RE: DOmain name and exchange

[Scharff, Chris]

a. Still no domain name marinex.com registered.
b. Still no Mx record for marinex.com, probably in large part because
there is no marinex.com registered.
c. 4 records seems a bit strange when one could use a single A record and 3
cname records.
d. The Mx record should be the A record.
e. You didn't mention if there was a valid PTR, which there isn't at the
moment since the domain isn't registered.
f. How to receive mail for additional domains is, I believe, covered in the
FAQ.
g. Now that you've discovered the joys of how to create a new thread, please
stop creating new threads when following up to your existing thread would be
more appropriate.
h. What does your Exchange administrator say about all of this?
g. Obfuscation of public records seems a bit silly, given that they're
public records. 

-Original Message-
From: Tener, Richard
To: Exchange Discussions
Sent: 9/27/2001 8:06 AM
Subject: RE: DOmain name and exchange

I went to network solutions and registered the domain name.  Then I have
another guy who is the primary Dns server for our domains. He set up a
MX
record called mail.marinex.com and also added 4 A records with my
mail
servers address.  One is called Pop3 other is smtp and last one is www.
Also there is a SOA record and a NS record.  I also set my server which
is
my mail server as a secondary lookup. 

-Original Message-
From: Sander Van Butzelaar [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Thursday, September 27, 2001 9:00 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: DOmain name and exchange


What does the MX record in that new domain's DNS say? Are you primary
DNS, Hidden primary, secondary etc. If you are hidden primary, check
that the secondary DNS server show the correct MX. I would start looking
at the DNS and follow "the road" down to your exchange box. Once you
have set your Exchange to accept mail, that's what it will do...:-)

Sander

-Original Message-
From: Tener, Richard [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: 27 September 2001 02:55
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: DOmain name and exchange


I have just set up a new domain name and wanted to add it to my mail
server which runs exchange 5.5.  But the problem I am having after I set
it up is that I can send but I cant recieve.  I set up the DNS, and I
know its somthing to do with exchange.  I went to the IMS and added the
new name in the routing tab and stopped the IMS and started it again.
But After almost 24 hours of setting up the DNS I still cant recieve.
Any Ideas anyone. Thanks 
Rich

-Original Message-
From: Sander Van Butzelaar [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Thursday, September 27, 2001 8:50 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: DOmain name and exchange


How to make a new domain name? i.e. change your email domain or add
another? Just accept mail on your IMC for that domain and make sure you
have the corresponding MX record in your DNS

 Sander

-Original Message-
From: Tener, Richard [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: 27 September 2001 02:42
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: DOmain name and exchange


Does anyone know where I can go to find out how to make a new domain
name with a current mail server. Its for exchane 5.5

Thanks 
Rich

_
List posting FAQ:   http://www.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: new domain for mail server

[Scharff, Chris]

My DNS lookups fail... can't find marinex.com: Non-existent domain

Also a whois search fails to find any registration for marinex.com. 

BTW, how do you know it has something to do with Exchange? What does the NDR
people receive say which leads you to believe the issue is related to
Exchange?

*
  Chris Scharff[EMAIL PROTECTED]www.swinc.com
  Simpler-Webb, Inc.  Austin, TX +1-512-322-0071
* 

> -Original Message-
> From: Tener, Richard [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
> Sent: Wednesday, September 26, 2001 4:37 PM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: RE: new domain for mail server
> 
> 
> I went to network solutions and registered the domain name.  
> Then I have
> another guy who is the primary Dns server for our domains. He 
> set up a MX
> record called mail.marinex.com and also added 4 A records 
> with my mail
> servers address.  One is called Pop3 other is smtp and last 
> one is www.
> Also there is a SOA record and a NS record.  I also set my 
> server which is
> my mail server as a secondary lookup. 
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: Kevin Miller [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Wednesday, September 26, 2001 5:30 PM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: RE: new domain for mail server
> 
> 
> MX record? Do you have people who have the email address/? How did you
> "setup a new domain?"
> 
> Kevinm WLKMMAS, UCC+WCA
> ~~~
> All spelling and Factual errors are the fault of Bob Barker
> ~~~
> This space has been rented by:
> Http://www.tiggercam.co.uk For all your tigger needs
> You 2 can rent this space if you need it.
> 
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of 
> Tener, Richard
> Sent: Wednesday, September 26, 2001 2:29 PM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: new domain for mail server
> 
> 
> I have just set up a new domain name and wanted to add it to my mail
> server which runs exchange 5.5.  But the problem I am having 
> after I set
> it up is that I can send but I cant recieve.  I set up the DNS, and I
> know its somthing to do with exchange.  I went to the IMS and 
> added the
> new name in the routing tab and stopped the IMS and started it again.
> Does anyone know what else I have to do.

_
List posting FAQ:   http://www.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: How to add public contacts to outlook address book automatica lly?

[Scharff, Chris]

If everyone really needs to have access to those addresses for name
resolution, they should be transferred to the GAL.

*
  Chris Scharff[EMAIL PROTECTED]www.swinc.com
  Simpler-Webb, Inc.  Austin, TX +1-512-322-0071
* 

> -Original Message-
> From: Tom.Gray [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
> Sent: Wednesday, September 26, 2001 8:53 AM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: How to add public contacts to outlook address book 
> automatically?
> 
> 
> 
> Situation:
>  Exchange 5.5 (one server).  Clients are all Win2kpro with 
> Outlook 2000.
>  User creates several public contact lists.  Gives "everyone" reviewer
>  permissions.  Wants all users to automatically see those 
> contact lists
>  in the address book of outlook.  Right now, each user would have to 
>  "wrong click" on each contact list, then properties, then select
>  the "outlook address book" tab, then check "show  this folder as
>  an outlook address book".  My users can't do this-- sigh.
> 
> Is there a way to automate this?
> 
> Tom Gray, CCNA, CBE
> Network Engineer
> All Kinds of Minds & The Center for Development and Learning
> University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill
> Internet:  [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> AT&T Net: (919)960-
> 
> 
> _
> List posting FAQ:   http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
> Archives:   http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp
> To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 

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

RE: test

[Scharff, Chris]

In my environment I generally won't even look at a message delay issue to an
internet source until it's been delayed at least 4 hours unless there's
free beer involved.

> -Original Message-
> From: Mehringer, Doug [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
> Sent: Tuesday, September 25, 2001 4:42 PM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: test
> 
> 
> 
> Douglass W. Mehringer
> Network Administrator
> Stinson Mag & Fizzell, P.C.
> 100 South Fourth Street
> St. Louis, MO 63102
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> (314) 393-1404 (cell)
> (314) 259-4541(office)

_
List posting FAQ:   http://www.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: Help with Public Folder

[Scharff, Chris]

IBID

> -Original Message-
> From: Mehringer, Doug [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
> Sent: Tuesday, September 25, 2001 4:26 PM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: Help with Public Folder
> 
> 
> I have a user who's Public Folder is showing up as "Mailbox - 
> Lattinville,
> Bob".  This user does have Delegate rights to that users 
> folder, but it
> shows up twice.  One of the two is actually the Public 
> Folders.  I have
> never run into this before and can't seem to find an answer 
> for this on
> Knowledge Base.  The folder cannot be renamed.  Deleting and 
> recreating the
> .ost does not fix it either.  I've tried removing the one 
> users mailbox, but
> the Public Folder is still named incorrectly.  Ever seen this 
> before?  Any
> thoughts, ideas?  I know it's not high level stuff, but it's 
> annoying... :-)
>  
> Thanks,
> 
> Douglass W. Mehringer
> Network Administrator
> Stinson Mag & Fizzell, P.C.
> 100 South Fourth Street
> St. Louis, MO 63102
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> (314) 393-1404 (cell)
> (314) 259-4541(office)
> 
> _
> List posting FAQ:   http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
> Archives:   http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp
> To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 

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

RE: Public Folder named wrong

[Scharff, Chris]

Create a new profile named "New profile"

> -Original Message-
> From: Mehringer, Doug [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
> Sent: Tuesday, September 25, 2001 1:20 PM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: Public Folder named wrong
> 
> 
> I have a user who's Public Folder in outlook 98 is showing up 
> as "Mailbox,
> Username".  It is actually the Public Folders, but I can't 
> find a way to
> rename it.  Anyone ever seen this or know how to fix it.  Can't find
> anything on Knowledge Base.
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Douglass W. Mehringer
> Network Administrator
> Stinson Mag & Fizzell, P.C.
> 100 South Fourth Street
> St. Louis, MO 63102
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]  
> (314) 393-1404 (cell)
> (314) 259-4541(office)
>  
> 
> _
> List posting FAQ:   http://www.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: Help with Public Folder

[Scharff, Chris]

IBID

> -Original Message-
> From: Mehringer, Doug [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
> Sent: Tuesday, September 25, 2001 3:33 PM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: Help with Public Folder
> 
> 
> I have a user who's Public Folder is showing up as "Mailbox - 
> Lattinville,
> Bob".  This user does have Delegate rights to that users 
> folder, but it
> shows up twice.  One of the two is actually the Public 
> Folders.  I have
> never run into this before and can't seem to find an answer 
> for this on
> Knowledge Base.  The folder cannot be renamed.  Deleting and 
> recreating the
> .ost does not fix it either.  I've tried removing the one 
> users mailbox, but
> the Public Folder is still named incorrectly.  Ever seen this 
> before?  Any
> thoughts, ideas?  I know it's not high level stuff, but it's 
> annoying... :-)
>  
> Thanks,
> 
> Douglass W. Mehringer
> Network Administrator
> Stinson Mag & Fizzell, P.C.
> 100 South Fourth Street
> St. Louis, MO 63102
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> (314) 393-1404 (cell)
> (314) 259-4541(office)
> 
> _
> List posting FAQ:   http://www.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 XP application

[Scharff, Chris]

Dmitry's product isn't free, but it is such a great value add for developers
that one might argue it pays for itself quite easily... Especially given
that the price is for a /distributable version/.

Not free, but certainly not expensive And it allows the standard
"security enhancements" in Outlook to remain, protecting your environment
from lusers.

