having problems with outlook where they: -Can't add appointments to calendar -Can't add tasks -Can't print e-mails They can: -add contacts -see public folder and put messages in them When they go to add a appointment or task they get the following message: The item could not be saved to this folder. The folder has been deleted or moved, or I do not have permission. Do you want to save a copy of it in the default folder for the item? They chose yes and get the following message: No matching entries were found They also get the same message when they try to print an e-mail. I've done scanpst on their pst file and I've ran outlook with the /cleanprofile and /ResetFolders switch but that hasn't cleaned up the problem. It was weird cause it was working all day long and then happened all of the sudden. Anyone know what's going on? Thanks Chris Hummert Network Administrator - Albany Agency of Insurance Webmaster for Noghri.net http://www.noghri.net MS Beta tester ID #: 388366 Sometimes I think the surest sign that intelligent life exists elsewhere in the universe is that none of it has tried to contacts us. - from Calvin and Hobbes _ List posting FAQ: http://www.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: Attachment
Indeed, reduce the message limits and make a note of who shouts. -Original Message- From: Jojo Solis [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 31 May 2002 11:12 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Attachment is there a way to monitor who are sending with large attachement? E2K server. regards, jojo _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: kinda OT - RAID on the exchange server
This is in English http://www.thestandard.com.au/IDG2.NSF/All/D56A4C61ECC7F0C3CA256BC60038E 885!OpenDocumentNavArea=HomeSelectedCategoryName=News But left me no wiser. Anyone for some StorageWorks ? -Original Message- From: Ed Crowley [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 31 May 2002 15:28 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: kinda OT - RAID on the exchange server Please share what RAID5e is. I could only find two hits in AltaVista on that phrase, and both used character sets not in my workstation. May I suggest you change hardware vendors? My employer makes a fine line of servers that I don't believe have this problem. 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 Mark Peoples Sent: Thursday, May 30, 2002 11:57 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: kinda OT - RAID on the exchange server I apologise for the OT question... Has anyone experienced issues with bad striping on a RAID5e disk array? (hardware RAID) I have had this twice in the last 6 months. When a disk dies in the array it is replaced ASAP. RAID5e should be able to handle this without error right? When the RAID5e striping has errors, it registers sectors on the logical disk as bad and causes disk I/O errors - which screws (eventually corrupts) the exchange information store(s) on the logical drive and prevents backups from completing. hhhmmm ... perhaps someone can enlighten me as to why RAID5e couldn't handle the occassional defunct drive without screwing the rest of the array in the process of rebuilding itself... The hardware vendor has recommended re-creating the RAID array from scratch and restoring from backup Any thoughts? sorry again for the OT question - but I'll even throw in a Friday afternoon Haiku for good measure: Friday afternoon gotta get going home server is cactus Thanks, MP _ List posting FAQ: http://www.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: kinda OT - RAID on the exchange server
It'll never be time to go with the D word. The D people don't make servers, they only claim to. Who's the I word though? -Original Message- From: MS Exchange Discussions [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 31 May 2002 18:28 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: kinda OT - RAID on the exchange server Maybe it's time to go with D or I! -Original Message- From: Andrey Fyodorov [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Posted At: Friday, May 31, 2002 10:19 AM Posted To: MS Exchange Discussions Conversation: kinda OT - RAID on the exchange server Subject: RE: kinda OT - RAID on the exchange server Back in 1998 we used Ed Crowley's employer's line of servers and they were not that good. We switched to their major competitor. But now it's not a competitor anymore since they became the same company. But I still like servers that start with C better than those that start with H. But I think Ed is also from the C side, right? -Original Message- From: Soysal, Serdar [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, May 31, 2002 10:56 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: kinda OT - RAID on the exchange server Drop your hardware vendor. Been running my databases on RAID5's on Ed Crowley's employer's fine line of servers and NEVER EVER had an issue. Serdar Soysal -Original Message- From: Mark Peoples [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, May 31, 2002 2:57 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: kinda OT - RAID on the exchange server I apologise for the OT question... Has anyone experienced issues with bad striping on a RAID5e disk array? (hardware RAID) I have had this twice in the last 6 months. When a disk dies in the array it is replaced ASAP. RAID5e should be able to handle this without error right? When the RAID5e striping has errors, it registers sectors on the logical disk as bad and causes disk I/O errors - which screws (eventually corrupts) the exchange information store(s) on the logical drive and prevents backups from completing. hhhmmm ... perhaps someone can enlighten me as to why RAID5e couldn't handle the occassional defunct drive without screwing the rest of the array in the process of rebuilding itself... The hardware vendor has recommended re-creating the RAID array from scratch and restoring from backup Any thoughts? sorry again for the OT question - but I'll even throw in a Friday afternoon Haiku for good measure: Friday afternoon gotta get going home server is cactus Thanks, MP _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: kinda OT - RAID on the exchange server
