RE: AOL is Blocking Mail from My Exchange Server 5.5

[Russ Chung]

Jim,

mail.earthlink.net
should work for your outbound mail relay.  That's what I use for my 
server. 

Russ


Russell W. Chung
800.419.8726
+1/818.957.4925
fax: +1/818.951.5761

[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote on 11/06/2003 01:32:12 PM:

> Well, I'm hoping to find an EMail Host that will provide outbound relay.
> Know of any?
> 
> Jim Underwood

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

RE: S/MIME

[Russ Chung]

Since HHS is a federal agency, you should be using the Federal Bridge 
Certification Authority (FBCA) to connect to other Federal Agencies. 
Currently,  use of the FBCA requires certain proprietary APIs to do 
certificate validation.
Here is a link to more information about the Federal bridge:
http://csrc.nist.gov/pki/fbca/welcome.html


Russell W. Chung
800.419.8726
+1/818.957.4925
fax: +1/818.951.5761

[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote on 12/04/2003 11:48:15 AM:

> I have a few questions here that I'd like to put out there.  Now, 
> mind you.  I'm not an expert in this field.  That's why I'm turning 
> to the people on this list for advice.  With that said.
> 
> -Since we have a requirement for secure messaging over the internet 
> with other government agencies.  We would have to get a third party 
> CA to accomplish this.  The other agencies that we would want to 
> communicate with also would have to go through a third party as well
> to obtain a CA so we can transmit messages securely between one another?
> 
> -Also, since we also have a requirement for us to have secure 
> messaging internally.  We already have a root CA in place within our
> organization.  Setting up S/MIME internally isn't that hard.  But if
> we already have this root CA in place and we needed to obtain a 
> third party CA.  How would we implement this third party CA into our
> already existing root CA?  I'm sure if there is a way to do this. 
> Are there any docs that describe how to accomplish this feat?
> 
> Thank you,
> 
> _
> John Bowles
> Exchange Engineer
> OIG/HHS
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]  
> 
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Tony Hlabse
> Sent: Thursday, December 04, 2003 2:05 PM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: RE: S/MIME
> 
> 
> which client will be signing the message? Also which version of Exchange
> 
> 
> From: "Bowles, John (OIG/OMP)" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Reply-To: "Exchange Discussions" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: "Exchange Discussions" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Subject: S/MIME
> Date: Thu, 4 Dec 2003 13:39:45 -0500
> 
> All,
> 
> I'm trying to setup S/MIME since we all of a sudden require message 
security 
> within our organization.  I'm trying to get an understanding on how this 

> works in the real world.  I've setup a test lab here at work.  But that 
can 
> only help me understand how to get things done internally.  I'm looking 
at a 
> braoder scope of allowing our messages to be secure while passing over 
the 
> internet to other corporations etc.  Can someone point me in the 
direction 
> on what I need to read to understand this a little bit better I'd really 

> appreciate it.
> 
> Also, if anyone wants to contact me offline.  I have a few questions 
that 
> I'd like answered if you have time.
> 
> TIA,
> 
> _
> John Bowles
> Exchange Engineer
> OIG/HHS
> [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]
> 
> _
> Don't worry if your Inbox will max out while you are enjoying the 
holidays. 
> Get MSN Extra Storage!  http://join.msn.com/?PAGE=features/es
> 
> 
> _
> List posting FAQ:   http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
> Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?
> enter=exchange&text_mode=&lang=english
> To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 
> _
> List posting FAQ:   http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
> Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?
> enter=exchange&text_mode=&lang=english
> To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]


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

RE: Comment on Notes and Exchange

[Russ Chung]

Craig/David,

I think that you may be confusing the Lotus Communications Server (LCS) 
with the Lotus Messaging Switch (LMS).
The LCS was announced at cc:Mail Interchange '93, and was supposed to be 
the product that served as the "Enterprise Messaging Backbone" that would 
link X.400, SMTP/MIME, Notes and cc:Mail, and support gateways to fax, 
MHS, PROFS, etc.  There were supposed to be versions for DOS, OS/2, UNIX 
(Sun, AIX, HP), NLM, and NT.  It was meant to be the message transfer 
agent, not the message store.  Lotus never shipped the product, and I 
assumed that it was because of technical reasons rather than internal 
politics, but possibly Mary is correct that it was political, because the 
technology eventually ended up in the Domino server.
The LMS was developed by the Softswitch division of Lotus, and provided a 
UNIX based alternative to the mainframe based Softswitch Central.  That 
product did ship in the mid-1990s (I forget the date).  It served as a 
message transfer agent, and was not a message store, but it did support 
optional mail enabled applications such as library services and directory 
services.