*
  Chris Scharff[EMAIL PROTECTED]www.swinc.com
  Simpler-Webb, Inc.  Austin, TX +1-512-322-0071
* 

> -Original Message-
> From: Presley, Steven [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
> Sent: Tuesday, September 25, 2001 5:36 PM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: RE: Outlook XP application
> 
> 
> Thanks Chris...guess the answer is that there is no "free" 
> way to do it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: Scharff, Chris [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
> Sent: Tuesday, September 25, 2001 3:16 PM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: RE: Outlook XP application
> 
> 
> I believe he could use Redemption to bypass the security model:
> http://shareit1.element5.com/programs.html?productid=139568 
> 
> *
>   Chris Scharff[EMAIL PROTECTED]www.swinc.com
>   Simpler-Webb, Inc.  Austin, TX +1-512-322-0071
> * 
> 
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Presley, Steven [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > Sent: Tuesday, September 25, 2001 4:33 PM
> > To: Exchange Discussions
> > Subject: Outlook XP application
> > 
> > 
> > I have a user who has built an application that accesses the
> > address book in
> > Outlook who just upgraded to XP.  Of course he now gets a 
> > message every time
> > the application tries to run about it being allowed to access 
> > the address
> > book and for how long (no option for always allow).  Does 
> > anyone know how to
> > turn this feature off?  I understand why it is there, but for this
> > particular user that is not a concern.
> > 
> > Thanks for any suggestions (going back to Outlook 2000 is
> > something that I
> > would like to avoid btw).
> > 
> > Thanks,
> > 
> > Steve
> > 
> > 
> > _
> > List posting FAQ:   http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
> > Archives:   http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp
> > To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > 
> 
> _
> List posting FAQ:   http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
> Archives:   http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp
> To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 
> _
> List posting FAQ:   http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
> Archives:   http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp
> To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 

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

RE: Outlook XP application

[Scharff, Chris]

I believe he could use Redemption to bypass the security model:
http://shareit1.element5.com/programs.html?productid=139568 

*
  Chris Scharff[EMAIL PROTECTED]www.swinc.com
  Simpler-Webb, Inc.  Austin, TX +1-512-322-0071
* 

> -Original Message-
> From: Presley, Steven [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
> Sent: Tuesday, September 25, 2001 4:33 PM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: Outlook XP application
> 
> 
> I have a user who has built an application that accesses the 
> address book in
> Outlook who just upgraded to XP.  Of course he now gets a 
> message every time
> the application tries to run about it being allowed to access 
> the address
> book and for how long (no option for always allow).  Does 
> anyone know how to
> turn this feature off?  I understand why it is there, but for this
> particular user that is not a concern.
> 
> Thanks for any suggestions (going back to Outlook 2000 is 
> something that I
> would like to avoid btw).
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Steve
> 
> 
> _
> List posting FAQ:   http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
> Archives:   http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp
> To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 

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

RE: anti-virus protection for Exchange server os

[Scharff, Chris]

Tom isn't saying one shouldn't run an Exchange aware AV product on the
server, he's saying you shouldn't run a file based scanner on an Exchange
server... at least not on the working directories. Since too many admins on
this list are unable to fathom the distinction, the conventional wisdom on
file based AV scanners has been dumbed down to "Don't do it."

There are certainly scenarios in which doing it is appropriate and at their
standard hourly rate, many of the gurus of the list, including Ed, will
happily explain them to anyone in as much detail as their checkbook will
allow.

> -Original Message-
> From: tech [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
> Sent: Tuesday, September 25, 2001 2:59 PM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: RE: anti-virus protection for Exchange server os
> 
> 
> AVAPI 2.0 scans both message body and attachments, adds support for
> proactive and priority-based scanning, and improves on-demand and
> background scanning. With proactive scanning, the system submits
> messages to the IS by putting them in a common queue. You can 
> prioritize
> items in this queue based on need (by default, all are low priority).
> When a client requests an item, AVAPI upgrades the item to high
> priority. The antivirus software proactively scans all items in the
> queue as priorities permit (AVAPI 1.0 treated all items as on-demand
> high-priority items). This approach maximizes detection rates with
> minimal effect on the client. AVAPI 2.0 performs multithreaded
> processing of the queue and supports native MIME and MAPI content
> (without the need for content conversion), which lets 
> antivirus scanning
> and detection operations have minimal effect on system resources. 
> 
> Why will this not do the job?  I admit I may be missing the 
> distinction,
> so please explainwhy this does not do what is required.
> 
> Nathan
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Tom Meunier
> Sent: Tuesday, September 25, 2001 12:58 PM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: RE: anti-virus protection for Exchange server os
> 
> 
> You still are missing the distinction between a file-based scanner and
> scanning the database using an Exchange-aware antivirus solution using
> the AVAPI technology.  They are NOT the same.  Sort of like 
> hitting your
> NTFS volumes with Norton Antivirus for DOS.
> 
> > -Original Message-
> > From: tech [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > Posted At: Tuesday, September 25, 2001 02:49 PM
> > Posted To: MSExchange Mailing List
> > Conversation: anti-virus protection for Exchange server os
> > Subject: RE: anti-virus protection for Exchange server os
> > 
> > 
> > I don't suggest anyone install an AV product physically on 
> the server.
> > 
> > I don't understand why to install on the same box, when 
> they can scan 
> > from a separate system. Microsoft are not against using file based 
> > scanners.  Clearly Microsoft
> > have no aversion to scanning Exchange 2000 servers.
> > 
> > I think previous comments have been misleading about this 
> point.  By 
> > combining installing on the same box and AV scanners.
> > 
> > What does Ed have to say anyway?  This issue seems right up 
> his alley.
> > 
> > Nathan
> > 
> > -Original Message-
> > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of
> > Scharff, Chris
> > Sent: Tuesday, September 25, 2001 12:43 PM
> > To: Exchange Discussions
> > Subject: RE: anti-virus protection for Exchange server os
> > 
> > 
> > Because there's a difference between an Exchange aware AV
> > product using
> > the AVAPI and a file based AV scanner running on a server 
> > which happens
> > to also be running Exchange. 
> > 
> > *
> >   Chris Scharff[EMAIL PROTECTED]www.swinc.com
> > 
> >   "Cheshire-Puss," she began, "would you tell me, please, 
> >   which way I ought to go from here?"
> >   "That depends a good deal on where you want to get to," 
> >   said the Cat.
> >   "I don't care much where--" said Alice.
> >   "Then it doesn't matter which way you go," said the Cat.
> > *
> > 
> > > -Original Message-
> > > From: tech [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > > Sent: Tuesday, September 25, 2001 2:30 PM
> > > To: Exchange Discussions
> > > Subject: RE: anti-virus protection f

RE: anti-virus protection for Exchange server os

[Scharff, Chris]

Because there's a difference between an Exchange aware AV product using the
AVAPI and a file based AV scanner running on a server which happens to also
be running Exchange. 

*
  Chris Scharff[EMAIL PROTECTED]www.swinc.com

  "Cheshire-Puss," she began, "would you tell me, please, 
  which way I ought to go from here?"
  "That depends a good deal on where you want to get to," 
  said the Cat.
  "I don't care much where--" said Alice.
  "Then it doesn't matter which way you go," said the Cat.
* 

> -Original Message-
> From: tech [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
> Sent: Tuesday, September 25, 2001 2:30 PM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: RE: anti-virus protection for Exchange server os
> 
> 
> http://www.win2000mag.com/Articles/Index.cfm?ArticleID=22416
> 
> Why have they invested in the new api then??
> 
> Nathan
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Stephen
> Mynhier
> Sent: Tuesday, September 25, 2001 12:34 PM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: RE: anti-virus protection for Exchange server os
> 
> 
> Third parties might support it... that's fine.   But MS doesn't really
> support running file-based AV on an Exchange server.  It is one of the
> first things that they have you remove if you call in with a 
> problem, it
> is one of the first things that they have you remove.
> 
> Never confuse "can" and "should"
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: Brian Ko
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Sent: 9/25/01 1:34 PM
> Subject: RE: anti-virus protection for Exchange server os
> 
> Kevin,
> Hi!
> 
> I don't know why you think why I am wrong.  Why don't you 
> call Antivirus
> companies and tell them they are wrong for supporting file based A/V
> products on Exchange servers.
> 
> Brian
> 
> > -Original Message-
> > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of 
> Kevin Miller
> > Sent: Tuesday, September 25, 2001 12:25 PM
> > To: Exchange Discussions
> > Subject: RE: anti-virus protection for Exchange server os
> > 
> > 
> > You NEVER want to use a file based scanner on the Exchange
> > folders in the server.. That is a very bad idea. You just 
> > don't do that period. If you want more protection then use 
> > extension blocking. File scanner your exchange server will 
> > cause nothing but problems and now help at all.. Why do you 
> > think there is a separate product for exchange?  Never mind.. 
> > Don will finish this one better then I can.. 
> > 
> > You should have left it you being wrong.
> > 
> > Kevinm WLKMMAS, UCC+WCA
> > ~~~
> > All spelling and Factual errors are the fault of Bob Barker 
> > ~~~
> > This space has been rented by:
> > Http://www.tiggercam.co.uk For all your tigger needs
> > You 2 can rent this space if you need it.
> > 
> > 
> > -Original Message-
> > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Brian Ko
> > Sent: Tuesday, September 25, 2001 10:19 AM
> > To: Exchange Discussions
> > Subject: RE: anti-virus protection for Exchange server os
> > 
> > 
> > Don,
> > 
> > Hi!
> > 
> > What I don't want is to make this as argument.  I am just
> > saying that I would run File Based A/V product to increase 
> > the protection of Exchange server.  You can't really say your 
> > server is bullet proof.  Maybe it is at the time, but what 
> > if/when there's a new threat for security holes. A/V may not 
> > be able to protect it, but it certainly may decrease the 
> > chance of getting infected (IMO).  You think that file based 
> > A/V products corrupt Exchange database?  Well, Not if people 
> > install it properly and run it properly.  Exchange Virus 
> > product companies support File Based A/V products.  Microsoft 
> > does not say you can not install File Based A/V products on 
> > Exchange server, do they?  If they do, please let me know.
> > 
> > If you are happy with not running file based A/V products on
> > your Exchange server, that's okay with me.  I am just happy 
> > running file based A/V product along email virus product on 
> > my Exchange server.  And this is supported by my A/V vendor. 
> > 
> > Brian
> > 
> > > -Original Message-
> > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Don Ely
> > > Sent: Tuesday, September 25, 2001 11:55 AM
> > > To: Exchange Discussions
> > > Subject: RE: anti-virus protection for Exchange server os
> > > 
> > > 
> > > Well, unless you have some rebuttal to prove me 
> otherwise... Please
> > > enlighten me if there is something I'm missing.  I'd 
> really like to 
> > > know...
> > > 
> > > -Original Message-
> > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Brian Ko
> > > Sent: Tuesday, September 25, 2001 9:43 AM
> > > To

RE: "MAIL FROM" & "RCPT TO" Info

[Scharff, Chris]

It could be done with a protocol event sink I believe.