Ahhh of course, that versatile Netfinity brand. Dreadful little boxes. Still they're our biggest competitor and are kicking our buts at this time, so they must be doing something right. It's just not doing servers right. -Original Message- From: Thomas Di Nardo [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 31 May 2002 19:24 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: kinda OT - RAID on the exchange server No...It would stand for Idiots. As in Idiots, Boneheads, and Morons. -Original Message- From: Mellott, Bill [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, May 31, 2002 2:12 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: kinda OT - RAID on the exchange server I'll bet 'I' is for Intel.. why? one of our divisions sell's these What do I win if I'm right? -Original Message- From: Mark Arnold [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, May 31, 2002 2:08 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: kinda OT - RAID on the exchange server It'll never be time to go with the D word. The D people don't make servers, they only claim to. Who's the I word though? -Original Message- From: MS Exchange Discussions [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 31 May 2002 18:28 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: kinda OT - RAID on the exchange server Maybe it's time to go with D or I! -Original Message- From: Andrey Fyodorov [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Posted At: Friday, May 31, 2002 10:19 AM Posted To: MS Exchange Discussions Conversation: kinda OT - RAID on the exchange server Subject: RE: kinda OT - RAID on the exchange server Back in 1998 we used Ed Crowley's employer's line of servers and they were not that good. We switched to their major competitor. But now it's not a competitor anymore since they became the same company. But I still like servers that start with C better than those that start with H. But I think Ed is also from the C side, right? -Original Message- From: Soysal, Serdar [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, May 31, 2002 10:56 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: kinda OT - RAID on the exchange server Drop your hardware vendor. Been running my databases on RAID5's on Ed Crowley's employer's fine line of servers and NEVER EVER had an issue. Serdar Soysal -Original Message- From: Mark Peoples [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, May 31, 2002 2:57 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: kinda OT - RAID on the exchange server I apologise for the OT question... Has anyone experienced issues with bad striping on a RAID5e disk array? (hardware RAID) I have had this twice in the last 6 months. When a disk dies in the array it is replaced ASAP. RAID5e should be able to handle this without error right? When the RAID5e striping has errors, it registers sectors on the logical disk as bad and causes disk I/O errors - which screws (eventually corrupts) the exchange information store(s) on the logical drive and prevents backups from completing. hhhmmm ... perhaps someone can enlighten me as to why RAID5e couldn't handle the occassional defunct drive without screwing the rest of the array in the process of rebuilding itself... The hardware vendor has recommended re-creating the RAID array from scratch and restoring from backup Any thoughts? sorry again for the OT question - but I'll even throw in a Friday afternoon Haiku for good measure: Friday afternoon gotta get going home server is cactus Thanks, MP _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com
RE: kinda OT - RAID on the exchange server
Yeah, there had been a minor Blonde moment. Even worse since I'm currently typing on a Thinkpad ! -Original Message- From: Roger Seielstad [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 31 May 2002 20:36 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: kinda OT - RAID on the exchange server Bzzz. Think 3 little letters, and a color. -- Roger D. Seielstad - MCSE Sr. Systems Administrator Peregrine Systems Atlanta, GA -Original Message- From: Mellott, Bill [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, May 31, 2002 2:12 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: kinda OT - RAID on the exchange server I'll bet 'I' is for Intel.. why? one of our divisions sell's these What do I win if I'm right? -Original Message- From: Mark Arnold [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, May 31, 2002 2:08 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: kinda OT - RAID on the exchange server It'll never be time to go with the D word. The D people don't make servers, they only claim to. Who's the I word though? -Original Message- From: MS Exchange Discussions [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 31 May 2002 18:28 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: kinda OT - RAID on the exchange server Maybe it's time to go with D or I! -Original Message- From: Andrey Fyodorov [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Posted At: Friday, May 31, 2002 10:19 AM Posted To: MS Exchange Discussions Conversation: kinda OT - RAID on the exchange server Subject: RE: kinda OT - RAID on the exchange server Back in 1998 we used Ed Crowley's employer's line of servers and they were not that good. We switched to their major competitor. But now it's not a competitor anymore since they became the same company. But I still like servers that start with C better than those that start with H. But I think Ed is also from the C side, right? -Original Message- From: Soysal, Serdar [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, May 31, 2002 10:56 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: kinda OT - RAID on the exchange server Drop your hardware vendor. Been running my databases on RAID5's on Ed Crowley's employer's fine line of servers and NEVER EVER had an issue. Serdar Soysal -Original Message- From: Mark Peoples [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, May 31, 2002 2:57 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: kinda OT - RAID on the exchange server I apologise for the OT question... Has anyone experienced issues with bad striping on a RAID5e disk array? (hardware RAID) I have had this twice in the last 6 months. When a disk dies in the array it is replaced ASAP. RAID5e should be able to handle this without error right? When the RAID5e striping has errors, it registers sectors on the logical disk as bad and causes disk I/O errors - which screws (eventually corrupts) the exchange information store(s) on the logical drive and prevents backups from completing. hhhmmm ... perhaps someone can enlighten me as to why RAID5e couldn't handle the occassional defunct drive without screwing the rest of the array in the process of rebuilding itself... The hardware vendor has recommended re-creating the RAID array from scratch and restoring from backup Any thoughts? sorry again for the OT question - but I'll even throw in a Friday afternoon Haiku for good measure: Friday afternoon gotta get going home server is cactus Thanks, MP _ List posting FAQ: http://www.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
RE: Large IS DB
