Re: winmail.dat

[Mike Carlson]

http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;en-us;Q138053&sd=tech

I have an app called fentun.exe that I use to get the attachment out of the
winmail.dat file when it comes from external. Works pretty slick, but in
your case you don't want to have to send that to everyone.

-Mike Carlson
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.uselessthoughts.com
- Original Message - 
From: "Miller, Robert" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Exchange Discussions" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Tuesday, September 30, 2003 9:16 AM
Subject: winmail.dat


> All,
>
> We are in the process of moving from Exchange 5.5 to Exchange 2000 (SP3,
May
> Post SP3 rollup). We have 3 Regional Hubs to which all outbound SMTP
traffic
> is routed through from downstream offices. My Team is getting numerous
> complaints of external clients receiving the winmail.dat files instead of
> the original attachments (hotmail, aol, etc...). This only happens to our
> senders that are from a downstream office. If we send from one of the Hub
> locations it works perfect every time. I think then we have narrowed it
down
> to the X400 connector, as that is the only difference between sending from
a
> downstream office and a Hub. We have the settings on Exchange 2000
> connectors the same as they were with the 5.5 X400 connectors. Has anyone
> else experienced this?
>
> TIA,
>
> BM
>
> _
> List posting FAQ:   http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
> Web Interface:
http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchange&text_mode=&lang=english
> To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>


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

Re: New Entourage

[Mike Carlson]

I myself don't like the Entourage update for Office X. I don't get anything
more than I did with IMAP it seems. Any public folders that are set to be of
Calendar type or Contact type don't show up correctly.

Is there a list of specific benefits of the update over just using IMAP?

-Mike Carlson
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.uselessthoughts.com

- Original Message - 
From: "Atkinson, Daniel" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Exchange Discussions" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Wednesday, August 06, 2003 3:11 AM
Subject: RE: New Entourage


> I'm thinking about trying out citrix
>
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Holstrom, Don [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Sent: 05 August 2003 19:44
> > To: Exchange Discussions
> > Subject: RE: New Entourage
> >
> >
> > So are OSX Macs therefore doomed to OWA, or is there an alternative?
> >
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Durkee, Peter [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Sent: Tuesday, August 05, 2003 1:44 PM
> > To: Exchange Discussions
> > Subject: RE: New Entourage
> >
> > I think they did away with Outlook because they were in the
> > semi-absurd situation of maintaining three entirely different
> > mail clients for the Mac, none of which made everyone, happy,
> > and two of which weren't OS X native, so they needed major
> > upgrades, and were free. I don't find it at all
> > incomprehensable that they'd concentrate their resources on
> > the product that generates some revenue. As far as
> > Entourage's new Exchange awareness goes, it's about what
> > you'd expect from a point upgrade.
> >
> > -Peter
> >
> >
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Erik Sojka [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Sent: Tuesday, August 05, 2003 10:25
> > To: Exchange Discussions
> > Subject: RE: New Entourage
> >
> >
> > I don't doubt it.  That makes perfect business sense.
> >
> > > -Original Message-
> > > From: Roger Seielstad [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > Sent: Tuesday, August 05, 2003 9:43 AM
> > > To: Exchange Discussions
> > > Subject: RE: New Entourage
> > >
> > >
> > > My personal opinion is that they did away with Outlook for
> > > the Mac because
> > > OS X, especially Jaguar (10.2.x) is the first OS with a
> > > legitimate chance of
> > > displacing Microsoft from their dominance of the desktop.
> > It meets the
> > > requirements of having Microsoft Office (Word/Excel/etc).
> > > Therefore, the
> > > only missing app is a full blown Outlook client. Its
> > > Microsoft's only way to
> > > stop the tide without giving up their entire Mac offering.
> > >
> > > Roger
> > > --
> > > Roger D. Seielstad - MTS MCSE MS-MVP
> > > Sr. Systems Administrator
> > > Inovis Inc.
> > >
> > >
> > > > -Original Message-
> > > > From: Erik Sojka [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > > Sent: Tuesday, August 05, 2003 9:11 AM
> > > > To: Exchange Discussions
> > > > Subject: RE: New Entourage
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > This is more venting than any serious question:
> > > >
> > > > What about MAPI? (Outlook for OfficeX-1)
> > > > What about RPC over HTTP? (I know that would have to be coded
> > > > from scratch)
> > > > You must enable IMAP on your Exchange server?
> > > >
> > > > Why did they get rid of the Outlook product?  Why make an
> > > > organization with
> > > > Macs go through so many hoops?  It's not like they have to
> > > > code from scratch.
> > > > It makes no sense.  The whole idea is to make the products
> > > across both
> > > > platforms the same or mostly the same.  They didn't take Word
> > > > or Excel,
> > > > retool it, take out some important features and call it
> > > > something else, did
> > > > they?  Keerist!!
> > > >
> > > > > -Original Message-
> > > > > From: Chris Scharff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > > > Sent: Monday, August 04, 2003 4:02 PM
> > > > > To: Exchange Discussions
> > > > > Subject: Re: New Entourage
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Depends on how one d

RE: New Entourage

[Mike Carlson]

"..you could have resolved by having someone with a 6th grade education read
you the FM"

What part of "I figured since I was browsing through the recent posts, I
would just ask a simple question and see what others results were before I
went home to try and figure it out. I installed it last night, set up the
account and looked at the public folders. About 10 minutes of time spent so
far" was so difficult to understand? Seemed pretty clear to me, with my 4th
grade edgukashun and all.

I guess I need to read the RTFM for mailing lists so I can find the part that
says:

"Be sure to spend lot's of time and completely read the manual over and over
just to make sure you don't upset anyone named Chris Scharff because he is
really important and doesn't care about things other than the really cool
things he is working on. No quick simple questions allowed!"

"I respond to over 6k posts in various forums on average each year. Only in a
minor subset of them to I recommend people RTFM or STFW. I guess your
egregious and obvious lack of research or effort earned your post a place in
that subset. "

Mr.
Iamreallyreallyimportantandmuststickoutmychesttocompensateforothershortcoming
s seems to have reared it's ugly head again. I am glad you actually keep
track of things like that. I guess everyone needs a hobby. 

It's really funny to see people get personal in a mailing list. It still
baffles me that people have to resort to making personal comments about
people they have never met personally. I guess it must make them feel more
important and in this case that really seems to fit.

"BTW, Footnoting empty air, while humorous, serves only to further
demonstrate the failure of the public schools in the community where you grew
up."

I figured I would put numbers in brackets like you since you are really
really cool and way more important than me.

-Mike
http://www.uselessthoughts.com
[EMAIL PROTECTED] 

-Original Message-
From: Chris Scharff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Wednesday, August 06, 2003 4:38 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: Re: New Entourage

I think your problem extends beyond 4th grade grammar skills to basic reading
comprehension issues. My footnote re: 'not caring' was inference to
troubleshooting my free/busy issue, not the clearly documented calendar and
contact "issues" you could have resolved by having someone with a 6th grade
education read you the FM.

I respond to over 6k posts in various forums on average each year. Only in a
minor subset of them to I recommend people RTFM or STFW. I guess your
egregious and obvious lack of research or effort earned your post a place in
that subset. 

BTW, Footnoting empty air, while humorous, serves only to further demonstrate
the failure of the public schools in the community where you grew up.


> From: "Mike Carlson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Reply-To: "Exchange Discussions" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Date: Wed, 6 Aug 2003 16:11:29 -0500
> To: "Exchange Discussions" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Subject: Re: New Entourage
> 
> [1] I hate grammar Nazi's. This is email, not English class. G37  0V3R 17!!
> 
> [2] I did RTFM. I guess I just didn't get to the part about Public 
> Folders not showing up correctly. I figured since I was browsing 
> through the recent posts, I would just ask a simple question and see 
> what others results were before I went home to try and figure it out. 
> I installed it last night, set up the account and looked at the public 
> folders. About 10 minutes of time spent so far. As far as you being 
> too important, I wasn't referring to the free/busy server issue, I was
referring to this:
> 
>>>> [3] And I don't really care all that much because I'm playing with
> cooler
>>>> Exchange tools for both the PC and Mac at the moment than 
>>>> Entourage,
> which
>>>> at the moment is working 'good enough' for my needs.
> 
> If you don't really care, why even reply?
> 
> [3] If everyone RTFM from front to back before they even installed the 
> app, these lists would be little more than haiku Fridays. I think you 
> need to get off your high horse. If your only worth while response is 
> going to be RTFM, then why bother sending an email?
> 
> -Mike Carlson
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> http://www.uselessthoughts.com
> 
> - Original Message -
> From: "Chris Scharff" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: "Exchange Discussions" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sent: Wednesday, August 06, 2003 3:32 PM
> Subject: Re: New Entourage
> 
> 
>> It's "you're" not "your". And don't blame me for your inability to RTFM.
>> This is indeed a peer support newsgroup

Re: New Entourage

[Mike Carlson]

Do you see the same issues of Calendar or Contact type public folders
looking like IMAP folders and not actual contacts or calendar entries?

-Mike Carlson
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.uselessthoughts.com
- Original Message - 
From: "Chris Scharff" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Exchange Discussions" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Wednesday, August 06, 2003 12:05 PM
Subject: Re: New Entourage


> It works just fine in E2K. The Entourage help files contain quite a bit of
> information, might try reading those for what the expected functionality
is.
>
> > From: "Atkinson, Daniel" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > Reply-To: "Exchange Discussions" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > Date: Wed, 6 Aug 2003 17:18:53 +0100
> > To: "Exchange Discussions" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > Subject: RE: New Entourage
> >
> > Ok, can anyone confirm how it works with E2K?
> >
> > With 5.5 you get what looks like an IMAP connection...
> >
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Martin Blackstone [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Sent: 06 August 2003 16:41
> > To: Exchange Discussions
> > Subject: RE: New Entourage
> >
> > Its designed for E2K or higher
> >
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Durkee, Peter [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Sent: Wednesday, August 06, 2003 8:37 AM
> > To: Exchange Discussions
> > Subject: RE: New Entourage
> >
> > I got the same results you did, using Entourage with an Exchange 5.5
server.
> > Does it maybe work better with 2000?
> >
> > -Peter
> >
> >
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Mike Carlson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Sent: Wednesday, August 06, 2003 5:38
> > To: Exchange Discussions
> > Subject: Re: New Entourage
> >
> >
> > I myself don't like the Entourage update for Office X. I don't get
anything
> > more than I did with IMAP it seems. Any public folders that are set to
be of
> > Calendar type or Contact type don't show up correctly.
> >
> > Is there a list of specific benefits of the update over just using IMAP?
> >
> > -Mike Carlson
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > http://www.uselessthoughts.com
> >
> > - Original Message -
> > From: "Atkinson, Daniel" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > To: "Exchange Discussions" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > Sent: Wednesday, August 06, 2003 3:11 AM
> > Subject: RE: New Entourage
> >
> >
> >> I'm thinking about trying out citrix
> >>
> >>> -Original Message-
> >>> From: Holstrom, Don [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >>> Sent: 05 August 2003 19:44
> >>> To: Exchange Discussions
> >>> Subject: RE: New Entourage
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> So are OSX Macs therefore doomed to OWA, or is there an alternative?
> >>>
> >>> -Original Message-
> >>> From: Durkee, Peter [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >>> Sent: Tuesday, August 05, 2003 1:44 PM
> >>> To: Exchange Discussions
> >>> Subject: RE: New Entourage
> >>>
> >>> I think they did away with Outlook because they were in the
> >>> semi-absurd situation of maintaining three entirely different
> >>> mail clients for the Mac, none of which made everyone, happy,
> >>> and two of which weren't OS X native, so they needed major
> >>> upgrades, and were free. I don't find it at all
> >>> incomprehensable that they'd concentrate their resources on
> >>> the product that generates some revenue. As far as
> >>> Entourage's new Exchange awareness goes, it's about what
> >>> you'd expect from a point upgrade.
> >>>
> >>> -Peter
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> -Original Message-
> >>> From: Erik Sojka [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >>> Sent: Tuesday, August 05, 2003 10:25
> >>> To: Exchange Discussions
> >>> Subject: RE: New Entourage
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> I don't doubt it.  That makes perfect business sense.
> >>>
> >>>> -Original Message-
> >>>> From: Roger Seielstad [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >>>> Sent: Tuesday, August 05, 2003 9:43 AM
> >>>> To: Exchange Discussions
> >>>> Subject: RE: New Entourage
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> My personal opinion is that they did away with Outlook for
> >>

Re: New Entourage

[Mike Carlson]

I am using e2k SP3.

-Mike Carlson
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.uselessthoughts.com

- Original Message - 
From: "Atkinson, Daniel" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Exchange Discussions" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Wednesday, August 06, 2003 11:18 AM
Subject: RE: New Entourage


> Ok, can anyone confirm how it works with E2K?
>
> With 5.5 you get what looks like an IMAP connection...
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Martin Blackstone [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: 06 August 2003 16:41
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: RE: New Entourage
>
> Its designed for E2K or higher
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Durkee, Peter [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Wednesday, August 06, 2003 8:37 AM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: RE: New Entourage
>
> I got the same results you did, using Entourage with an Exchange 5.5
server.
> Does it maybe work better with 2000?
>
> -Peter
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Mike Carlson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Wednesday, August 06, 2003 5:38
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: Re: New Entourage
>
>
> I myself don't like the Entourage update for Office X. I don't get
anything
> more than I did with IMAP it seems. Any public folders that are set to be
of
> Calendar type or Contact type don't show up correctly.
>
> Is there a list of specific benefits of the update over just using IMAP?
>
> -Mike Carlson
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> http://www.uselessthoughts.com
>
> - Original Message - 
> From: "Atkinson, Daniel" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: "Exchange Discussions" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sent: Wednesday, August 06, 2003 3:11 AM
> Subject: RE: New Entourage
>
>
> > I'm thinking about trying out citrix
> >
> > > -Original Message-
> > > From: Holstrom, Don [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > Sent: 05 August 2003 19:44
> > > To: Exchange Discussions
> > > Subject: RE: New Entourage
> > >
> > >
> > > So are OSX Macs therefore doomed to OWA, or is there an alternative?
> > >
> > > -Original Message-
> > > From: Durkee, Peter [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > Sent: Tuesday, August 05, 2003 1:44 PM
> > > To: Exchange Discussions
> > > Subject: RE: New Entourage
> > >
> > > I think they did away with Outlook because they were in the
> > > semi-absurd situation of maintaining three entirely different
> > > mail clients for the Mac, none of which made everyone, happy,
> > > and two of which weren't OS X native, so they needed major
> > > upgrades, and were free. I don't find it at all
> > > incomprehensable that they'd concentrate their resources on
> > > the product that generates some revenue. As far as
> > > Entourage's new Exchange awareness goes, it's about what
> > > you'd expect from a point upgrade.
> > >
> > > -Peter
> > >
> > >
> > > -Original Message-
> > > From: Erik Sojka [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > Sent: Tuesday, August 05, 2003 10:25
> > > To: Exchange Discussions
> > > Subject: RE: New Entourage
> > >
> > >
> > > I don't doubt it.  That makes perfect business sense.
> > >
> > > > -Original Message-
> > > > From: Roger Seielstad [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > > Sent: Tuesday, August 05, 2003 9:43 AM
> > > > To: Exchange Discussions
> > > > Subject: RE: New Entourage
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > My personal opinion is that they did away with Outlook for
> > > > the Mac because
> > > > OS X, especially Jaguar (10.2.x) is the first OS with a
> > > > legitimate chance of
> > > > displacing Microsoft from their dominance of the desktop.
> > > It meets the
> > > > requirements of having Microsoft Office (Word/Excel/etc).
> > > > Therefore, the
> > > > only missing app is a full blown Outlook client. Its
> > > > Microsoft's only way to
> > > > stop the tide without giving up their entire Mac offering.
> > > >
> > > > Roger
> > > > --
> > > > Roger D. Seielstad - MTS MCSE MS-MVP
> > > > Sr. Systems Administrator
> > > > Inovis Inc.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > > -Original Message-
> > > > > From: Er

Re: New Entourage

[Mike Carlson]

[1] I hate grammar Nazi's. This is email, not English class. G37  0V3R 17!!

[2] I did RTFM. I guess I just didn't get to the part about Public Folders
not showing up correctly. I figured since I was browsing through the recent
posts, I would just ask a simple question and see what others results were
before I went home to try and figure it out. I installed it last night, set
up the account and looked at the public folders. About 10 minutes of time
spent so far. As far as you being too important, I wasn't referring to the
free/busy server issue, I was referring to this:

> >> [3] And I don't really care all that much because I'm playing with
cooler
> >> Exchange tools for both the PC and Mac at the moment than Entourage,
which
> >> at the moment is working 'good enough' for my needs.

If you don't really care, why even reply?

[3] If everyone RTFM from front to back before they even installed the app,
these lists would be little more than haiku Fridays. I think you need to get
off your high horse. If your only worth while response is going to be RTFM,
then why bother sending an email?

-Mike Carlson
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.uselessthoughts.com

- Original Message - 
From: "Chris Scharff" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Exchange Discussions" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Wednesday, August 06, 2003 3:32 PM
Subject: Re: New Entourage


> It's "you're" not "your". And don't blame me for your inability to RTFM.
> This is indeed a peer support newsgroup; if you don't like my responses
feel
> free to add me to your killfile. I couldn't care less.
>
> Indicating I don't have time to go troubleshoot free/busy issues on my
> machine is hardly an attempt to blow off about how important I am. I was
> simply pointing out the only unexpected issue I've seen with the Exchange
> update for Entourage. The "issue" you describe seems to be expected
behavior
> based on the help files, but I guess you're too important to read those
and
> need the rest of us to do your work for you.
>
>
> > From: "Mike Carlson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > Reply-To: "Exchange Discussions" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > Date: Wed, 6 Aug 2003 15:08:13 -0500
> > To: "Exchange Discussions" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > Subject: Re: New Entourage
> >
> > Well your a happy guy. Thanks for the great answer there. For a minute I
> > thought this a group to help each other out, not blow off about how
> > important we are.
> >
> > Since I am not at home and not near a Mac with Entourage installed, I
cant
> > really read the help file right now. I figured if you didn't see the
same
> > issue I would dig further, if you didn't see the same issue, I wouldn't
> > worry about it right now.
> >
> > I would figure the appropriate response would be:
> >
> > 1. I don't have any public folders of calendar or contact type so I cant
> > test it
> >
> > OR
> >
> > 2. Yes/No
> >
> > Since you were so helpful, I wont comment on my status of the free/busy
> > server thing either since I have cooler things to play as well.
> >
> > =)
> >
> > -Mike Carlson
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > http://www.uselessthoughts.com
> >
> > - Original Message -
> > From: "Chris Scharff" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > To: "Exchange Discussions" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > Sent: Wednesday, August 06, 2003 2:48 PM
> > Subject: Re: New Entourage
> >
> >
> >> Do I see Have you read the help files yet? The client is working as
I
> >> would expect it to work for me at the moment based on my reading of the
> > help
> >> files. With the exception of the free/busy server which I haven't had
time
> >> to look into.[1]
> >>
> >> [1] Since Macs aren't supported on my network, it has pretty low
> >> priority.[2]
> >> [2] Plus it's my Mac, which puts it even lower on the priority list.[3]
> >> [3] And I don't really care all that much because I'm playing with
cooler
> >> Exchange tools for both the PC and Mac at the moment than Entourage,
which
> >> at the moment is working 'good enough' for my needs.
> >>
> >>> From: "Mike Carlson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >>> Reply-To: "Exchange Discussions" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >>> Date: Wed, 6 Aug 2003 14:24:45 -0500
> >>> To: "Exchange Discussions" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >>> Subject: Re: New Entourag

Re: New Entourage

[Mike Carlson]

Well your a happy guy. Thanks for the great answer there. For a minute I
thought this a group to help each other out, not blow off about how
important we are.

Since I am not at home and not near a Mac with Entourage installed, I cant
really read the help file right now. I figured if you didn't see the same
issue I would dig further, if you didn't see the same issue, I wouldn't
worry about it right now.

I would figure the appropriate response would be:

1. I don't have any public folders of calendar or contact type so I cant
test it

OR

2. Yes/No

Since you were so helpful, I wont comment on my status of the free/busy
server thing either since I have cooler things to play as well.

=)

-Mike Carlson
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.uselessthoughts.com

- Original Message - 
From: "Chris Scharff" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Exchange Discussions" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Wednesday, August 06, 2003 2:48 PM
Subject: Re: New Entourage


> Do I see Have you read the help files yet? The client is working as I
> would expect it to work for me at the moment based on my reading of the
help
> files. With the exception of the free/busy server which I haven't had time
> to look into.[1]
>
> [1] Since Macs aren't supported on my network, it has pretty low
> priority.[2]
> [2] Plus it's my Mac, which puts it even lower on the priority list.[3]
> [3] And I don't really care all that much because I'm playing with cooler
> Exchange tools for both the PC and Mac at the moment than Entourage, which
> at the moment is working 'good enough' for my needs.
>
> > From: "Mike Carlson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > Reply-To: "Exchange Discussions" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > Date: Wed, 6 Aug 2003 14:24:45 -0500
> > To: "Exchange Discussions" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > Subject: Re: New Entourage
> >
> > Do you see the same issues of Calendar or Contact type public folders
> > looking like IMAP folders and not actual contacts or calendar entries?
> >
> > -Mike Carlson
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > http://www.uselessthoughts.com
> > - Original Message -
> > From: "Chris Scharff" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > To: "Exchange Discussions" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > Sent: Wednesday, August 06, 2003 12:05 PM
> > Subject: Re: New Entourage
> >
> >
> >> It works just fine in E2K. The Entourage help files contain quite a bit
of
> >> information, might try reading those for what the expected
functionality
> > is.
> >>
> >>> From: "Atkinson, Daniel" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >>> Reply-To: "Exchange Discussions" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >>> Date: Wed, 6 Aug 2003 17:18:53 +0100
> >>> To: "Exchange Discussions" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >>> Subject: RE: New Entourage
> >>>
> >>> Ok, can anyone confirm how it works with E2K?
> >>>
> >>> With 5.5 you get what looks like an IMAP connection...
> >>>
> >>> -Original Message-
> >>> From: Martin Blackstone [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >>> Sent: 06 August 2003 16:41
> >>> To: Exchange Discussions
> >>> Subject: RE: New Entourage
> >>>
> >>> Its designed for E2K or higher
> >>>
> >>> -Original Message-
> >>> From: Durkee, Peter [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >>> Sent: Wednesday, August 06, 2003 8:37 AM
> >>> To: Exchange Discussions
> >>> Subject: RE: New Entourage
> >>>
> >>> I got the same results you did, using Entourage with an Exchange 5.5
> > server.
> >>> Does it maybe work better with 2000?
> >>>
> >>> -Peter
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> -Original Message-
> >>> From: Mike Carlson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >>> Sent: Wednesday, August 06, 2003 5:38
> >>> To: Exchange Discussions
> >>> Subject: Re: New Entourage
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> I myself don't like the Entourage update for Office X. I don't get
> > anything
> >>> more than I did with IMAP it seems. Any public folders that are set to
> > be of
> >>> Calendar type or Contact type don't show up correctly.
> >>>
> >>> Is there a list of specific benefits of the update over just using
IMAP?
> >>>
> >>> -Mike Carlson
> >>> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >>> http://www.uselessthoughts.com
> >>>
&g

Exchange 2003 with Exchange 2000

[Mike Carlson]

Is there a howto or white paper on setting up an Exchange 2003 as a second
server to an Exchange 2000 server? I was hoping to set it up and move a
couple mailboxes over to it to start playing with it.

Any gotchas or "look out fors" that I should know about?

Thanks,
Mike


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

RE: Mail stuck in SMTP queue

[Mike Carlson]

You would be correct. Mac 2001 does not support HTML or plain text formatted
emails.

-Mike
http://www.uselessthoughts.com
[EMAIL PROTECTED] 

-Original Message-
From: Woodruff, Michael [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: Thursday, January 23, 2003 9:18 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Mail stuck in SMTP queue


I think the Mac Outlook clients can only send RTF.

-Original Message-
From: Couch, Nate [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: Thursday, January 23, 2003 10:09 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Mail stuck in SMTP queue


Do you see any event in the Application log to indicate any issue with the
message?  Any Event ID 290 messages?

If not try having the user send without RTF and see how that effects the
message.

Nate Couch
EDS Messaging

-Original Message-
From: Woodruff, Michael [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Thursday, January 23, 2003 9:03 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: Mail stuck in SMTP queue


Exchange 2k sp3...

Every now and then one of our Mac clents will send an internet message with
an attachment that will get stuck in our SMTP connector to the
internet.   This only happens on Macs and not on Windows based PCs.  It
will stay in the queue until it times out with no NDR or any events logged.
They are using Outlook 2001 for Mac.  Any idea.  They are sending using Rich
Text also.  Thanks.

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

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

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

_
List posting FAQ:   http://www.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: Rules Wizard Issue

[Mike Carlson]

I figured by using the term "software product" that you meant commercial
software. If I could find someone to buy my "Hello World" applications, I
would be a happy man.

Also, I have 15 "move email" rules for various lists and spam filtering in
Outlook 2002 and they work with no problems whatsoever.

-Mike
http://www.uselessthoughts.com
[EMAIL PROTECTED] 

-Original Message-
From: Ed Crowley [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: Monday, January 20, 2003 12:21 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Rules Wizard Issue


I guess I should have qualified that as "commercial software".

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 Roger Seielstad
Sent: Monday, January 20, 2003 3:57 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Rules Wizard Issue


SO you've never managed to completely debug the requsisit "Hello World"
applications you've written in the 15 or so languages you've used? I'm
shocked!