> -Original Message-
> From: SHAW,Dale [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
> Sent: Tuesday, September 25, 2001 3:08 AM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: "MAIL FROM" & "RCPT TO" Info
> 
> 
> G'day,
> 
> Does anyone know if it's possible to have the IMC generate 
> RFC822 headers
> based on the RFC821 'MAIL FROM' and 'RCPT TO' information? I 
> was thinking
> something along the lines of 'X-Sender:' and 'X-Receiver:' 
> headers with the
> actual values used in the RFC821 part of the SMTP conversation..
> 
> This would be particularly useful when a spammer includes no 
> (or forged)
> RFC822 'To:' header and you've got multiple SMTP proxy 
> addresses. I realise
> I can turn on logging but I was hoping for a solution that 
> wouldn't involve
> leaving Outlook in order to see the values.
> 
> Obviously I would prefer this to happen with the IMC and not 
> have to stick
> another SMTP gateway in front of Exchange.
> 
> Cheers,
> Dale
> PS: Please directly copy me on any replies. I will summarise 
> if appropriate.
> 
> Notice:
> The information contained in this e-mail message and any 
> attached files may
> be confidential information, and may also be the subject of legal
> professional privilege.  If you are not the intended 
> recipient any use,
> disclosure or copying of this e-mail is unauthorised.  If you 
> have received
> this e-mail in error, please notify the sender immediately by 
> reply e-mail
> and delete all copies of this transmission together with any 
> attachments.
> 
> 
> 
> _
> List posting FAQ:   http://www.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: GroupWise and Exchange

[Scharff, Chris]

Ask someone to decide what the messaging server is, forward all mail from
the %other server% to %messaging server%. Have users check mail in one
place, on %messaging server%.

-Original Message-
From: Tim H
To: Exchange Discussions
Sent: 9/24/2001 4:28 PM
Subject: GroupWise and Exchange

I have an Exchange Server that manages voice mail from an IP Telephone
system (as well as text e-mail
from GroupWise)

and a GroupWise mail server (text voice mail from Exchange)

I need to update the read status when/if someone reads an email on
groupwise to the exchange system
and vice versa.

Any help on where to start or what objects to start looking at would be
greatly appreciated since I
have no experience working with either.

Thanks in advance,

Tim Hesse
[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: # of folders in mailboxes

[Scharff, Chris]

What are we trying to measure? It's not really the number of non default
mail folders in a mailbox is it? That doesn't really yeild a number which
can be used to make management decisions as far as I can see. 

*
  Chris Scharff[EMAIL PROTECTED]www.swinc.com
  Simpler-Webb, Inc.  Austin, TX +1-512-322-0071
* 

> -Original Message-
> From: Gomez, Mary Lou [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
> Sent: Friday, September 21, 2001 2:28 PM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: # of folders in mailboxes
> 
> 
> Does anyone know if there is a way to run some kind of a 
> report on Exchange
> that will tell me how many personal folders were created in 
> each user's
> mailbox? We are running Exchange 5.5, sp3 on 1 server and 
> Outlook 98. While
> running a scan on our server, I noticed some users had folders they'd
> created under their Inbox or somewhere within their mailbox. 
> We want to
> notify these people that we want them to point their Personal 
> Folders to
> their Home drives and not on the C:\drive. Some of these 
> people are usually
> pretty obvious because they constantly complain about running 
> out of mail
> space.
> Thanks
> Mary Lou Gomez, Sr. Network Administrator
> Texas Guaranteed Student Loan Corp.
> TSDS - Systems Management
> 512-219-4980 (direct)
> 512-336-6644 (fax)
> [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: Nimda

[Scharff, Chris]

There's a difference between your post and the one Eric made though. Your
post well thought out with both legitimate criticism and possible
resolutions. Eric was just whining. 

*
  Chris Scharff[EMAIL PROTECTED]www.swinc.com
  Simpler-Webb, Inc.  Austin, TX +1-512-322-0071
* 

> -Original Message-
> From: Jeremy Newell [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
> Sent: Friday, September 21, 2001 9:56 AM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: RE: Nimda
> 
> 
> Sure I make my living supporting Microsoft's software too but 
> you do have to
> admit that there are some "features" in outlook and many 
> other Microsoft
> products that seemed like a good thing at the time but only 
> make our lives
> entertaining.  Personally I see no need for 
> HTML/scripting/vbs/ActiveX in
> e-mails.  Most of these mass mailers use well known 
> holes/bugs in Outlook/OE
> to replicate.  If Outlook only supplied plain text or only 
> allowed basic
> HTML without all the fancy scripting then it would be ok.  
> The fact that
> viewing an e-mail via the preview panel will trigger the 
> virus/worm is dumb.
> Or how about the new "feature" found in OE 6.0 what will run, 
> under certain
> conditions, scripting in a plain text e-mail.  The other 
> option I can think
> of is to enhance Windows Update to always be on and for 
> Microsoft to release
> all patches via that web site (IIS, Exchange, Server, 
> Workstation, etc).  So
> all Windows users will have the current up to date software.  The main
> problem that I see is that most system aren't patched because 
> the admins or
> home user is lazy or doesn't know any better. I think it was Russ in
> NTBugTraq that did a search on Microsoft's site for IIS 
> patches and found 3
> different repositories for patches and all 3 of them had 
> different number of
> patches.  So an admin hits one of the pages and downloads all 
> the patches
> that he/she sees thinking that's all the needed updates.  But 
> the system may
> still be missing a few very important security updates that 
> the page failed
> to mention.
> 
> But in the end we can do only two things.  One sit back and 
> watch as other
> non-patched systems infect more non-patched systems or two 
> get management
> jobs at Microsoft and change some of their "features".  Oh 
> yes, and as Kevin
> says you can always use something else (many do).
> 
> Jeremy Newell
> Systems Technician
> 
> INSCRIBER TECHNOLOGY CORPORATION
> 26 Peppler Street
> Waterloo, Ontario   
> Canada, N2J 3C4
> T.519.570.9111
> F.519.570.9140 
> www.inscriber.com 
> 
> 
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Kevin Miller [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > Sent: September 20, 2001 2:21 PM
> > To: Exchange Discussions
> > Subject: RE: Nimda
> > 
> > 
> > Well then why work with it..  Why be on this list? Why even 
> > post to it??
> > We here make our livings based on there software and don't 
> really like
> > crap comments like that. Go shit in some else's back yard. We 
> > here don't
> > want to hear your crap.
> > 
> > Period.
> > 
> > Kevinm WLKMMAS, UCC+WCA
> > ~~~
> > All spelling and Factual errors are the fault of Bob Barker
> > ~~~
> > This space has been rented by:
> > Http://www.tiggercam.co.uk For all your tigger needs
> > You 2 can rent this space if you need it.
> > 
> > 
> > -Original Message-
> > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of 
> Romero, Eric
> > Sent: Thursday, September 20, 2001 11:12 AM
> > To: Exchange Discussions
> > Subject: RE: Nimda
> > 
> > 
> > Microsoft softwar is bad!
> > 
> > period!
> > --er
> 
> _
> List posting FAQ:   http://www.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: Moving Xchange database to a network Storage location

[Scharff, Chris]

Mr Q,

What is it you want to achieve? I am unfortunately unable to suggest an
alternative at this time because I am not clear as to the desired objective.

-Original Message-
From: The Geek Q
To: Exchange Discussions
Sent: 9/20/2001 5:44 PM
Subject: RE: Moving Xchange database to a network Storage location

Chris,

First thank you for the quick replyZ, I was just wondering what
alternatives 
I have. I believe it was answered, ide, SCSI or fiber connection.  Do
you 
know of any other way?

Thanks again,
Q!

>From: "Scharff, Chris" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Reply-To: "Exchange Discussions" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>To: "Exchange Discussions" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Subject: RE: Moving Xchange database to a network Storage location
>Date: Thu, 20 Sep 2001 17:17:26 -0500
>
>Dear Mr. Q,
>
>Workaround to what? To it not being supported? No.
>
> > Great, thanks, ooohhh are there any work around?
> > Let me guess, cluster?!?
>
>

_
List posting FAQ:   http://www.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 and Groupsheild Exchange Question

[Scharff, Chris]

I think you may have answered your own question:

"Every time Group shield"

> -Original Message-
> From: Rama Arumugam [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
> Sent: Thursday, September 20, 2001 4:34 PM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: Outlook and Groupsheild Exchange Question
> 
> 
> Hello Everyone! 
> Can any one tell me why...Every time Group shield catches a 
> virus and sends
> an alert to the administrators, I get an error message saying 
> "Unable to
> load language resource file: AVFO*.dll" when I tried to open 
> them using
> outlook 97/2000/2002.
> Once I pressed OK, I also get the following message...
> "The custom form could not be opened. Outlook will use an outlook form
> instead. The form required to view this message cannot be 
> displayed. Contact
> your Administrator." --- Once I press OK. The mail opens up 
> in a notepad
> document format and I am able to view who was sending the 
> infected document
> to who...and so forth.
> We are running --Exchange 5.5
> Group shield -- Latest 
> Any help would be greatly appreciated. Thanks in advance.
> 
> rama
> 
> 
> 
> _
> List posting FAQ:   http://www.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: Moving Xchange database to a network Storage location

[Scharff, Chris]

Dear Mr. Q,

Workaround to what? To it not being supported? No.

> Great, thanks, ooohhh are there any work around?
> Let me guess, cluster?!?


_
List posting FAQ:   http://www.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: Moving Xchange database to a network Storage location

[Scharff, Chris]

> I have just finished setting up Exchange 2K and when I 
> attempted to move the 
> Mailbox Database location to a location OTHER that the server 
> it's self I 
> get a " Invalid location specified"  any ideas?

Yes, it's not supported.

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

RE: Removing Exchange 2000 after abortive install

[Scharff, Chris]

> Bored - Yawn - Remind me not to help you when your bleeding 
> in the street.

It's "you're".  

If you are bored, please go buy a book on grammar and read it thoroughly.

*
  Chris Scharff[EMAIL PROTECTED]www.swinc.com
  Simpler-Webb, Inc.  Austin, TX +1-512-322-0071
  "Are you pondering what I'm pondering?"
  "I think so Brain, but . . . if we give peas a chance,
  won't the lima beans feel left out?"
*

_
List posting FAQ:   http://www.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: Potentially Corrupt Personal Folder?

[Scharff, Chris]

Well, on the plus side you're currently demonstrating exactly why PST=BAD to
this user in an up close and personal way. 

You might try exporting the PST data into another PST file in addition to
the other suggestions offered.

-Original Message-
From: Matt Hoffman
To: Exchange Discussions
Sent: 9/18/2001 3:35 PM
Subject: Potentially Corrupt Personal Folder?

I've got a small problem with one of our users' personal folder:  not
everything in it will import into Exchange (Exch. 5.5, SP4).  This user
is
the last of ours still using PST's, and I was hoping to get him up on
our
Exchange server.  After having finally convinced him that it was a good
thing, I go to import his PST and it blows up in my face.  Specifically,
I
get no error numbers with this problem - just a message that says that
the
files could not be copied.  This applies to some email, most of his
calendar
events, and all tasks.  I've not been able to find any Q articles
specifically relating to this, but I was hoping someone else might have
seen
this before.  