Yeah, the place where you see the sizes of the mailboxes doesn't have the option to view hidden, it shows all things. It's only a guide but isn't usually that far out. I know you've said you're reporting 2GB of white space but have you tried an offline defrag, in my experience you'll gain more than it reports as spare. -Original Message- From: Steve [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 24 May 2002 19:10 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Large IS DB The report is the dump of the total size of all mailboxes (as seen from Exchange Admin). There are some large mailboxes on the server, but the total space taken up by both hidden and visible mailboxes does not total more then 8 GBthus my delima. -Original Message- From: Kevin Miller [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, May 24, 2002 10:49 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Large IS DB Do you have any hidden mailboxes that are not showing up in your reports? Ever clean out he Admin box? Or the AV box? --Kevinm KMAP-SR, M, WLKMMAS, UCC+WCA, And Beyond http://www.daughtry.ca/ For Graphics and WebDesign, GO here! -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of paragon400 Sent: Friday, May 24, 2002 10:11 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Large IS DB Fellow exchange admins\engineers\gurus, Does anyone have any suggestions for this situation? Config: Exchange 5.5 SP4 WinNT 4.0 SP6 Priv.edb = 45GB Deleted Item Cache = 11.5 GB Deleted Item retention was 7 days, but in an effort to fix this I set it to 3 days to see if it would make a difference. The DIC (ok..I can see the jokes coming, but hey.it's Friday) was 15 GB and after the change it shrunk to 11.5 GB after a couple days. Whitespace = Event ID's 1221 state that on average there is 2GB of whitespace When I look at the mailbox sizes through Exchange Admin and do a dump to CSV it totals out to be about 7 GB, yet the Priv is 45 GB. Backups are taking extremely long and I wanted to see if anyone had a suggestions as to what, if any, the problem could be here. We have done a number of IS compresses and only gotten about 2-4 GB of space (no surprise because of the reported whitespace). But with what Exchange Admin is reporting I am concerned. Thanks for any suggestions and for those in the states..have a good relaxing holiday. Best regards, Steve _ List posting FAQ: http://www.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: Large IS DB
I only mention it because you haven't, but.. XADM: Database Does Not Shrink after Several Mailbox Deletions [Q192189] talks of waiting a while before kicking off the eseutil. I don't think it applies since you've done several offline defrags over time. Can't hurt though. Also have a look at XADM: Determining Database Free Space with Exchange 5.5 SP1 [Q195914] which would give a truer picture of free space. -Original Message- From: paragon400 [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 24 May 2002 19:16 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Large IS DB We have done a number of IS compresses to try to resolve it and only gotten about 2-4 GB of space (no surprise because of the reported whitespace in the event logs). -Original Message- From: Mark Arnold () [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, May 24, 2002 11:18 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Large IS DB Yeah, the place where you see the sizes of the mailboxes doesn't have the option to view hidden, it shows all things. It's only a guide but isn't usually that far out. I know you've said you're reporting 2GB of white space but have you tried an offline defrag, in my experience you'll gain more than it reports as spare. -Original Message- From: Steve [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 24 May 2002 19:10 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Large IS DB The report is the dump of the total size of all mailboxes (as seen from Exchange Admin). There are some large mailboxes on the server, but the total space taken up by both hidden and visible mailboxes does not total more then 8 GBthus my delima. -Original Message- From: Kevin Miller [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, May 24, 2002 10:49 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Large IS DB Do you have any hidden mailboxes that are not showing up in your reports? Ever clean out he Admin box? Or the AV box? --Kevinm KMAP-SR, M, WLKMMAS, UCC+WCA, And Beyond http://www.daughtry.ca/ For Graphics and WebDesign, GO here! -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of paragon400 Sent: Friday, May 24, 2002 10:11 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Large IS DB Fellow exchange admins\engineers\gurus, Does anyone have any suggestions for this situation? Config: Exchange 5.5 SP4 WinNT 4.0 SP6 Priv.edb = 45GB Deleted Item Cache = 11.5 GB Deleted Item retention was 7 days, but in an effort to fix this I set it to 3 days to see if it would make a difference. The DIC (ok..I can see the jokes coming, but hey.it's Friday) was 15 GB and after the change it shrunk to 11.5 GB after a couple days. Whitespace = Event ID's 1221 state that on average there is 2GB of whitespace When I look at the mailbox sizes through Exchange Admin and do a dump to CSV it totals out to be about 7 GB, yet the Priv is 45 GB. Backups are taking extremely long and I wanted to see if anyone had a suggestions as to what, if any, the problem could be here. We have done a number of IS compresses and only gotten about 2-4 GB of space (no surprise because of the reported whitespace). But with what Exchange Admin is reporting I am concerned. Thanks for any suggestions and for those in the states..have a good relaxing holiday. Best regards, Steve _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin
RE: Ex 5.5-W2k and IMAP/SSL
XIMS: Troubleshooting POP3/IMAP 13002 Errors w. SSL on Exchange [Q251097] My experience was getting a certificate for [EMAIL PROTECTED] didn't permit getting mail over [EMAIL PROTECTED] for example. You'd need to set DNS up for one dns name only, which should be ok since you're using different ports. That's probably not an example of your problem though ? -Original Message- From: Jason Kelley [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 22 May 2002 19:44 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Ex 5.5-W2k and IMAP/SSL I'm trying to configure the IMAP protocol to only accept connections over SSL. I have obtained an SSL certificate from Verisign and imported it into the certificate store. I know that it works because I can connect to OWA over https without errors or warnings. In the exchange administrator I have selected the IMAP protocol to only use SSL. I have enabled diagnostic logging on the IMAP protocol to maximum. When I try to connect via Outlook configured to use IMAP(over SSL) it fails. The event logs on the server show the following event ID 13002 which says An attempt to connect an SSL client failed because the server does not have a valid certificate. Does anybody have any ideas what I may have missed? Thanks - Jason _ List posting FAQ: http://www.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: 3rd party utility to check for mailboxes that are no longer b eing used....