Roger
--
Roger D. Seielstad - MCSE
Sr. Systems Administrator
Inovis - Formerly Harbinger and Extricity
Atlanta, GA


> -Original Message-
> From: Ed Crowley [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Saturday, January 18, 2003 12:23 PM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: RE: Rules Wizard Issue
> 
> 
> In 23-plus years of programming and computer infrastructure experience

> I've never seen a software product that was completely free of bugs.
> Period.
> 
> 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 Scoles, 
> Damian
> Sent: Friday, January 17, 2003 7:58 AM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: RE: Rules Wizard Issue
> 
> 
> Roger,
>   Look back at the previous emails in the discussion and see the
EXACT 
> description of the rules.  The rule is set to move the email.  Not 
> make a copy.  As for it not being a product issue, when have you ever 
> seen a Microsoft product that was not buggy? I've been using 
> Microsoft's products since DOS 2.0  It's a bug as I've said
> before And it's
> definitely not a user issue as I've made dozens of these 
> rules before in
> Outlook 2000 with NO issues.  If you have any more 
> constructive feedback
> I'd like to hear it. Thanks.
> 
> 
> Damian
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: Roger Seielstad [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Friday, January 17, 2003 9:58 AM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: RE: Rules Wizard Issue
> 
> 
> I've got plenty of rules just like the ones you're descibing, in 
> Outlook 2002, that all work fine. Hence, the belief its not the 
> product.
> 
> --
> Roger D. Seielstad - MCSE
> Sr. Systems Administrator
> Inovis - Formerly Harbinger and Extricity
> Atlanta, GA
> 
> 
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Scoles, Damian [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > Sent: Friday, January 17, 2003 9:05 AM
> > To: Exchange Discussions
> > Subject: RE: Rules Wizard Issue
> > 
> > 
> > Roger,
> > I am using the move message, not move a copy of the message.
> Either
> > way, this used to work in Outlook 2000 with no issues.  I
> am assuming
> > that it is a bug in Outlooks 2002 not user error as
> everyone seems to
> > think.  Thanks for the 'help'.
> > 
> > 
> > Damian
> > 
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Roger Seielstad [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > Sent: Friday, January 17, 2003 6:17 AM
> > To: Exchange Discussions
> > Subject: RE: Rules Wizard Issue
> > 
> > 
> > There are two options for rules - move the message or move
> a copy of
> > the message. You're using the latter on the rule that doesn't work
> > 
> > --
> > Roger D. Seielstad - MCSE
> > Sr. Systems Administrator
> > Inovis - Formerly Harbinger and Extricity
> > Atlanta, GA
> > 
> > 
> > > -Original Message-
> > > From: Scoles, Damian [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > > Sent: Thursday, January 16, 2003 2:36 PM
> > > To: Exchange Discussions
> > > Subject: Re: Rules Wizard Issue
> > > 
> > > 
> > > Update to this issue.  I only have two rules for my rules
> wizard to
> > > follow.  One is for this mailing list and the other is
> for another
> > > mailing list.  Both are set the exact same way.  I
> noticed that the
> > > first rule in the list copies the message to the folder but
> > does not
> > > remove it from the Inbox. While the second rule moves the
> > message and
> > > does not leave behind a copy.  It does not matter which
> of the two
> > > rules is first, the patter of the first failing to work properly 
> > > always occurs.  Any ideas?  Or is this a bug with Outlook
> 2002 and
> > > move message rules?  Thanks.
> > > 
> > > Damian
> > > -

RE: VPN breaks Outlook

[Mike Carlson]

Well you will be waiting a while to move to Linux 8 seeing as they are only
on 2.4.19 right now. It will be quite a while before they get to version 8.

-Mike
http://www.uselessthoughts.com
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

> --
> From: Blunt, James H (Jim)
> Reply To: Exchange Discussions
> Sent: Wednesday, October 30, 2002 5:36 PM
> To:   Exchange Discussions
> Subject:  RE: VPN breaks Outlook
> 
> MS is going to force us to go to a .NET/Titanium platform in order to use
> OL11?!
> 
> How freakin' stupid is that?  It's a great marketing strategy, but I can't
> believe that they wouldn't make it backwards compatible with E2k/E5.5.
> Talk
> about continually shooting yourself in the foot with your customers...
> 
> That's it!  I'm done playing!  I'm gonna move our whole organization to one
> Linux 8.0 server running CommuniGate Pro!  Phhhppptt!
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: Andrey Fyodorov [mailto:afyodorov@;innerhost.com] 
> Sent: Wednesday, October 30, 2002 3:22 PM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: RE: VPN breaks Outlook
> 
> 
> I am pretty sure you are correct.
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: Ben Schorr [mailto:bms@;hawaiilawyer.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, October 30, 2002 6:16 PM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: RE: VPN breaks Outlook
> 
> 
> Yes, but I believe it requires Titanium on the server side too.  You can't
> run over HTTP against an Exchange 5.5 Server just because you have OL11.
> 
> Aloha,
> 
> -Ben-
> Ben M. Schorr, MVP-Outlook, CNA, MCPx3
> Director of Information Services
> Damon Key Leong Kupchak Hastert
> http://www.hawaiilawyer.com
> >  
> >  
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Andrey Fyodorov [mailto:afyodorov@;innerhost.com]
> > Sent: Wednesday, October 30, 2002 10:06 AM
> > To: Exchange Discussions
> > 
> > Has it been announced?
> > 
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Chris Scharff [mailto:chris_scharff@;messageone.com]
> > Sent: Wednesday, October 30, 2002 2:59 PM
> > To: Exchange Discussions
> > Subject: RE: VPN breaks Outlook
> > 
> > 
> > Something like MAPI over http as announced for Outlook 11?
> > Maybe, but given the large install base of Outlook 97 still 
> > out there, it would seem that an investment in VPN today 
> > would have reasonable utility over the lifespan of the 
> > hardware used to run it.
> > 
> > > -Original Message-
> > > From: Andrey Fyodorov [mailto:afyodorov@;innerhost.com]
> > > Sent: Wednesday, October 30, 2002 1:53 PM
> > > To: Exchange Discussions
> > > Subject: RE: VPN breaks Outlook
> > > 
> > > 
> > > Hypothetically, if Microsoft came out with new technology
> > that would
> > > make MAPI obsolete (something like front-end/back-end OWA
> > with all the
> > > features of Outlook), would you then toss out the VPN and stop
> > > charging customers for it?
> > > 
> > > I am still hoping that something like this will be
> > available, but then
> > > if I invest in VPN technologies it would be a waste of money.
> > > 
> > > 
> > > -Original Message-
> > > From: Julian Stone [mailto:julian.stone@;netstore.net]
> > > Sent: Wednesday, October 30, 2002 12:36 PM
> > > To: Exchange Discussions
> > > Subject: RE: VPN breaks Outlook
> > > 
> > > 
> > > We also "allow" Mapi across the internet, but with VPN systems for
> > > those customers who are willing to pay for the added security.
> > > 
> > > Some customers have even requested & got non HTTPS OWA
> > access, where
> > > their password is sent in clear text !!
> > > 
> > > Yours,
> > > 
> > > Julian Stone
> > > Exchange 2000 Consultant and Webmaster
> > > 
> > > Sent from Microsoft Exchange 2000 SP3 build 6249.4
> > > 
> > > Netstore - Europe's Leading Application Service Provider
> > > 
> > > Tel:+44 (0) 1344 444349
> > > Mobile: +44 (0) 7710 122 312
> > > Fax:+44 (0) 207 681 1238
> > > Email:  [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > 
> > > LOCATION: http://www.netstore.net/contact/location.htm
> > > HomePage: http://www.netstore.net/
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > -Original Message-
> > > From: Andrey Fyodorov [mailto:afyodorov@;innerhost.com]
> > > Sent: 30 October 2002 17:22 pm
> > > To: Exchange Discussions
> > > Subject: RE: VPN breaks Outlook
> > > 
> > > 
> > > Been like this for 2 years now.
> > > 
> > > Of course I always look for ways to make it better and safer.
> > > 
> > > -Original Message-
> > > From: Chris Scharff [mailto:chris_scharff@;messageone.com]
> > > Sent: Wednesday, October 30, 2002 12:07 PM
> > > To: Exchange Discussions
> > > Subject: RE: VPN breaks Outlook
> > > 
> > > 
> > > When your goal is to sell as many seats as possible @ $9.95
> > each, you
> > > cut corners and customers get what they pay for.
> > > Welcome to the wonderful world of capitalism.
> > > 
> > > > -Original Message-
> > > > From: Ely, Don [mailto:dely@;TripathImaging.com]
> > > > Sent: Wednesday, October 30, 2002 10:44 AM
> > > > To: Exchange Discussions
> > > > Subject: RE: VPN breaks Outlook
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > But as 

RE: Log File

[Mike Carlson]

I do some freelance web and Outlook development on the side at home. I
originally got it with my MSDN subscription but recently bought the Action
Pack which comes with Exchange Enterprise and 5 CALs. 

I only have 5 users at home.

-Mike
http://www.uselessthoughts.com
[EMAIL PROTECTED]


-Original Message-
From: Allison M. Wittstock [mailto:aw@;inubit.com] 
Sent: Wednesday, October 30, 2002 7:02 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: Re: Log File


Hi Mike,

I am just curious -- why did  you choose to buy and run Exchange for your
home 
network?  Do you work from home?  
How many users do you have? :)

AW

On Wednesday 30 October 2002 04:04, you wrote:
> I am only missing a few emails out of a couple of the log files. It is 
> exchange 2000 and it is on my home network so this isn't mission 
> critical which is why I can screw it up and not worry too much about 
> it.
>
> Since Exchange runs the log files every time the store is mounted I 
> was hoping I could just copy them back in and have it apply the emails 
> out of the log files into the IS.
>
> What do you mean by Exmerge the data out? Would I do this against the 
> IS or the log files?
>
> -Mike
> http://www.uselessthoughts.com
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> > --
> > From:   Edgington, Jeff
> > Reply To:   Exchange Discussions
> > Sent:   Tuesday, October 29, 2002 8:46 PM
> > To: Exchange Discussions
> > Subject:RE: Log File
> >
> > Well.. I'm assuming E2K (don't know enough about E55 and eseutil)... 
> > you have a couple questions/problems.
> >
> > 1.  If you have already mounted the store and did not have the tlogs 
> > you copied in the templogs dir... then Andy is correct... too late.  
> > You should have unchecked 'last backup set' during the restore... 
> > let the restore run, then copied the tlogs into that templogs dir 
> > that you specified during the restore... then ran eseutil /cc by 
> > hand.
> >
> > 2.  To check the tlogs (and I _think_ you would have had to have 
> > done this with the tlogs in their original place and with the 
> > original db... but not sure)... eseutil /ml ... I believe.
> >
> > At this point, you could do the following:
> >
> > 1.  restore that backup to an offline exchange server and do the 
> > eseutil /cc there...
> >
> > 2.  exmerge out the data however many days back you want to go.
> >
> > I think that you will find that if in fact you have a bad tlog.. you 
> > will only be able to recover mail up to that point in time...
> >
> > jeff e.
> >
> >
> >
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Andy David [mailto:davida@;vss.com]
> > Sent: Tuesday, October 29, 2002 8:37 PM
> > To: Exchange Discussions
> > Subject: RE: Log File
> >
> >
> > I think if you had restored the week old online? backup then 
> > restarted the services with those log files in place it would have 
> > replayed them on startup. At this late point however, I think its 
> > too late. I'm sleepy ,so someone may need to correct me on this.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Mike Carlson [mailto:domitianx@;domitianx.com]
> > Sent: Tuesday, October 29, 2002 8:51 PM
> > To: Exchange Discussions
> > Subject: Log File
> >
> >
> > A few weeks ago my exchange server wouldn't mount the IS. I found an 
> > article that talked about moving all the log files from the MDBData 
> > folder to a different location which would then let you mount the IS 
> > again. Apparently
> > it
> > was a corrupt log file or something.
> >
> > In the mean time of trying to figure it out I also restored from a 
> > back up tape. which set me back a week or two.
> >
> > My question now is can I take those log files and reapply them to 
> > the current IS to get the messages applied? Do I just copy them back 
> > over one at a time
> > to see if I can find the offending file?
> >
> > Any ideas are appreciated.
> >
> > -Mike
> > http://www.uselessthoughts.com
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >
> > _
> > List posting FAQ:   http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
> > Archives:   http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp
> > To unsubscribe: mailto:leave-exchange@;ls.swynk.com
> > Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >
> > ---

RE: Log File

[Mike Carlson]

I am only missing a few emails out of a couple of the log files. It is
exchange 2000 and it is on my home network so this isn't mission critical
which is why I can screw it up and not worry too much about it.

Since Exchange runs the log files every time the store is mounted I was
hoping I could just copy them back in and have it apply the emails out of the
log files into the IS.

What do you mean by Exmerge the data out? Would I do this against the IS or
the log files?

-Mike
http://www.uselessthoughts.com
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

> --
> From: Edgington, Jeff
> Reply To: Exchange Discussions
> Sent: Tuesday, October 29, 2002 8:46 PM
> To:   Exchange Discussions
> Subject:  RE: Log File
> 
> Well.. I'm assuming E2K (don't know enough about E55 and eseutil)... you
> have a couple questions/problems.
> 
> 1.  If you have already mounted the store and did not have the tlogs you
> copied in the templogs dir... then Andy is correct... too late.  You
> should have unchecked 'last backup set' during the restore... let the
> restore run, then copied the tlogs into that templogs dir that you
> specified during the restore... then ran eseutil /cc by hand.
> 
> 2.  To check the tlogs (and I _think_ you would have had to have done
> this with the tlogs in their original place and with the original db...
> but not sure)... eseutil /ml ... I believe.
> 
> At this point, you could do the following:
> 
> 1.  restore that backup to an offline exchange server and do the eseutil
> /cc there...
> 
> 2.  exmerge out the data however many days back you want to go.
> 
> I think that you will find that if in fact you have a bad tlog.. you
> will only be able to recover mail up to that point in time... 
> 
> jeff e.
> 
> 
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: Andy David [mailto:davida@;vss.com] 
> Sent: Tuesday, October 29, 2002 8:37 PM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: RE: Log File
> 
> 
> I think if you had restored the week old online? backup then restarted
> the
> services with those log files in place it would have replayed them on
> startup. At this late point however, I think its too late.
> I'm sleepy ,so someone may need to correct me on this.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: Mike Carlson [mailto:domitianx@;domitianx.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, October 29, 2002 8:51 PM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: Log File
> 
> 
> A few weeks ago my exchange server wouldn't mount the IS. I found an
> article
> that talked about moving all the log files from the MDBData folder to a
> different location which would then let you mount the IS again.
> Apparently
> it
> was a corrupt log file or something.
> 
> In the mean time of trying to figure it out I also restored from a back
> up
> tape. which set me back a week or two.
> 
> My question now is can I take those log files and reapply them to the
> current
> IS to get the messages applied? Do I just copy them back over one at a
> time
> to see if I can find the offending file?
> 
> Any ideas are appreciated.
> 
> -Mike
> http://www.uselessthoughts.com
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 
> _
> List posting FAQ:   http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
> Archives:   http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp
> To unsubscribe: mailto:leave-exchange@;ls.swynk.com
> Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 
> 
> --
> The information contained in this email message is privileged and
> confidential information intended only for the use of the individual or
> entity to whom it is addressed.  If the reader of this message is not
> the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination,
> distribution or copy of this message is strictly prohibited.  If you
> have received this email in error, please immediately notify Veronis
> Suhler Stevenson by telephone (212)935-4990, fax (212)381-8168, or email
> ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) and delete the message.  Thank you.
> 
> 
> ==
> 
> 
> _
> List posting FAQ:   http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
> Archives:   http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp
> To unsubscribe: mailto:leave-exchange@;ls.swynk.com
> Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 
> _
> List posting FAQ:   http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
> Archives:  

Log File

[Mike Carlson]

A few weeks ago my exchange server wouldn't mount the IS. I found an article
that talked about moving all the log files from the MDBData folder to a
different location which would then let you mount the IS again. Apparently it
was a corrupt log file or something.

In the mean time of trying to figure it out I also restored from a back up
tape. which set me back a week or two.

My question now is can I take those log files and reapply them to the current
IS to get the messages applied? Do I just copy them back over one at a time
to see if I can find the offending file?

Any ideas are appreciated.

-Mike
http://www.uselessthoughts.com
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

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

RE: McAfee GroupShield 5.2

[Mike Carlson]

Here is a MS KB article on it:

http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=KB;EN-US;q319011&;

-Mike

-Original Message-
From: Hansen, Eric [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: Monday, October 07, 2002 11:03 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: McAfee GroupShield 5.2


Elaborate:  I called McAfee about the product once for help with a problem,
they charged us for the help then transferred us.  The next guy that came on
the phone said that the product was no longer supported.  We had tons of
problems with it, service was always stopping, updates we slow coming when
compared to other products, tons of technical problem.  we dumped it.

We are running Symantec no, no problems.
-Original Message-
From: Andrea Coppini [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: Sunday, October 06, 2002 3:42 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: McAfee GroupShield 5.2

Can someone elaborate?  We've been using it for 2 years and never had any
problems.

We're about to renew our subscription (not sure if we did already), as well
as installing the management console (they call it e-policy orchestrator
nowadays..) on a new server If it's so crap, we'll consider switching...



-Original Message-
From: Martin Blackstone [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: 06 October 2002 8:24 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: McAfee GroupShield 5.2


That will eventually change. They you will come back to the good side.

-Original Message-
From: Andrea Coppini [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: Sunday, October 06, 2002 11:02 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: McAfee GroupShield 5.2


We use McAfee throughout...  Never had any problems (apart from constantly
trying to remember if it's called McAffee or McAfee or McAffe)..

-Original Message-
From: Martin Blackstone [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: 05 October 2002 4:26 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: McAfee GroupShield 5.2


Or not...

-Original Message-
From: David N. Precht [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: Saturday, October 05, 2002 7:08 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: McAfee GroupShield 5.2


Or Symantec...

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of William Lefkovics
Sent: Saturday, October 05, 2002 00:11
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: McAfee GroupShield 5.2


or GFI?


-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Andy David
Sent: Friday, October 04, 2002 8:42 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: McAfee GroupShield 5.2


How about Sybari or Trend? 


-Original Message-
From: Mike Carlson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Friday, October 04, 2002 11:34 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: McAfee GroupShield 5.2


HA!

I know, I get grief from people all the time over it, but its my only choice
right now until I can get NAV implemented.

> --
> From: Andy David
> Reply To: Exchange Discussions
> Sent: Friday, October 4, 2002 10:32 PM
> To:   Exchange Discussions
> Subject:  RE: McAfee GroupShield 5.2
> 
> Ah!
> Groupshield!
> I'm melting...
> 
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: Mike Carlson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Friday, October 04, 2002 9:31 PM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: McAfee GroupShield 5.2
> 
> 
> Anyone ever have problems with McAfee GSE 5.2 and it not being able to
open
> the private information store?
> 
> I get the following error in Event Viewer:
> 
> McAfee GroupShield Exchange failed to open private message store.
> 
> Then I also get this error:
> 
> Alert Manager Event Log Alert:
> 
> An internal error occurred in Groupshield - please check the log for
> details.(from  Serial# 3) IP  user SYSTEM
running
> GroupShield 5.20.664.0 odcmd)
> 
> I have defragged the private store and I have uninstalled/reinstalled
GSE
> but
> I cannot figure out why this is happening.
> 
> Any help is appreciated.
> 
> ~!M
> 
> _
> List posting FAQ:   http://www.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

RE: McAfee GroupShield 5.2

[Mike Carlson]

I have NAV corp edition rolling out now, I was kinda hoping to get all my AV
in one place by implementing the NAV For Exchange, but I am open to
suggestions as well.

> --
> From: Andy David
> Reply To: Exchange Discussions
> Sent: Friday, October 4, 2002 10:41 PM
> To:   Exchange Discussions
> Subject:  RE: McAfee GroupShield 5.2
> 
> How about Sybari or Trend? 
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-
> From: Mike Carlson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Friday, October 04, 2002 11:34 PM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: RE: McAfee GroupShield 5.2
> 
> 
> HA!
> 
> I know, I get grief from people all the time over it, but its my only
> choice
> right now until I can get NAV implemented.
> 
> > --
> > From:   Andy David
> > Reply To:   Exchange Discussions
> > Sent:   Friday, October 4, 2002 10:32 PM
> > To: Exchange Discussions
> > Subject:RE: McAfee GroupShield 5.2
> > 
> > Ah!
> > Groupshield! 
> > I'm melting...
> > 
> > 
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Mike Carlson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > Sent: Friday, October 04, 2002 9:31 PM
> > To: Exchange Discussions
> > Subject: McAfee GroupShield 5.2
> > 
> > 
> > Anyone ever have problems with McAfee GSE 5.2 and it not being able to
> open
> > the private information store?
> > 
> > I get the following error in Event Viewer:
> > 
> > McAfee GroupShield Exchange failed to open private message store. 
> > 
> > Then I also get this error:
> > 
> > Alert Manager Event Log Alert: 
> > 
> > An internal error occurred in Groupshield - please check the log for
> > details.(from  Serial# 3) IP  user SYSTEM running
> > GroupShield 5.20.664.0 odcmd) 
> > 
> > I have defragged the private store and I have uninstalled/reinstalled GSE
> > but
> > I cannot figure out why this is happening.
> > 
> > Any help is appreciated.
> > 
> > ~!M
> > 
> > _
> > List posting FAQ:   http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
> > Archives:   http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp
> > To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > 
> >
> ---
> > ---
> > The information contained in this email message is privileged and
> > confidential information intended only for the use of the individual or
> > entity to whom it is addressed.  If the reader of this message is not the
> > intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination,
> > distribution or copy of this message is strictly prohibited.  If you have
> > received this email in error, please immediately notify Veronis Suhler
> > Stevenson by telephone (212)935-4990, fax (212)381-8168, or email
> > ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) and delete the message.  Thank you.
> > 
> >
> ===
> > ===
> > 
> > 
> > _
> > List posting FAQ:   http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
> > Archives:   http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp
> > To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > 
> > 
> 
> _
> List posting FAQ:   http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
> Archives:   http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp
> To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 
> ---
> ---
> The information contained in this email message is privileged and
> confidential information intended only for the use of the individual or
> entity to whom it is addressed.  If the reader of this message is not the
> intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination,
> distribution or copy of this message is strictly prohibited.  If you have
> received this email in error, please immediately notify Veronis Suhler
> Stevenson by telephone (212)935-4990, fax (212)381-8168, or email
> ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) and delete the message.  Thank you.
> 
> ===
> ===
> 
> 
> _
> List posting FAQ:   http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
> Archives:   http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp
> To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 
> 

_
List posting FAQ:   http://www.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: McAfee GroupShield 5.2

[Mike Carlson]

HA!

I know, I get grief from people all the time over it, but its my only choice
right now until I can get NAV implemented.

> --
> From: Andy David
> Reply To: Exchange Discussions
> Sent: Friday, October 4, 2002 10:32 PM
> To:   Exchange Discussions
> Subject:  RE: McAfee GroupShield 5.2
> 
> Ah!
> Groupshield! 
> I'm melting...
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-
> From: Mike Carlson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Friday, October 04, 2002 9:31 PM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: McAfee GroupShield 5.2
> 
> 
> Anyone ever have problems with McAfee GSE 5.2 and it not being able to open
> the private information store?
> 
> I get the following error in Event Viewer:
> 
> McAfee GroupShield Exchange failed to open private message store. 
> 
> Then I also get this error:
> 
> Alert Manager Event Log Alert: 
> 
> An internal error occurred in Groupshield - please check the log for
> details.(from  Serial# 3) IP  user SYSTEM running
> GroupShield 5.20.664.0 odcmd) 
> 
> I have defragged the private store and I have uninstalled/reinstalled GSE
> but
> I cannot figure out why this is happening.
> 
> Any help is appreciated.
> 
> ~!M
> 
> _
> List posting FAQ:   http://www.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]

McAfee GroupShield 5.2

[Mike Carlson]

Anyone ever have problems with McAfee GSE 5.2 and it not being able to open
the private information store?

I get the following error in Event Viewer:

McAfee GroupShield Exchange failed to open private message store. 

Then I also get this error:

Alert Manager Event Log Alert: 

An internal error occurred in Groupshield - please check the log for
details.(from  Serial# 3) IP  user SYSTEM running
GroupShield 5.20.664.0 odcmd) 

I have defragged the private store and I have uninstalled/reinstalled GSE but
I cannot figure out why this is happening.

Any help is appreciated.

~!M

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

IMAP Contacts

[Mike Carlson]

Is there any way to view the contacts on the exchange server for a user
through IMAP? I tried adding the contacts folder as a subscribed IMAP
folder but that just displayed it as an email folder.

Thanks,
Mike



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

RE: Hardware Question

[Mike Carlson]

Right now there is only 5. It's a home development box. I do some forwarding
for a few small websites I host. Right now I run about 1200 messages a day
through it with me and the family.

I have a extra dual 300 that fell into my lap and I am trying to figure out
if I want to migrate my SQL box or my Exchange box to it.

Mike


-Original Message-
From: William Lefkovics [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: Monday, August 12, 2002 6:27 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Hardware Question


How many users roughly?


-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Mike Carlson
Sent: Monday, August 12, 2002 4:23 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Hardware Question


No its only function is Exchange. It does have McAfee Groupshield installed
though. Client access is OWA and Outlook 2K+2.

Mike

-Original Message-
From: William Lefkovics [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: Monday, August 12, 2002 6:23 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Hardware Question


Will this serve as the gateway as well, with antivirus software, OWA usage,
content management, etc?

Personally, I think both are insufficient on the memory side.  

I have a PII/300 w/ 384MB RAM hosting 12 users with varied connections and it
is maxed.  But it does work fairly well.

Given absolute choice, I'd pick the greater RAM.  

William

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Mike Carlson
Sent: Monday, August 12, 2002 4:13 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: Hardware Question


I am looking for opinions about hardware for E2k.