_
List posting FAQ:   http://www.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: HELP! Exchange Server 5.5 Disapearing E-mails

[Scharff, Chris]

What SP on the server? Any AV software running (if the answer is Yes,
GroupShield... stop reading now)? If not, is this the only Exchange server
in the Org? Is this happening to other Exchange servers as well?

-Original Message-
From: Matthew Dulak
To: Exchange Discussions
Sent: 9/18/2001 6:17 PM
Subject: HELP! Exchange Server 5.5 Disapearing E-mails

Hi all,
Firstly let me introduce myself. I'm an aspiring sysadmin in
Australia
currently doing PC support but slowly creeping into the fun stuff. We
have a
problem with Exchange 5.5 Svr in that it is receiving
emails from external sources and delivering them to the mailboxes
according
to the IMC logs. However the messages are not showing up in any of the
cues
nor obviously the mailboxes. An offline compaction has been suggested
but we
a trying to avoid this until a long weekend due to the down time
involved in
backup and compaction. Would anybody have any possible suggestions as to
alternative courses of action???

Thanks in advance.

Kind Regards
Matthew Dulak



Matthew Dulak
IT Support
Vision Systems Limited
495 Blackburn Road
Mt Waverley VIC 3149

ph:03 9211 7034
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]

RE: How do I change default Domain password when creating an acco unt with Exchange?

[Scharff, Chris]

Create the both programmatically.

*
  Chris Scharff[EMAIL PROTECTED]www.swinc.com
  Simpler-Webb, Inc.  Austin, TX +1-512-322-0071
* 

> -Original Message-
> From: Phil Labonte [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
> Sent: Monday, September 17, 2001 7:18 AM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: How do I change default Domain password when 
> creating an account with Exchange?
> 
> 
> I am using Exchange 5.5 SP4 and Windows NT4 SP6.
> 
> When I create a new user using the Exchange Administrator and 
> I select a
> "New Windows NT Account" it creates the username on the 
> domain with a blank
> password.  I would like to change that.  Any thoughts?
> 
> 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]

RE: TCO - Linux vs. Exchange

[Scharff, Chris]

The article's example scales out to 50k seats, with the example server still
running that on a single box. Groupwise documentation indicates it can scale
to 10k users per server, it also doesn't appear to run on any flavor of
*nix. Didn't forget about it per se, just thought it was unlikely to be the
groupware application running on the config mentioned in the article.

-Original Message-
From: Rocky Stefano
To: Exchange Discussions
Sent: 9/15/2001 12:52 PM
Subject: RE: TCO - Linux vs. Exchange


You'er forgetting about GroupWise 5/6. Also runs on NT and can scale
with
clusters, either NT or Netware.

-Original Message- 
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Scharff, Chris 
Sent: September 15, 2001 1:43 PM 
To: Exchange Discussions 
Subject: RE: TCO - Linux vs. Exchange 




I was thinking that perhaps they might have been talkign about Insight 
Groupware from Bynari (http://www.bynari.net/), but I find it interesting 
they didn't bother to go into details or specifics at all. 

2 years ago I worked as part fo an implementation team migrating 8,000 users

from MSMail to Exchange and from personal experience I can say that there 
are a whole host of numbers which have been left out of this "TCO" analysis.

How much does it cost to deploy a client to the desktop.. are there training

materials for this suite, whatever it is? If so, how does the learning curve

compare to Exchange.  

The only other possible decent collaborative mail solutions I can think of 
offhand which can scale to the sizes discussed in the article are OpenMail 
and Domino. If it's OpenMail, one wonders what crack the author was on to 
implement a product whose end of life cycle has been announced and if it's 
Domino, the administrative costs listed are completely off base IMHO. 

BTW, on the off chance it was Bynari I went to their website to see if I 
could download a demo version of the client and server to install on my 
Linux box. Can't seem to find one unfortunately. 

-Original Message- 
From: Glenn Corbett 
To: Exchange Discussions 
Sent: 9/15/2001 5:53 AM 
Subject: Re: TCO - Linux vs. Exchange 

Chris, 

My additional assumption would be: 

h. Linux has an equivalent mail system to that of Exchange. 

Whilst all these numbers may be great to throw around (and based on the 
publisher they are biased towards a Linux implementation), the real 
question 
is "does Linux have a mail system that could go head-to-head, or 
toe-to-toe 
with Exchange" ?? 

So far, the mail systems / packages / collection of unrelated 
applications 
on Linux that I've seen doesn't come close to what the Microsoft 
Exchange 
system offers. Most of the solutions seem to revolve around web-based or 
POP3, IMAP4 clients. 

Yes, there is web-based email for Linux, but no, most Exchange installs 
don't use this as the primary client. 

Yes, Exchange supports POP3, IMAP, but no, most exchange installs use 
the 
Outlook client, not Outlook Express. 

Looking at TCO number for servers and licensing is great, and is 
something 
that should be done regularly to ensure your company is receiving value 
for 
money, but unless the resulting solution provides the necessary 
functionality, what is the point ? 

I'll be the first to admit that I'm not 100% up on the offerings from 
the 
Linux community, but after recent investigations looking for a 
replacement 
for Exchange on the Linux platform for some smaller companies who see 
the 
cost of Exchange as prohibitive, I was unable to locate a complete 
solution 
that offered the same functionality. If someone would like to point me 
to 
such a solution, then maybe we can have a discussion about the TCO 
numbers / 
relative merits of such a solution. 

Glenn. 

- Original Message - 
From: "Scharff, Chris" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 
To: "Exchange Discussions" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 
Sent: Friday, September 14, 2001 1:39 PM 
Subject: RE: TCO - Linux vs. Exchange 



> It's amazingly accurate if the following assumtions are made: 
> a. bandwidth is unlimited 
> b. bandwidth is free 
> c. MCSEs are all paper 
> d. Unix admins are all rocket scientists 
> e. The Unix community if full of messaging experts who are willing to 
drop 
> everything to run to the aid of anyone with a software issue. 
> f. The exchange community is not. 
> g. morons were hired to design the Exchange infrastructure 
> 
> I'd like the specs on Jimmy's Groupware application though. The T in 
TCO 
> includes more than what he's listed... I'd like to see how the product 
> enhances productivity in the Enterprise. That certainly has to be 
factored 
> in unless you're a SSM who isn't aware of how what they do and the 
services 
> they provide effects the bottom line. 
> 
> BTW, "Jimmy went out of his w

RE: TCO - Linux vs. Exchange

[Scharff, Chris]

I was thinking that perhaps they might have been talkign about Insight
Groupware from Bynari (http://www.bynari.net/), but I find it interesting
they didn't bother to go into details or specifics at all. 

2 years ago I worked as part fo an implementation team migrating 8,000 users
from MSMail to Exchange and from personal experience I can say that there
are a whole host of numbers which have been left out of this "TCO" analysis.
How much does it cost to deploy a client to the desktop.. are there training
materials for this suite, whatever it is? If so, how does the learning curve
compare to Exchange. 

The only other possible decent collaborative mail solutions I can think of
offhand which can scale to the sizes discussed in the article are OpenMail
and Domino. If it's OpenMail, one wonders what crack the author was on to
implement a product whose end of life cycle has been announced and if it's
Domino, the administrative costs listed are completely off base IMHO.

BTW, on the off chance it was Bynari I went to their website to see if I
could download a demo version of the client and server to install on my
Linux box. Can't seem to find one unfortunately.

-Original Message-
From: Glenn Corbett
To: Exchange Discussions
Sent: 9/15/2001 5:53 AM
Subject: Re: TCO - Linux vs. Exchange

Chris,

My additional assumption would be:

h. Linux has an equivalent mail system to that of Exchange.

Whilst all these numbers may be great to throw around (and based on the
publisher they are biased towards a Linux implementation), the real
question
is "does Linux have a mail system that could go head-to-head, or
toe-to-toe
with Exchange" ??

So far, the mail systems / packages / collection of unrelated
applications
on Linux that I've seen doesn't come close to what the Microsoft
Exchange
system offers. Most of the solutions seem to revolve around web-based or
POP3, IMAP4 clients.

Yes, there is web-based email for Linux, but no, most Exchange installs
don't use this as the primary client.

Yes, Exchange supports POP3, IMAP, but no, most exchange installs use
the
Outlook client, not Outlook Express.

Looking at TCO number for servers and licensing is great, and is
something
that should be done regularly to ensure your company is receiving value
for
money, but unless the resulting solution provides the necessary
functionality, what is the point ?

I'll be the first to admit that I'm not 100% up on the offerings from
the
Linux community, but after recent investigations looking for a
replacement
for Exchange on the Linux platform for some smaller companies who see
the
cost of Exchange as prohibitive, I was unable to locate a complete
solution
that offered the same functionality. If someone would like to point me
to
such a solution, then maybe we can have a discussion about the TCO
numbers /
relative merits of such a solution.

Glenn.

- Original Message -
From: "Scharff, Chris" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Exchange Discussions" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Friday, September 14, 2001 1:39 PM
Subject: RE: TCO - Linux vs. Exchange


> It's amazingly accurate if the following assumtions are made:
> a. bandwidth is unlimited
> b. bandwidth is free
> c. MCSEs are all paper
> d. Unix admins are all rocket scientists
> e. The Unix community if full of messaging experts who are willing to
drop
> everything to run to the aid of anyone with a software issue.
> f. The exchange community is not.
> g. morons were hired to design the Exchange infrastructure
>
> I'd like the specs on Jimmy's Groupware application though. The T in
TCO
> includes more than what he's listed... I'd like to see how the product
> enhances productivity in the Enterprise. That certainly has to be
factored
> in unless you're a SSM who isn't aware of how what they do and the
services
> they provide effects the bottom line.
>
> BTW, "Jimmy went out of his way to be fair to the Exchange/PC
solution,
> since the industry average is 350 mailboxes per server" is a perfect
example
> of zealotry blotting out rational thought processes.
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Bob Razler
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Sent: 9/13/2001 6:35 PM
> Subject: TCO - Linux vs. Exchange
>
> Hello:
>
> I am not advocating either side.  I am just providing this as
> some
> related reading for Exchange Admins.  Maybe you can even comment on it
> and
> let the rest of us know if you disagree with it and why.
>
> http://consultingtimes.com/Serverheist.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]

RE: GAL mod's by reg user for ALL users info

[Scharff, Chris]

www.mail-resources.com server | directory mgmt

> -Original Message-
> From: Mellott, Bill [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
> Sent: Friday, September 14, 2001 1:11 PM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: RE: GAL mod's by reg user for ALL users info
> 
> 
> tried to keep it short and sweet.
> 
> basically I want to say have the main receptionist
> be able to update all users Phone, Address, Cell #...etc.
> 
> I'd like to use the GAL entities like the address book it is.
> I just want to be able to have another user other then a 
> admin update it and not in exch admin.
> 
> Note: I did add myself to the RECIPIENTS with ADMIN permissions
> when I open the GAL in OL2K and then say open my user I still 
> can't edit my
> information.
> 
> I'm missing something here..
> 
> thx
> bill
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: missy koslosky [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Friday, September 14, 2001 1:08 PM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: Re: GAL mod's by reg user for ALL users info
> 
> 
> Directory import.
> 
> What do you want to do?
> - Original Message -
> From: "Mellott, Bill" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: "Exchange Discussions" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sent: Friday, September 14, 2001 12:44 PM
> Subject: GAL mod's by reg user for ALL users info
> 
> 
> Ok ready for the flaming over this:
> 
> is there a way to set permissions so that a assigned user can 
> "update" ALL
> users infomation in the GAL??
> 
> Yes looked on technet  NG or missed it.(did find ability 
> for user to
> update their info.. BORK)
> Looked at slipstick... NG (did find ability for user to 
> update their info..
> BORK)
> read the FAQ  Read it...Loved it... working on Living 
> it... NG or missed
> it.
> 
> thx
> bill
> 
> _
> List posting FAQ:   http://www.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: Column width @ address book Outlook 2k

[Scharff, Chris]

Yes, no.