That got him where it hurts Lori. -Original Message- From: Hunter, Lori [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 22 May 2002 19:26 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: 3rd party utility to check for mailboxes that are no longer b eing used Except you're not new Mike. You've been asking questions of this caliber for over a year. I'm beginning to believe that you cannot read. -Original Message- From: Mitchell Mike [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, May 21, 2002 4:45 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: 3rd party utility to check for mailboxes that are no longer b eing used You all are my friends here. Thanks... -Original Message- From: John Allhiser [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, 21 May, 2002 4:42 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: 3rd party utility to check for mailboxes that are no longer b eing used A popular (read effective) antivirus for mail servers. Google is your friend here. :^) -Original Message- From: Mitchell Mike [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, May 21, 2002 4:41 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: 3rd party utility to check for mailboxes that are no longer b eing used Yeah really... I am a new administrator and I haven't a clue. Sorry. -Original Message- From: John Allhiser [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, 21 May, 2002 4:38 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: 3rd party utility to check for mailboxes that are no longer b eing used Really? -Original Message- From: Mitchell Mike [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, May 21, 2002 4:39 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: 3rd party utility to check for mailboxes that are no longer b eing used What is Scanmail and what is it used for? Thanks.. -Original Message- From: James Casstevens [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, 20 May, 2002 12:02 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: 3rd party utility to check for mailboxes that are no longer being used Does anyone know of a 3rd party utility that can calculate the mailboxes that are not currently being used. Since we are using Trend Micro's Scanmail, we cannot depend on using the last time a user logs onto his/her mailbox, since Scanmail does so on a regular basis. Any help would be appreciated. James Casstevens. _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: 3rd party utility to check for mailboxes that are no longer b eing used....
Why should he fish when others can answer his question afresh and then create a nice thread taking the rise out of him. Perhaps he's into SM or something, not that I know what SM means, any more than I know what FSCK means (if you're following the other threads) -Original Message- From: Hunter, Lori [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 22 May 2002 20:50 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: 3rd party utility to check for mailboxes that are no longer b eing used Hope so. This man refuses to learn to fish, so he can just starve. -Original Message- From: Mark Arnold () [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, May 22, 2002 2:14 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: 3rd party utility to check for mailboxes that are no longer b eing used That got him where it hurts Lori. -Original Message- From: Hunter, Lori [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 22 May 2002 19:26 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: 3rd party utility to check for mailboxes that are no longer b eing used Except you're not new Mike. You've been asking questions of this caliber for over a year. I'm beginning to believe that you cannot read. -Original Message- From: Mitchell Mike [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, May 21, 2002 4:45 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: 3rd party utility to check for mailboxes that are no longer b eing used You all are my friends here. Thanks... -Original Message- From: John Allhiser [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, 21 May, 2002 4:42 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: 3rd party utility to check for mailboxes that are no longer b eing used A popular (read effective) antivirus for mail servers. Google is your friend here. :^) -Original Message- From: Mitchell Mike [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, May 21, 2002 4:41 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: 3rd party utility to check for mailboxes that are no longer b eing used Yeah really... I am a new administrator and I haven't a clue. Sorry. -Original Message- From: John Allhiser [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, 21 May, 2002 4:38 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: 3rd party utility to check for mailboxes that are no longer b eing used Really? -Original Message- From: Mitchell Mike [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, May 21, 2002 4:39 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: 3rd party utility to check for mailboxes that are no longer b eing used What is Scanmail and what is it used for? Thanks.. -Original Message- From: James Casstevens [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, 20 May, 2002 12:02 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: 3rd party utility to check for mailboxes that are no longer being used Does anyone know of a 3rd party utility that can calculate the mailboxes that are not currently being used. Since we are using Trend Micro's Scanmail, we cannot depend on using the last time a user logs onto his/her mailbox, since Scanmail does so on a regular basis. Any help would be appreciated. James Casstevens. _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
RE: 3rd party utility to check for mailboxes that are no longer b eing used....
Kind of, but instead of them being candy they're all chocolatey (that's never spelt right surely) but still round, with a strange whiff of salt. A pint of beer for the 1st to get the reference -Original Message- From: Thomas Di Nardo [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 22 May 2002 21:26 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: 3rd party utility to check for mailboxes that are no longer b eing used SM's...is that a new candy? -Original Message- From: Mark Arnold () [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, May 22, 2002 4:23 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: 3rd party utility to check for mailboxes that are no longer b eing used Why should he fish when others can answer his question afresh and then create a nice thread taking the rise out of him. Perhaps he's into SM or something, not that I know what SM means, any more than I know what FSCK means (if you're following the other threads) -Original Message- From: Hunter, Lori [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 22 May 2002 20:50 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: 3rd party utility to check for mailboxes that are no longer b eing used Hope so. This man refuses to learn to fish, so he can just starve. -Original Message- From: Mark Arnold () [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, May 22, 2002 2:14 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: 3rd party utility to check for mailboxes that are no longer b eing used That got him where it hurts Lori. -Original Message- From: Hunter, Lori [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 22 May 2002 19:26 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: 3rd party utility to check for mailboxes that are no longer b eing used Except you're not new Mike. You've been asking questions of this caliber for over a year. I'm beginning to believe that you cannot read. -Original Message- From: Mitchell Mike [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, May 21, 2002 4:45 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: 3rd party utility to check for mailboxes that are no longer b eing used You all are my friends here. Thanks... -Original Message- From: John Allhiser [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, 21 May, 2002 4:42 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: 3rd party utility to check for mailboxes that are no longer b eing used A popular (read effective) antivirus for mail servers. Google is your friend here. :^) -Original Message- From: Mitchell Mike [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, May 21, 2002 4:41 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: 3rd party utility to check for mailboxes that are no longer b eing used Yeah really... I am a new administrator and I haven't a clue. Sorry. -Original Message- From: John Allhiser [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, 21 May, 2002 4:38 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: 3rd party utility to check for mailboxes that are no longer b eing used Really? -Original Message- From: Mitchell Mike [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, May 21, 2002 4:39 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: 3rd party utility to check for mailboxes that are no longer b eing used What is Scanmail and what is it used for? Thanks.. -Original Message- From: James Casstevens [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, 20 May, 2002 12:02 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: 3rd party utility to check for mailboxes that are no longer being used Does anyone know of a 3rd party utility that can calculate the mailboxes that are not currently being used. Since we are using Trend Micro's Scanmail, we cannot depend on using the last time a user logs onto his/her mailbox, since Scanmail does so on a regular basis. Any help would be appreciated. James Casstevens. _ List posting FAQ: http://www.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: 3rd party utility to check for mailboxes that are no longer b eing used....