Would it be better to have a single processor PII 400 w/ 384MB of RAM or a
dual PII 300 with 256MB of RAM? The sever doesn't get a lot us usage but I
want to be better prepared for when the usage increases.

Thanks,
Mike

___



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

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

RE: Hardware Question

[Mike Carlson]

No its only function is Exchange. It does have McAfee Groupshield installed
though. Client access is OWA and Outlook 2K+2.

Mike

-Original Message-
From: William Lefkovics [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: Monday, August 12, 2002 6:23 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Hardware Question


Will this serve as the gateway as well, with antivirus software, OWA usage,
content management, etc?

Personally, I think both are insufficient on the memory side.  

I have a PII/300 w/ 384MB RAM hosting 12 users with varied connections and it
is maxed.  But it does work fairly well.

Given absolute choice, I'd pick the greater RAM.  

William

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Mike Carlson
Sent: Monday, August 12, 2002 4:13 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: Hardware Question


I am looking for opinions about hardware for E2k.

Would it be better to have a single processor PII 400 w/ 384MB of RAM or a
dual PII 300 with 256MB of RAM? The sever doesn't get a lot us usage but I
want to be better prepared for when the usage increases.

Thanks,
Mike

___


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

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

RE: Hardware Question

[Mike Carlson]

So the dually would be a better option for Exchange or just max out the PII
400 with as much  RAM as it will hold?

-Original Message-
From: William Lefkovics [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: Monday, August 12, 2002 6:31 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Hardware Question


Oh cool.  Then the users will not be expecting perfection.  I'd still go with
as much RAM as possible for the Exchange box.


-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Mike Carlson
Sent: Monday, August 12, 2002 4:27 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Hardware Question


Right now there is only 5. It's a home development box. I do some forwarding
for a few small websites I host. Right now I run about 1200 messages a day
through it with me and the family.

I have a extra dual 300 that fell into my lap and I am trying to figure out
if I want to migrate my SQL box or my Exchange box to it.

Mike


-Original Message-
From: William Lefkovics [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: Monday, August 12, 2002 6:27 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Hardware Question


How many users roughly?


-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Mike Carlson
Sent: Monday, August 12, 2002 4:23 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Hardware Question


No its only function is Exchange. It does have McAfee Groupshield installed
though. Client access is OWA and Outlook 2K+2.

Mike

-Original Message-
From: William Lefkovics [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: Monday, August 12, 2002 6:23 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Hardware Question


Will this serve as the gateway as well, with antivirus software, OWA usage,
content management, etc?

Personally, I think both are insufficient on the memory side.  

I have a PII/300 w/ 384MB RAM hosting 12 users with varied connections and it
is maxed.  But it does work fairly well.

Given absolute choice, I'd pick the greater RAM.  

William

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Mike Carlson
Sent: Monday, August 12, 2002 4:13 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: Hardware Question


I am looking for opinions about hardware for E2k.

Would it be better to have a single processor PII 400 w/ 384MB of RAM or a
dual PII 300 with 256MB of RAM? The sever doesn't get a lot us usage but I
want to be better prepared for when the usage increases.

Thanks,
Mike

___



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

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


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

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

Hardware Question

[Mike Carlson]

I am looking for opinions about hardware for E2k.

Would it be better to have a single processor PII 400 w/ 384MB of RAM  or a
dual PII 300 with 256MB of RAM? The sever doesn't get a lot us usage but I
want to be better prepared for when the usage increases.

Thanks,
Mike

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

SP3 & McAfee Groupshield

[Mike Carlson]

Anyone install SP3 on a E2k server running McAfee GroupShield? Just wondering
if anyone ran into issues? I cannot find anything on McAfee's or MS's site.

Thanks,

****
Mike Carlson

Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
MSN: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
ICQ: 9031460

http://www.uselessthoughts.com
http://www.domitianx.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]

RE: IIS QUESTION

[Mike Carlson]

I was able to change the Logon user for the IIS Admin Service and the WWW
service to my local user and my domain user without a problem.

Mike

-Original Message-
From: kanee [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: Tuesday, June 04, 2002 7:51 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: IIS QUESTION


Because here my quest is not to make logs available to webtrends, I know
webtrends can get the logs from any where. My main objective is to store the
iis logs on a different server than the web server because we are hurting for
disk space. So I was saying if I cannot figure out a way to make iis log
directly to the logfile server I will just let iis write to the local server
and then move the logs to the logfile server nightly using a batch file and
then would point webtrends to the logfile server. thanks

-Original Message-
From: Kevin Lundy [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: Monday, June 03, 2002 3:58 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: IIS QUESTION


DUDE - I did read the whole thread.  What it appears you are trying to
accomplish is getting IIS to log everything to a mapped drive or UNC path -
if your web sites are so high traffic as you claim, you wouldn't want to
incur the network overhead of doing that.  So then YOU SAID, and I quote "I
am thinking of just writing them to the local disk and then copy them to the
logfile server every night with a batch file before the webtrends prog runs
to analyse the logs."  I just pointed out that you don't need to write a
batch file - which if you knew you didn't need to write a batch file, why did
you say you would write a batch file.

Yes, I have ideas.

-Original Message-
From: kanee [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: Monday, June 03, 2002 3:55 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: IIS QUESTION


dude read thw whole message before answering..not trying to be rude.i
know i dont need a batch file for web trends..if you read my entire problem
you would have known what i was trying to accomplish, if you have any ideas
for my problem i will appreciate it.

thx

-Original Message-
From: Kevin Lundy [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Monday, June 03, 2002 3:44 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: IIS QUESTION


Webtrends can simply retrieve the log files, you don't need to write a batch
file.

You might also want to move this discussion over to
http://www.15seconds.com/listserv.htm, an IIS5 list where it is more on
topic.  Also, if this is a public website, I would not have them as member
servers of your internal domain

-Original Message-
From: kanee [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: Monday, June 03, 2002 3:39 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: IIS QUESTION


i cannot take that risk that comes along with the odbc logging i thought
about it, these are highly visible websites in my organisation and a lot of
traffic.

I am thinking of just writing them to the local disk and then copy them to
the logfile server every night with a batch file before the webtrends prog
runs to analyse the logs.

thx

-Original Message-
From: Felicity Smith [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Monday, June 03, 2002 3:38 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: Re: IIS QUESTION


Why can't you log to an ODBC datasource.  This is not as performant as
logging to  a file.

IIS runs under the local system account.  The documentation you are reading
must be incorrect.

A note on IIS Logging.  This is a high performance asynchronous process. So
entries are flushed to disk when processor cycles permit.  ODBC logging will
degrade performance on your server as it is more of a synchronous process and
as such prone to locking.

I suggest you write to disk and then use a perl script to merge the log
files.

--Felicity


> Here is the scenario. i have serverA, serverB and SERVERC(LOG FILE =
> SERVER)
> 
> I need to redirect all the websites log files from serverA and ServerB

> = to serverC.
> 
> In IIS5.0 when you go into the logfile properties and try to change
> the = patch to a mapped drive it clearly says mapped drives and UNC 
> paths are = not supported. But in winNT4.0 it is supported. So i go 
> into the logfile = properties on serverA and serverB and change the 
> logfile path from = %systemroot%\system32\logfiles to 
> f:\logfiles(mapped drive to serverC) = it accepts the path but records

> event id:2 cannot create folder and = cannot write to drive errors. I
> looked it up and the article says that = IIS will write logfiles with 
> the logged on username meaning the account = you use for iisadmin 
> service account and if that account doesnt have = rights on the path 
> it will try and use the system account. When i go to = serverA and 
> serverB and look at the iis admin service it is using the = system 
> account and i am trying to change it to my account but the = options 
> are dimmed out meaning i cannot change the service account from = 
> system to m y user id. I tried this hoping that if i use my user id as

> = the service account then m

RE: Somewhat OT: DNS transer?

[Mike Carlson]

I use ZoneEdit. Its free for up to 5 zones:

http://www.zoneedit.com

Its much easier to use the GraniteCanyon although I havent used Granite
Canyon in a couple years.

Mike

-Original Message-
From: kanee [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: Tuesday, June 04, 2002 7:39 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Somewhat OT: DNS transer?


That's all you need to do.create a zone for your domain name on granitecanyon
and change the SOA for your zone at the place you bought your domain name
from.

Also make sure you make some sort of a donation to granite canyon, it doesn't
matter how much because they provide us with a great service..FREE DNS.

-Original Message-
From: Jeremy Pinquist [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: Tuesday, June 04, 2002 3:16 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: Somewhat OT: DNS transer?


I realize this post is a bit OT, but put it under the heading: minimize
missed mail! we got into a tiff with our webhosting company over the DNS
hostfile, and are thinking about using granitecanyon.  If i want to make the
public nameserver at granitecanyon authoritative, does the previous
authoritative nameserver need to do anything, or do i simply update our
registration info?  The goal here is to keep e-mail flowing the entire time.
Reply offlist to [EMAIL PROTECTED] if you think this is too
off-topic... Thx, Jeremy

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

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

_
List posting FAQ:   http://www.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: Product Support Services - Microsoft Security Bulletin -MS02 -025

[Mike Carlson]

I needed a reboot. It actually failed to stop some services in the beginning
and then failed to start the same services at the end. Rebooting resolved all
the issues and it seems to be running fine.

Mike

-Original Message-
From: Mikael Andersson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: Thursday, May 30, 2002 1:42 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Product Support Services - Microsoft Security Bulletin -MS02
-025


Microsoft have written in their Security Bulletin MS02-25 that no reboot is
needed. Anyone who have succeed to apply the patch with no reboot?


-Original Message-
From: Dan Bartley [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: den 30 maj 2002 02:41
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Product Support Services - Microsoft Security Bulletin -MS02
-025


In my case I did apply to a test server first. I got could not stop
msexchangesa and could not restart iisadmin services. Not a problem, I
stopped the Exchange services manually, it requires a reboot anyway so
restarting at time of install is not important.

I've had similar services stopping and starting issues with every Exchange
patch for E2k. That's why I test first. So far, 4 hours into it, no
performance problems or loss of services on the test box. That's the
important part. If it continues to be ok under load then I will apply it to a
production server, after stopping all services manually first (something I
learned to do as far back as 4.0).

The important part is that I know what to expect when I apply the patch in
production and that makes for a smooth transition and minimum downtime.

Best Regards, 
Dan Bartley

-Original Message-
From: MS Exchange Discussions [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: Wednesday, May 29, 2002 17:30
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Product Support Services - Microsoft Security Bulletin -MS02
-025

Hoooya!

-Original Message-
From: Andy David [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Posted At: Wednesday, May 29, 2002 1:06 PM
Posted To: MS Exchange Discussions
Conversation: Product Support Services - Microsoft Security Bulletin -MS02
-025
Subject: RE: Product Support Services - Microsoft Security Bulletin -MS02
-025


"Customers are advised to review the bulletin and *test* and deploy the patch
in their environments, if applicable"


-Original Message-
From: MS Exchange Discussions [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: Wednesday, May 29, 2002 4:00 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Product Support Services - Microsoft Security Bulletin -
MS02-025


Patch was unable to restart 'msexchangesa' and 'msexchangeis' automatically.
Rebooted and all appears to be fine.  

-Original Message-
From: Ed Crowley [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Posted At: Wednesday, May 29, 2002 12:13 PM
Posted To: MS Exchange Discussions
Conversation: Product Support Services - Microsoft Security Bulletin -
MS02-025
Subject: Product Support Services - Microsoft Security Bulletin - MS02-025


Title: Malformed Mail Attribute can Cause Exchange 2000 to Exhaust CPU
Resources (Q320436)

Date: May 29, 2002

Software: Microsoft Exchange 2000

Impact: Denial of Service

Maximum Severity Rating: Critical

Bulletin: MS02-025

The Microsoft Security Response Center has released Microsoft Security
Bulletin MS02-025

What Is It?

The Microsoft Security Response Center has released Microsoft Security
Bulletin MS02-025 which concerns a vulnerability found in Microsoft Exchange
2000. Customers are advised to review the bulletin and test and deploy the
patch in their environments, if applicable

More information is now available at
http://www.microsoft.com/technet/security/bulletin/MS02-025.asp
 

If you have any questions regarding the patch or its implementation after
reading the above listed bulletin you should contact Product Support Services
in the United States at 1-866-PCSafety (1-866-727-2338). International
customers should contact their local subsidiary.


 Yahoo! Groups Sponsor -~--> Save
30% on Web addresses! Get with the times, get a web site. Share information,
pictures, your hobby, or start a business. Great names are still available-
get yours before someone else does!
http://us.click.yahoo.com/XmK3jA/nFGEAA/sXBHAA/8vOslB/TM
-~->

To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

 

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ 



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

_
List posting FAQ:   http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
Archives:   http://www.swynk.com/sites

RE: OWA and non standard port

[Mike Carlson]

I did break down and call PSS and they confirmed my suspicions.

The code behind OWA that displays the public folders does not specify or look
to see what the port OWA is set to and it defaults to 80 because it is using
HTTP. The fix changes the code so that is looks to see what port OWA is set
to use and uses that port to display the public folders instead of using the
default for HTTP.

I can get to the public folders if I use the direct URL to the public folders
and specify the current port setting. For example, this works fine:

http://my.exchange.com:997/public/

They are sending me the fix. I figured it was something as simple as that.
The KB article I referenced was posted about 2 weeks ago, so the support rep
had to track down the fix and email it to me since it hasn’t been posted in
the normal location yet.


Mike Carlson - DomitianX Designs

Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
MSN: [EMAIL PROTECTED]


-Original Message-
From: Daniel Chenault [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: Thursday, March 14, 2002 11:07 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: Re: OWA and non standard port


OWA uses four ports total:
80 for inbound from the client
three dynamically-chosen (by the Exchange server) ports for communication on
the back-end.

Not sure if this helps since I don't know your configuration.

- Original Message -
From: "Mike Carlson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Exchange Discussions" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Thursday, March 14, 2002 8:32 AM
Subject: OWA and non standard port


> Due to firewall configuration I had to configure OWA to use a port 
> other
than
> 80 and it returns the error:
>
> "Error Unknown -2147467259"
>
> I found this article in th KB:
>
> http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;en-us;Q313932
>
> Does anyone have the fix that article talks about or know of a work
around?
> Everything works fine except I can see the public folders.
>
> Thanks,
> Mike
> .+--x
m ,)捩r(溷
\bí¥½!轶 0 㧑&zǚ䀱r,:.˛
> m隊[hy\z[,牣)r䉄Z Zvh宧+-i٢2쯞G(
>

_
List posting FAQ:   http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
Archives:   http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp
To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
â²Úh²Ø§€P†Ûiÿü0ÂÌ"Ç(›úÞ²‹«qïÞÅÈ_j¨m˜
܆+Þ²m§ÿðÃ0Êy¢oìŠ×¬yªÜ‡ûj·!jÊS¢éì¹»®&ޙ¨¥¶‰^j÷žÅÈZž¥²Ì2žG(˜L\…©àx¸¬µ§fŠyb²Öš)ìÃ)är‰

RE: OWA and non standard port

[Mike Carlson]

I use it for developing Outlook applications. Some of the things I work on
require Exchange.
 
Mike 

-Original Message- 
From: Andy David [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: Thu 3/14/2002 9:38 AM 
To: Exchange Discussions 
Cc: 
Subject: RE: OWA and non standard port



I presume you are testing it for use in the production environment?
This is the BEST time to call PSS, so it will work when you go live
with it.


-Original Message-
From: Mike Carlson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Thursday, March 14, 2002 10:29 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: OWA and non standard port


Its a home test box. It is not production. I didnt really want to
spend an
hour on the phone. If it was a critical business box, I would not
have
posted
to a mail list to get a fix/work around. I would have been on the
phone a
week ago when I moved OWA to a different port and discovered the
problem.

Mike

-Original Message-
From: Matt Monteleone-Haught [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Thu 3/14/2002 9:24 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Cc:
Subject: Re: OWA and non standard port
   
   

Call PSS.  Just like the article says.  If the 'fix' corrects
the
problem,
normally you won't be charged for the call.  Even if you are
charged,
isn't
it worth it?  What other option do you have, just leave the
box
broken?
YMMV
   
--
Matt
- Original Message -
        From: "Mike Carlson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Exchange Discussions" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Thursday, March 14, 2002 9:32 AM
Subject: OWA and non standard port
   
   
> Due to firewall configuration I had to configure OWA to use
a port
other
than
> 80 and it returns the error:
>
> "Error Unknown -2147467259"
>
> I found this article in th KB:
>
>
http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;en-us;Q313932
>
> Does anyone have the fix that article talks about or know
of a
work
around?
> Everything works fine except I can see the public folders.
>
> Thanks,
> Mike
> .+--x
m ,) r(뺷 \ bí¹¨í¶½!  0 & zǚȱr櫬:.˛ m隊[hy \z[, 
)r䉄
ZZvh˧+-i٢2̞G(
   
   

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

.+--x
m ,)r(ື
\檆b=!6 0 ৑&zǚ1r,:.˛
m隊[hy\z[,)rɄZZvh'+-i٢2G(


-
-
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]


ŠËi¢Ëbž
@Bm§ÿðÃ0Šw¢oëzÊ.­Ç¿{!}ª¡¶`+r¯zÈm¶ŸÿÃ
,Ã)är‰¿²+^±æ«rìyªÜ…«)N‹§²æìr¸›zf¢–Ú%y«Þ{!jx–Ë0Êy¢a1r§ââ²Öš)åŠËZvh§³§‘Ê&

RE: OWA and non standard port

[Mike Carlson]

Its a home test box. It is not production. I didnt really want to spend an
hour on the phone. If it was a critical business box, I would not have posted
to a mail list to get a fix/work around. I would have been on the phone a
week ago when I moved OWA to a different port and discovered the problem.
 
Mike

-Original Message- 
From: Matt Monteleone-Haught [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: Thu 3/14/2002 9:24 AM 
To: Exchange Discussions 
Cc: 
Subject: Re: OWA and non standard port



Call PSS.  Just like the article says.  If the 'fix' corrects the
problem,
normally you won't be charged for the call.  Even if you are charged,
isn't
it worth it?  What other option do you have, just leave the box
broken?
YMMV

--
Matt
- Original Message -----
    From: "Mike Carlson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Exchange Discussions" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Thursday, March 14, 2002 9:32 AM
Subject: OWA and non standard port


> Due to firewall configuration I had to configure OWA to use a port
other
than
> 80 and it returns the error:
>
> "Error Unknown -2147467259"
>
> I found this article in th KB:
>
> http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;en-us;Q313932
>
> Does anyone have the fix that article talks about or know of a work
around?
> Everything works fine except I can see the public folders.
>
> Thanks,
> Mike
> .+--x
m ,) r(뺷 \ bí¹¨í¶½!  0 & zǚȱr櫬:.˛ m隊[hy \z[, )r䉄
ZZvh˧+-i٢2̞G(


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


.+-¦‹-Šx
m¶ŸÿÃ,Â)Ür‰¿­ë(º·ýì\…öª†Ù€­Èb½ë!¶Úÿ0³
§‘Ê&þÈ­zǚ­È±æ«r¬¥:.žË›±Êâm隊[h•æ¯yì\…©àz[,Ã)är‰„ÅÈZž‹ŠËZvh§–+-iÙ¢žÌ2žG(

RE: MDAC on Exchange

[Mike Carlson]

The latest version of MDAC doesnt come with any of the JET drivers, you could
try that:
 
http://www.microsoft.com/data/download.htm
 
"MDAC 2.7 RTM does not include Microsoft Jet, the Microsoft Jet OLE DB
Provider, the Desktop Database Drivers ODBC Driver, or the Visual FoxPro ODBC
driver. See Knowledge Base article Q271908 for more information. "
 
Mike

-Original Message- 
From: Schwartz, Jim [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: Thu 3/14/2002 8:57 AM 
To: Exchange Discussions 
Cc: 
Subject: MDAC on Exchange



The monitoring solution that they are pushing here has a requirement
to add
MDAC (v 2.1.2 or higher) to the Exchange (5.5 - SP4) servers in order
for
the agent to work properly. Has anyone else installed MDAC or is
anyone
aware of any information of why this is a bad idea? My largest
concern is
the changes to the JET ODBC driver and driver manager, but I have yet
to
find anything "official" that comes out and states that this is not a
good
idea.

Any thoughts, comments or URL's would be appreciated.





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


â²Úh²Ø§€P†Ûiÿü0ÂÌ"Ç(›úÞ²‹«qïÞÅÈ_j¨m˜
܆+Þ²m§ÿðÃ0Êy¢oìŠ×¬yªÜ‡ûj·!jÊS¢éì¹»®&ޙ¨¥¶‰^j÷žÅÈZž¥²Ì2žG(˜L\…©àx¸¬µ§fŠyb²Öš)ìÃ)är‰

OWA and non standard port

[Mike Carlson]

Due to firewall configuration I had to configure OWA to use a port other than
80 and it returns the error:
 
"Error Unknown -2147467259"
 
I found this article in th KB:
 
http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;en-us;Q313932
 
Does anyone have the fix that article talks about or know of a work around?
Everything works fine except I can see the public folders.
 
Thanks,
Mike
.+-¦‹-Šx
m¶ŸÿÃ,Â)Ür‰¿­ë(º·ýì\…öª†Ù€­Èb½ë!¶Úÿ0³
§‘Ê&þÈ­zǚ­È±æ«r¬¥:.žË›±Êâm隊[h•æ¯yì\…©àz[,Ã)är‰„ÅÈZž‹ŠËZvh§–+-iÙ¢žÌ2žG(

RE: System Manager for XP Pro?

[Mike Carlson]

My understanding is that you need to install the 2K adminpak, install it even
tho it warns about not being compatible. Then install ESM, then install .Net
adminpak.

ESM will not install unless the 2k tools are there. Then the >net tools
should overwrite the 2k tools after you install ESM.

****
Mike Carlson
http://www.domitianx.com
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
  

-Original Message-
From: Lefkovics, William [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: Friday, January 18, 2002 7:25 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: System Manager for XP Pro?


I believe you still get the error, but it will install.

I am certainly open to correction.  

William

-Original Message-
From: Dan Bartley [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Friday, January 18, 2002 5:28 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: System Manager for XP Pro?


Hmm. I installed the adminpak.msi from Windows.NET beta3 on XP Pro and I
still get the "You need to have Windows 2000 Administration Tools" error when
I try to install Exchange2000 ESM. I even did it 3 times.

Am I missing something?

Dan Bartley
[EMAIL PROTECTED]


-Original Message-
From: Andy David [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: Friday, January 18, 2002 20:23
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: System Manager for XP Pro?

Say that three times fast:

Deploy the adminpak.msi from Windows.net beta3 on XP Pro, then install the
Exchange2000 ESM Deploy the adminpak.msi from Windows.net beta3 on XP Pro,
then install the Exchange2000 ESM Deploy the adminpak.msi from Windows.net
beta3 on XP Pro, then install the Exchange2000 ESM



-Original Message-
From: Lefkovics, William [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Friday, January 18, 2002 8:18 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: System Manager for XP Pro?


I believe this is currently unsupported.

Some people have successfully deployed the adminpak.msi from Windows.net
beta3 on XP Pro, then installed the Exchange2000 ESM, but this is also not
supported.

William Lefkovics, MCSE, A+

-Original Message-
From: Fred W. Macondray Jr. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Friday, January 18, 2002 2:58 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: System Manager for XP Pro?


Hi All,

Anyone know if there is a version of Exchange Manager for Windows XP
Professional?

I tried doing the install from the Exchange 2000 CD but it warns of needing
the Windows 2000 Support Tools.

I do have the Admin Tools for XP installed, but obviously that's not enough.

Thanks,
Fred

Fred Macondray
Systems Administrator
Virtual Purchase Card, Inc.
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]

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


--
The information contained in this email message is privileged and
confidential information intended only for the use of the individual or
entity to whom it is addressed.  If the reader of this message is not the
intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination,
distribution or copy of this message is strictly prohibited.  If you have
received this email in error, please immediately notify Veronis Suhler
Stevenson by telephone (212)935-4990, fax (212)381-8168, or email
([EMAIL PROTECTED]) and delete the message.  Thank you.


==


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

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

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

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

Chat

[Mike Carlson]

Is there a way in ESM to see any chat rooms that were created on the fly? I
only see the ones I created using ESM, but I cannot see any rooms that were
create using /join to a room that doesn't exists yet.

Thanks,


Mike Carlson
http://www.domitianx.com
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
 

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

Question

[Mike Carlson]

Is it possible to create a custom read receipt?

Thanks,


Mike Carlson
http://www.domitianx.com
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
 

_
List posting FAQ:   http://www.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: You sent a message with obscene wording

[Mike Carlson]

I got the same thing.
 
~!Mike

-Original Message- 
From: MAILsweeper [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: Tue 1/15/2002 9:26 AM 
To: Mike Carlson 
Cc: Postmaster 
Subject: You sent a message with obscene wording



OBSCENE MESSAGE FROM [EMAIL PROTECTED] ON
15-Jan-2002 15:29:23.00 RE RE: Oh crap.  Need to change service
account
password. TO
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

---

Your message entitled

RE: Oh crap.  Need to change service account password.

has been blocked due to obscene or offensive wording.

The message was originally sent to
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

---

This message has been saved for review
Continued abuse of the system may result in action being taken
For more information contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

---
 <>



_
List posting FAQ:   http://www.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: Oh crap. Need to change service account password.

[Mike Carlson]

They cant be educated.
 
I had a manager one time use a phrase, when questioned about his traning in a
particular subject, that nailed it on the head:
 
"I cant read or write, but I can trace like no ones business."
 
I think that phrase fits just about all managers I have ever had.
 
~!Mike

-Original Message- 
From: Hunter, Lori [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: Tue 1/15/2002 9:24 AM 
To: Exchange Discussions 
Cc: 
Subject: RE: Oh crap. Need to change service account password.