> does anyone know how, if possible at all, to change the width 
> of the address
> book columns in Outlook 2000 ?

_
List posting FAQ:   http://www.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: TCO - Linux vs. Exchange

[Scharff, Chris]

It's amazingly accurate if the following assumtions are made:
a. bandwidth is unlimited
b. bandwidth is free
c. MCSEs are all paper
d. Unix admins are all rocket scientists
e. The Unix community if full of messaging experts who are willing to drop
everything to run to the aid of anyone with a software issue.
f. The exchange community is not.
g. morons were hired to design the Exchange infrastructure

I'd like the specs on Jimmy's Groupware application though. The T in TCO
includes more than what he's listed... I'd like to see how the product
enhances productivity in the Enterprise. That certainly has to be factored
in unless you're a SSM who isn't aware of how what they do and the services
they provide effects the bottom line.

BTW, "Jimmy went out of his way to be fair to the Exchange/PC solution,
since the industry average is 350 mailboxes per server" is a perfect example
of zealotry blotting out rational thought processes.

-Original Message-
From: Bob Razler
To: Exchange Discussions
Sent: 9/13/2001 6:35 PM
Subject: TCO - Linux vs. Exchange

Hello:

I am not advocating either side.  I am just providing this as
some
related reading for Exchange Admins.  Maybe you can even comment on it
and
let the rest of us know if you disagree with it and why.

http://consultingtimes.com/Serverheist.html


Bob

_
List posting FAQ:   http://www.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 are not applied to cc messages [q195583]

[Scharff, Chris]

I would recommend one or more of the following:

a. using a cr/alternate recipient and having him call the help desk when it
needs to be implemented/removed.
b. Configuring a method of access to the exchange based system for those not
on the LAN (e.g. RAS or VPN or HTTP(S)) 
c. Not allowing automatic replies and/or forwards to the internet

All it takes is 1 AutoCAD file to throw most ISP based mail accounts into an
amazingly interesting mail loop. It makes a really nice DoS attack.

Anyway, the short answer to your question as originally asked is included in
a previous message of mine. ROT-13 and all that.

*
  Chris Scharff[EMAIL PROTECTED]www.swinc.com
  Simpler-Webb, Inc.  Austin, TX +1-512-322-0071
* 

> -Original Message-
> From: North Martin [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
> Sent: Thursday, September 13, 2001 3:10 AM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: RE: Rules are not applied to cc messages [q195583]
> 
> 
> 1).The forwarding, to a users Internet based mail system, of 
> messages sent
> originally to his Exchange based system when he does not have 
> access to it.
>   2).I am fully aware of the implications of allowing automatic
> replies and/or forwards to the internet.
> 
> 
> 
> > --
> > From:   Scharff, Chris[SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > Reply To:   Exchange Discussions
> > Sent:   12 September 2001 17:58
> > To: Exchange Discussions
> > Subject:RE: Rules are not applied to cc  messages  [q195583]
> > 
> > Much better. Now, before I answer the question, let me ask 
> a couple of
> > other
> > fishing related questions. 
> > 
> > 1. What is it you're ultimately trying to achieve? (paint 
> me a picture)
> > 
> > 2. Are you aware of the implications of allowing automatic 
> replies and/or
> > forwards to the internet?
> > 
> > *
> >   Chris Scharff[EMAIL PROTECTED]www.swinc.com
> >   Simpler-Webb, Inc.  Austin, TX +1-512-322-0071
> > * 
> > 
> > > -Original Message-
> > > From: North Martin [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
> > > Sent: Wednesday, September 12, 2001 11:46 AM
> > > To: Exchange Discussions
> > > Subject: RE: Rules are not applied to cc messages [q195583]
> > > 
> > > 
> > > Ok lets try again,
> > > This is done in exchange client 5 NOT outlook.
> > > From the menu bar select :- tools, inbox assistant, add rule
> > > A dialogue box open with numerous options** , leave them all 
> > > empty except
> > > for the forward entry, here we put a tick in the box and 
> > > enter the address
> > > you want to forward  the message to - eg. [EMAIL PROTECTED] , 
> > > underneath this
> > > entry select the "method"  , I have used "leave the message 
> > > intact". Click
> > > on the OK button and the system responds with the 
> following message :-
> > > This rule will fire for all incoming messages. Is this 
> what you want.?
> > > selected  yes. A new box is displayed with the rule listed 
> > > showing "status"
> > > (tick in box to show its active) , "Condition" - All messages 
> > > and "Action"
> > > Forward To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > 
> > > ** The options are as follows- "From" , "Sent To", "Sent 
> > > directly to me",
> > > "Copied (CC) to me" , "Subject", "Message body", "Move ", 
> > > "Copy", "Forward",
> > > "Reply template" and "Custom"
> > > 
> > > I have tried selecting the "copied (cc) to me" and this works 
> > > fine if the
> > > mail is forwarded internally however, it falls over when you 
> > > try to forward
> > > to an external address.
> > > 
> > > I hope this make things clear.
> > > 
> > > Regards
> > > 
> > > Martin
> > > > --
> > > > From:   Scharff, Chris[SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > > > Reply To:   Exchange Discussions
> > > > Sent:   12 September 2001 16:35
> > > > To: Exchange Discussions
> > > > Subject:RE: Rules are not applied to cc  
> mess

RE: Rules are not applied to cc messages [q195583]

[Scharff, Chris]

Apparently there has been some sort fo a breakdown in the fishing lesson.
For those who might care, here's the short answer to Mr. Martin's
question[0]:

Rkpunatr/Bhgybbx unf n uneq gvzr xabjvat jub "gb zr" vf jura gnyxvat gb na
Rkpnatr freire.[1] Gur fbyhgvba gb gur dhrfgvba nf nfxrq [2] va guvf
vafgnapr vf gb perngr n arj Rkpunatr 5 vaobk nffvfgnag ehyr nf sbyybjf[3]:

1. Gbbyf | Vaobk Nffvfgnag | Nqq Ehyr
2. Purpx "Sbejneq"
3. Pyvpx "Gb:" naq fryrpg nqqerff
4. Punatr Zrgubq gb "Yrnir Zrffntr Vagnpg"
5. Pyvpx BX
6. Pyvpx Lrf.
7. Pyvpx BX.

Gur ehyr abj sverf sbe /nyy/ vapbzvat znvy naq qbrfa'g jbeel nobhg jub "zr"
vf.[4]

The longer answer to his question is potentially much more valuable than the
short answer but there's always utility in learning how to fish isn't
there?

[0] It's not a violation of the DMCA to decrypt the message I swear. ;)
[1] V'q trg vagb n qrgnvyrq qvfphffvba bs ErfbyirC2 ng guvf cbvag rkprcg
gung, vg'f cneg bs n ynetre svfuvat yrffba naq qbrfa'g frrz gb zr gb or
ernyyl arprffnel gb nafjre onfrq ba gur vasbezngvba cebivqrq gb qngr (juvpu
vf snveyl fcnefr, urapr zl nf lrg hanafjrerq erdhrfgf sbe nqqvgvbany
vasbezngvba).  
[2] Lrf, vg'f cebonoyl gur jebat dhrfgvba orvat nfxrq.
[3] Onfrq ba gur cbfgref erdhrfg gb sbejneq /nyy/ znvy erprvirq gb nabgure
nqqerff.
[4] Guvf fbyhgvba vf nyfb qvfphffrq ba zber guna bar bppnfvba va gur
nepuvirf OGJ

*
  Chris Scharff[EMAIL PROTECTED]www.swinc.com
  Simpler-Webb, Inc.  Austin, TX +1-512-322-0071
  "With sufficient thrust, pigs fly just fine." - RFC 1925
* 

> -Original Message-
> From: Scharff, Chris [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
> Sent: Wednesday, September 12, 2001 11:59 AM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: RE: Rules are not applied to cc messages [q195583]
> 
> 
> Much better. Now, before I answer the question, let me ask a 
> couple of other
> fishing related questions. 
> 
> 1. What is it you're ultimately trying to achieve? (paint me 
> a picture)
> 
> 2. Are you aware of the implications of allowing automatic 
> replies and/or
> forwards to the internet?
> 
> *
>   Chris Scharff[EMAIL PROTECTED]www.swinc.com
>   Simpler-Webb, Inc.  Austin, TX +1-512-322-0071
> * 
> 
> > -Original Message-
> > From: North Martin [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
> > Sent: Wednesday, September 12, 2001 11:46 AM
> > To: Exchange Discussions
> > Subject: RE: Rules are not applied to cc messages [q195583]
> > 
> > 
> > Ok lets try again,
> > This is done in exchange client 5 NOT outlook.
> > From the menu bar select :- tools, inbox assistant, add rule
> > A dialogue box open with numerous options** , leave them all 
> > empty except
> > for the forward entry, here we put a tick in the box and 
> > enter the address
> > you want to forward  the message to - eg. [EMAIL PROTECTED] , 
> > underneath this
> > entry select the "method"  , I have used "leave the message 
> > intact". Click
> > on the OK button and the system responds with the following 
> message :-
> > This rule will fire for all incoming messages. Is this what 
> you want.?
> > selected  yes. A new box is displayed with the rule listed 
> > showing "status"
> > (tick in box to show its active) , "Condition" - All messages 
> > and "Action"
> > Forward To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > 
> > ** The options are as follows- "From" , "Sent To", "Sent 
> > directly to me",
> > "Copied (CC) to me" , "Subject", "Message body", "Move ", 
> > "Copy", "Forward",
> > "Reply template" and "Custom"
> > 
> > I have tried selecting the "copied (cc) to me" and this works 
> > fine if the
> > mail is forwarded internally however, it falls over when you 
> > try to forward
> > to an external address.
> > 
> > I hope this make things clear.
> > 
> > Regards
> > 
> > Martin
> > > --
> > > From: Scharff, Chris[SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > > Reply To: Exchange Discussions
> > > Sent: 12 September 2001 16:35
> > > To:   Exchange Discussions
> > > Subject:  RE: Rules are not applied to cc  messages  [q195583]
> > > 
> > > No... If

RE: Hosting Multiple Domains

[Scharff, Chris]

Intimately familiar... And I have a whole host of subcontractors who are as
well. How many hours would you like to book with them?