You will find £2.20 in your left pocket. Pub/bar somewhere near you. When you get back you can ask how the hell sterling got in your pocket and why the barman accepted it. -Original Message- From: John Allhiser [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 22 May 2002 21:32 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: 3rd party utility to check for mailboxes that are no longer b eing used Chef? -Original Message- From: Mark Arnold () [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, May 22, 2002 3:31 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: 3rd party utility to check for mailboxes that are no longer b eing used Kind of, but instead of them being candy they're all chocolatey (that's never spelt right surely) but still round, with a strange whiff of salt. A pint of beer for the 1st to get the reference -Original Message- From: Thomas Di Nardo [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 22 May 2002 21:26 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: 3rd party utility to check for mailboxes that are no longer b eing used SM's...is that a new candy? -Original Message- From: Mark Arnold () [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, May 22, 2002 4:23 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: 3rd party utility to check for mailboxes that are no longer b eing used Why should he fish when others can answer his question afresh and then create a nice thread taking the rise out of him. Perhaps he's into SM or something, not that I know what SM means, any more than I know what FSCK means (if you're following the other threads) -Original Message- From: Hunter, Lori [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 22 May 2002 20:50 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: 3rd party utility to check for mailboxes that are no longer b eing used Hope so. This man refuses to learn to fish, so he can just starve. -Original Message- From: Mark Arnold () [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, May 22, 2002 2:14 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: 3rd party utility to check for mailboxes that are no longer b eing used That got him where it hurts Lori. -Original Message- From: Hunter, Lori [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 22 May 2002 19:26 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: 3rd party utility to check for mailboxes that are no longer b eing used Except you're not new Mike. You've been asking questions of this caliber for over a year. I'm beginning to believe that you cannot read. -Original Message- From: Mitchell Mike [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, May 21, 2002 4:45 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: 3rd party utility to check for mailboxes that are no longer b eing used You all are my friends here. Thanks... -Original Message- From: John Allhiser [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, 21 May, 2002 4:42 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: 3rd party utility to check for mailboxes that are no longer b eing used A popular (read effective) antivirus for mail servers. Google is your friend here. :^) -Original Message- From: Mitchell Mike [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, May 21, 2002 4:41 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: 3rd party utility to check for mailboxes that are no longer b eing used Yeah really... I am a new administrator and I haven't a clue. Sorry. -Original Message- From: John Allhiser [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, 21 May, 2002 4:38 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: 3rd party utility to check for mailboxes that are no longer b eing used Really? -Original Message- From: Mitchell Mike [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, May 21, 2002 4:39 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: 3rd party utility to check for mailboxes that are no longer b eing used What is Scanmail and what is it used for? Thanks.. -Original Message- From: James Casstevens [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, 20 May, 2002 12:02 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: 3rd party utility to check for mailboxes that are no longer being used Does anyone know of a 3rd party utility that can calculate the mailboxes that are not currently being used. Since we are using Trend Micro's Scanmail, we cannot depend on using the last time a user logs onto his/her mailbox, since Scanmail does so on a regular basis. Any help would be appreciated. James Casstevens. _ List posting FAQ: http://www.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: 3rd party utility to check for mailboxes that are no longer b eing used....
Not so as you'd notice grin -Original Message- From: David Florea [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 22 May 2002 21:37 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: 3rd party utility to check for mailboxes that are no longer b eing used Dunno, but fsck is a *nix command, isn't it? ;-} -Original Message- From: Mark Arnold () [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, May 22, 2002 1:31 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: 3rd party utility to check for mailboxes that are no longer b eing used Kind of, but instead of them being candy they're all chocolatey (that's never spelt right surely) but still round, with a strange whiff of salt. A pint of beer for the 1st to get the reference -Original Message- From: Thomas Di Nardo [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 22 May 2002 21:26 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: 3rd party utility to check for mailboxes that are no longer b eing used SM's...is that a new candy? -Original Message- From: Mark Arnold () [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, May 22, 2002 4:23 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: 3rd party utility to check for mailboxes that are no longer b eing used Why should he fish when others can answer his question afresh and then create a nice thread taking the rise out of him. Perhaps he's into SM or something, not that I know what SM means, any more than I know what FSCK means (if you're following the other threads) -Original Message- From: Hunter, Lori [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 22 May 2002 20:50 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: 3rd party utility to check for mailboxes that are no longer b eing used Hope so. This man refuses to learn to fish, so he can just starve. -Original Message- From: Mark Arnold () [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, May 22, 2002 2:14 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: 3rd party utility to check for mailboxes that are no longer b eing used That got him where it hurts Lori. -Original Message- From: Hunter, Lori [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 22 May 2002 19:26 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: 3rd party utility to check for mailboxes that are no longer b eing used Except you're not new Mike. You've been asking questions of this caliber for over a year. I'm beginning to believe that you cannot read. -Original Message- From: Mitchell Mike [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, May 21, 2002 4:45 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: 3rd party utility to check for mailboxes that are no longer b eing used You all are my friends here. Thanks... -Original Message- From: John Allhiser [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, 21 May, 2002 4:42 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: 3rd party utility to check for mailboxes that are no longer b eing used A popular (read effective) antivirus for mail servers. Google is your friend here. :^) -Original Message- From: Mitchell Mike [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, May 21, 2002 4:41 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: 3rd party utility to check for mailboxes that are no longer b eing used Yeah really... I am a new administrator and I haven't a clue. Sorry. -Original Message- From: John Allhiser [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, 21 May, 2002 4:38 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: 3rd party utility to check for mailboxes that are no longer b eing used Really? -Original Message- From: Mitchell Mike [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, May 21, 2002 4:39 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: 3rd party utility to check for mailboxes that are no longer b eing used What is Scanmail and what is it used for? Thanks.. -Original Message- From: James Casstevens [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, 20 May, 2002 12:02 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: 3rd party utility to check for mailboxes that are no longer being used Does anyone know of a 3rd party utility that can calculate the mailboxes that are not currently being used. Since we are using Trend Micro's Scanmail, we cannot depend on using the last time a user logs onto his/her mailbox, since Scanmail does so on a regular basis. Any help would be appreciated. James Casstevens. _ List posting FAQ: http://www.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