I can dig it, but it's part of your job to educate all management
types.  :)

-Original Message-
From: Hansen, Eric [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Tuesday, January 15, 2002 9:14 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Oh crap. Need to change service account password.


I don't use the service account.  But my super knows all the domain
admin
passwords and it was he that gave it out to a bunch of the helpdesk
people.
I have one backup that knows what to do and how to behave, and I have
a
person that creates accounts for me but her rights are trimmed.

Basically this whole problems boils down to the extreme stupidity of
my
supervisor.

-Original Message-
From: Hunter, Lori [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Tuesday, January 15, 2002 7:14 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Oh crap. Need to change service account password.


That's one of the articles.  You didn't say how you are setup though.


One thing that jumps out at me though is that you should never be
using the
service account anyway.  Systems use the service account; people use
logon
accounts that have privileges.

Also you should be training [1] your admins to quit deleting
mailboxes.
Mailboxes should be hidden for an appropriate amount of time before
being
deleted from the Hidden view.

[1] Or beating them with the StIcK, you choose.

-Original Message-
From: Hansen, Eric [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Tuesday, January 15, 2002 9:01 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Oh crap. Need to change service account password.


Would that be q157780?

-Original Message-
From: Hunter, Lori [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Tuesday, January 15, 2002 7:00 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Oh crap. Need to change service account password.


There is a technet whitepaper - get it, read it, read it again.
There could
be many gotchas depending on your Org and site setup. 

-Original Message-
From: Hansen, Eric [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Tuesday, January 15, 2002 8:50 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: Oh crap. Need to change service account password.



You know some days I really like this job, and other days I really
hate it.

Apparently my boss in his infinite wisdom decided it would be wise to
give a
bunch of people that know nothing about Exchange the service account
password.  A result of this was the deletion of several mailboxes and
one
IMS connector.  Needless to say I was nowhere around at the time,
perhaps if
I had been I would have been able to put a stop to this.  So it looks
like I
need to change my service account password and not tell my boss what
it is.

So I'm making a checklist of where the password gets used.  Obviously
all
the MS Exchange services.  Is there any other place where I will need
to
type in the new password?  Any other concerns I should have in doing
this?

Help most appreciated.

Thanks
Eric

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

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

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

RE: High Physical Memory Utilization

[Mike Carlson]

One time. In band camp...


Mike Carlson
http://www.domitianx.com
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
  

-Original Message-
From: Martin Blackstone [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: Friday, January 11, 2002 10:49 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: High Physical Memory Utilization


I once had 1000 users as well. But it was in Egypt. I was running the
messaging system for the pyramid building project. We were running Glyphmail
1.5. Talk about a PITA. My server was made out of solid stone. Someone would
hammer a message into a sheet of sandstone. Then lay it on the server. Then
50 guys would carry the whole server to the recipient. We were supposed to
have 200 guys, but there was a mass killing of the slaves that year and we
had to make due.

Done even get me started on disaster recovery!

-Original Message-
From: Ed Crowley [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: Friday, January 11, 2002 8:24 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: High Physical Memory Utilization


I once had about 1,000 users with a 70GB store running on a dual Pentium Pro
200MHz ProLiant system that had only 256MB RAM.  It worked fine.  We had to
run that way because the box came with missing memory.  We didn't upgrade the
memory (to 768MB) for a few weeks.

Ed Crowley MCSE+Internet MVP kcCC+I
Tech Consultant
Compaq Computer Corporation
Protecting the world from PSTs and Bricked Backups!


-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Don Ely
Sent: Friday, January 11, 2002 6:38 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: High Physical Memory Utilization


Typically, I don't think you have a friggin clue about what you're talking
about.  I've had a 20gb+ store on a box running with 512MB of RAM.  It worked
just fine...

D

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: Thursday, January 10, 2002 1:35 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: High Physical Memory Utilization


Typically if you have a 4 gig priv.edb your Memory Utilization is going to be
around 800-900 Meg.  Obviously this number would fluctuate based on the
numbers of users connected to the system.  The amount of mail moving back and
forth through the database on 4000 users there is no way your running 1 gig
of ram unless your strickly speaking of an smtp relay box.

-Original Message-
From: Milton R Dogg [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Thursday, January 10, 2002 3:19 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: High Physical Memory Utilization


I have 4000 users running off of less then a Gig or ram. And almost a gig
Page file. How many users you planning maintaining?

Milton R Dogg
Of The Dogg Foundation..



-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, January 10, 2002 12:48 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: High Physical Memory Utilization


400 Mailboxes and 1 gig of Ram does not sound right.  Your primary problem is
hardware.

This is my minimum recommendation for your hardware requirements.

Dual Pentium III 550 +
Separate Raid Controller running in Raid 5 config.  (2 partitions
logical) 2 Gig physical memory. 3 Gig Page File on second partition Run
optimizer and move the databases and log files to 2nd partition.


-Original Message-
From: Frazer J Clark [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Thursday, January 10, 2002 11:09 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: High Physical Memory Utilization


One of my colleagues recently reinstalled a 5.5 SP4 Exchange Server on NT4
SP5 (only Exchange was reinstalled) and have noticed that the Physical Memory
Utilization sits at around 99% (prior to the rebuild it was around 60%).  The
server has about 400 mailboxes on it and has 1Gb of physical memory and 1Gb
page file.  It is the same spec as 4 other servers in the site which all sit
at around 60% utilization.  As it is a 24x7 service we offer on our server,
down time is very limited.  Is there any way I can check the performance
optimizer settings without stopping the store? Or are there any other
pointers that anyone can think of I can check?



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

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



_

Do You Yahoo!?

Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com




_
List pos

RE: store.exe

[Mike Carlson]

I run e2k on a PII 400 with 256 MB of Ram and a couple dozen users and I
don't have that problem. I have4t touched the box in weeks and it runs my SQL
server too which gets a good work out. I would check for a rogue application
with a mem leak of some kind before I would throttle Exchange.

I honestly don't think limiting Exchange will solve the problem.

****
Mike Carlson
http://www.domitianx.com
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
  

-Original Message-
From: Roger [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: Thursday, January 10, 2002 8:31 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: store.exe


Hi all
Does anyone know how to restrict the memory allocation used by Exchange
2000?   I have a small site that keeps blowing out its memory.
Wiondows 2000 SBS / Exchange 2000 service pack, IBM netserver with 896 Mb
Ram with 10 users.   The store.exe after 24 hours uses all the available
RAM and will not release it for other applications so all applications are
using the swap file which slows down the server.I would like to
restrict the Information store to 384MB ram and allow the other processes to
use the rest of the available RAM I know that the system is suppose to be
self regulating but I would like
to restrict it.   I have read some of the articles on Technet but they
only talk about restricting the treads and we have tried that but it still
has the same problems. Thanks in advanced

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

_
List posting FAQ:   http://www.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: High Physical Memory Utilization

[Mike Carlson]

And network bandwidth.

You could have a 8x 1.5Ghz machine with 10GB of RAM and if you have a 512K
DSL connection and using RPC over the web, it will hang.

You can run into that problem when you have an improperly configured network
too.


Mike Carlson
http://www.domitianx.com
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
  

-Original Message-
From: missy koslosky [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: Thursday, January 10, 2002 8:23 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: Re: High Physical Memory Utilization


That's not memory causing that, it's sucky RPC.

- Original Message - 
From: "Saul" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Exchange Discussions" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Thursday, January 10, 2002 4:57 PM
Subject: RE: High Physical Memory Utilization


How many, and what speed is your processor on your Exchange Box?  I am
running 1gMhz, with 1g Ram, for about 200 users, and I still get "Requesting
data from the Microsoft Exchange Server"  Share your secret on how you do
that?

Thanks
Saul

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



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

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

[Mike Carlson]

So... Since no one seems to want to share this super secret information on
turning off anonymous LDAP, am I to assume that it is something as simple
like disabling the guest account?

BTW: when I try ldap://server I get an error returned saying that "An error
occurred while performing the search. You computer, your ISP, or the
specified directory service may be disconnected. Check you connections and
try again."

What does that error indicate?

****
Mike Carlson
http://www.domitianx.com
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
  

-Original Message-
From: Jennifer Baker [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: Thursday, January 10, 2002 1:15 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Solicitation


Well the second part was a wild guess, so good.

-Original Message-----
From: Mike Carlson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: Thursday, January 10, 2002 11:13 AM
To: Baker, Jennifer
Subject: RE: Solicitation


I have a firewall. I have no pre windows 2000 anything. Everything is in
native mode. I am asking the question out of curiosity not to fix something.

****
Mike Carlson
http://www.domitianx.com
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
  

-Original Message-
From: Jennifer Baker [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: Thursday, January 10, 2002 1:11 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Solicitation


Buy a cheap firewall. Or remove the everyone group from pre-windows 2000
compatibility group which will break your pre-w2k clients.

-Original Message-----
From: Mike Carlson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: Thursday, January 10, 2002 10:04 AM
To: Baker, Jennifer
Subject: RE: Solicitation


Well then.

How does one turn off anonymous LDAP access in AD?

=p

****
Mike Carlson
http://www.domitianx.com
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
  

-Original Message-
From: Chris Scharff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: Thursday, January 10, 2002 11:49 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Solicitation


E2K isn't an LDAP server. AD on the other hand

Chris
-- 
Chris Scharff
Senior Sales Engineer
MessageOne
If you can't measure, you can't manage! 


> -Original Message-
> From: Mike Carlson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Thursday, January 10, 2002 11:59 AM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: RE: Solicitation
> 
> 
> This may be a real dumb question, but how do disable anonymous LDAP
> access to the Exchange Server? I did not see that option anywhere in 
> E2k.
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> 
> Mike Carlson
> http://www.domitianx.com
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Thursday, January 10, 2002 12:01 PM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: RE: Solicitation
> 
> 
> 
> It would be the exchange server that the LDAP protocol is running on
> that you want to hit. ~
> -K.Borndale
> Network Administrator
> Sybari Software
> 631.630.8569 -direct dial
> 631.439.0689 -fax
> http://www.sybari.com
> "One man's ceiling is another man's floor"
> 
> 
> |+--->
> ||  "Blunt, James H (Jim)"   |
> ||  <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>|
> ||  Sent by: |
> ||  bounce-exchange-148870@ls|
> ||  .swynk.com   |
> ||   |
> ||   |
> ||  01/10/2002 12:44 PM  |
> ||  Please respond to|
> ||  "Exchange Discussions"   |
> ||   |
> |+--->
>  
> >-
> --
> >-
> -|
>   |
> |
>   |  To: "Exchange Discussions" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> |
>   |  cc:
> |
>   |  Subject: RE: Solicitation
> |
>  
> >-
> --
> >-
> -|
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Andy,
> 
> By ldap://yourexchangeserver, I'm assuming you mean the name of your
> OWA server, correct?  Not the name of your BE Exchange server?
> 
> Jim Blunt
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: Andy David [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Thursday, January 10, 2002 5:57 AM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: RE: Solicitation
> 
> 
> Just type :
> ldap://yourexchangeserver in 

RE: Solicitation

[Mike Carlson]

I have a firewall. I have no pre windows 2000 anything. Everything is in
native mode. I am asking the question out of curiosity not to fix something.


Mike Carlson
http://www.domitianx.com
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
  

-Original Message-
From: Jennifer Baker [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: Thursday, January 10, 2002 1:11 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Solicitation


Buy a cheap firewall. Or remove the everyone group from pre-windows 2000
compatibility group which will break your pre-w2k clients.

-Original Message-
From: Mike Carlson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: Thursday, January 10, 2002 10:04 AM
To: Baker, Jennifer
Subject: RE: Solicitation


Well then.

How does one turn off anonymous LDAP access in AD?

=p


Mike Carlson
http://www.domitianx.com
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
  

-Original Message-
From: Chris Scharff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: Thursday, January 10, 2002 11:49 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Solicitation


E2K isn't an LDAP server. AD on the other hand

Chris
-- 
Chris Scharff
Senior Sales Engineer
MessageOne
If you can't measure, you can't manage! 


> -Original Message-
> From: Mike Carlson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Thursday, January 10, 2002 11:59 AM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: RE: Solicitation
> 
> 
> This may be a real dumb question, but how do disable anonymous LDAP 
> access to the Exchange Server? I did not see that option anywhere in 
> E2k.
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> 
> Mike Carlson
> http://www.domitianx.com
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Thursday, January 10, 2002 12:01 PM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: RE: Solicitation
> 
> 
> 
> It would be the exchange server that the LDAP protocol is running on 
> that you want to hit. ~
> -K.Borndale
> Network Administrator
> Sybari Software
> 631.630.8569 -direct dial
> 631.439.0689 -fax
> http://www.sybari.com
> "One man's ceiling is another man's floor"
> 
> 
> |+--->
> ||  "Blunt, James H (Jim)"   |
> ||  <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>|
> ||  Sent by: |
> ||  bounce-exchange-148870@ls|
> ||  .swynk.com   |
> ||   |
> ||   |
> ||  01/10/2002 12:44 PM  |
> ||  Please respond to|
> ||  "Exchange Discussions"   |
> ||   |
> |+--->
>  
> >-
> --
> >-
> -|
>   |
> |
>   |  To: "Exchange Discussions" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> |
>   |  cc:
> |
>   |  Subject: RE: Solicitation
> |
>  
> >-
> --
> >-
> -|
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Andy,
> 
> By ldap://yourexchangeserver, I'm assuming you mean the name of your 
> OWA server, correct?  Not the name of your BE Exchange server?
> 
> Jim Blunt
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: Andy David [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Thursday, January 10, 2002 5:57 AM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: RE: Solicitation
> 
> 
> Just type :
> ldap://yourexchangeserver in your browser...
> 
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: Etts, Russell [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Thursday, January 10, 2002 8:50 AM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: RE: Solicitation
> 
> 
> Hi there
> 
> At the risk of sounding stupid, how do you do this? I would like to 
> know how this is done so I can prevent this on my own network.
> 
> Thanks
> 
> Russell
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: Jennifer Baker [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Wednesday, January 09, 2002 5:55 PM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: RE: Solicitation
> 
> 
> Yikes, I see your whole address book.  No firewall, eh?
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: Hansen, Eric [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Wednesday, January 09, 2002 14:46
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: Solicitation
> 
> 
> Hi
> 
> On a system that is Exchange 5.

RE: Solicitation

[Mike Carlson]

Well then.

How does one turn off anonymous LDAP access in AD?

=p


Mike Carlson
http://www.domitianx.com
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
  

-Original Message-
From: Chris Scharff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: Thursday, January 10, 2002 11:49 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Solicitation


E2K isn't an LDAP server. AD on the other hand

Chris
-- 
Chris Scharff
Senior Sales Engineer
MessageOne
If you can't measure, you can't manage! 


> -Original Message-
> From: Mike Carlson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Thursday, January 10, 2002 11:59 AM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: RE: Solicitation
> 
> 
> This may be a real dumb question, but how do disable
> anonymous LDAP access to the Exchange Server? I did not see 
> that option anywhere in E2k.
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> 
> Mike Carlson
> http://www.domitianx.com
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Thursday, January 10, 2002 12:01 PM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: RE: Solicitation
> 
> 
> 
> It would be the exchange server that the LDAP protocol is
> running on that you want to hit. 
> ~
> -K.Borndale
> Network Administrator
> Sybari Software
> 631.630.8569 -direct dial
> 631.439.0689 -fax
> http://www.sybari.com
> "One man's ceiling is another man's floor"
> 
> 
> |+--->
> ||  "Blunt, James H (Jim)"   |
> ||  <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>|
> ||  Sent by: |
> ||  bounce-exchange-148870@ls|
> ||  .swynk.com   |
> ||   |
> ||   |
> ||  01/10/2002 12:44 PM  |
> ||  Please respond to|
> ||  "Exchange Discussions"   |
> ||   |
> |+--->
>  
> >-
> --
> >-
> -|
>   |
> |
>   |  To: "Exchange Discussions" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> |
>   |  cc:
> |
>   |  Subject: RE: Solicitation
> |
>  
> >-
> --
> >-
> -|
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Andy,
> 
> By ldap://yourexchangeserver, I'm assuming you mean the name
> of your OWA server, correct?  Not the name of your BE Exchange server?
> 
> Jim Blunt
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: Andy David [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Thursday, January 10, 2002 5:57 AM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: RE: Solicitation
> 
> 
> Just type :
> ldap://yourexchangeserver in your browser...
> 
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: Etts, Russell [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Thursday, January 10, 2002 8:50 AM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: RE: Solicitation
> 
> 
> Hi there
> 
> At the risk of sounding stupid, how do you do this? I would
> like to know how this is done so I can prevent this on my own network.
> 
> Thanks
> 
> Russell
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: Jennifer Baker [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Wednesday, January 09, 2002 5:55 PM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: RE: Solicitation
> 
> 
> Yikes, I see your whole address book.  No firewall, eh?
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: Hansen, Eric [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Wednesday, January 09, 2002 14:46
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: Solicitation
> 
> 
> Hi
> 
> On a system that is Exchange 5.5 sp4hot and 2k sp2hot, and
> also relay secure, is there a way for someone to scan my site 
> for all the email addresses?
> 
> In the last 48 hours many many users in the company have seen
> a RASH of solicitaiton emails.  I have blocked the home 
> servers and IP's for most of them but I am concerend how 
> these solicitation agencies got a hold of all these 
> addresses.  Most of these addresses arent things we have 
> published on a web site or anywhere.
> 
> Maybe they got it out of the public access for OWA but that
> would take a lot of work cause OWA limits the number of 
> addresses it will display at a given time.
> 
> Ideas?
> 
> E-
> 
>

RE: Solicitation

[Mike Carlson]

This may be a real dumb question, but how do disable anonymous LDAP access to
the Exchange Server? I did not see that option anywhere in E2k.

Thanks,


Mike Carlson
http://www.domitianx.com
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
  

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: Thursday, January 10, 2002 12:01 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Solicitation



It would be the exchange server that the LDAP protocol is running on that you
want to hit. ~
-K.Borndale
Network Administrator
Sybari Software
631.630.8569 -direct dial
631.439.0689 -fax
http://www.sybari.com
"One man's ceiling is another man's floor"


|+--->
||  "Blunt, James H (Jim)"   |
||  <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>|
||  Sent by: |
||  bounce-exchange-148870@ls|
||  .swynk.com   |
||   |
||   |
||  01/10/2002 12:44 PM  |
||  Please respond to|
||  "Exchange Discussions"   |
||   |
|+--->
 
>
-|
  |
|
  |  To: "Exchange Discussions" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
|
  |  cc:
|
  |  Subject: RE: Solicitation
|
 
>
-|




Andy,

By ldap://yourexchangeserver, I'm assuming you mean the name of your OWA
server, correct?  Not the name of your BE Exchange server?

Jim Blunt

-Original Message-
From: Andy David [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Thursday, January 10, 2002 5:57 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Solicitation


Just type :
ldap://yourexchangeserver in your browser...


-Original Message-
From: Etts, Russell [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Thursday, January 10, 2002 8:50 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Solicitation


Hi there

At the risk of sounding stupid, how do you do this? I would like to know how
this is done so I can prevent this on my own network.

Thanks

Russell

-Original Message-
From: Jennifer Baker [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Wednesday, January 09, 2002 5:55 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Solicitation


Yikes, I see your whole address book.  No firewall, eh?

-Original Message-
From: Hansen, Eric [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Wednesday, January 09, 2002 14:46
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: Solicitation


Hi

On a system that is Exchange 5.5 sp4hot and 2k sp2hot, and also relay secure,
is there a way for someone to scan my site for all the email addresses?

In the last 48 hours many many users in the company have seen a RASH of
solicitaiton emails.  I have blocked the home servers and IP's for most of
them but I am concerend how these solicitation agencies got a hold of all
these addresses.  Most of these addresses arent things we have published on a
web site or anywhere.

Maybe they got it out of the public access for OWA but that would take a lot
of work cause OWA limits the number of addresses it will display at a given
time.

Ideas?

E-

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

__
This message is private or privileged.  If you are not the person for whom
this message is intended, please delete it and notify me immediately, and
please do not copy or send this message to anyone else.



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

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

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

RE: OWA and UTF-8

[Mike Carlson]

No, No, No, No, No.

I did manage to fix the problem using this:

http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;EN-US;Q273615

Apparently this did not come with SP2. I installed the above update and it
seems to be working fine.


Mike Carlson
http://www.domitianx.com
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
 

-Original Message-
From: Ed Crowley [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: Saturday, December 22, 2001 12:58 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: OWA and UTF-8


I asked you some of this earlier and you didn't reply.

1.  Do you have any international languages installed and/or configured on
the OWA server? 2.  Do you have any international languages installed and/or
configured on your client browser? 3.  Do you have a front-end/back-end
configuration? 4.  Do you have any connectors to third-party messaging
systems? 5.  Does your mail go through any other vendors' products, gateways,
pre-processing, post-processing, virus-scanning, or other steps between
Exchange and the Internet?

©2000 Ed Crowley MCSE+Internet MVP kcCC+I®
Protecting the world from PSTs and Bricked Backups!™


-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Mike Carlson
Sent: Friday, December 21, 2001 9:37 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: OWA and UTF-8


I am having a problem with Exchange 2k SP 2 and OWA. Occasionally when I
reply to a message the recipient receives gobbly goop, which looks like it is
encrytped or UTF-8. I am using OWA over SSL.

This only happens with OWA and usually only when I reply.

Example:

> i 0  z+Ё$͕ ȁձѥqͥѕ´ ѡā%@ɕ  M ȁAՉ͡4)! ! ѡ%%L 4(4)]Ё 䁱ЁI   
ѥѥ4(4) ԁ āȁ
ɔ4(4)Qᅹ̰4)44(4($䴴=ɥ5 4(%ɽ)聥! ͽmѼ驥
͠ɝt4(%M ɤ  44(%Qm%M 
 ȹɜ͍
Í¥1
t4(%4(%M  mͅ tIA ͡4($4($4(4(%   ܹ%M͕ ȹɜ4($4($4($ĸЁɕ  ѕɥѼ
ɽ ѡɕ  
4($
Ёɕ  ѕɥѼ
ѕЁ ȁݕ͕  4($̸= ɹ%@Ѽ͕ չѕݕͥѕ̀ ѕѕ٥4(Ĥ4($Ȥ4($иЁɕ   ȁ 
ѥѥ4($4(%)!
ͽ4(%5@9Pа\,ɤ9
ɬA4(%  ͕ͅ ȹɜ   ͽ4(%Iѡ4($4($=ɥ5 4(%ɽ耉5ɱͽ񑽵ѥ
ᑽѥํ4(%Q 
m%M͕ ȹɜ͍ ͥ1 t

íŸ†íµ•



̹4(%M Q聡 ͑䰁Ȁ 4(%M  mͅ tAՉ͡4($4($4(%   ܹ%M͕ ȹɜ4($4($4(%]Ё$ 
Í¥] Í¡
M ȁ
͡4)ȁݕ4(%͕  4($4(%% ɕ䁅她Ѽٔ䁱´ɽѡͅU ͼ$4)4(%ѥݕ ͡´ѡ݅ 
4($4(%Q̰4($4($4(%5ɱͽ4(%
ܹѥํ4(%ѥ
ᑽѥํ4($4($4($4(%eԁɔ ɕѱ Չ͍ɥѼѡ´%M͕ ȹɜ͍ ͥ1 4) 
4(%
͠ɜ4(%Qչ
͍ɥ͕Ѽ4)ٔͅ

ݕ ̹4($4($4($4($4(%eԁɔ ɕѱ Չ͍ɥѼѡ´%M͕ ȹɜ͍ ͥ1 4) 
Ñ¥
ᑽѥํ4(%Qչ ͍ɥ͕Ѽ4)ٔͅ

ݕ
̹4($4(4(
jÙ²ry ! z+Ë¢rֲڞ Ë¢ Nʋ rzǧujy器^jí½‹í±©bݸ:+ 㮛zX(


****
Mike Carlson
http://www.domitianx.com
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Master Of The Spoon People
Keeper Of None
 
.
 rí½¶ zrmyzrÉ Z Zvh˧+-iÙ¢2̞G(


_
List posting FAQ:   http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
Archives:   http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp
To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
ŠËi¢Ëbž
@Bm§ÿðÃ0Šw¢oëzÊ.­Ç¿{!}ª¡¶`+r¯zÈm¶ŸÿÃ
,Ã)är‰¿²+^±æ«rìyªÜ…«)N‹§²æìr¸›zf¢–Ú%y«Þ{!jx–Ë0Êy¢a1r§ââ²Öš)åŠËZvh§³§‘Ê&

OWA and UTF-8

[Mike Carlson]

I am having a problem with Exchange 2k SP 2 and OWA. Occasionally when I reply to a 
message the recipient receives gobbly goop, which looks like it is encrytped or UTF-8. 
I am using OWA over SSL.

This only happens with OWA and usually only when I reply.