*
  Chris Scharff[EMAIL PROTECTED]www.swinc.com
  Simpler-Webb, Inc.  Austin, TX +1-512-322-0071
* 

> -Original Message-
> From: Chris [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
> Sent: Wednesday, September 12, 2001 10:53 AM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: Hosting Multiple Domains
> 
> 
> Is anyone experienced in hosting multiple domains. We are 
> having problems
> with different domains being able to view each others 
> contacts/calenders

_
List posting FAQ:   http://www.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: Rejected Message

[Scharff, Chris]

Basic attachment type filtering might be somewhat useful, but set up any
'legitimate' text content filtering solution you'd like and my 5th grader
could get around it. Much like the locks on my car doors, text filtering is
purely an ornamental deterrent.

> -Original Message-
> From: Daniel Deward [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
> Sent: Wednesday, September 12, 2001 11:46 AM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: RE: Rejected Message
> 
> 
> This is why improperly configured content filtering is a 
> waste of time.
> 
> Dan Deward
> http://www.cmsconnect.com
> 
> >-Original Message-
> >From: Scharff, Chris [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> >Sent: Tuesday, September 11, 2001 1:07 PM
> >To: Exchange Discussions
> >Subject: RE: Rejected Message
> >
> >
> >Amazing... This is why content filtering is a waste of time.
> >
> >-Original Message-
> >From: Ed Crowley
> >To: Exchange Discussions
> >Sent: 9/10/2001 8:36 PM
> >Subject: FW: Rejected Message
> >
> >For your amusement.  Of course the admin whose system does this won't
> >get
> >this.
> >
> >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]]
> >Sent: Monday, September 10, 2001 3:27 PM
> >To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >Subject: Rejected Message
> >
> >
> >The attached mail message has been rejected for the following reason:
> >
> >Body contains word(s)/phrase(s) 'joke'
> >
> >_
> >List posting FAQ:   http://www.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 has been checked for all known viruses by Star Internet
> >delivered through the MessageLabs Virus Scanning Service. For further
> >information visit http://www.star.net.uk/stats.asp or 
> >alternatively call
> >Star Internet for details on the Virus Scanning Service.
> >
> 
> 
> The information in this communication and any attachments is 
> confidential
> and may be legally privileged. It is intended solely for the 
> addressee. If
> you are not the intended recipient any use, review, dissemination,
> distribution or copying of this information is strictly 
> prohibited. If you
> have received this communication in error please notify us 
> immediately on
> 0191 261 2681 and delete the original message and any copies of it. 
> 
> Any opinions, conclusions or other information in this 
> message that do not
> relate to the official business of Sanderson Townend & 
> Gilbert are neither
> given nor endorsed by the firm. 
> 
> 
> _
> This message has been checked for all known viruses by Star Internet
> delivered through the MessageLabs Virus Scanning Service. For further
> information visit http://www.star.net.uk/stats.asp or 
> alternatively call
> Star Internet for details on the Virus Scanning Service.
> 
> _
> List posting FAQ:   http://www.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: Problem with Information Store

[Scharff, Chris]

The size of the IS displayed in explorer does not change while the services
are running. Mailbox size only changes with an offline defrag and it sounds
like it's time to consider a. mailbox size limits, b. server management and
monitoring tools and c. a permanent enterprise version of Exchange.

> -Original Message-
> From: Nelson Silva [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
> Sent: Wednesday, September 12, 2001 7:01 AM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: Problem with Information Store
> 
> 
> Hi all, i dont know if i´m following the correct conduct of 
> this mailing
> list while posting this mail, if i´m not i´m sorry,
>  
> Here is my problem,
>  
> Suddenly, my 5 GB Information Stores jumps to 16 GB in space 
> without any
> modification of parameters in the Exchange Server. To try to 
> correct this,
> i did an offline desfragmentation but it only achive 200 Mb 
> of free space.
> I then move some mailboxes to PST and performed an online 
> backup whitout
> any results. I´m going to perform another offline backup but 
> to tell you
> the true, i´m running out of ideas. Any suggestions?
>  
> My company has a Compaq Server with Windows 2000 installed 
> and Exchange
> 5.5 SP4. It was the normal version but i then installed the Enterprise
> Edition temporarely until I have a fix for this.
>  
> Thanks,
> 
> Nelson Silva

_
List posting FAQ:   http://www.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: Global Address Question

[Scharff, Chris]

Sorry, I just assumed it was YAPPQ.[1] If it's in fact YAPAM[2] then of
course your answer was correct.

I guess bringing up the automatic display name generation options in the
admin client is completely unnecessary at this point as well?

[1] Yet Another Poorly Phrased Question.
[2] Yet Another Poor Administration Model.

> -Original Message-
> From: Ed Crowley [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
> Sent: Wednesday, September 12, 2001 11:46 AM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: RE: Global Address Question
> 
> 
> There's nothing wrong with your answer except that it 
> technically changes
> each and every entry, which was specifically ruled out in the 
> question.
> 
> 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 Scharff, Chris
> Sent: Wednesday, September 12, 2001 7:47 AM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: RE: Global Address Question
> 
> 
> Import & Export. Takes about 30 seconds to change 10k entries 
> in excel.
> 
> *
>   Chris Scharff[EMAIL PROTECTED]www.swinc.com
>   Simpler-Webb, Inc.  Austin, TX +1-512-322-0071
> *
> 
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Rebecca Ford [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > Sent: Tuesday, September 11, 2001 4:49 PM
> > To: Exchange Discussions
> > Subject: Global Address Question
> >
> >
> > I am using Exchange 5.5.  Currently our global address
> > displays names First
> > Name, Last Name.  Is there a way to change the views to be
> > Last Name, First
> > Name without changing the display names in each and every
> > entry?  thanks.
> >
> >
> > Rebecca

_
List posting FAQ:   http://www.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 are not applied to cc messages [q195583]

[Scharff, Chris]

Much better. Now, before I answer the question, let me ask a couple of other
fishing related questions. 

1. What is it you're ultimately trying to achieve? (paint me a picture)

2. Are you aware of the implications of allowing automatic replies and/or
forwards to the internet?

*
  Chris Scharff[EMAIL PROTECTED]www.swinc.com
  Simpler-Webb, Inc.  Austin, TX +1-512-322-0071
* 

> -Original Message-
> From: North Martin [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
> Sent: Wednesday, September 12, 2001 11:46 AM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: RE: Rules are not applied to cc messages [q195583]
> 
> 
> Ok lets try again,
> This is done in exchange client 5 NOT outlook.
> From the menu bar select :- tools, inbox assistant, add rule
> A dialogue box open with numerous options** , leave them all 
> empty except
> for the forward entry, here we put a tick in the box and 
> enter the address
> you want to forward  the message to - eg. [EMAIL PROTECTED] , 
> underneath this
> entry select the "method"  , I have used "leave the message 
> intact". Click
> on the OK button and the system responds with the following message :-
> This rule will fire for all incoming messages. Is this what you want.?
> selected  yes. A new box is displayed with the rule listed 
> showing "status"
> (tick in box to show its active) , "Condition" - All messages 
> and "Action"
> Forward To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 
> ** The options are as follows- "From" , "Sent To", "Sent 
> directly to me",
> "Copied (CC) to me" , "Subject", "Message body", "Move ", 
> "Copy", "Forward",
> "Reply template" and "Custom"
> 
> I have tried selecting the "copied (cc) to me" and this works 
> fine if the
> mail is forwarded internally however, it falls over when you 
> try to forward
> to an external address.
> 
> I hope this make things clear.
> 
> Regards
> 
> Martin
> > --
> > From:   Scharff, Chris[SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > Reply To:   Exchange Discussions
> > Sent:   12 September 2001 16:35
> > To: Exchange Discussions
> > Subject:RE: Rules are not applied to cc  messages  [q195583]
> > 
> > No... If that's what the rule said it would work. Your rule 
> says something
> > else. The group isn't sure what it says as vague 
> generalities have been
> > used
> > where details are required[1]. Pretend I'm an idiot and 
> walk me step by
> > tedious step through the process used to set up this rule.
> > 
> > [1] Though generalities are no match for my amazing psychic powers.
> > 
> > *
> >   Chris Scharff[EMAIL PROTECTED]www.swinc.com
> >   Simpler-Webb, Inc.  Austin, TX +1-512-322-0071
> >   "Are you pondering what I'm pondering?"
> >   "I think so Brain, but . . . if we give peas a chance,
> >   won't the lima beans feel left out?"
> > ********* 
> > 
> > > -Original Message-
> > > From: North Martin [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
> > > Sent: Wednesday, September 12, 2001 10:26 AM
> > > To: Exchange Discussions
> > > Subject: RE: Rules are not applied to cc messages [q195583]
> > > 
> > > 
> > > The rule is currently set that all messages received should 
> > > be forwarded to
> > > the  new address 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > > -Original Message-
> > > > From:   Scharff, Chris [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > > > Sent:   12 September 2001 16:10
> > > > To: Exchange Discussions
> > > > Subject:RE: Rules are not applied to cc  
> messages  [q195583]
> > > > 
> > > > Hmmm, your version of Outlook must be different than mine. 
> > > I don't have
> > > > anything which says "simple check box to forward to an 
> external smtp
> > > > address". What /exactly/ does the rule say?
> > > > 
> > > > > -Original Message-
> > > > > From: North Martin [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
> > > > > Sent: Wednesday, September 12, 2001 10:08 AM
> > > > > To: Exchange Discussions
> > > > > Subject: RE: Rules are not applied to cc 

RE: DISCLAIMER

[Scharff, Chris]

Tried what? 

A search for "disclaimer" at the location of the FAQ yields 2 hits. One
relates to some MailMover product and the other is in the Exchange 5.5 FAQ. 