RE: Products to replicate Exchange data over the wire
Explains why they're making 3000 ignite people redundant. -Original Message- From: Martin Blackstone [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 21 May 2002 14:10 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Products to replicate Exchange data over the wire Huh? -Original Message- From: Louis Joyce [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, May 21, 2002 5:55 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Products to replicate Exchange data over the wire Exchange 2K :) Regards Mr Louis Joyce Data Support Specialist BT Ignite eSolutions -Original Message- From: wade robinson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 21 May 2002 12:31 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Products to replicate Exchange data over the wire I am looking for a product that is able to replicate exchange data from one datacenter over the wire to another location. Is there any products that provided this type of off site replication?? _ List posting FAQ: http://www.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: Products to replicate Exchange data over the wire
And as Martin suggested the answer wasn't the most helpful you've submitted. Mass redundancies are never funny but one must adopt a positive stance in the face of adversity. Now, about that solution for Wade, what do you think.. -Original Message- From: Louis Joyce [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 21 May 2002 14:54 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Products to replicate Exchange data over the wire Doesn't really explain anything Mark. 3000 of my colleagues losing their jobs isn't really a comical subject. Regards Mr Louis Joyce Data Support Specialist BT Ignite eSolutions -Original Message- From: Mark Arnold () [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 21 May 2002 14:39 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Products to replicate Exchange data over the wire Explains why they're making 3000 ignite people redundant. -Original Message- From: Martin Blackstone [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 21 May 2002 14:10 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Products to replicate Exchange data over the wire Huh? -Original Message- From: Louis Joyce [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, May 21, 2002 5:55 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Products to replicate Exchange data over the wire Exchange 2K :) Regards Mr Louis Joyce Data Support Specialist BT Ignite eSolutions -Original Message- From: wade robinson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 21 May 2002 12:31 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Products to replicate Exchange data over the wire I am looking for a product that is able to replicate exchange data from one datacenter over the wire to another location. Is there any products that provided this type of off site replication?? _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Products to replicate Exchange data over the wire (a solution ?)
http://www.amtsoft.com/geocluster/ Geocluster will replicate Exchange data to alternative data centres and is supported by MS subject to being on the relevant HCLs and other key parameters. -Original Message- From: Mark Arnold () Sent: 21 May 2002 14:59 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Products to replicate Exchange data over the wire And as Martin suggested the answer wasn't the most helpful you've submitted. Mass redundancies are never funny but one must adopt a positive stance in the face of adversity. Now, about that solution for Wade, what do you think.. -Original Message- From: Louis Joyce [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 21 May 2002 14:54 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Products to replicate Exchange data over the wire Doesn't really explain anything Mark. 3000 of my colleagues losing their jobs isn't really a comical subject. Regards Mr Louis Joyce Data Support Specialist BT Ignite eSolutions -Original Message- From: Mark Arnold () [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 21 May 2002 14:39 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Products to replicate Exchange data over the wire Explains why they're making 3000 ignite people redundant. -Original Message- From: Martin Blackstone [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 21 May 2002 14:10 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Products to replicate Exchange data over the wire Huh? -Original Message- From: Louis Joyce [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, May 21, 2002 5:55 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Products to replicate Exchange data over the wire Exchange 2K :) Regards Mr Louis Joyce Data Support Specialist BT Ignite eSolutions -Original Message- From: wade robinson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 21 May 2002 12:31 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Products to replicate Exchange data over the wire I am looking for a product that is able to replicate exchange data from one datacenter over the wire to another location. Is there any products that provided this type of off site replication?? _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Recovering a specific mailbox from backup
Usual option is a Disaster Recovery Restore onto alternative hardware, either by DR restoring the entire box off the production LAN or by hot spare recovery (which I tend to define as a server on the production network with a live DS and blank stores onto which you restore the IS) Once done, then export the mailbox to PST and import it into the newly created mailbox. -Original Message- From: Mustafa Ibrahim [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 21 May 2002 15:20 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Recovering a specific mailbox from backup Hi folks, I need to recover a specific mailbox from backup tapes for exchange 5.5. We are no longer doing brick-level backup. Can anyone offer any advise on this as to how I can recover this particular mailbox without interrupting users on the system. Many thanks. Mustafa Ibrahim _ List posting FAQ: http://www.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: Emails
Sounds a little like you've got an open relay and the messages are being received by your people as spam and also relayed elsewhere. Check your system (IMS / smtp service) for relay -Original Message- From: Farquharson, Andrea [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 20 May 2002 20:09 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Emails Can someone explain to me how a Spam message comes into the company and picks up two of our domain extensions? Example: the Spam message came from [EMAIL PROTECTED] When it was received by one of our employees, the address had changed to [EMAIL PROTECTED]@Day@Hoy (these domains are just an example). How did it pick up the 2 domain extensions and how can I block these types of messages? _ List posting FAQ: http://www.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: Emails
Taught me. Thanks. -Original Message- From: Chris Scharff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 20 May 2002 20:31 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Emails Or not. -Original Message- From: mark arnold [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, May 20, 2002 2:16 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Emails Sounds a little like you've got an open relay and the messages are being received by your people as spam and also relayed elsewhere. Check your system (IMS / smtp service) for relay -Original Message- From: Farquharson, Andrea [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 20 May 2002 20:09 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Emails Can someone explain to me how a Spam message comes into the company and picks up two of our domain extensions? Example: the Spam message came from [EMAIL PROTECTED] When it was received by one of our employees, the address had changed to [EMAIL PROTECTED]@Day@Hoy (these domains are just an example). How did it pick up the 2 domain extensions and how can I block these types of messages? _ List posting FAQ: http://www.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: PSS?