Example:

> i 0  z+Ё$͕ ȁձѥqͥѕ́ ѡā%@ɕ  M ȁAՉ͡4)! ! ѡ%%L 4(4)]Ё 䁱ЁI   
ѥѥ4(4) ԁ āȁ
ɔ4(4)Qᅹ̰4)44(4($䴴=ɥ5 4(%ɽ)聥! ͽmѼ驥
͠ɝt4(%M ɤ  44(%Qm%M 
 ȹɜ͍ ͥ1
t4(%4(%M  mͅ tIA ͡4($4($4(4(%   ܹ%M͕ ȹɜ4($4($4($ĸЁɕ  ѕɥѼ
ɽ ѡɕ  
4($ Ёɕ  ѕɥѼ
ѕЁ ȁݕ͕  4($̸= ɹ%@Ѽ͕ չѕݕͥѕ̀ ѕѕ٥4(Ĥ4($Ȥ4($иЁɕ   ȁ 
ѥѥ4($4(%)! ͽ4(%5@9Pа\,ɤ9
ɬA4(%  ͕ͅ ȹɜ   ͽ4(%Iѡ4($4($=ɥ5 4(%ɽ耉5ɱͽ񑽵ѥ
ᑽѥํ4(%Q 
m%M͕ ȹɜ͍ ͥ1 t  
íŸ†íµ•


̹4(%M Q聡 ͑䰁Ȁ 4(%M  mͅ tAՉ͡4($4($4(%   ܹ%M͕ ȹɜ4($4($4(%]Ё$ 
ͥ] ͡ M ȁ
͡4)ȁݕ4(%͕  4($4(%% ɕ䁅她Ѽٔ䁱́ɽѡͅU ͼ$4)4(%ѥݕ ́͡ѡ݅ 
4($4(%Q̰4($4($4(%5ɱͽ4(%
ܹѥํ4(%ѥ
ᑽѥํ4($4($4($4(%eԁɔ ɕѱ Չ͍ɥѼѡ́%M͕ ȹɜ͍ ͥ1 4) 
4(%
͠ɜ4(%Qչ ͍ɥ͕Ѽ4)ٔͅ

ݕ ̹4($4($4($4($4(%eԁɔ ɕѱ Չ͍ɥѼѡ́%M͕ ȹɜ͍ ͥ1 4) 
Ñ¥
ᑽѥํ4(%Qչ ͍ɥ͕Ѽ4)ٔͅ
ݕ
̹4($4(4(
jÙ²ry ! z+Ë¢rֲڞ Ë¢ Nʋ rzǧujy器^jí½‹í±©bݸ:+ 㮛zX(


****
Mike Carlson
http://www.domitianx.com
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Master Of The Spoon People
Keeper Of None
 
â²Úh²Ø§€P†Ûiÿü0ÂÌ"Ç(›úÞ²‹«qïÞÅÈ_j¨m˜
܆+Þ²m§ÿðÃ0Êy¢oìŠ×¬yªÜ‡ûj·!jÊS¢éì¹»®&ޙ¨¥¶‰^j÷žÅÈZž¥²Ì2žG(˜L\…©àx¸¬µ§fŠyb²Öš)ìÃ)är‰

RE: Lotus Notes Problem

[Mike Carlson]

On a side note to this thread, is there doco on the Lotus Notes
connector and the interaction between Exchange 2k and Lotus Notes?

Thanks,


Mike Carlson
http://www.domitianx.com
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
 

-Original Message-
From: Bowles, John L. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: Wednesday, December 19, 2001 3:32 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: Lotus Notes Problem


All,

I have this really weird problem with (I think) our Notes connector.
Ok, we have users in the US and Europe.  WHen we send email to users in
the US they send/receive email just fine.  But if we send them to the
Europe users we get the error message: 

The following recipient(s) could not be reached:
Userslastname, User on 12/19/2001 3:04 PM
The recipient name is not recognized
The MTS-ID of the original message is: c=US;a=
;p=Organization;l=Exchange Server-011219200331Z-12404
MSEXCH:MSExchangeMTA:Site:Exchange Server

Why would I be able to send email to the US and not the Europe users?

Has anyone experienced this problem before?  Please help if you have
seen this or might know what the problem might be.

Thank you,
___
John Bowles
Exchange Administrator
Enterprise Support & Engineering
Celera Genomics
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

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

_
List posting FAQ:   http://www.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: general OoO

[Mike Carlson]

I found this article in the KB but after looking at the date, I assume this fix should 
have been in SP2?
 
http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;EN-US;Q273615
 
~!M

-Original Message- 
From: Joyce, Louis [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: Wed 12/19/2001 10:09 AM 
To: Exchange Discussions 
Cc: 
Subject: RE: general OoO



I remember it was to do with the fact that Unicode(utf-8) was attaching
itself to messages sent via OWA on an E2k server. If you look at the top of
the mail in outlook, its says its in Plain text and UTF-8.

I found an article on it for someone and now i cannot find it again.

Sorry, I am about as much use as boobs on a boar today.

Regards

Mr Louis Joyce
Computer Support Analyst
Network Administrator
BT Ignite eSolutions




-Original Message-
From: Mike Carlson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: 19 December 2001 15:58
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: general OoO


Kim:

I dont have an answer to your question, but I do have one. Are you using OWA
to send this email? If so are you doing so over SSL (https://)?

I noticed the strange characters at the end of your message that I
occasionally get and I am trying to figure out what causes them.

Thanks,
Mike

-Original Message-
From: Kim Schotanus [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Wed 12/19/2001 10:04 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Cc:
Subject: general OoO
   
   

how can I set a return message on the mailserver for EVERY incoming
mail
on the server?  (Exch 2K)
Director's orders, not mine...
I'll unsubscribe to this list for that period ;-)
.+x
 耀)r뺷
Ƚ˶ ёzǭȱr:ޞ˱m[yz[)r቉vh֖+i̞ٞG

.+--x
m ,)ꐧr(康
\檆b☽!㱶 0 집&zǚ㌱r㱬:.˛
m隊[hyꖡ\z[,훌)rɄZZvh+-i٢2穞G(

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


â²Úh²Ø§€P†Ûiÿü0ÂÌ"Ç(›úÞ²‹«qïÞÅÈ_j¨m˜
܆+Þ²m§ÿðÃ0Êy¢oìŠ×¬yªÜ‡ûj·!jÊS¢éì¹»®&ޙ¨¥¶‰^j÷žÅÈZž¥²Ì2žG(˜L\…©àx¸¬µ§fŠyb²Öš)ìÃ)är‰

RE: SSL and Outlook Web Access

[Mike Carlson]

I use on from http://www.freessl.com and the free one works on everything but the 
latest version of Opera.
 
The first year is free or you can pay $99 I believe to just buy one. The $99 version 
supposed to work on just about everything.
 
~!M

-Original Message- 
From: Grewal, Raj [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: Wed 12/19/2001 10:31 AM 
To: Exchange Discussions 
Cc: 
Subject: RE: SSL and Outlook Web Access



Robert,

Do you have an exact product name for the Verisign Certificate that your
company is using??  I am trying to explain what we need from to our vendor,
but they are not understanding.   

Thanks again for your help,

Raj Grewal
MCSE Win2000, MCSE NT 4.0, CNE5, CNA5, CNA4.11, Network+
Senior Network Analyst
Playboy Enterprises, Inc.
(312) 751-8000 Ext. 2084
"We Will Meet Again, I Don't Know Where, I Don't Know Why."



-Original Message-
From: Robert Moore [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Monday, December 17, 2001 11:56 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: SSL and Outlook Web Access


Verisign, $175.

-Original Message-
From: Grewal, Raj [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Monday, December 17, 2001 12:49 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: SSL and Outlook Web Access


Hello,

Right now we have SSL on our Outlook Web Access Server with a CA that I made
in Windows 2000.  There is one issue with it; it is not compatible with the
latest version of IE for the MAC.  Which SSL's do you all use for your
Outlook Web Access Servers???  I know Verisign makes them.  Could you also
give me an idea for price???

Thank You all in Advance,

Raj Grewal
MCSE Win2000, MCSE NT 4.0, CNE5, CNA5, CNA4.11, Network+
Senior Network Analyst
Playboy Enterprises, Inc.
(312) 751-8000
"All of your dreams are made of strawberry-lemonade."


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

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

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


â²Úh²Ø§€P†Ûiÿü0ÂÌ"Ç(›úÞ²‹«qïÞÅÈ_j¨m˜
܆+Þ²m§ÿðÃ0Êy¢oìŠ×¬yªÜ‡ûj·!jÊS¢éì¹»®&ޙ¨¥¶‰^j÷žÅÈZž¥²Ì2žG(˜L\…©àx¸¬µ§fŠyb²Öš)ìÃ)är‰

RE: general OoO

[Mike Carlson]

It doesnt happen very often and I notice it usually only happens with a reply or when 
I paste text into the message window. But it does only happen with OWA. I have never 
had the problem with Outlook. I had one message that was just completely pooched. It 
looked like it was encrypted. That only happened once and it was on a Notes list. I 
jokingly chalked that up to OWA sending email to a Notes server.
 
=)

-Original Message- 
From: Neil Hobson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: Wed 12/19/2001 10:02 AM 
To: Exchange Discussions 
Cc: 
Subject: RE: general OoO



Mike,

We're using Exchange 2000 with OWA over SSL and are getting the same
problem, hence my earlier post in a different thread.  I admit I haven't
looked deeply into it, but I originally thought it was our disclaimer
that was garbled.

Have you tried using different browser versions at all?

Neil

-Original Message-
From: Mike Carlson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Posted At: 19 December 2001 15:58
Posted To: Exchange Mailing List
Conversation: general OoO
Subject: RE: general OoO


Kim:

I dont have an answer to your question, but I do have one. Are you using
OWA to send this email? If so are you doing so over SSL (https://)?

I noticed the strange characters at the end of your message that I
occasionally get and I am trying to figure out what causes them.

Thanks,
Mike

-Original Message-
From: Kim Schotanus [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Wed 12/19/2001 10:04 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Cc:
Subject: general OoO
   
   

how can I set a return message on the mailserver for EVERY
incoming mail
on the server?  (Exch 2K)
Director's orders, not mine...
I'll unsubscribe to this list for that period ;-)
.+x
 耀)r뺷
Ƚ˶ ёzǭȱr:ޞ˱m[yz[)r቉ vh֖+i̞ٞG

.+x
 )r뺷
Ƚ˶ zǭȱr:˱m[yz[)r  vh+i̞ٞG
Nzfj|WhNJr׶&jwu番W   
؉ۖچ+uڲ|퉉쮊*y潮zz\䆆y抝מyDZ*z{*۹v&   
zjy捥+wy•꺚вHj†ɼzW}M朠MҊj)גȽjwr.+妦x
 )r뺷
Ƚ˶ 
푑zǭȱr:ޞ˱m瑳[y桴z[)r鉉vh+i̞ٞG

ŠËi¢Ëbž
@Bm§ÿðÃ0Šw¢oëzÊ.­Ç¿{!}ª¡¶`+r¯zÈm¶ŸÿÃ
,Ã)är‰¿²+^±æ«rìyªÜ…«)N‹§²æìr¸›zf¢–Ú%y«Þ{!jx–Ë0Êy¢a1r§ââ²Öš)åŠËZvh§³§‘Ê&

RE: Blocking certain email addresses

[Mike Carlson]

Apparently science has progressed so far that a pill will give you a three inch growth 
on certain appendages.
 
Well maybe not you perse as I believe it only works for the male species.
 
Science is wonderful.

-Original Message- 
From: Hunter, Lori [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: Wed 12/19/2001 10:03 AM 
To: Exchange Discussions 
Cc: 
Subject: RE: Blocking certain email addresses



m
appendage growth pills 

-Original Message-
From: Mike Carlson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Wednesday, December 19, 2001 9:52 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Blocking certain email addresses


How true. I am sure the solitations I get for exciting adult entertainment
and appendage growth pills from [EMAIL PROTECTED] are not legitimate.

=)

-Original Message-
From: Hunter, Lori [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Wed 12/19/2001 9:47 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Cc:
Subject: RE: Blocking certain email addresses
   
   

Sure, but be aware that 99.999% of them are spoofed.  Heck, my 10
and 12
year olds spoofed an smtp mail recently using bored.com.  My husband
freaked, so we told them not to do that anymore.
   
-Original Message-
From: Phil Labonte [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Wednesday, December 19, 2001 7:59 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: Blocking certain email addresses
   
   
Exchange 5.5 SP4, NT4 SP6a
   
I am getting some spam from a particular email address recently and
I wanted
to know where I can block certain email addresses from getting
through the
exchange server.
Can I block email from certain originating email addresses?
   
Thanks.
   
   
   
_
   
Do You Yahoo!?
   
Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.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]
   

.+--x
m ,)r(ື
\檆b=!6 0 ৑&zǚ1r,:.˛
m隊[hy\z[,)rɄZZvh'+-i٢2G(

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


â²Úh²Ø§€P†Ûiÿü0ÂÌ"Ç(›úÞ²‹«qïÞÅÈ_j¨m˜
܆+Þ²m§ÿðÃ0Êy¢oìŠ×¬yªÜ‡ûj·!jÊS¢éì¹»®&ޙ¨¥¶‰^j÷žÅÈZž¥²Ì2žG(˜L\…©àx¸¬µ§fŠyb²Öš)ìÃ)är‰

RE: general OoO test in plain text

[Mike Carlson]

Looks like it.
 
=)

-Original Message- 
From: Kim Schotanus [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: Wed 12/19/2001 10:14 AM 
To: Exchange Discussions 
Cc: 
Subject: RE: general OoO test in plain text




curious whether it will be there now...
.
rí½¶à³‘zrmyzr8vi 

.+-¦‹-Šx
m¶ŸÿÃ,Â)Ür‰¿­ë(º·ýì\…öª†Ù€­Èb½ë!¶Úÿ0³
§‘Ê&þÈ­zǚ­È±æ«r¬¥:.žË›±Êâm隊[h•æ¯yì\…©àz[,Ã)är‰„ÅÈZž‹ŠËZvh§–+-iÙ¢žÌ2žG(

RE: general OoO

[Mike Carlson]

Kim:
 
I dont have an answer to your question, but I do have one. Are you using OWA to send 
this email? If so are you doing so over SSL (https://)?
 
I noticed the strange characters at the end of your message that I occasionally get 
and I am trying to figure out what causes them.
 
Thanks,
Mike

-Original Message- 
From: Kim Schotanus [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: Wed 12/19/2001 10:04 AM 
To: Exchange Discussions 
Cc: 
Subject: general OoO



how can I set a return message on the mailserver for EVERY incoming mail
on the server?  (Exch 2K)
Director's orders, not mine...
I'll unsubscribe to this list for that period ;-)
.+x
 耀)r뺷
Ƚ˶ ёzǭȱr:ޞ˱m[yz[)r቉vh֖+i̞ٞG 

ŠËi¢Ëbž
@Bm§ÿðÃ0Šw¢oëzÊ.­Ç¿{!}ª¡¶`+r¯zÈm¶ŸÿÃ
,Ã)är‰¿²+^±æ«rìyªÜ…«)N‹§²æìr¸›zf¢–Ú%y«Þ{!jx–Ë0Êy¢a1r§ââ²Öš)åŠËZvh§³§‘Ê&

RE: Blocking certain email addresses

[Mike Carlson]

How true. I am sure the solitations I get for exciting adult entertainment and 
appendage growth pills from [EMAIL PROTECTED] are not legitimate.
 
=)

-Original Message- 
From: Hunter, Lori [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: Wed 12/19/2001 9:47 AM 
To: Exchange Discussions 
Cc: 
Subject: RE: Blocking certain email addresses



Sure, but be aware that 99.999% of them are spoofed.  Heck, my 10 and 12
year olds spoofed an smtp mail recently using bored.com.  My husband
freaked, so we told them not to do that anymore.

-Original Message-
From: Phil Labonte [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Wednesday, December 19, 2001 7:59 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: Blocking certain email addresses


Exchange 5.5 SP4, NT4 SP6a

I am getting some spam from a particular email address recently and I wanted
to know where I can block certain email addresses from getting through the
exchange server.
Can I block email from certain originating email addresses?

Thanks.



_

Do You Yahoo!?

Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.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]


ŠËi¢Ëbž
@Bm§ÿðÃ0Šw¢oëzÊ.­Ç¿{!}ª¡¶`+r¯zÈm¶ŸÿÃ
,Ã)är‰¿²+^±æ«rìyªÜ…«)N‹§²æìr¸›zf¢–Ú%y«Þ{!jx–Ë0Êy¢a1r§ââ²Öš)åŠËZvh§³§‘Ê&

RE: Exchange CALs

[Mike Carlson]

Check out my post about OWA Exchange 2k.
 
I have no sig and I have no virus software running.
 
Mike

-Original Message- 
From: Neil Hobson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: Wed 12/19/2001 2:32 AM 
To: Exchange Discussions 
Cc: Mike Carlson 
Subject: RE: Exchange CALs



My guess is that he's using OWA on Exchange 2000, and the 'crud' is
actually a disclaimer appended by a 3rd party program (possibly Trend
VirusWall).

Mike - how are we doing?

Neil


-Original Message-
From: Benjamin Winzenz [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Posted At: 18 December 2001 19:22
Posted To: Exchange Mailing List
Conversation: Exchange CALs
Subject: RE: Exchange CALs


My guess is that he is using some funky font in his sig that isn't
normally installed.  With of course, Word as his e-mail editor.  How'm I
doing, Mike? Close?

Ben Winzenz, MCSE
Network/Systems Administrator
Peregrine Systems, Inc.


-Original Message-
From: Blunt, James H (Jim) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 1:44 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Exchange CALs

What is that crud in your sig?

-Original Message-
    From: Mike Carlson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 10:38 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: Exchange CALs


How exactly does the Exchange 2000 CALs work? If all my clients will be
using Outlook, will I need to buy CALs for them also or does Outlook
give me the CAL for the user?

Thanks,
Mike
.+--x
m
,)r(캷
\b䀽!ᢶ
0
৑&zǚ1r濬:.˛
m隊[hy
\z[,)rɄZ Zvh'+-i٢2G(

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

_
List posting FAQ:   http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
Archives:   http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp
To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
NxƢj|Whpꊊbr鉉߉ק&jwbקulW奥   +⢢دۚ0憆+uǝ|(ꮊb*'ޱ  
yÖ«z%z\í­­ay톊ڝhgyǬ*㋪z{mݲڟ*,é¹¹"v&   
&zʋjyᤈm+1訨wɕy'嵵-hB&bjɼzWޢ}5M緷M4ȝViu吨$)oz⢢ 犊ib螞
@Bm 
0ꊊwoz.ǿ{!}`+rzm涶 ,)r+^ry܅)Nrzf%y뫫{!jx斖0睷ya1r֝)ŊZvh &

.+-¦‹-Šx
m¶ŸÿÃ,Â)Ür‰¿­ë(º·ýì\…öª†Ù€­Èb½ë!¶Úÿ0³
§‘Ê&þÈ­zǚ­È±æ«r¬¥:.žË›±Êâm隊[h•æ¯yì\…©àz[,Ã)är‰„ÅÈZž‹ŠËZvh§–+-iÙ¢žÌ2žG(

RE: OWA 5.5

[Mike Carlson]

Are there any other magical keystrokes like ALT+K?
 
I have always been frustrated that I dont have an option to search for a contact in my 
contacts, all I ever get is the GAL when I click the To button in OWA, any criteria I 
put in that isnt in the GAL comes back with no records found.
 
Thanks,
Mike

-Original Message- 
From: Soysal, Serdar [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: Tue 12/18/2001 2:54 PM 
To: Exchange Discussions 
Cc: 
Subject: RE: OWA 5.5



There's probably another users that has a similar alias like greene2 or
something.  Just type greene in the To: field and do Alt+K.  You'll probably
be prompted with a dialog that asks you which greene you want.   The only
thing you can do is to either change the alias or have the user keep using
his display name (or SMTP address).

S.

-Original Message-
From: Friese, Casey [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 3:52 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: OWA 5.5


Seems to be OWA day so I'll through a question into the mix.

Exchange 5.5 SP4 on NT 4.0SP6a, IIS 4 on separate NT4 sp6a box.

Problem with OWA recognizing the alias of one user.  User's alias is listed
as greene but OWA will only accept
Green, Edward.  This is the only user that is having the problem.

I've had other user's in his site test their OWA access and they do not have
any problems.  I have made sure that his site sees his alias the same as the
site OWA is installed in does.  I have tested access from the OWA site to
his mailbox and that doesn't like his alias either.

Any help on this would be great.

Thanks,
Casey

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


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


ŠËi¢Ëbž
@Bm§ÿðÃ0Šw¢oëzÊ.­Ç¿{!}ª¡¶`+r¯zÈm¶ŸÿÃ
,Ã)är‰¿²+^±æ«rìyªÜ…«)N‹§²æìr¸›zf¢–Ú%y«Þ{!jx–Ë0Êy¢a1r§ââ²Öš)åŠËZvh§³§‘Ê&

OWA Exchange 2k

[Mike Carlson]

For example, take a look at the end of the email I sent earlier.
 
Mike
 
-Original Message-
 
I have OWA running over SSL and every once in a while when sending a new mail, and 95% 
of the time when replying to an email, I get garbled crap in the message.
I have no problems from Outlook 2002, just OWA.
I have exchange set to only send plain text, I use IE 6 with all the latest patches in 
stalled and both computers I use have Office XP installed.
Any ideas?
Thanks,
Mike
.
rí½¶à³‘zrmyzravi 

ŠËi¢Ëbž
@Bm§ÿðÃ0Šw¢oëzÊ.­Ç¿{!}ª¡¶`+r¯zÈm¶ŸÿÃ
,Ã)är‰¿²+^±æ«rìyªÜ…«)N‹§²æìr¸›zf¢–Ú%y«Þ{!jx–Ë0Êy¢a1r§ââ²Öš)åŠËZvh§³§‘Ê&

RE: Exchange Conferencing Server

[Mike Carlson]

So if I get Exchange conferencing server, I dont get "Exchange" in the 
workgroup/mail/collaboration sense?

Mike

-Original Message- 

From:  Don Ely Subject:  RE: Exchange Conferencing Server   
Conversation:  Exchange Conferencing Server 
Separate beast all together...

D


"The secret to success is - find out where the people are going and get
there first". (Mark Twain)

-Original Message-
From: Mike Carlson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 11:16 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: Exchange Conferencing Server


Is Exchange Conferencing Server a seperate product or a add on for Exchange
2000?

We are looking to implement Exchange Conferencing but we were unsure if it
required a purchase of Exchange 2000 or if when you bought Conferencing
Server it came with a license for Exchange?

Microsofts website states that Exchange 2k standard is $699 (w/o cals) and
conferencing is $3999 (w/o cals).

If we buy Exchange standard at $699 now, but in 6 months want to implement
conferencing, will we have to pay another $3999?

Mike

 
.+-¦‹-Šx
m¶ŸÿÃ,Â)Ür‰¿­ë(º·ýì\…öª†Ù€­Èb½ë!¶Úÿ0³
§‘Ê&þÈ­zǚ­È±æ«r¬¥:.žË›±Êâm隊[h•æ¯yì\…©àz[,Ã)är‰„ÅÈZž‹ŠËZvh§–+-iÙ¢žÌ2žG(

OWA Exchange 2K

[Mike Carlson]

I have OWA running over SSL and every once in a while when sending a new mail, and 95% 
of the time when replying to an email, I get garbled crap in the message.
 
I have no problems from Outlook 2002, just OWA.
 
I have exchange set to only send plain text, I use IE 6 with all the latest patches in 
stalled and both computers I use have Office XP installed.
 
Any ideas?
 
Thanks,
Mike
â²Úh²Ø§€P†Ûiÿü0ÂÌ"Ç(›úÞ²‹«qïÞÅÈ_j¨m˜
܆+Þ²m§ÿðÃ0Êy¢oìŠ×¬yªÜ‡ûj·!jÊS¢éì¹»®&ޙ¨¥¶‰^j÷žÅÈZž¥²Ì2žG(˜L\…©àx¸¬µ§fŠyb²Öš)ìÃ)är‰

Exchange Conferencing Server

[Mike Carlson]

Is Exchange Conferencing Server a seperate product or a add on for Exchange 2000?
 
We are looking to implement Exchange Conferencing but we were unsure if it required a 
purchase of Exchange 2000 or if when you bought Conferencing Server it came with a 
license for Exchange?
 
Microsofts website states that Exchange 2k standard is $699 (w/o cals) and 
conferencing is $3999 (w/o cals).
 
If we buy Exchange standard at $699 now, but in 6 months want to implement 
conferencing, will we have to pay another $3999?
 
Mike
 
.+-¦‹-Šx
m¶ŸÿÃ,Â)Ür‰¿­ë(º·ýì\…öª†Ù€­Èb½ë!¶Úÿ0³
§‘Ê&þÈ­zǚ­È±æ«r¬¥:.žË›±Êâm隊[h•æ¯yì\…©àz[,Ã)är‰„ÅÈZž‹ŠËZvh§–+-iÙ¢žÌ2žG(

RE: Exchange CALs

[Mike Carlson]

If I have bought say 25 copies of Outlook for other reasons, will those work for CALs 
on Exchange?

Mike

-Original Message-

Outlook is essentially free. You get it when you buy Exchange. You need
CALs for Exchange, though.

Rob

-Original Message-
From: Mike Carlson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 1:38 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: Exchange CALs


How exactly does the Exchange 2000 CALs work? If all my clients will be
using Outlook, will I need to buy CALs for them also or does Outlook
give me the CAL for the user?

Thanks,
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

 
ŠËi¢Ëbž
@Bm§ÿðÃ0Šw¢oëzÊ.­Ç¿{!}ª¡¶`+r¯zÈm¶ŸÿÃ
,Ã)är‰¿²+^±æ«rìyªÜ…«)N‹§²æìr¸›zf¢–Ú%y«Þ{!jx–Ë0Êy¢a1r§ââ²Öš)åŠËZvh§³§‘Ê&

Exchange CALs

[Mike Carlson]

How exactly does the Exchange 2000 CALs work? If all my clients will be using Outlook, 
will I need to buy CALs for them also or does Outlook give me the CAL for the user?
 
Thanks,
Mike
â²Úh²Ø§€P†Ûiÿü0ÂÌ"Ç(›úÞ²‹«qïÞÅÈ_j¨m˜
܆+Þ²m§ÿðÃ0Êy¢oìŠ×¬yªÜ‡ûj·!jÊS¢éì¹»®&ޙ¨¥¶‰^j÷žÅÈZž¥²Ì2žG(˜L\…©àx¸¬µ§fŠyb²Öš)ìÃ)är‰

RE: Fax

[Mike Carlson]

Not if Kinkos is about 150 miles away. There is not a Kinkos or any
other shop such as Kinkos for about 3 counties.