At support.microsoft.com a search on 'Exchange 5.5 and earlier versions' for
the same term yields 3 hits. 1 related to 128 bit encryption, 1 related to
Y2K testing and one whose excerpt section looks promising. A search at the
same site for the same term in the Exchange 2000 category yields 1 hit.

As for the home edition of the archives.. there is at least 1 hit on the
subject in the last couple of years.

> -Original Message-
> From: Ewart, Vicki L. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
> Sent: Wednesday, September 12, 2001 11:46 AM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: RE: DISCLAIMER
> 
> 
> Tried that.  Got a bunch of jibberish.
> 
> ve
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: Scharff, Chris [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Wednesday, September 12, 2001 9:30 AM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: RE: DISCLAIMER
> 
> 
> The secret pass phrase is "disclaimer" for the 5.5 faq @ swinc.com and
> searches for Exchange 5.5 & 2000 @ support.microsoft.com. It 
> also works
> with
> the home edition of the archives, available for less the cost of a
> Madonna
> tour t-shirt.
> 
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Ewart, Vicki L. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
> > Sent: Wednesday, September 12, 2001 11:29 AM
> > To: Exchange Discussions
> > Subject: RE: DISCLAIMER
> > 
> > 
> > I'm sure you all think this is very good advice, but I couldn't find
> > anything about adding disclaimers or a global signature 
> line by typing
> > in either of those phrases into the search box.  I guess you have to
> > know the "secret code" to get any of these search engines 
> to cough up
> > the information you're looking for.  Sure wish I knew it.  
> I have the
> > same problem with the Microsoft KB.
> > 
> > V. Ewart
> > Hunt & Associates
> > 
> > -Original Message-
> > From: kumar [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > Sent: Wednesday, September 12, 2001 2:14 AM
> > To: Exchange Discussions
> > Subject: Re: DISCLAIMER
> > 
> > 
> > Disclaimer should add automatically  for all the users in 
> my exchange
> > server, when ever they send a mail.
> >  - Original Message -
> > From: "Kuminda Chandimith" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > To: "Exchange Discussions" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > Sent: Wednesday, September 12, 2001 2:21 PM
> > Subject: RE: DISCLAIMER
> > 
> > 
> > >
> > > Before everyone come and flame you..
> > > Take my advise...go to
> > >   http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp
> > >
> > > Other wise your (apparently) first day in the list will not be a
> > pleasant
> > > encounter at all..
> > >
> > > good luck
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Kuminda Chandimith
> > > Sr. Technical Consultant
> > > Ducont.com FZ-LLC
> > > Tel:  + 971-4-3913000 Ext 237
> > > Fax: +971-4-3913001
> > > http://www.ducont.com
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > -Original Message-
> > > From: kumar [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > > Sent: 12 September 2001 12:46
> > > To: Exchange Discussions
> > > Subject: DISCLAIMER
> > >
> > >
> > > Hi all,
> > >
> > >
> > > How do I add the Disclimer massege to each mail which is going out
> > from my
> > > exchange server, (Exchange 5.5 SP4)
> > >
> > > thanks
> > > UK
> 
> _
> List posting FAQ:   http://www.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: DISCLAIMER

[Scharff, Chris]

The secret pass phrase is "disclaimer" for the 5.5 faq @ swinc.com and
searches for Exchange 5.5 & 2000 @ support.microsoft.com. It also works with
the home edition of the archives, available for less the cost of a Madonna
tour t-shirt.

> -Original Message-
> From: Ewart, Vicki L. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
> Sent: Wednesday, September 12, 2001 11:29 AM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: RE: DISCLAIMER
> 
> 
> I'm sure you all think this is very good advice, but I couldn't find
> anything about adding disclaimers or a global signature line by typing
> in either of those phrases into the search box.  I guess you have to
> know the "secret code" to get any of these search engines to cough up
> the information you're looking for.  Sure wish I knew it.  I have the
> same problem with the Microsoft KB.
> 
> V. Ewart
> Hunt & Associates
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: kumar [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Wednesday, September 12, 2001 2:14 AM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: Re: DISCLAIMER
> 
> 
> Disclaimer should add automatically  for all the users in my exchange
> server, when ever they send a mail.
>  - Original Message -
> From: "Kuminda Chandimith" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: "Exchange Discussions" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sent: Wednesday, September 12, 2001 2:21 PM
> Subject: RE: DISCLAIMER
> 
> 
> >
> > Before everyone come and flame you..
> > Take my advise...go to
> >   http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp
> >
> > Other wise your (apparently) first day in the list will not be a
> pleasant
> > encounter at all..
> >
> > good luck
> >
> >
> >
> > Kuminda Chandimith
> > Sr. Technical Consultant
> > Ducont.com FZ-LLC
> > Tel:  + 971-4-3913000 Ext 237
> > Fax: +971-4-3913001
> > http://www.ducont.com
> >
> >
> >
> > -Original Message-
> > From: kumar [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > Sent: 12 September 2001 12:46
> > To: Exchange Discussions
> > Subject: DISCLAIMER
> >
> >
> > Hi all,
> >
> >
> > How do I add the Disclimer massege to each mail which is going out
> from my
> > exchange server, (Exchange 5.5 SP4)
> >
> > thanks
> > UK

_
List posting FAQ:   http://www.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 are not applied to cc messages [q195583]

[Scharff, Chris]

No... If that's what the rule said it would work. Your rule says something
else. The group isn't sure what it says as vague generalities have been used
where details are required[1]. Pretend I'm an idiot and walk me step by
tedious step through the process used to set up this rule.

[1] Though generalities are no match for my amazing psychic powers.

*
  Chris Scharff[EMAIL PROTECTED]www.swinc.com
  Simpler-Webb, Inc.  Austin, TX +1-512-322-0071
  "Are you pondering what I'm pondering?"
  "I think so Brain, but . . . if we give peas a chance,
  won't the lima beans feel left out?"
* 

> -Original Message-
> From: North Martin [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
> Sent: Wednesday, September 12, 2001 10:26 AM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: RE: Rules are not applied to cc messages [q195583]
> 
> 
> The rule is currently set that all messages received should 
> be forwarded to
> the  new address 
> 
> 
> > -Original Message-
> > From:   Scharff, Chris [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > Sent:   12 September 2001 16:10
> > To: Exchange Discussions
> > Subject:RE: Rules are not applied to cc  messages  [q195583]
> > 
> > Hmmm, your version of Outlook must be different than mine. 
> I don't have
> > anything which says "simple check box to forward to an external smtp
> > address". What /exactly/ does the rule say?
> > 
> > > -Original Message-
> > > From: North Martin [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
> > > Sent: Wednesday, September 12, 2001 10:08 AM
> > > To: Exchange Discussions
> > > Subject: RE: Rules are not applied to cc messages [q195583]
> > > 
> > > 
> > > thr rule is the  simple check box to forward mail to an 
> external smtp
> > > address
> > > 
> > > Martin
> > > 
> > > > -Original Message-
> > > > From:   Scharff, Chris [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > > > Sent:   12 September 2001 15:58
> > > > To: Exchange Discussions
> > > > Subject:RE: Rules are not applied to cc  
> messages  [q195583]
> > > > 
> > > > Only when it's related to user error in the design of the rule.
> > > > 
> > > > > -Original Message-
> > > > > From: North Martin [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
> > > > > Sent: Wednesday, September 12, 2001 9:42 AM
> > > > > To: Exchange Discussions
> > > > > Subject: Rules are not applied to cc messages [q195583]
> > > > > 
> > > > > 
> > > > > When you recieve an SMTP message with your address specified 
> > > > > in the cc field
> > > > > the inbox forwarding rule does not work.
> > > > > 
> > > > > I have checked this out on the MS Technet/web site and found 
> > > > > one reference
> > > > > in Q195583. This states the problem was fixed in Service Pack 
> > > > > 2 , however I
> > > > > am on Exchange 5.5 spk 4 and the problem still exists. I have 
> > > > > checked the
> > > > > file versions as stated in the Q Article and can confirm that 
> > > > > all files
> > > > > mentioned are later than those listed.
> > > > > 
> > > > > Has anybody else come across this problem and if so how did 
> > > > > you fix it?
> > > > > 
> > > > > Martin North
> > > > > Ricardo Consulting Engineers Ltd
> > > > > [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]
> > > > Exchan

RE: Rules are not applied to cc messages [q195583]

[Scharff, Chris]

Ok. Details are a nice thing.

Now, what is the exact combination you are using at this very second?[1]
Don't generalize when you can be specific.

[1] I actually know the answer to your question, and have known it since
your first post... but this is now a fishing lesson.

> -Original Message-
> From: North Martin [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
> Sent: Wednesday, September 12, 2001 10:12 AM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: RE: Rules are not applied to cc messages [q195583]
> 
> 
> The rule is done from exchange client ver 5 and is a check 
> box -it does not
> use a rule wizard as in outlook.
> 
> the rule is to forward all messages to the nominated user.
> 
> Have tried various combinations of the "cc" box only and "addressed to
> directly to me" and none seem to work
> 
> > -Original Message-
> > From:   Scharff, Chris [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > Sent:   12 September 2001 16:04
> > To: Exchange Discussions
> > Subject:RE: Rules are not applied to cc  messages  [q195583]
> > 
> > No... "What does the rule say".
> > 
> > > -Original Message-
> > > From: North Martin [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
> > > Sent: Wednesday, September 12, 2001 10:07 AM
> > > To: Exchange Discussions
> > > Subject: RE: Rules are not applied to cc messages [q195583]
> > > 
> > > 
> > > The rule simply forwards the mail on to another external 
> smtp address
> > > 
> > > Regards
> > > Martin
> > > 
> > > > -Original Message-
> > > > From:   Ewins, James [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > > > Sent:   12 September 2001 15:46
> > > > To: Exchange Discussions
> > > > Subject:RE: Rules are not applied to cc  
> messages  [q195583]
> > > > 
> > > > What does the rule say?
> > > > 
> > > >  -Original Message-
> > > > From:   North Martin [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
> > > > Sent:   Wednesday, September 12, 2001 3:42 PM
> > > > To: Exchange Discussions
> > > > Subject:Rules are not applied to cc  messages  [q195583]
> > > > 
> > > > When you recieve an SMTP message with your address 
> > > specified in the cc
> > > > field
> > > > the inbox forwarding rule does not work.
> > > > 
> > > > I have checked this out on the MS Technet/web site and 
> > > found one reference
> > > > in Q195583. This states the problem was fixed in Service 
> > > Pack 2 , however
> > > > I
> > > > am on Exchange 5.5 spk 4 and the problem still exists. I 
> > > have checked the
> > > > file versions as stated in the Q Article and can confirm 
> > > that all files
> > > > mentioned are later than those listed.
> > > > 
> > > > Has anybody else come across this problem and if so how did 
> > > you fix it?