I'm glad this newsgroup goes into its own Public Folder Store. I foresee exponential growth for a little while. -Original Message- From: Woodruff, Michael [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 17 May 2002 16:27 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: PSS? Here it comes! -Original Message- From: Phil [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, May 17, 2002 11:27 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: PSS? I have seen alot of references to this in this list? What is PSS? Phil _ List posting FAQ: http://www.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: MS Mail mjgration
The question came from a person who is employed in the Messaging and Collaborative Services group within the UK central support facility, called the DSMC (Distributed Services Management Cowboys). His job is to support lots of different accounts as witnessed by the fact that he sent the mail from a BP.com and a reply from a flsystems.co.uk account. Over on this side of the pond the 1st and 2nd line support is in place but can be very intransigent and isn't that great. 3rd line support in EDS UK is nigh non existent and no one will fart without a cost centre to book time as. They have taken the leveraged support model to such an extent that nothing works, no one knows who to talk to, where and when. I too am horrified but not in the least bit surprised that an EDSer has had to go to the web to ask this kind of question. None of them in DSMC seem to use TechNet of the online KB for anything. I like working for EDS but Christ, they sure make it difficult for you. What makes me laugh is that I know the guy and know that he knows there are two Exchange MVPs working in EDS and who they are, but still he emails the newsgroup to ask a pretty basic question. All this from a group that touts themselves as the last word in messaging for EDS customers. M -Original Message- From: Chris Scharff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 17 May 2002 15:36 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: MS Mail mjgration I don't need to point out how silly that is right? -Original Message- From: Hurst, Paul [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, May 17, 2002 2:31 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: MS Mail mjgration Chris, Not really what happens is that each contract basically has to look after itself and cannot expect 'help' from a central source unless the contract is being held to ransom. Cheers Paul Standards are like toothbrushes, everybody agrees you should have one, but no one wants to use yours -Original Message- From: Chris Scharff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, May 16, 2002 3:57 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: MS Mail mjgration http://www.microsoft.com/exchange/techinfo/interop/MSmail.asp I've got to imagine that EDS has better docs internally on the subject, but here ya go... I don't think Microsoft really updated the MS Mail docs for E2K. -Original Message- From: Caisley, Simon (EDS) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, May 16, 2002 7:00 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: MS Mail mjgration Hi, I'm sure this has been asked before but I can't find on microsoft.com so was hoping someone could send me this direct. I am looking for a document on migrating from MS Mail to Exchange 5.5 and would be grateful if someone has a document or guide of some description they can pass on. _ List posting FAQ: http://www.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: MS Mail migration
Unfortunately for the company it's nothing that hasn't repeatedly been published in the IT press over here and Private Eye (www.private-eye.co.uk) Ad Passim, Ad Nauseam, in recent years. Give it a few more years and we'll be a smooth streamlined business -Original Message- From: John Matteson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 17 May 2002 17:13 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: MS Mail mjgration Do you EDS'ers need to be airing the dirty wash here in public? John Matteson; Exchange Manager Geac Corporate Infrastructure Systems and Standards (404) 239 - 2981 Be who you are and say what you feel because those who matter don't mind, and those who mind don't matter. -Original Message- From: Mark Arnold [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, May 17, 2002 12:02 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Re: MS Mail mjgration The question came from a person who is employed in the Messaging and Collaborative Services group within the UK central support facility, called the DSMC (Distributed Services Management Cowboys). His job is to support lots of different accounts as witnessed by the fact that he sent the mail from a BP.com and a reply from a flsystems.co.uk account. Over on this side of the pond the 1st and 2nd line support is in place but can be very intransigent and isn't that great. 3rd line support in EDS UK is nigh non existent and no one will fart without a cost centre to book time as. They have taken the leveraged support model to such an extent that nothing works, no one knows who to talk to, where and when. I too am horrified but not in the least bit surprised that an EDSer has had to go to the web to ask this kind of question. None of them in DSMC seem to use TechNet of the online KB for anything. I like working for EDS but Christ, they sure make it difficult for you. What makes me laugh is that I know the guy and know that he knows there are two Exchange MVPs working in EDS and who they are, but still he emails the newsgroup to ask a pretty basic question. All this from a group that touts themselves as the last word in messaging for EDS customers. M -Original Message- From: Chris Scharff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 17 May 2002 15:36 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: MS Mail mjgration I don't need to point out how silly that is right? -Original Message- From: Hurst, Paul [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, May 17, 2002 2:31 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: MS Mail mjgration Chris, Not really what happens is that each contract basically has to look after itself and cannot expect 'help' from a central source unless the contract is being held to ransom. Cheers Paul Standards are like toothbrushes, everybody agrees you should have one, but no one wants to use yours -Original Message- From: Chris Scharff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, May 16, 2002 3:57 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: MS Mail mjgration http://www.microsoft.com/exchange/techinfo/interop/MSmail.asp I've got to imagine that EDS has better docs internally on the subject, but here ya go... I don't think Microsoft really updated the MS Mail docs for E2K. -Original Message- From: Caisley, Simon (EDS) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, May 16, 2002 7:00 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: MS Mail mjgration Hi, I'm sure this has been asked before but I can't find on microsoft.com so was hoping someone could send me this direct. I am looking for a document on migrating from MS Mail to Exchange 5.5 and would be grateful if someone has a document or guide of some description they can pass on. _ List posting FAQ: http://www.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: Mr. Coffee's Office up for grabs on Monday