It's deja vu all over again.  The same internal tensions that hurt the 
Lotus/cc:Mail relationship are appearing in the IBM/Lotus relationship. 

Russ


Russell W. Chung
800.419.8726
+1/818.957.4925
fax: +1/818.951.5761
http://www.ameagle.com




"Dupler, Craig" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent by: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
09/04/02 02:03 PM
Please respond to "Exchange Discussions"
 
To: "Exchange Discussions" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
cc: 
Subject:RE: Comment on Notes and Exchange


I guess you bought the spin.  What I said was correct.

R1 did not do anything to which a gateway could be attached.

Mary McCarthy gave lots of pitches wherein LMS was clearly described as a
combination message store and MTA common to both Notes and cc:Mail, and it
did not get built because the team was not assembled.

Perhaps integration with AD is finally happening.  That in no way
contradicts what I said about their early resistance to the notion due to
their multi-platform approach.

Finally, just because I don't like many of the decisions that they have 
made
along the way, you should not interpret that as not admiring much of what
they accomplished.  This isn't religion.  criticism is not "bashing."  If 
it
were I would have some real problems, since my strongest criticisms have
been reserved for some of the things that the Exchange team has done, even
though I think they still win out overall.



-Original Message-
From: David Weinstein [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Wednesday, September 04, 2002 9:03 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Comment on Notes and Exchange


The Technology that Notes is built on has allowed it to be resilient and
morph it self to an ever changing market conditions.  It was declared dead
at the start of the Internet revolution but with the help of IBM was able 
to
quickly deliver a decent HTTP server in R4 and native SMTP transport which
was fine tuned in r4.5.

Just a couple of corrections 
-Notes always had a messaging component even from the R1 days - its native
workflow was built around its ability to do messaging.
-LMS was actually was never intended to be a message store.  It was 
product
that Lotus developed to compete against third party tools to provide 
message
exchange between disparate e-mail systems like PROFS, All-In-One, MS-Mail,
cc:Mail, Notes and Exchange in addition to provide x.400 and SMTP 
transport.
This was primary to assist corporations to exchange e-mail between the
different systems they might have run.
-Notes adaptability has allowed to continue its tight integration with
NT/2000 and with the release R6 Domino, the word is, will tightly 
integrate
AD and provide administrators a single spot to create users both for the
Network and Notes.

-Original Message-
From: Dupler, Craig [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: Tuesday, September 03, 2002 5:13 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Comment on Notes and Exchange


Some typo corrections - sorry.

-Original Message-
From: Dupler, Craig 
Sent: Tuesday, September 03, 2002 2:47 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: Comment on Notes and Exchange


I agree with much of what has been posted, especially about the cost of
switching, Notes not being horrid, and Exchange being more about . . . 
well
that's where I started to disagree, since the phrase that was used was
"e-mail system."

So I thought I would throw in some basics that are very old, very boring 
for
most, but perhaps informative for anyone that is currently involved in a
Notes vs. Exchange battle/discussion.

What is Notes?  You have to answer that in context.  In 1989 when version 
1
first came out, it was a workgroup collaboration tool.  It did not do
e-mail.  It could not connect to the Internet (most LAN e-mail systems
couldn't) and it could not connect to X.400 serv

RE: OT - great fish tacos

[Russ Chung]

Check out this article in the Los Angeles Times about fish tacos

http://www.latimes.com/business/la-71928sep06.story?coll=la%2Dheadlines%2Dbusiness



Russell W. Chung
800.419.8726
+1/818.957.4925
fax: +1/818.951.5761
http://www.ameagle.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]