Mike Carlson
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.domitianx.com

Master Of The Spoon People
Keeper Of None
 

> -Original Message-
> From: Soysal, Serdar [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
> Sent: Friday, November 16, 2001 3:11 PM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: RE: Fax
> 
> 
> For 7 faxes a year you can walk to a Kinko's.
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: Don Ely [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Thursday, November 15, 2001 2:20 PM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: RE: Fax
> 
> 
> For a whoppin 7 faxes a year, I wouldn't do anything beyond 
> WinFax.  I might even be inclined to use the Symantec Fax 
> program that comes with W2K...
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: Mike Carlson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
> Sent: Thursday, November 15, 2001 11:22 AM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: RE: Fax
> 
> 
> I am not looking for anything fancy. I just want the ability 
> to fax out of Outlook and receive faxes. I get about 2 per 
> year and I send about 5 per year.
>  
> I was hoping to not spend any money if I dont have to. I may 
> have to look to something like WinFax.
> 
>   -Original Message- 
>   From: Dupler, Craig 
>   Sent: Thu 11/15/2001 12:54 PM 
>   To: Exchange Discussions 
>   Cc: 
>   Subject: RE: Fax
>   
>   
> 
>   Oh, one other thing.  If someone on the outside of your 
> company is
>   sophisticated enough to be able to handle supplemental 
> DTMF addressing to
>   cause an inbound fax arriving at your Exchange Server 
> to be properly routed,
>   then that person will have access to a digital route, 
> which basically means
>   that inbound automatic routing can work, but no one is 
> ever going to use it.
>   You can buy the technology, but that does not make it 
> worthwhile. Inbound
>   will have to be manually forwarded.
>   
>   Fax really is an obsolete technology that is probably 
> less useful than an
>   Underwood.
>   
>   -Original Message-
>   From: Dupler, Craig [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
>   Sent: Thursday, November 15, 2001 10:37 AM
>   To: Exchange Discussions
>   Subject: RE: Fax
>   
>   
>   I agree with both EG's (Exchange goddesses)
>   
>   Can Exchange act as a fax server?  Not exactly.  Fax's 
> can be transported by
>   SMTP as a registered MIME type.  This of course makes 
> the server blind to
>   the content, and means that it can be a client issue.  
> However, Exchange
>   Server can also have a FAX service or connector 
> installed.  This enables the
>   server itself to drive a modem or high grade telephony 
> board to either
>   directly send or receive faxes.  Outbound, MAPI clients (i.e.
> Outlook) or
>   OWA clients can send to a fax recipient using ad hoc 
> addressing, once the
>   FAX address type has been created by adding such a 
> service.  Of course,
>   permanent fax addressees can be stored in the AD/GAL or 
> the PAB/CL.
>   Inbound, is a little trickier.  If the inbound fax has some DTMF
>   supplemental addressing that maps (insert magic box 
> here) to an AD/GAL
>   addressee, then the MTA can deliver it.  Alternately, 
> they can be routed to
>   a specific printer, or a specific secretarial addressee 
> for manual
>   forwarding.
>   
>   Several vendors make one of these combination fax 
> connector and magic box
>   servers for Exchange.
>   
>   Microsoft Fax is a client tool.  It is not Exchange 
> Server aware. It's been
>   awhile since I looked at it, but if it can save a 
> document as a fax file,
>   then presumably this could be attached to a mail 
> message and the proper MIME
>   type would get applied. But as the EG's said, this 
> would be lame beyond
>   belief or any human comprehension.  Usually people are 
> interested in
>   transmitting digital data and getting non-digital data 
> into some sort of
>   intelligible format.  To take a perfectly good digital 
> document, then store
>   it as a useless piece of raster junk, and then send it 
> as an SMTP attachment
>   to someone that has some sort of a junky raster-only 
> printer, well, that
>   would be sad.  So it is hard to imagine a scenario in 

RE: Fax

[Mike Carlson]

Symantec Fax program that comes with Win2k? If Win2k comes with Fax
software that can send and receive faxes like a stripped down version of
WinFax, that would be great. The modem is hooked up to a server, it is
not hooked up to the client.

-Original Message- 
From: Don Ely 
Sent: Thu 11/15/2001 1:20 PM 
To: Exchange Discussions 
Cc: 
Subject: RE: Fax



For a whoppin 7 faxes a year, I wouldn't do anything beyond
WinFax.  I might
even be inclined to use the Symantec Fax program that comes with
W2K...

-Original Message-
From: Mike Carlson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Thursday, November 15, 2001 11:22 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Fax


I am not looking for anything fancy. I just want the ability to
fax out of
Outlook and receive faxes. I get about 2 per year and I send
about 5 per
year.

I was hoping to not spend any money if I dont have to. I may
have to look to
something like WinFax.

-Original Message-
From: Dupler, Craig
Sent: Thu 11/15/2001 12:54 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Cc:
Subject: RE: Fax
   
   

Oh, one other thing.  If someone on the outside of your
company is
sophisticated enough to be able to handle supplemental
DTMF
addressing to
cause an inbound fax arriving at your Exchange Server to
be properly
routed,
then that person will have access to a digital route,
which
basically means
that inbound automatic routing can work, but no one is
ever going to
use it.
You can buy the technology, but that does not make it
worthwhile.
Inbound
will have to be manually forwarded.
   
Fax really is an obsolete technology that is probably
less useful
than an
Underwood.
   
-Original Message-
From: Dupler, Craig [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Thursday, November 15, 2001 10:37 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Fax
   
   
I agree with both EG's (Exchange goddesses)
   
Can Exchange act as a fax server?  Not exactly.  Fax's
can be
transported by
SMTP as a registered MIME type.  This of course makes
the server
blind to
the content, and means that it can be a client issue.
However,
Exchange
Server can also have a FAX service or connector
installed.  This
enables the
server itself to drive a modem or high grade telephony
board to
either
directly send or receive faxes.  Outbound, MAPI clients
(i.e.
Outlook) or
OWA clients can send to a fax recipient using ad hoc
addressing,
once the
FAX address type has been created by adding such a
service.  Of
course,
permanent fax addressees can be stored in the AD/GAL or
the PAB/CL.
Inbound, is a little trickier.  If the inbound fax has
some DTMF
supplemental addressing that maps (insert magic box
here) to an
AD/GAL
addressee, then the MTA can deliver it.  Alternately,
they can be
routed to
a specific printer, or a specific secretarial addressee
for manual
forwarding.
   
Several vendors make one of these combination fax
connector and
magic box
servers for Exchange.
   
Microsoft Fax is a client tool.  It is not Exchange
Server aware.
It's been
awhile since I looked at it, but if it can save a
document as a fax
file,
then presumably this could be attached to a mail message
and the
proper MIME
type would get applied. But as the EG's said, this would
be lame
beyond
belief or any human comprehension.  Usually people are
interested in
transmitting digital data and getting non-digital data
into some
sort of
intelligible format.  To take a perfectly good digital
document,
then store
it as a useless piece of raster junk, and then send it
as an SMTP
attachment
to someone that has some sort of a junky raster-only
printer, well,
that

RE: Internet NewsGroups

[Mike Carlson]

No I dont have it hookup up to a news server. Just the built in,
installed by default, NNTP service of Exchange 2k. It isnt pulling
anything. It isnt accessbile by anyone except internal, which is me.
 
If I click on the Internet Newsgroups folder it does not display
anything.

-Original Message- 
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Thu 11/15/2001 1:12 PM 
To: Exchange Discussions 
Cc: 
Subject: RE: Internet NewsGroups




Do you have it hooked up to a news server?  Is it pulling news
groups?  Do
you really need to be running a news server?
~
-K.Borndale
Network Administrator
Sybari Software
631.630.8569 -direct dial
631.439.0689 -fax
http://www.sybari.com
"One man's ceiling is another man's floor"


|+--->
    |    |  "Mike Carlson"   |
||  <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>|
||  Sent by: |
||  bounce-exchange-148870@ls|
||  .swynk.com   |
||   |
||   |
||  11/15/2001 12:34 PM  |
||  Please respond to|
||  "Exchange Discussions"   |
||   |
|+--->

>---
|
  |
|
  |   To: "Exchange Discussions" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
|
  |   cc:
|
  |   Subject: RE: Internet NewsGroups
|

>---
|




I have the NNTP service running on the Exchange box. Is it
supposed to
link to that?

   -Original Message-
   From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
   Sent: Thu 11/15/2001 11:35 AM
   To: Exchange Discussions
   Cc:
   Subject: Re: Internet NewsGroups




   If you are pulling stuff from a news server.  You'll
know if you
are.
   ~
   -K.Borndale
   Network Administrator
   Sybari Software
   631.630.8569 -direct dial
   631.439.0689 -fax
   http://www.sybari.com
   "One man's ceiling is another man's floor"


   |+--->
   ||  "Mike Carlson"   |
   ||  <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>|
   ||  Sent by: |
   ||  bounce-exchange-148870@ls|
   ||  .swynk.com   |
   ||   |
   ||   |
   ||  11/14/2001 09:47 PM  |
   ||  Please respond to|
   ||  "Exchange Discussions"   |
   ||   |
   |+--->


>---

|
 |
|
 |   To: "Exchange Discussions"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
|
 |   cc:
|
 |   Subject: Internet NewsGroups
|


>---

|




   What is the Internet Newsgroups Public Folder for?
Just for
kicks I
   tried to post something to it and said Operation
Failed.

   Thanks,

   

RE: Fax

[Mike Carlson]

I am not looking for anything fancy. I just want the ability to fax out
of Outlook and receive faxes. I get about 2 per year and I send about 5
per year.
 
I was hoping to not spend any money if I dont have to. I may have to
look to something like WinFax.

-Original Message- 
From: Dupler, Craig 
Sent: Thu 11/15/2001 12:54 PM 
To: Exchange Discussions 
Cc: 
Subject: RE: Fax



Oh, one other thing.  If someone on the outside of your company
is
sophisticated enough to be able to handle supplemental DTMF
addressing to
cause an inbound fax arriving at your Exchange Server to be
properly routed,
then that person will have access to a digital route, which
basically means
that inbound automatic routing can work, but no one is ever
going to use it.
You can buy the technology, but that does not make it
worthwhile.  Inbound
will have to be manually forwarded.

Fax really is an obsolete technology that is probably less
useful than an
Underwood.

-Original Message-
From: Dupler, Craig [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Thursday, November 15, 2001 10:37 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Fax


I agree with both EG's (Exchange goddesses)

Can Exchange act as a fax server?  Not exactly.  Fax's can be
transported by
SMTP as a registered MIME type.  This of course makes the server
blind to
the content, and means that it can be a client issue.  However,
Exchange
Server can also have a FAX service or connector installed.  This
enables the
server itself to drive a modem or high grade telephony board to
either
directly send or receive faxes.  Outbound, MAPI clients (i.e.
Outlook) or
OWA clients can send to a fax recipient using ad hoc addressing,
once the
FAX address type has been created by adding such a service.  Of
course,
permanent fax addressees can be stored in the AD/GAL or the
PAB/CL.
Inbound, is a little trickier.  If the inbound fax has some DTMF
supplemental addressing that maps (insert magic box here) to an
AD/GAL
addressee, then the MTA can deliver it.  Alternately, they can
be routed to
a specific printer, or a specific secretarial addressee for
manual
forwarding.

Several vendors make one of these combination fax connector and
magic box
servers for Exchange.

Microsoft Fax is a client tool.  It is not Exchange Server
aware.  It's been
awhile since I looked at it, but if it can save a document as a
fax file,
then presumably this could be attached to a mail message and the
proper MIME
type would get applied. But as the EG's said, this would be lame
beyond
belief or any human comprehension.  Usually people are
interested in
transmitting digital data and getting non-digital data into some
sort of
intelligible format.  To take a perfectly good digital document,
then store
it as a useless piece of raster junk, and then send it as an
SMTP attachment
to someone that has some sort of a junky raster-only printer,
well, that
would be sad.  So it is hard to imagine a scenario in which
someone would
want to spend money integrating MS Fax to an e-mail service. 

The right way to leverage MS Fax is in a scenario in which you
have a
requirement for a small number of users to send or receive
Faxes, but can't
cost justify the incremental cost of something like OmTool for
Exchange over
the cost of some personal modems.

Some organizations are going to be in a bind with this.  Most
good
enterprise security policies prohibit using a personal modem to
link to an
external connection while at the same time being connected to
the enterprise
network.  Obviously, something like OmTool solves this problem,
but that
does not make the cost story any prettier.

-Original Message-
    From: Mike Carlson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Wednesday, November 14, 2001 3:58 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: Fax


Can Exchange act as a Fax Server? Does it integrate with MS Fax?
I want
to be able to Fax out of Outlook, but I want to avoid  buying
something
like winfax.

********
Mike Carlson
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.domitianx.com

Master Of The Spoon Peopl

RE: Internet NewsGroups

[Mike Carlson]

I am using OWA 2k right now. I am at work and my exchange box is at
home.
 
I did get a bounce back on a message from Internet.com saying it could
not be delivered and the contents of the message was gobbly gook. I get
that on occasion.
 
Mike

-Original Message- 
From: Hatley, Ken 
Sent: Thu 11/15/2001 11:45 AM 
To: Exchange Discussions 
Cc: 
Subject: RE: Internet NewsGroups



Is there something I need to change on my end?  Every time
certain people
mail, my rules do not get processed.  All those strange
characters show up
at the bottom and it seems that every time it is coming from OWA
2000.  Mike
do you have OWA 2000? 
I do not have the option to use a public folder, so I filter by
mail sent to
this list, but every time Mike sends something it does not get
processed.  I
have a rule to move these to a specific folder and quit
processing more
rules, I have several of these and I finally send to my 2way
pager if none
of the others match specific criteria.  Not that big a deal, but
when a big
thread opens up that Mike replies to, all subsequent replies go
to my
pager...major pain in the arse.  What's the deal?

Ken Hatley, MCSE
972.997.9261
pager [EMAIL PROTECTED]


-Original Message-
From: Mike Carlson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Thursday, November 15, 2001 11:34 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Internet NewsGroups

I have the NNTP service running on the Exchange box. Is it
supposed to
link to that?

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thu 11/15/2001 11:35 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Cc:
Subject: Re: Internet NewsGroups
   
   


If you are pulling stuff from a news server.  You'll
know if you
are.
~
-K.Borndale
Network Administrator
Sybari Software
631.630.8569 -direct dial
631.439.0689 -fax
http://www.sybari.com
"One man's ceiling is another man's floor"
   
   
|+--->
    ||  "Mike Carlson"   |
||  <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>|
||  Sent by: |
||  bounce-exchange-148870@ls|
||  .swynk.com   |
||   |
||   |
||  11/14/2001 09:47 PM  |
||  Please respond to|
||  "Exchange Discussions"   |
||   |
|+--->
   

>---

|
  |
|
  |   To: "Exchange Discussions"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
|
  |   cc:
|
  |   Subject: Internet NewsGroups
|
   

>---

|
   
   
   
   
What is the Internet Newsgroups Public Folder for? Just
for
kicks I
tried to post something to it and said Operation Failed.
   
Thanks,
   

Mike Carlson
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.domitianx.com
   
Master Of The Spoon People
Keeper Of None

   
   

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

RE: Internet NewsGroups

[Mike Carlson]

I have the NNTP service running on the Exchange box. Is it supposed to
link to that?

-Original Message- 
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Thu 11/15/2001 11:35 AM 
To: Exchange Discussions 
Cc: 
Subject: Re: Internet NewsGroups




If you are pulling stuff from a news server.  You'll know if you
are.
~
-K.Borndale
Network Administrator
Sybari Software
631.630.8569 -direct dial
631.439.0689 -fax
http://www.sybari.com
"One man's ceiling is another man's floor"


|+--->
    ||  "Mike Carlson"   |
||  <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>|
||  Sent by: |
||  bounce-exchange-148870@ls|
||  .swynk.com   |
||   |
||   |
||  11/14/2001 09:47 PM  |
||  Please respond to|
||  "Exchange Discussions"   |
||   |
|+--->

>---
|
  |
|
  |   To: "Exchange Discussions" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
|
  |   cc:
|
  |   Subject: Internet NewsGroups
|

>---
|




What is the Internet Newsgroups Public Folder for? Just for
kicks I
tried to post something to it and said Operation Failed.
    
Thanks,


Mike Carlson
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.domitianx.com

Master Of The Spoon People
Keeper Of None



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






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


ŠËi¢Ëbž
@Bm§ÿðÃ0Šw¢oëzÊ.­Ç¿{!}ª¡¶`+r¯zÈm¶ŸÿÃ
,Ã)är‰¿²+^±æ«rìyªÜ…«)N‹§²æìr¸›zf¢–Ú%y«Þ{!jx–Ë0Êy¢a1r§ââ²Öš)åŠËZvh§³§‘Ê&

RE: Internet NewsGroups

[Mike Carlson]

It doesnt prevent me from buying a book. I never said I wasnt going to
buy a book. As a matter of fact I am wating for the 2 I ordered to be
shipped from Amazon.
 
I was just replying to her comment about me staging a coup.

-Original Message- 
From: Slinger, Gary 
Sent: Thu 11/15/2001 6:57 AM 
To: Exchange Discussions 
Cc: 
Subject: RE: Internet NewsGroups



All of which prevents you from buying a book how?

-Original Message-
From: Mike Carlson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Thursday, November 15, 2001 07:57
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Internet NewsGroups


I installed it at home so I can play with it. This is not a
corporate
environment. I am developing some Outlook forms for a client and
I set up
Exchange so I could test the forms and what not.

Mike

-Original Message-
From: kim cameron
Sent: Wed 11/14/2001 9:57 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Cc:
Subject: RE: Internet NewsGroups
   
   

dear Mike,
just for kicks, you might want to read a book about
Exchange before
you go
trying to administer it.  here are some recommendations:
   
http://www.swinc.com/resource/exchange.htm
   
you didn't stage a coup and oust the real Exchange
admin, did you?
   
   
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of
Mike Carlson
Sent: Wednesday, November 14, 2001 8:47 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: Internet NewsGroups
   
   
What is the Internet Newsgroups Public Folder for? Just
for kicks I
tried to post something to it and said Operation Failed.
   
Thanks,
   

    Mike Carlson
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.domitianx.com
   
Master Of The Spoon People
Keeper Of None

   
   

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

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

.+--x
m ,)r(ື
\檆b=!6 0 ৑&zǚ1r,:.˛
m隊[hy\z[,)rɄZ Zvh'+-i٢2G(


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


â²Úh²Ø§€P†Ûiÿü0ÂÌ"Ç(›úÞ²‹«qïÞÅÈ_j¨m˜
܆+Þ²m§ÿðÃ0Êy¢oìŠ×¬yªÜ‡ûj·!jÊS¢éì¹»®&ޙ¨¥¶‰^j÷žÅÈZž¥²Ì2žG(˜L\…©àx¸¬µ§fŠyb²Öš)ìÃ)är‰

RE: Internet NewsGroups

[Mike Carlson]

I installed it at home so I can play with it. This is not a corporate
environment. I am developing some Outlook forms for a client and I set
up Exchange so I could test the forms and what not.
 
Mike

-Original Message- 
From: kim cameron 
Sent: Wed 11/14/2001 9:57 PM 
To: Exchange Discussions 
Cc: 
Subject: RE: Internet NewsGroups



dear Mike,
just for kicks, you might want to read a book about Exchange
before you go
trying to administer it.  here are some recommendations:

http://www.swinc.com/resource/exchange.htm

you didn't stage a coup and oust the real Exchange admin, did
you?


-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Mike
Carlson
Sent: Wednesday, November 14, 2001 8:47 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: Internet NewsGroups


What is the Internet Newsgroups Public Folder for? Just for
kicks I
tried to post something to it and said Operation Failed.

Thanks,


    Mike Carlson
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.domitianx.com

Master Of The Spoon People
Keeper Of None



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



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


.+-¦‹-Šx
m¶ŸÿÃ,Â)Ür‰¿­ë(º·ýì\…öª†Ù€­Èb½ë!¶Úÿ0³
§‘Ê&þÈ­zǚ­È±æ«r¬¥:.žË›±Êâm隊[h•æ¯yì\…©àz[,Ã)är‰„ÅÈZž‹ŠËZvh§–+-iÙ¢žÌ2žG(

Internet NewsGroups

[Mike Carlson]

What is the Internet Newsgroups Public Folder for? Just for kicks I
tried to post something to it and said Operation Failed.

Thanks,


Mike Carlson
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.domitianx.com

Master Of The Spoon People
Keeper Of None
 

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

Error

[Mike Carlson]

80004005 when trying to get properties on a Public Folder in Exchange
Manager.

I created a few new Public Folders while I was in Outlook, now when I
try get properties on them in Exchange Manager I get the error. I can
get properties on the folders while in Outlook and I can view the item
when I am in OWA.

I have tried all the steps in the MS KB that I could find.


Mike Carlson
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.domitianx.com

Master Of The Spoon People
Keeper Of None
 

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

Fax

[Mike Carlson]

Can Exchange act as a Fax Server? Does it integrate with MS Fax? I want
to be able to Fax out of Outlook, but I want to avoid  buying something
like winfax.


Mike Carlson
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.domitianx.com

Master Of The Spoon People
Keeper Of None
 

_
List posting FAQ:   http://www.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: Lotus Notes

[Mike Carlson]

So the Exchange directory could be populated by the Notes server? So if
the Notes box is the one in the MX records for our domain and an email
is sent to [EMAIL PROTECTED] the Notes box would get it and the Exchange
box would pull it off there and store it in the appropriate mailbox on
the Exchange server or would it just pull it from the Notes server as it
is opened.

I don't see Notes going away initially since our corporate company sent
us the Notes box and told us to use it and they have some stupid little
apps that are Notes based.

If we could get the Exchange box to basically mirror the Notes box until
such time as we can migrate everything, that would be great.


Mike Carlson
http://www.domitianx.com
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Master Of The Spoon People
Keeper Of None
 

> -Original Message-
> From: Eric Cooper [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
> Sent: Wednesday, November 14, 2001 3:40 PM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: Re: Lotus Notes
> 
> 
> Allows you to send messages (ie, "Connect") between the two 
> systems.  It's also possible to replicate directory between 
> the two systems over the Notes Connector.  It's useful in 
> heterogeneous environments or during a migration from one 
> system (Notes) to the other (Exchange).
> 
> Eric
> 
> - Original Message -
> From: "Mike Carlson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: "Exchange Discussions" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sent: Wednesday, November 14, 2001 1:11 PM
> Subject: Lotus Notes
> 
> 
> What functionality does the Lotus Notes connector provide? We 
> have a Notes box and we are thinking about setting up an 
> Exchange 2k box, for various reasons, and wondering what type 
> of functionality the connector provides.
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> 
> Mike Carlson
> http://www.domitianx.com
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 
> Master Of The Spoon People
> Keeper Of None
> 
> 
> _
> List posting FAQ:   http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
> Archives:   http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp
> To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 
> 
> 
> _
> List posting FAQ:   http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
> Archives:   http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp
> To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 

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

Lotus Notes

[Mike Carlson]

What functionality does the Lotus Notes connector provide? We have a
Notes box and we are thinking about setting up an Exchange 2k box, for
various reasons, and wondering what type of functionality the connector
provides.

Thanks,


Mike Carlson
http://www.domitianx.com
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Master Of The Spoon People
Keeper Of None
 

_
List posting FAQ:   http://www.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: Oracle to replace Exchange? Not!

[Mike Carlson]

I was reading about the Email package Oracle offers and it really doesnt
look like much more than a standard POP3/IMAP server that has a "new
feature" called web calendaring.
 
H sounds allot like IMail by Ipswitch. Just 200 times the
cost.
 
It doesnt look like it does hardly any collaboration at all besides the
big bad Web Calendaring.
 
Mike

-Original Message- 
From: Dupler, Craig 
Sent: Tue 11/13/2001 11:51 AM 
To: Exchange Discussions 
Cc: 
Subject: RE: Oracle to replace Exchange? Not!



Interesting discussion.

A couple of observations:  Exchange and Notes are about
something quite
different than Oracle and other similar messaging engines.  What
Ellison
calls e-mail, is not the same thing.  The reasons that the
mostly Unix based
systems did not get the market that went the LAN server based
systems was
the cost of entry for small installations, and the lack of
critical features
such as integration with the Windows desktop and a good group
calendaring
solution.

That much being said, Exchange and Notes are now incumbents.  If
they fail
to do the better job of supporting emerging requirements from
other
platforms, then Exchange and Notes could also go away or become
marginalized.  Right now, Exchange does not do the web as well
as it should,
and some parts of Microsoft still labor under the totally lame
notion that
the new small devices are only companions to big PC's.  Unix
folks back in
the 80's used to look down their noses at the lowly PC and could
not bring
themselves to stoop to be good service providers to them.  Much
of that same
attitude is now being exhibited by the PC systems communities
toward the new
smaller devices.  What goes around . . .

-Original Message-
From: Martin Blackstone [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Tuesday, November 13, 2001 7:23 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Oracle to replace Exchange? Not!


"Ellison derided Microsoft's Exchange e-mail servers as
unreliable and
insecure."
Huh? What??

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Doug
Hampshire
Sent: Tuesday, November 13, 2001 7:17 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: Oracle to replace Exchange? Not!




http://dailynews.yahoo.com/h/cn/2003/tc/ellison_aims_for_microsoft_s
_e-m
ail_crown_1.html



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



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


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


â²Úh²Ø§€P†Ûiÿü0ÂÌ"Ç(›úÞ²‹«qïÞÅÈ_j¨m˜
܆+Þ²m§ÿðÃ0Êy¢oìŠ×¬yªÜ‡ûj·!jÊS¢éì¹»®&ޙ¨¥¶‰^j÷žÅÈZž¥²Ì2žG(˜L\…©àx¸¬µ§fŠyb²Öš)ìÃ)är‰

RE: Oracle to replace Exchange? Not!