I was just going to reply with the old swap the 21 and 24 routine until John read the question right and moved only one number. Phew, glad I avoided making a fool of myself and no one found me out. - Original Message - From: Chinnery Paul [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, May 17, 2002 7:48 PM Subject: RE: Mr. Coffee's Office up for grabs on Monday Well, here's an interesting solution my boss sent me: He included the total for the first column (21) to the list of the numbers by moving the '2' to right below the one. This then adds 3 (2+1) to the first column giving a total equal to the second. 2 8 3 1 7 2 1 Paul Chinnery Network Administrator Mem Med Ctr -Original Message- From: Woodruff, Michael [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, May 17, 2002 2:10 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Mr. Coffee's Office up for grabs on Monday RAA! Yeah, I'm stupid. Thanks:-) -Original Message- From: John Allhiser [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, May 17, 2002 2:02 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Mr. Coffee's Office up for grabs on Monday turn the 9 upside down -Original Message- From: Woodruff, Michael [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, May 17, 2002 12:53 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: FW: Mr. Coffee's Office up for grabs on Monday Help would be greatly appreciated. -Original Message- From: Jerig, Tony Sent: Friday, May 17, 2002 1:48 PM To: Burke, Sean; Gilligan, Todd; Coomer, Chris; Weber, Rick; Woodruff, Michael; Shumway, Neal; Rhodes, Kevin; Brown, Ted; Biller, Bradley; Wright, Aaron; Abner, Mary; Hingsbergen, Kathleen Subject: Mr. Coffee's Office up for grabs on Monday I will be out of the office Monday for vacation and Tuesday visiting HPM. Thought I would send out a couple of quizzes to offer up the office while I am out. Here is the first quiz. First person to email me the correct answer gets the office for Monday. I will send a second quiz for Tuesday's lodging. Quiz #1: Both of these columns of numbers add up to different totals. Can you move just one number to make the totals equal? 2 8 3 1 7 21 6 4 5 9 24 Sorry Sean -- I don't think Google will help on this one. T. _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MS Mail migration
It probably does with our lot, but hey, you all gotta know what's really goin' on. Now about the dirt in geac. - Original Message - From: John Matteson [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, May 17, 2002 7:39 PM Subject: RE: MS Mail migration I'd like to, but around here dirt dishing shovels come with pink slips attached. John Matteson; Exchange Manager Geac Corporate Infrastructure Systems and Standards (404) 239 - 2981 Be who you are and say what you feel because those who matter don't mind, and those who mind don't matter. -Original Message- From: Tom Meunier [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, May 17, 2002 12:48 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: MS Mail migration Give us some GEAC dirt, John. You know you want to. -Original Message- From: John Matteson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Posted At: Friday, May 17, 2002 11:46 AM Posted To: MSExchange Mailing List Conversation: MS Mail migration Subject: RE: MS Mail migration Emily_LaTella Oh. Never mind. /Emily_LaTella John Matteson; Exchange Manager Geac Corporate Infrastructure Systems and Standards (404) 239 - 2981 Be who you are and say what you feel because those who matter don't mind, and those who mind don't matter. -Original Message- From: Mark Arnold [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, May 17, 2002 12:36 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Re: MS Mail migration Unfortunately for the company it's nothing that hasn't repeatedly been published in the IT press over here and Private Eye (www.private-eye.co.uk) Ad Passim, Ad Nauseam, in recent years. Give it a few more years and we'll be a smooth streamlined business -Original Message- From: John Matteson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 17 May 2002 17:13 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: MS Mail mjgration Do you EDS'ers need to be airing the dirty wash here in public? John Matteson; Exchange Manager Geac Corporate Infrastructure Systems and Standards (404) 239 - 2981 Be who you are and say what you feel because those who matter don't mind, and those who mind don't matter. _ List posting FAQ: http://www.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: MS Mail mjgration
I'll send them toy your EDS mailbox Simon, if that's OK. They're on TechNet, Articles entitled Migrating from MS Mail for PC Networks Migrating to MS Exchange Server 5.5 from Microsoft Mail Also, TechNet Products Technologies Exchange Server Product Documentation Exchange Server 5.5 Product Documentation Chapter called MIGRATION Mark Arnold MCSE MVP(Exchange) -Original Message- From: Caisley, Simon (EDS) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 16 May 2002 13:00 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: MS Mail mjgration Hi, I'm sure this has been asked before but I can't find on microsoft.com so was hoping someone could send me this direct. I am looking for a document on migrating from MS Mail to Exchange 5.5 and would be grateful if someone has a document or guide of some description they can pass on. Best Regards, Simon Caisley EDS - I.Solutions Core Infrastructure EMEA Messaging Collaborative Services Tel: +44 (0) 191 5874075 Fax: +44 (0) 191 5181304 E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Intranet: http://www.groupware.emea.eds.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]