[Mike Carlson]

Great. Now I have to clean the snot/pop off my monitor.
 
Thanks,
Mike

-Original Message- 
From: Doug Hampshire 
Sent: Tue 11/13/2001 9:17 AM 
To: Exchange Discussions 
Cc: 
Subject: Oracle to replace Exchange? Not!





http://dailynews.yahoo.com/h/cn/2003/tc/ellison_aims_for_microsoft_s
_e-m
ail_crown_1.html



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


ŠËi¢Ëbž
@Bm§ÿðÃ0Šw¢oëzÊ.­Ç¿{!}ª¡¶`+r¯zÈm¶ŸÿÃ
,Ã)är‰¿²+^±æ«rìyªÜ…«)N‹§²æìr¸›zf¢–Ú%y«Þ{!jx–Ë0Êy¢a1r§ââ²Öš)åŠËZvh§³§‘Ê&

RE: Outlook 2000 Rules?

[Mike Carlson]

LCD?

What TLA is that a TLA for?


Mike Carlson
http://www.domitianx.com
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Master Of The Spoon People
Keeper Of None
 

> -Original Message-
> From: Chris  [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
> Sent: Tuesday, November 13, 2001 7:21 AM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: RE: Outlook 2000 Rules?
> 
> 
> > This list and the
> > Outlook-Dev list are the only ones out of the 30 or so I 
> > subscribe to that don't prefix the subjects.
> 
> Apparently the other 28 or so pander to the LCD. 
> 
> Chris
> -- 
> Chris Scharff
> Senior Sales Engineer
> MessageOne
> If you can't measure, you can't manage! 
> 
> 
> 
> _
> List posting FAQ:   http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
> Archives:   http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp
> To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 

_
List posting FAQ:   http://www.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 2000 Rules?

[Mike Carlson]

I have no idea what you are talking about in regards to subscribe a
public folder and set NOMAIL?
 
So I should set a public folder to receive all my mail and I receive
none in my personal box?
 
Can you elaborate?
 
BTW, I have never had a problem with the subject being prefixed in any
client I have used from OE to Outlook to Entourage to Netscape to
Mozilla on the Mac/PC. Or Pine or Evolution or Netscape or Mozilla on
Linux. This list and the Outlook-Dev list are the only ones out of the
30 or so I subscribe to that dont prefix the subjects.
 
Mike

-Original Message- 
From: Roger Seielstad 
Sent: Tue 11/13/2001 7:07 AM 
To: Exchange Discussions 
Cc: 
Subject: RE: Outlook 2000 Rules?



Because its obnoxious to add that, as it breaks thread sorting
capabilities
of some clients.

HINT: If you're not going to follow the best method (subscribe a
public
folder for the mail and your personal account with the NOMAIL
option), set
the rule up to move all mail sent TO "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"

Works wonders...

--
Roger D. Seielstad - MCSE MCT
Senior Systems Administrator
Peregrine Systems
Atlanta, GA
http://www.peregrine.com


> -Original Message-
    > From: Mike Carlson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Tuesday, November 13, 2001 7:44 AM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: RE: Outlook 2000 Rules?
>
>
> Thats the reason most other lists prefix the subject with the
> list name.
> For example:
> 
> [ExchangeDiscussion] Subject
> 
> So people can create rules to move it to folders when they
> arrive. This
> is one of the few lists I have been on that does not do that.
> 
> Mike
>
>   -Original Message-
>   From: Robert Moore
>   Sent: Tue 11/13/2001 6:31 AM
>   To: Exchange Discussions
>   Cc:
>   Subject: RE: Outlook 2000 Rules?
>  
>  
>
>   I sort on the rule if
> "http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm";
>   appears in the body, then send it to my Exchange List
folder.
> That
>   works.
>  
>   Rob
>  
>   -Original Message-
>   From: Ed Crowley [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
>   Sent: Tuesday, November 13, 2001 12:07 AM
>   To: Exchange Discussions
>   Subject: RE: Outlook 2000 Rules?
>  
>  
>   Subscribe a public folder.
>  
>   Ed Crowley MCSE+I MVP
>   Tech Consultant
>   Compaq Computer
>   "There are seldom good technological solutions to
behavioral
> problems."
>  
>   -Original Message-
>   From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>   [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of
Desmond
>   Witherspoon
>   Sent: Monday, November 12, 2001 8:11 AM
>   To: Exchange Discussions
>   Subject: Outlook 2000 Rules?
>  
>  
>   Hey all,
>   I'm trying to set some rules so that the emails from
this
>   list gets diverted to the appropriate folder. Which is
great (in
> theory)
>   the problem is that none of the rules seem to work.
>  
>   Desmond Witherspoon
>   Network and PC Support Technician
>   Metropolitan New York Library Council
>   57 East 11th Street
>   New York, NY 10003
>  
>  
>  
>
_
>   List posting FAQ:
> http://www.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 2000 Rules?

[Mike Carlson]

Thats the reason most other lists prefix the subject with the list name.
For example:
 
[ExchangeDiscussion] Subject
 
So people can create rules to move it to folders when they arrive. This
is one of the few lists I have been on that does not do that.
 
Mike

-Original Message- 
From: Robert Moore 
Sent: Tue 11/13/2001 6:31 AM 
To: Exchange Discussions 
Cc: 
Subject: RE: Outlook 2000 Rules?



I sort on the rule if
"http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm";
appears in the body, then send it to my Exchange List folder.
That
works.

Rob

-Original Message-
From: Ed Crowley [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Tuesday, November 13, 2001 12:07 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Outlook 2000 Rules?


Subscribe a public folder.

Ed Crowley MCSE+I MVP
Tech Consultant
Compaq Computer
"There are seldom good technological solutions to behavioral
problems."

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Desmond
Witherspoon
Sent: Monday, November 12, 2001 8:11 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: Outlook 2000 Rules?


Hey all,
I'm trying to set some rules so that the emails from this
list gets diverted to the appropriate folder. Which is great (in
theory)
the problem is that none of the rules seem to work.

Desmond Witherspoon
Network and PC Support Technician
Metropolitan New York Library Council
57 East 11th Street
New York, NY 10003



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


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


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


ŠËi¢Ëbž
@Bm§ÿðÃ0Šw¢oëzÊ.­Ç¿{!}ª¡¶`+r¯zÈm¶ŸÿÃ
,Ã)är‰¿²+^±æ«rìyªÜ…«)N‹§²æìr¸›zf¢–Ú%y«Þ{!jx–Ë0Êy¢a1r§ââ²Öš)åŠËZvh§³§‘Ê&

RE: It's not Microsoft's fault because....

[Mike Carlson]

To be honest, I dont know. I dont think it will bother me too much. I
will just have to adapt. It would be painful initially that is for sure.
 
It may turn off people that have not yet "come to the dark side", but
those of us that are entrenched into the ways of the dark side may just
adapt. There will be some that jump ship, but over all I think that most
MS developers will not have too many problems. I think the ones that
will be most affected are the ones that are big developers. Secretaries
and Managers who do "simple things" without realizing the code that is
underneath the hood. They will have a problem Im sure.
 
Again, this is based on the idea that they implement a security model
that mirrors that of the other big players.
 
Mike

-Original Message- 
From: Benjamin Scott 
Sent: Mon 11/12/2001 1:56 PM 
To: Exchange Discussions 
Cc: 
Subject: RE: It's not Microsoft's fault because



    On Mon, 12 Nov 2001, Mike Carlson wrote:
> For a developer having to write 600 lines of code to make sure
> everything is set right before launching the form would be an
enormous
> amount of work compared to editing a key to allow .exe files
to show up.
> Granted that may be the more secure way of doing things, but
then people
> may not want to develop for that platform.
>
> Microsoft made a lot of money off Windows and Office being
extremely
> easy to develop for and use. With that there is security
risks.

  I think you make a good point.  What may have been a good
approach in the
short term (very easy to work with, but insecure) is not so good
in the long
term (it is still insecure, leading to many upset customers).  I
wonder,
what happens next?  Microsoft has said they will be moving to
make things
more secure.  Assuming they follow through, does that mean
people will move
away to easier-but-less-secure platforms, restarting a cycle?
Or will it
mean security becomes a fundamental for Windows/Office
programming (which, I
would argue, it should be)?

  Would people still like Exchange so much, if it was more
secure but less
convenient?  I know *I* certainly would, but I'm not an Exchange
programmer.
I wonder, how hard would it be to design a model that is secure
by default,
but easily opens up access to software with the proper
authorizations?  I
suspect that would require moving most of the scripting
intelligence into
the server, where it can be protected better.  Anyone here who
knows more
about Exchange programming than I (i.e., just about anyone) have
any
comments on that?

--
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]


â²Úh²Ø§€P†Ûiÿü0ÂÌ"Ç(›úÞ²‹«qïÞÅÈ_j¨m˜
܆+Þ²m§ÿðÃ0Êy¢oìŠ×¬yªÜ‡ûj·!jÊS¢éì¹»®&ޙ¨¥¶‰^j÷žÅÈZž¥²Ì2žG(˜L\…©àx¸¬µ§fŠyb²Öš)ìÃ)är‰

RE: To all the Vets on the list

[Mike Carlson]

I would like to add this to this thread, a post I made on a site that I
frequent:
 
http://www.ultimatechaos.com/cgi-bin/news/viewnews.cgi?category=1&id=100
5543735
 
Mike

-Original Message- 
From: John Matteson 
Sent: Mon 11/12/2001 2:04 PM 
To: Exchange Discussions 
Cc: 
Subject: To all the Vets on the list



To all the Veterans of all branches of the U.S. Armed Services
on the list:

Thank you for your service to our country.

And if you happen to be a veteran of an Allied armed service:

Thank you for your service to your country.

John Matteson; Exchange Manager
Geac Corporate Infrastructure Systems and Standards
(404) 239 - 2981

...the words that I remember from my childhood still are true,
that there
are none so blind as those who will not see
--The Moody Blues (I know you're out there)




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


â²Úh²Ø§€P†Ûiÿü0ÂÌ"Ç(›úÞ²‹«qïÞÅÈ_j¨m˜
܆+Þ²m§ÿðÃ0Êy¢oìŠ×¬yªÜ‡ûj·!jÊS¢éì¹»®&ޙ¨¥¶‰^j÷žÅÈZž¥²Ì2žG(˜L\…©àx¸¬µ§fŠyb²Öš)ìÃ)är‰

RE: It's not Microsoft's fault because....

[Mike Carlson]

I wouldnt say it is a flaw. It can be a bad thing, but not a flaw. MS
software out of the box has been historically "access unless denied"
where as the other big players are "denied until granted access".
 
It is that way no matter the file system, it just the way MS has it
setup out of the box. For people from the Novell or *nix world, this is
something they have a hard time remembering.
 
I wish MS would use the "denied until granted access" mindset, but that
will probably never happen. At least not in the short term.
 
Mike

-Original Message- 
From: Black, Nathan 
Sent: Mon 11/12/2001 1:44 PM 
To: Exchange Discussions 
Cc: 
Subject: RE: It's not Microsoft's fault because



> Nimda required the IUSR_ account to have read
> access into the
> \WinNT tree. A properly secured server would have that
> directory (and ALL
> directories outside Inetpub\www) explicity denied permissions.

If you came from a different background, that _would_ be a flaw
in the
promiscuous-by-default design of the NTFS file system.

Nathan

> -Original Message-
> From: Roger Seielstad [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Monday, November 12, 2001 1:23 PM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: RE: It's not Microsoft's fault because
>


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


.+-¦‹-Šx
m¶ŸÿÃ,Â)Ür‰¿­ë(º·ýì\…öª†Ù€­Èb½ë!¶Úÿ0³
§‘Ê&þÈ­zǚ­È±æ«r¬¥:.žË›±Êâm隊[h•æ¯yì\…©àz[,Ã)är‰„ÅÈZž‹ŠËZvh§–+-iÙ¢žÌ2žG(

RE: It's not Microsoft's fault because....

[Mike Carlson]

I think it has quite a lot to do with ease of use. The mindset may be
that products that are easier to use will sell more copies. If you have
to go into an application and set a couple hundred options just to
allow/disallow things, then people may not want to use the product.
Being easy to use right out of the box is a huge selling point for MS.
 
I dont think it is a matter of demanding insecure features, I think it
is more of demanding to do whatever they want to configure the
application to suit their needs, which then opens up security risks.
 
They need to keep it open enough so that when someone creates a custom
form in Outlook, they dont have to programatically check various
registry keys and settings to see if the necessary settings are
available and if they are not, enable them.
 
For a developer having to write 600 lines of code to make sure
everything is set right before launching the form would be an enormous
amount of work compared to editing a key to allow .exe files to show up.
Granted that may be the more secure way of doing things, but then people
may not want to develop for that platform.
 
Microsoft made a lot of money off Windows and Office being extremely
easy to develop for and use. With that there is security risks. If they
started to make it difficult and a lot of work for developers, they
would loose a portion of the bread and butter. There would be a lot less
MS/Windows/Office developers out there. Which I guess isnt a BAD thing.
:-)
 
 
Mike
 

-Original Message- 
From: Benjamin Scott 
Sent: Mon 11/12/2001 12:00 PM 
To: Exchange Discussions 
Cc: 
Subject: RE: It's not Microsoft's fault because



On Mon, 12 Nov 2001, Chris Scharff wrote:
>> Why should *I* have to clean up after *Microsoft's*
>> mistakes?  I paid good money for their software; it is
>> unreasonable to expect it to be secure in the default
configuration?
>
> You're just being a troll like Shawn now right?  If you're not
going to
> add anything useful to the conversation, why even have it?

  Alright, I will concede that was a bit heated, but that
attitude really
irks me.

  Some customers demand insecure features.  Granted.
Historically,
Microsoft has implemented those insecure features by default,
leading to
security problems for everyone.  Other customers have demanded
products
designed with security in mind.  Microsoft blames the problem on
customers
not installing fixes.

  Am I the only one who sees the inconsistency with this?  Why
does
Microsoft only listen to the demands of customers who want
insecurity?  Why
don't the demands of people who want more secure products count?

  My issue is not with installing updates or correcting insecure
defaults.
I am perfectly capable of doing so, thank you very much.  My
issue is that
the problem does not appear to be caused simple programming
errors, but
through a continued disregard for security on the part of
Microsoft.  That
makes my job harder than it needs to be, and that is not
something I like.

  To use an analogy, when I buy a car, I do not expect to have
to remove a
bolt mounted behind the gas tank to prevent the vehicle from
exploding when
involved in a rear-end impact.

  Thankfully, after this latest Nimda fiasco, Microsoft appears
to be waking
up to the fact that producing the software equivalent of a Ford
Pinto is not
a practice that instills customer loyalty.

--
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]


â²Úh²Ø§€P†Ûiÿü0ÂÌ"Ç(›úÞ²‹«qïÞÅÈ_j¨m˜
܆+Þ²m§ÿðÃ0Êy¢oìŠ×¬yªÜ‡ûj·!jÊS¢éì¹»®&ޙ¨¥¶‰^j÷žÅÈZž¥²Ì2žG(˜L\…©àx¸¬µ§fŠyb²Öš)ìÃ)är‰

RE: It's not Microsoft's fault because....

[Mike Carlson]

> -Original Message-
> From: Benjamin Scott [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
> Sent: Monday, November 12, 2001 7:26 AM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: RE: It's not Microsoft's fault because
> 
> 
> On Mon, 12 Nov 2001, Roger Seielstad wrote:
> > Most customers who have used MS OSs since the DOS days, not 
> to mention 
> > those exposed to *nix, like the ability to script just about any 
> > change to the OS ...
> 
>   The issue is not scripting per se, but the fact that MS 
> Outlook and MSIE have a long history of just running whatever 
> the other guy sends to you, without regard for the fact that 
> it may be harmful to your computer.
> 
> > Do you think Microsoft pulls these features out of their nether 
> > regions?
> 
>   How else do you explain that damn paperclip?  ;-)

The paper clip was quite popular when it first came out. If it wouldn't
show up every 2.85 seconds in Windows, it wouldn't be hated the way it
is now.

> 
> > So, you're not aware of the fact that with about 30 seconds 
> worth of 
> > work (literally), you could write a script that would alleviate all 
> > these scripting vulnerabilities on all your machines?
> 
>   Why should *I* have to clean up after *Microsoft's* 
> mistakes?  I paid good money for their software; it is 
> unreasonable to expect it to be secure in the default configuration?

If you have been working with Microsoft's software for any amount of
time over a week you should know that their software is open until
closed, where as most other applications and operating systems are
closed until open.

You do NOT have any type of access to a *nix box unless given permission
to. Same with Novell. Micrsoft on the other hand gives you full blown
rights to just about everything out of the box.

It has always been that way, this is nothing new.

> 
> > Again, the onus here rests on the Administrator ...
> 
>   What about the millions of home users who don't know even 
> know how to spell VBS?

That ths advantage of Windows. You don't need to spell VBS, it adds it
for you and the user will never see it unless they take the time to
change that setting.

> 
>   The estimates I hear state that viruses and worms due to 
> poor design on Microsoft's part cost billions of dollars per 
> year.  Don't you think billions of dollars is a bit much?

So you did hear about the customers that complained about MS security. I
thought you were unaware of anyone that complained about MS software
being vulnerable. Hmmm..

No I don't think that is a lot of money considering how large of a
penetration Outlook has in the Corp. world. The amount of bandwidth
consumed from all the emails, the crashed mail servers, support costs.
That really isnt a lot of money in the big scheme of things.

> 
> -- 
> 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: Move Exchange 2k to a different box

[Mike Carlson]

Is there a tool I can use to move everything off the old box to the new
box? I was just planning on installing exchange on the other box (which
is a member of the same domain), get it up to date and them move
everything over to it.


Mike Carlson
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.domitianx.com

Master Of The Spoon People
Keeper Of None
 

> -Original Message-
> From: Chris Scharff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
> Sent: Saturday, November 10, 2001 2:12 PM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: RE: Move Exchange 2k to a different box
> 
> 
> No, you don't need to make the new box a DC. The supposition 
> for the AD migration portion was the migration in a single 
> server environment.
> 
> Chris
> -- 
> Chris Scharff
> Senior Sales Engineer
> MessageOne
> If you can't measure, you can't manage! 
> 
> 
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Mike Carlson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > Sent: Saturday, November 10, 2001 12:43 PM
> > To: Exchange Discussions
> > Subject: Move Exchange 2k to a different box
> > 
> > 
> > I was reading the ECMSM and it talks about, if the current
> > exchange box is also a AD server, the steps in making the new 
> > box a AD server.
> > 
> > If Exchange is running on a DC do I NEED to make the new box
> > a DC? The box I am moving it to is not a DC it is just a 2k 
> > server (with SQL) and a member of the domain, but it is not a DC.
> > 
> > I want to get exchange off the DC and move it to a regular 2k box.
> > 
> > Thanks,
> > 
> > 
> > Mike Carlson
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > http://www.domitianx.com
> > 
> > Master Of The Spoon People
> > Keeper Of None
> > 
> > 
> > _
> > List posting FAQ:   http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
> > Archives:   http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp
> > To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > 
> 
> _
> List posting FAQ:   http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
> Archives:   http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp
> To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 

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

Move Exchange 2k to a different box

[Mike Carlson]

I was reading the ECMSM and it talks about, if the current exchange box
is also a AD server, the steps in making the new box a AD server.

If Exchange is running on a DC do I NEED to make the new box a DC? The
box I am moving it to is not a DC it is just a 2k server (with SQL) and
a member of the domain, but it is not a DC.

I want to get exchange off the DC and move it to a regular 2k box.

Thanks,


Mike Carlson
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.domitianx.com

Master Of The Spoon People
Keeper Of None
 

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

RE: backup

[Mike Carlson]

I know what you mean. I don't trick coffee, but Mountain Dew gets really
old after a while.

This is a learning process for me. I have exchange setup at home and I
am in the process of learning how it works and what not. I am going out
today to purchase some books on the topic, which will help immensely. I
have only had it setup for a few weeks.

The backup ran last night and everything seems to be working fine. All I
need is System state, the storage group and the C: drive right?

The box is also the DC for AD.

Since this is a home box, I can afford to mess something up without
major impact.


Mike Carlson
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.domitianx.com

Master Of The Spoon People
Keeper Of None
 

> -Original Message-
> From: Tony Hlabse [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
> Sent: Saturday, November 10, 2001 9:31 AM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: Re: backup
> 
> 
> Ah the old if I work at it long enough I will get the results 
> needed. I hate that, then you wake up the next day and the 
> light bulb goes off. I have an unwritten rule that after 6-8 
> hours working at a problem and your running around in circles 
> go home and get a good rest and 9 times out of 10 the answers 
> comes much more quickly. Everytime I am forced to stay at it 
> all nite due to a serious outage the next day I always say 
> man why didn't I think of that last nite. I think coffee 
> dulls the brain after 14 hours. Good luck with your backup 
> maintenance issues.
> 
> - Original Message -
> From: "Mike Carlson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: "Exchange Discussions" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sent: Saturday, November 10, 2001 10:37 AM
> Subject: RE: backup
> 
> 
> Because I clicked on the link at the bottom of the emails. 
> And since it was almost midnight, my time, I failed to notice 
> that the link brought you to the 5.5 faq instead of the 2k faq.
> 
> 
> Mike Carlson
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> http://www.domitianx.com
> 
> Master Of The Spoon People
> Keeper Of None
> 
> 
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Tony Hlabse [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > Sent: Saturday, November 10, 2001 6:40 AM
> > To: Exchange Discussions
> > Subject: Re: backup
> >
> >
> > Pretty basic stuff. All/most all books on E2K and 2K Server have 
> > procedures in them to do a backup. Why would you look in 
> the 5.5 FAQ 
> > if your using E2K?
> >
> > - Original Message -
> > From: "Mike Carlson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > To: "Exchange Discussions" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > Sent: Friday, November 09, 2001 11:55 PM
> > Subject: RE: backup
> >
> >
> > Welp. The E2k faq wasn't much better.
> >
> > Am I going to do any damage from a online backup? Is there 
> anything I 
> > should look out for?  What is the proper procedure for an offline 
> > backup.
> >
> > Any help is appreciated.
> >
> > 
> > Mike Carlson
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > http://www.domitianx.com
> >
> > Master Of The Spoon People
> > Keeper Of None
> > 
> >
> > > -Original Message-
> > > From: Mike Carlson
> > > Sent: Friday, November 09, 2001 10:37 PM
> > > To: Exchange Discussions
> > > Subject: RE: backup
> > >
> > >
> > > Welp. I mispoke about info in the Faq. I was looking in the
> > 5.5 FAQ.
> > > 2k faq seems to have a bit more.
> > >
> > > 
> > > Mike Carlson
> > > [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > http://www.domitianx.com
> > >
> > > Master Of The Spoon People
> > > Keeper Of None
> > > 
> > >
> > > > -Original Message-
> > > > From: Mike Carlson
> > > > Sent: Friday, November 09, 2001 10:35 PM
> > > > To: Exchange Discussions
> > > > Subject: RE: backup
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > It does sound new to me, but I found very little in the 
> FAQ about 
> > > > back up except what to use.
> > > >
> > > > I find the FAQ not very useful. Things like Open File 
> Agent = BAD 
> > > > without an explanation is useless.
> > > >
> > > > The only reference I found was to an Exchange 5.5
> > whitepaper on MS's
> > > > website.
> > > >
> > > > The discuss_exch2000 group has 10 entries for backup.
> > > >
> 

RE: backup

[Mike Carlson]

Because I clicked on the link at the bottom of the emails. And since it
was almost midnight, my time, I failed to notice that the link brought
you to the 5.5 faq instead of the 2k faq.


Mike Carlson
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.domitianx.com

Master Of The Spoon People
Keeper Of None
 

> -Original Message-
> From: Tony Hlabse [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
> Sent: Saturday, November 10, 2001 6:40 AM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: Re: backup
> 
> 
> Pretty basic stuff. All/most all books on E2K and 2K Server 
> have procedures in them to do a backup. Why would you look in 
> the 5.5 FAQ if your using E2K?
> 
> ----- Original Message -
> From: "Mike Carlson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: "Exchange Discussions" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sent: Friday, November 09, 2001 11:55 PM
> Subject: RE: backup
> 
> 
> Welp. The E2k faq wasn't much better.
> 
> Am I going to do any damage from a online backup? Is there 
> anything I should look out for?  What is the proper procedure 
> for an offline backup.
> 
> Any help is appreciated.
> 
> 
> Mike Carlson
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> http://www.domitianx.com
> 
> Master Of The Spoon People
> Keeper Of None
> 
> 
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Mike Carlson
> > Sent: Friday, November 09, 2001 10:37 PM
> > To: Exchange Discussions
> > Subject: RE: backup
> >
> >
> > Welp. I mispoke about info in the Faq. I was looking in the 
> 5.5 FAQ. 
> > 2k faq seems to have a bit more.
> >
> > ********
> > Mike Carlson
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > http://www.domitianx.com
> >
> > Master Of The Spoon People
> > Keeper Of None
> > 
> >
> > > -Original Message-
> > > From: Mike Carlson
> > > Sent: Friday, November 09, 2001 10:35 PM
> > > To: Exchange Discussions
> > > Subject: RE: backup
> > >
> > >
> > > It does sound new to me, but I found very little in the FAQ about 
> > > back up except what to use.
> > >
> > > I find the FAQ not very useful. Things like Open File Agent = BAD 
> > > without an explanation is useless.
> > >
> > > The only reference I found was to an Exchange 5.5 
> whitepaper on MS's 
> > > website.
> > >
> > > The discuss_exch2000 group has 10 entries for backup.
> > >
> > > The MS info I found here: 
> > > http://www.microsoft.com/technet/treeview/default.asp?url=/tec
> > > hnet/prodt echnol/exchange/maintain/operate/opsguide/e2kops5.asp
> > >
> > > It talks about off line storage but it doesn't talk about how I 
> > > should stop the services to do an off-line backup. Do I have to 
> > > manually stop everything first? I am backing up to disk using 
> > > NTBackup.
> > >
> > > 
> > > Mike Carlson
> > > [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > http://www.domitianx.com
> > >
> > > Master Of The Spoon People
> > > Keeper Of None
> > > 
> > >
> > > > -Original Message-
> > > > From: Josefowski, Larry [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > > > Sent: Friday, November 09, 2001 8:54 PM
> > > > To: Exchange Discussions
> > > > Subject: RE: backup
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Have you backed up the server before?  The NT backup on
> > the Exchange
> > > > server is a little different, and backs up the Exchange
> > Store, known
> > > > as an "on-line" backup.  If this sounds new to you, you
> > haven't read
> > > > the FAQ.
> > > >
> > > > -Original Message-
> > > > From: Mike Carlson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > > > Sent: Friday, November 09, 2001 9:50 PM
> > > > To: Exchange Discussions
> > > > Subject: BackUp
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > I am going to use NTBackup to back up my exchange box. I have 
> > > > selected system state, C: drive and Exchange.
> > > >
> > > > Are there any issues with doing this? Any recommendations?
> > > >
> > > > Thanks,
> > > >
> > > > 
> > > > Mike Carlson
> > > > [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > > http://www.domitianx.com
> > > >
> > > > Master Of The Spoon People
> > 

RE: backup

[Mike Carlson]

Welp. The E2k faq wasn't much better.

Am I going to do any damage from a online backup? Is there anything I
should look out for?  What is the proper procedure for an offline
backup.

Any help is appreciated.


Mike Carlson
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.domitianx.com

Master Of The Spoon People
Keeper Of None
 

> -Original Message-
> From: Mike Carlson 
> Sent: Friday, November 09, 2001 10:37 PM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: RE: backup
> 
> 
> Welp. I mispoke about info in the Faq. I was looking in the 
> 5.5 FAQ. 2k faq seems to have a bit more.
> 
> 
> Mike Carlson
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> http://www.domitianx.com
> 
> Master Of The Spoon People
> Keeper Of None
> ******** 
> 
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Mike Carlson
> > Sent: Friday, November 09, 2001 10:35 PM
> > To: Exchange Discussions
> > Subject: RE: backup
> > 
> > 
> > It does sound new to me, but I found very little in the FAQ
> > about back up except what to use.
> > 
> > I find the FAQ not very useful. Things like Open File Agent =
> > BAD without an explanation is useless.
> > 
> > The only reference I found was to an Exchange 5.5 whitepaper
> > on MS's website.
> > 
> > The discuss_exch2000 group has 10 entries for backup.
> > 
> > The MS info I found here:
> > http://www.microsoft.com/technet/treeview/default.asp?url=/tec
> > hnet/prodt
> > echnol/exchange/maintain/operate/opsguide/e2kops5.asp
> > 
> > It talks about off line storage but it doesn't talk about how
> > I should stop the services to do an off-line backup. Do I 
> > have to manually stop everything first? I am backing up to 
> > disk using NTBackup.
> > 
> > 
> > Mike Carlson
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > http://www.domitianx.com
> > 
> > Master Of The Spoon People
> > Keeper Of None
> > 
> > 
> > > -Original Message-
> > > From: Josefowski, Larry [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > > Sent: Friday, November 09, 2001 8:54 PM
> > > To: Exchange Discussions
> > > Subject: RE: backup
> > > 
> > > 
> > > Have you backed up the server before?  The NT backup on 
> the Exchange 
> > > server is a little different, and backs up the Exchange 
> Store, known 
> > > as an "on-line" backup.  If this sounds new to you, you 
> haven't read 
> > > the FAQ.
> > > 
> > > -Original Message-----
> > > From: Mike Carlson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > > Sent: Friday, November 09, 2001 9:50 PM
> > > To: Exchange Discussions
> > > Subject: BackUp
> > > 
> > > 
> > > I am going to use NTBackup to back up my exchange box. I have 
> > > selected system state, C: drive and Exchange.
> > > 
> > > Are there any issues with doing this? Any recommendations?
> > > 
> > > Thanks,
> > > 
> > > 
> > > Mike Carlson
> > > [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > http://www.domitianx.com
> > > 
> > > Master Of The Spoon People
> > > Keeper Of None
> > > 
> > > 
> > > _
> > > List posting FAQ:   http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
> > > Archives:   http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp
> > > To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > 
> > > _
> > > List posting FAQ:   http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
> > > Archives:   http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp
> > > To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > 
> > 
> > _
> > List posting FAQ:   http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
> > Archives:   http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp
> > To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > 
> 
> _
> List posting FAQ:   http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
> Archives:   http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp
> To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 

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

RE: backup

[Mike Carlson]

Welp. I mispoke about info in the Faq. I was looking in the 5.5 FAQ. 2k
faq seems to have a bit more.


Mike Carlson
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.domitianx.com

Master Of The Spoon People
Keeper Of None
 

> -Original Message-
> From: Mike Carlson 
> Sent: Friday, November 09, 2001 10:35 PM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: RE: backup
> 
> 
> It does sound new to me, but I found very little in the FAQ 
> about back up except what to use.
> 
> I find the FAQ not very useful. Things like Open File Agent = 
> BAD without an explanation is useless.
> 
> The only reference I found was to an Exchange 5.5 whitepaper 
> on MS's website.
> 
> The discuss_exch2000 group has 10 entries for backup.
> 
> The MS info I found here: 
> http://www.microsoft.com/technet/treeview/default.asp?url=/tec
> hnet/prodt
> echnol/exchange/maintain/operate/opsguide/e2kops5.asp
> 
> It talks about off line storage but it doesn't talk about how 
> I should stop the services to do an off-line backup. Do I 
> have to manually stop everything first? I am backing up to 
> disk using NTBackup.
> 
> 
> Mike Carlson
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> http://www.domitianx.com
> 
> Master Of The Spoon People
> Keeper Of None
>  
> 
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Josefowski, Larry [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > Sent: Friday, November 09, 2001 8:54 PM
> > To: Exchange Discussions
> > Subject: RE: backup
> > 
> > 
> > Have you backed up the server before?  The NT backup on the
> > Exchange server is a little different, and backs up the 
> > Exchange Store, known as an "on-line" backup.  If this sounds 
> > new to you, you haven't read the FAQ.
> > 
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Mike Carlson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > Sent: Friday, November 09, 2001 9:50 PM
> > To: Exchange Discussions
> > Subject: BackUp
> > 
> > 
> > I am going to use NTBackup to back up my exchange box. I have
> > selected system state, C: drive and Exchange.
> > 
> > Are there any issues with doing this? Any recommendations?
> > 
> > Thanks,
> > 
> > 
> > Mike Carlson
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > http://www.domitianx.com
> > 
> > Master Of The Spoon People
> > Keeper Of None
> > 
> > 
> > _
> > List posting FAQ:   http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
> > Archives:   http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp
> > To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > 
> > _
> > List posting FAQ:   http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
> > Archives:   http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp
> > To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > 
> 
> _
> List posting FAQ:   http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
> Archives:   http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp
> To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 

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

RE: backup

[Mike Carlson]

It does sound new to me, but I found very little in the FAQ about back
up except what to use.

I find the FAQ not very useful. Things like Open File Agent = BAD
without an explanation is useless.

The only reference I found was to an Exchange 5.5 whitepaper on MS's
website.

The discuss_exch2000 group has 10 entries for backup.

The MS info I found here:
http://www.microsoft.com/technet/treeview/default.asp?url=/technet/prodt
echnol/exchange/maintain/operate/opsguide/e2kops5.asp

It talks about off line storage but it doesn't talk about how I should
stop the services to do an off-line backup. Do I have to manually stop
everything first? I am backing up to disk using NTBackup.

****
Mike Carlson
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.domitianx.com

Master Of The Spoon People
Keeper Of None
 

> -Original Message-
> From: Josefowski, Larry [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
> Sent: Friday, November 09, 2001 8:54 PM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: RE: backup
> 
> 
> Have you backed up the server before?  The NT backup on the 
> Exchange server is a little different, and backs up the 
> Exchange Store, known as an "on-line" backup.  If this sounds 
> new to you, you haven't read the FAQ.
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: Mike Carlson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Friday, November 09, 2001 9:50 PM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: BackUp
> 
> 
> I am going to use NTBackup to back up my exchange box. I have 
> selected system state, C: drive and Exchange.
> 
> Are there any issues with doing this? Any recommendations?
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> 
> Mike Carlson
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> http://www.domitianx.com
> 
> Master Of The Spoon People
> Keeper Of None
>  
> 
> _
> List posting FAQ:   http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
> Archives:   http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp
> To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 
> _
> List posting FAQ:   http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
> Archives:   http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp
> To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 

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

RE: exchange digest: November 08, 2001

[Mike Carlson]

Shawn:

I do not disagree with you on all points, just some of them. Comments
below.


Mike Carlson
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.domitianx.com
 

> -Original Message-
> From: Shawn Connelly [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
> Sent: Friday, November 09, 2001 7:38 PM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: RE: exchange digest: November 08, 2001
> 
> 
> Mike, I really wanted to bow out of this over-discussed 
> thread but I felt compelled to comment.
> 
> >Subject: RE: Outlook blocked access to the following 
> potentially unsafe
> >From: "Mike Carlson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >Date: Thu, 8 Nov 2001 17:45:21 -0600
> >
> >No reason to blame MS for stupid people that open every 
> >"clickmetof*ckupyourcomputer.exe" they get in an email.
> >
> >When are people going to take responsibility for stupid 
> stuff they do 
> >and their own incompetence.
> 
> Hello?  Mike are you there?  (Apologizes for the sarcasm...but...)
> 
> For the last time (I HOPE), it's not about clicking on .exe 
> files!!  It never has been about click on .exe files!! It's 
> always been about scripting files that execute simply by 
> having a preview pane open or masquerading as a benign 
> graphics file or a seemingly innocent MS Word document or MS 
> Excel spreadsheet or... just about anything else Microsoft 
> has had their hands in.
> 
> Why is this so difficult to understand?

Because vbs files and what not are only but a part of the problem.
People don't get screwed only by vbs files or other scripts. FunLove was
an executable. That ripped through networks and is still around. We
still battle that one. The security update was not implemented to stop
only vbs files and other scripts. It was developed to prevent all types
of viruses and worms. The vbs ones just got the most attention recently.

> 
> Sure, you may want to add that is what anti-virus software is 
> for... but I say MS should just listen to their customers and 
> figg'n remove the potentially damaging 'features' of their 
> scripting language.

They have listened. Thats why we have the patch. I would think that it
would be hard to remove the damaging features of the scripting language
when that is what runs Outlook. The forms are built from the very same
scripting language. As a VBScript/Outlook/ASP developer I would find it
very difficult to do my job if Outlook could not interpret the script
that I have in my forms.

> 
> Sure, you may want to add that all a user must do is disable 
> the vb scripting components of their OS?  Really now, so 
> AGAIN, instead of fixing the problem, let's just remove it 
> entirely?  What about the many situations where basic 
> scripting is required?  Why isn't Sun's JAVA dangerous?

It can be. I have seen Java stuff that could do serious damage with the
click of the mouse. A in-house Java developer demonstrated that.
Click.GrindDead Computer.

If someone wanted to they could do just as much damage with a Java app
than you can with VBScript. Since Java is such a low level language you
don't find the 10th grade script kiddies creating Java apps that do
damage. Those same kids can go out and search on the web for 15 minutes
and put together a VBScript that will do damage since the only tool you
really need is notepad.

> 
> Oh, what's the other common excuse I read 
> That MS products are so much more popular (ubiquitous?), that 
> is why there are so many vulnerabilities?  
> What utter nonsense!  
> Microsoft products have so many vulnerabilities because their 
> products have so many more vulnerabilities than other products!  
> Have you forgotten that there are most Apache servers than 
> IIS installations and more Novell Servers than Microsoft 
> Servers. Why are these facts so difficult to understand?

The excuse is not that they have more vulnerabilities because they are
popular, it because they are popular that they are targets. Since there
are more uninformed, untrained and irresponsible people using Windows,
viruses and worms spread faster on Windows. I have said it many, many
times. If linux was as popular as Windows, you would see about the same
amount of Linux viruses. There are some linux viruses out there, but the
penetration isnt that great because it isnt that common place.

The Apache argument is becoming less and less valid. If you do more
research on the Apache/IIS debate you will see that even NetCraft is
modifying their stats to reflect that Linux installations can have
thousands upon thousands of TLDs on a single server where as IIS
averages around a few hundred. One ISP I used had 3,000 websites on one
linux box.

> 
> Do I hate Microsoft like some of you have erroneously 
> assume

BackUp

[Mike Carlson]

I am going to use NTBackup to back up my exchange box. I have selected
system state, C: drive and Exchange.

Are there any issues with doing this? Any recommendations?

Thanks,


Mike Carlson
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.domitianx.com

Master Of The Spoon People
Keeper Of None
 

_
List posting FAQ:   http://www.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: Forest and domain prep

[Mike Carlson]

Thanks Andrew.

That is what I assumed, but I just needed to confirm.


Mike Carlson
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.domitianx.com

Master Of The Spoon People
Keeper Of None
 

-Original Message-
From: Andrew Chan [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: Friday, November 09, 2001 6:42 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Forest and domain prep


If you installed fresh Exchange 2k, you don't need to run those tools.
They RAN themselves behind the scene already.  However, if you DO have
the older exchange and wanna still talk to it after you E2K install,
there are a couple of steps you have to do first.  If you wanna to know
more, there are plenty of KB articles you can find on MS.  

Andrew,
MCSE (NT & W2K) + CCNA


-Original Message-----
From: Mike Carlson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Posted At: Friday, November 09, 2001 4:30 PM
Posted To: NewsgroupDiscussion
Conversation: Forest and domain prep
Subject: RE: Forest and domain prep


I apologize for chiming in here late, but I have question.

Do you NEED to run these tools? What exactly are they for and what do
they do? I set up AD at home on one box and installed exchange on that
box. Should I have run these before I installed exchange? Should I run
them now?

I have never upgraded from NT 4 or an earlier version of exchange. I am
assuming these tools are only for if you are migrating, correct?

Thanks,

****
Mike Carlson
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.domitianx.com

Master Of The Spoon People
Keeper Of None
 

-Original Message-
From: Chris Scharff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: Friday, November 09, 2001 2:52 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Forest and domain prep


Well, it causes an entire replication of the GC schema and I suppose I
wouldn't want to be mucking about in it too much... How's 0300 GMT on
Saturday work for ya?

Chris
-- 
Chris Scharff
Senior Sales Engineer
MessageOne
If you can't measure, you can't manage! 


> -Original Message-
> From: Varghese, Wilson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Friday, November 09, 2001 2:51 PM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: RE: Forest and domain prep
> 
> 
> So it's not like other databases where you don't want people logged in

> during schema updates?  I was just covering my behind in making sure
> that users accessing resources in AD wouldn't cause issues.  When we 
> did our first forest prep in our test lab, it failed.  But when we ran

> it again, it worked.  Only difference was, the first time, we were
> goofing around with AD (checking permissions, creating new users, etc)
> 
> I guess I'm just a tad bit nervous.  This has to work on the first try

> or we
> will have some pretty ticked off directors.
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Wilson Varghese
> NT Systems Manager
> KMV, LLC
> Office: (415)229-0726
> Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 
>  -Original Message-
> From: Chris Scharff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
> Sent: Friday, November 09, 2001 12:33 PM
> To:   Exchange Discussions
> Subject:  RE: Forest and domain prep
> 
> Forestprep and domainprep don't cause outages, so I might ask you to
> rephrase the question? Replication of the changes could take weeks 
> depending on the environment. It took about 60 minutes for me to 
> install and configure E2K including forestprep and domainprep in my 
> lab last night. Course I've done it once or twice before...
> 
> Chris
> --
> Chris Scharff
> Senior Sales Engineer
> MessageOne
> If you can't measure, you can't manage!
> 
> 
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Varghese, Wilson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > Sent: Friday, November 09, 2001 1:53 PM
> > To: Exchange Discussions
> > Subject: Forest and domain prep
> > 
> > 
> > Does anyone know if there is a formula to calculate the amount of 
> > time it will take to do a forest prep and domain prep for a Exchange

> > 2000 migration?
> > 
> > 
> > Or can someone give me some numbers on how long it took you to do it

> > when you did the migration?
> > 
> > I am just trying to see what kind of an outage window I should 
> > prepare for, but don't see any documentation on this.
> > 
> > Thanks for any info you can provide.
> > 
> > Wilson Varghese
> > NT Systems Manager
> > KMV, LLC
> > Office: (415)229-0726
> > Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > 
> > 
> > _
> > List posting FAQ:   http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
> > Archives:   http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp
> > To u

RE: Outlook blocked access to the following potentially unsafe - FOR THE LAST TIME!

[Mike Carlson]

Its all a matter of experience. If I had to manage a Novell network by
myself it would take me a hell of a lot longer to test stuff and
configure things than my NT/2k boxes.

Also, with Linux. I can guarantee my NT/2k boxes are much more secure
that my Linux boxes. The reason is my level of experience. I have not
spent enough time diving into Linux. I am a Linux hobbyist.

Anyone that makes a blanket statement about TCO of any platform is a
beer short of a six pack. It all comes down to experience and resources.


Mike Carlson
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.domitianx.com

Master Of The Spoon People
Keeper Of None
 

-Original Message-
From: Shawn Connelly [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: Friday, November 09, 2001 6:19 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Outlook blocked access to the following potentially unsafe
- FOR THE LAST TIME!


> Subject: RE: Outlook blocked access to the following potentially 
>unsafe
>From: "Martin Blackstone" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Date: Thu, 8 Nov 2001 11:45:06 -0800
>Even allowing your mail system to pass .EXE and .COM files is a
mistake.
>You should thank MS for making OL block those types of files since you
>don't.

Huh??

So are implying that every other mail platform is dangerous because they
allow .com and .exe files?

Gee, I thought the real issue (read: problem) was the way Microsoft
processed their 'special' files (e.g. asp, vb*). 

Thank Microsoft, you must be joking?   

Let's see, in a typical work:
I spend about 3-6 hours research and testing (YES I really do test both
in my test lab and on my workstation VMs)  Microsoft's latest bug
patches.  
For Linux, probably about 1-3 hours per week.  
For Netware 5, probably not much more than 1 hour per week.  

The point being, Microsoft can make it easier but all I see is
supporting MS products is becoming more and more costly.  
[Unnecessary inflammatory comment warning] Anyone who claims the TCO is
lower for MS NOS products as compared to Novell NOS (or any other NOS
for that matter) understands little about non-MS NOS platforms!

Okay, I'm done my rant!
 
>-Original Message- [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
>On Behalf Of Andy David
>Sent: Thursday, November 08, 2001 11:41 AM
>Subject: RE: Outlook blocked access to the following potentially unsafe
>>>>>For such a typically minor patch?
>   Where did you get that idea?

8mb worth of changes Patches have been larger. yeah, yeah, I
know Size is not representative at all.  Why are you nitpicking
something so unimportant, forgedabowdid!

>The Patch didnt break Outlook, your lack of preparation did. Over and 
>Out.

For god's sakes, how many times must I repeat myself? 

I understood the consequences!

My intent was to simply protest the method Microsoft used to 'correct'
the problems with Outlook.  I was really hoping to hear that fellow
administrators also agreed with my observations.  

Damn, I did not expect a lynch mob! 

I'm beginning to think this is a discussion group for a Microsoft cult.
(ha! - now take it easy, that means joke okay?)

I'll tell y'all what, from now on I'll wear my dunce cap and promise
never to speak ill of Microsoft ever again.

BTW, I wish some of you folks would edit your responses (delete the
unnecessary text) before pressing the send button.  

Have a nice day everyone!

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

_
List posting FAQ:   http://www.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: Forest and domain prep

[Mike Carlson]

I apologize for chiming in here late, but I have question.

Do you NEED to run these tools? What exactly are they for and what do
they do? I set up AD at home on one box and installed exchange on that
box. Should I have run these before I installed exchange? Should I run
them now?

I have never upgraded from NT 4 or an earlier version of exchange. I am
assuming these tools are only for if you are migrating, correct?

Thanks,


Mike Carlson
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.domitianx.com

Master Of The Spoon People
Keeper Of None
 

-Original Message-
From: Chris Scharff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: Friday, November 09, 2001 2:52 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Forest and domain prep


Well, it causes an entire replication of the GC schema and I suppose I
wouldn't want to be mucking about in it too much... How's 0300 GMT on
Saturday work for ya?

Chris
-- 
Chris Scharff
Senior Sales Engineer
MessageOne
If you can't measure, you can't manage! 


> -Original Message-
> From: Varghese, Wilson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Friday, November 09, 2001 2:51 PM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: RE: Forest and domain prep
> 
> 
> So it's not like other databases where you don't want people
> logged in during schema updates?  I was just covering my 
> behind in making sure that users accessing resources in AD 
> wouldn't cause issues.  When we did our first forest prep in 
> our test lab, it failed.  But when we ran it again, it 
> worked.  Only difference was, the first time, we were goofing 
> around with AD (checking permissions, creating new users, etc)
> 
> I guess I'm just a tad bit nervous.  This has to work on the
> first try or we
> will have some pretty ticked off directors.
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Wilson Varghese
> NT Systems Manager
> KMV, LLC
> Office: (415)229-0726
> Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 
>  -Original Message-
> From: Chris Scharff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
> Sent: Friday, November 09, 2001 12:33 PM
> To:   Exchange Discussions
> Subject:  RE: Forest and domain prep
> 
> Forestprep and domainprep don't cause outages, so I might ask
> you to rephrase the question? Replication of the changes 
> could take weeks depending on the environment. It took about 
> 60 minutes for me to install and configure E2K including 
> forestprep and domainprep in my lab last night. Course I've 
> done it once or twice before...
> 
> Chris
> --
> Chris Scharff
> Senior Sales Engineer
> MessageOne
> If you can't measure, you can't manage! 
> 
> 
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Varghese, Wilson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > Sent: Friday, November 09, 2001 1:53 PM
> > To: Exchange Discussions
> > Subject: Forest and domain prep
> > 
> > 
> > Does anyone know if there is a formula to calculate the amount of 
> > time it will take to do a forest prep and domain prep for a Exchange

> > 2000 migration?
> > 
> > 
> > Or can someone give me some numbers on how long it took you to do it

> > when you did the migration?
> > 
> > I am just trying to see what kind of an outage window I should 
> > prepare for, but don't see any documentation on this.
> > 
> > Thanks for any info you can provide.
> > 
> > Wilson Varghese
> > NT Systems Manager
> > KMV, LLC
> > Office: (415)229-0726
> > Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > 
> > 
> > _
> > List posting FAQ:   http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
> > Archives:   http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp
> > To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > 
> 
> _
> List posting FAQ:   http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
> Archives:   http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp
> To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 
> _
> List posting FAQ:   http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
> Archives:   http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp
> To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 

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

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

RE: OWA 2000 KISS

[Mike Carlson]

You are just trying to set it up so that they don't have to type the
extra \exchange on the end right?

You could also set the default website to point to the same virtual
directory that the \exchange virtual directory points to. I believe that
should work.


Mike Carlson
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.domitianx.com

Master Of The Spoon People
Keeper Of None
 

-Original Message-
From: Ed Crowley [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: Friday, November 09, 2001 5:43 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: OWA 2000 KISS


You could make it even easier by creating a CNAME record for "mail" and
point it to servername.

Ed Crowley MCSE+Internet MVP
Tech Consultant
Compaq Computer Corporation (soon to be HP)
All your base are belong to us.


-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Morrison, Gordon
Sent: Thursday, November 08, 2001 6:44 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: OWA 2000 KISS



Is there any way I can change the OWA launch location from being
"http:\\servername\exchange" to "http:\\servername".  This was pretty
straightforward on 5.5 OWA, but when I try it on 2000 I either get an
unauthorized to view message or I get a directory listing format, which
is kind of cool, but would make my users cranky.

Thanks
Gordon


















___NOTICE
This electronic mail transmission contains confidential information
intended only for the person(s) named. Any use, distribution, copying or
disclosure by any other person is strictly prohibited. If you received
this transmission in error, please notify the sender by reply e-mail and
then destroy the message. Opinions, conclusions, and other information
in this message that do not relate to the official business of Bain &
Company shall be understood to be neither given nor endorsed by the
Company. When addressed to Bain clients, any information contained in
this e-mail is subject to the terms and conditions in the governing
client contract.

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


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

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

E2k SP2

[Mike Carlson]

Out of curiosity, what is the target release date of SP2 for E2k?


Mike Carlson
http://www.domitianx.com
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Master Of The Spoon People
Keeper Of None
 

_
List posting FAQ:   http://www.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: Upgrading to W2K

[Mike Carlson]

Upgrading is like rolling the dice. It may work and it may not.

A clean install is always the recommended procedure.


Mike Carlson
http://www.domitianx.com
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Master Of The Spoon People
Keeper Of None
 

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: Friday, November 09, 2001 1:28 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: Upgrading to W2K


I want to upgrade an NT4 SP6a server with E5.5 Sp4 to W2K Server.  I
want to do a direct upgrade and not have to touch Exchange.  Has anyone
done this and if so are there any pitfalls to be aware of?  I plan to
review TechNet prior to doing it but I thought someone who as had the
experience could comment.

Thanks.




Bill Lambert, MCP,MCSE


Network Consultant
Endoxy Healthcare
847-941-9206
[EMAIL PROTECTED] 

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

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