_
List posting FAQ:   http://www.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 are not applied to cc messages [q195583]

[Scharff, Chris]

Hmmm, your version of Outlook must be different than mine. I don't have
anything which says "simple check box to forward to an external smtp
address". What /exactly/ does the rule say?

> -Original Message-
> From: North Martin [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
> Sent: Wednesday, September 12, 2001 10:08 AM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: RE: Rules are not applied to cc messages [q195583]
> 
> 
> thr rule is the  simple check box to forward mail to an external smtp
> address
> 
> Martin
> 
> > -Original Message-
> > From:   Scharff, Chris [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > Sent:   12 September 2001 15:58
> > To: Exchange Discussions
> > Subject:RE: Rules are not applied to cc  messages  [q195583]
> > 
> > Only when it's related to user error in the design of the rule.
> > 
> > > -Original Message-
> > > From: North Martin [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
> > > Sent: Wednesday, September 12, 2001 9:42 AM
> > > To: Exchange Discussions
> > > Subject: Rules are not applied to cc messages [q195583]
> > > 
> > > 
> > > When you recieve an SMTP message with your address specified 
> > > in the cc field
> > > the inbox forwarding rule does not work.
> > > 
> > > I have checked this out on the MS Technet/web site and found 
> > > one reference
> > > in Q195583. This states the problem was fixed in Service Pack 
> > > 2 , however I
> > > am on Exchange 5.5 spk 4 and the problem still exists. I have 
> > > checked the
> > > file versions as stated in the Q Article and can confirm that 
> > > all files
> > > mentioned are later than those listed.
> > > 
> > > Has anybody else come across this problem and if so how did 
> > > you fix it?
> > > 
> > > Martin North
> > > Ricardo Consulting Engineers Ltd
> > > [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: Rules are not applied to cc messages [q195583]

[Scharff, Chris]

No... "What does the rule say".

> -Original Message-
> From: North Martin [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
> Sent: Wednesday, September 12, 2001 10:07 AM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: RE: Rules are not applied to cc messages [q195583]
> 
> 
> The rule simply forwards the mail on to another external smtp address
> 
> Regards
> Martin
> 
> > -Original Message-
> > From:   Ewins, James [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > Sent:   12 September 2001 15:46
> > To: Exchange Discussions
> > Subject:RE: Rules are not applied to cc  messages  [q195583]
> > 
> > What does the rule say?
> > 
> >  -Original Message-
> > From:   North Martin [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
> > Sent:   Wednesday, September 12, 2001 3:42 PM
> > To: Exchange Discussions
> > Subject:Rules are not applied to cc  messages  [q195583]
> > 
> > When you recieve an SMTP message with your address 
> specified in the cc
> > field
> > the inbox forwarding rule does not work.
> > 
> > I have checked this out on the MS Technet/web site and 
> found one reference
> > in Q195583. This states the problem was fixed in Service 
> Pack 2 , however
> > I
> > am on Exchange 5.5 spk 4 and the problem still exists. I 
> have checked the
> > file versions as stated in the Q Article and can confirm 
> that all files
> > mentioned are later than those listed.
> > 
> > Has anybody else come across this problem and if so how did 
> you fix it?
> > 
> > Martin North
> > Ricardo Consulting Engineers Ltd
> > [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: Rules are not applied to cc messages [q195583]

[Scharff, Chris]

Only when it's related to user error in the design of the rule.

> -Original Message-
> From: North Martin [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
> Sent: Wednesday, September 12, 2001 9:42 AM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: Rules are not applied to cc messages [q195583]
> 
> 
> When you recieve an SMTP message with your address specified 
> in the cc field
> the inbox forwarding rule does not work.
> 
> I have checked this out on the MS Technet/web site and found 
> one reference
> in Q195583. This states the problem was fixed in Service Pack 
> 2 , however I
> am on Exchange 5.5 spk 4 and the problem still exists. I have 
> checked the
> file versions as stated in the Q Article and can confirm that 
> all files
> mentioned are later than those listed.
> 
> Has anybody else come across this problem and if so how did 
> you fix it?
> 
> Martin North
> Ricardo Consulting Engineers Ltd
> [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: reccommendations for NOT putting exchange on any domain contr olle rs on network.

[Scharff, Chris]

Archives cover this topic in detail. I have many customers running Exchange
on domain controllers and I was responsible for configuring more than one of
them that way.

> -Original Message-
> From: .DL Helpdesk [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
> Sent: Wednesday, September 12, 2001 6:51 AM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: reccommendations for NOT putting exchange on any 
> domain controlle rs on network.
> 
> 
> Listers,
> 
> I know you're not supposed to put Exchange on a DC, 
> complicates backup and
> restore procedures in the event of disaster recovery.  
> However I am sure
> that there are other reasons.  Can anyone recommend where I 
> can find a list
> of what these problems are.
> 
> Yes - I have someone who is running it on a PDC and I need to 
> tell them why
> not to.
> 
> Cheers
> 
> JJ
> 
> 
> 
>  -Original Message-
> From: .DL Helpdesk [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
> Sent: Wednesday, September 12, 2001 10:08 AM
> To:   Exchange Discussions
> Subject:  RE: IMS wont run - problem with Exchange or the Server?
> 
> Sorry - Ladies and Gents...!
> 
>  -Original Message-
> From: .DL Helpdesk [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
> Sent: Wednesday, September 12, 2001 10:06 AM
> To:   Exchange Discussions
> Subject:  IMS wont run - problem with Exchange or the Server?
> 
> Gents, I have a problem with our Exchange Server sp 5.5 on 
> NT4.0 srv sp6a.
> 
> The microsoft exchange internet mail service won't run.  The 
> error message
> in the event log is...
> 
> The registry checkpoint for cluster resource Microsoft 
> Exchange Internet
> Mail Service could not be restored to registry key
> HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SYSTEM\CurrentControlSet\Services\MSExchang
> eIMC. The
> resource may not function correctly. Make sure that no other 
> processes have
> open handles to registry keys in this registry subtree. event id 1024.
> 
> I also get another error message appear onscreen when i try 
> and bring the 
> internet mail service online, its
> 
> Store.exe error
> The instruction at "0x70247270" referenced memory at 
> "0x00014".  The
> memory could not be "read".
> 
> This error message also appeared a few times when i tried to login to
> hotmail on internet explorer on the server.  When i clicked 
> on ok it closed
> the browser.
> This might suggest that the problem is with the server and 
> not just with the
> exchange services.
> I've checked the disk space, tried stopping and restarting 
> all the different
> services, rebooted the server, checked for any signs of viruses on the
> servers (eg code red variations as our servers do not have antivirus
> software on them - no sign of any viruses).
> 
> I've already looked around on technet for hours and cannot 
> find much on this
> error at all.
> 
> Any assistance on this one would be greatly appreciated.
> 
> thanks,
> 
> James Johnston
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _
> List posting FAQ:   http://www.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: Global Address Question

[Scharff, Chris]

Import & Export. Takes about 30 seconds to change 10k entries in excel.

*
  Chris Scharff[EMAIL PROTECTED]www.swinc.com
  Simpler-Webb, Inc.  Austin, TX +1-512-322-0071
* 

> -Original Message-
> From: Rebecca Ford [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
> Sent: Tuesday, September 11, 2001 4:49 PM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: Global Address Question
> 
> 
> I am using Exchange 5.5.  Currently our global address 
> displays names First
> Name, Last Name.  Is there a way to change the views to be 
> Last Name, First
> Name without changing the display names in each and every 
> entry?  thanks.  
> 
> 
> Rebecca 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _
> List posting FAQ:   http://www.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: my 2 cents

[Scharff, Chris]

lol That's pretty funny, but I don't think this is the right time to be
making jokes. Funny stuff though.

> -Original Message-
> From: Velazquez, Carlos F [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
> Sent: Tuesday, September 11, 2001 10:24 AM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: my 2 cents
> 
> 
> The world, not just the US, has just changed. Assume we will be on war
> footing for the next several months. The news is reporting as 
> I type that
> terrorist organizations are saying that not all attacks are over.
> 
> Expect all sorts of shortages in fuel, food, etc. Nationwide 
> curfews are in
> the offing and should be implemented immediately. This "me" or "X" or
> whatever generation has just learned a tough lesson: those 
> that fail to heed
> history are doomed to repeat it. This is Pearl Harbor all 
> over again, except
> it is worse.
> 
> We have grown fat, inattentive, complacent, naively thinking 
> the rest of the
> world hold the same values and respect for human life that we 
> have. Now we
> know better.
> 
> This is a massive incomprehensible failure in intelligence. 
> The liberals
> gutted the CIA & the FBI in the 70's and we are now reaping 
> the rewards.
> 
> The only way to have and preserve peace is to be always ready 
> for conflict
> and to have the gonads to follow up and implement what we 
> have learned from
> the hard lessons of history.
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: John Allhiser [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Tuesday, September 11, 2001 11:02 AM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: RE: Terrible disasters and an expression of 
> sympathetic grief.
> 
> 
> If we step back a moment from the horrific events happening, 
> we realize that
> the world has changed abruptly this morning.  The United 
> States is at war,
> (officially or not) and it is for the first time that it has 
> affected the
> mainland since 1812.  
> 
> God help us all...
> 
> John Allhiser MCSE CCNA
> Network Engineer
> Business Men's Assurance
> 
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: Velazquez, Carlos F [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Tuesday, September 11, 2001 10:05 AM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: RE: Terrible disasters and an expression of 
> sympathetic grief.
> 
> 
> plane just crashed at Camp David
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: Monteleone-Haught Matt - Millville
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Tuesday, September 11, 2001 10:56 AM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: RE: Terrible disasters and an expression of 
> sympathetic grief.
> 
> 
> Does anyone know if the Wired Magazine is located in the 
> World Trade Center?
> 
> 
> >>>-Original Message-
> >>>From: Orr, Dale L. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> >>>Sent: Tuesday, September 11, 2001 11:00 AM
> >>>To: Exchange Discussions
> >>>Subject: RE: Terrible disasters and an expression of 
> >>>sympathetic grief.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>Very thoughtful of you, Dean. We have all lost someone 
> >>>today: the person we
> >>>woke up as. And I doubt if we'll ever see them again. Our 
> >>>thoughts and
> >>>prayers are with the victims.
> >>>
> >>>Dale L. Orr
> >>>Network Administrator
> >>>DoD Polygraph Institute
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>-Original Message-
> >>>From: Great Cthulhu Jones [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> >>>Sent: Tuesday, September 11, 2001 10:47 AM
> >>>To: Exchange Discussions
> >>>Subject: Terrible disasters and an expression of sympathetic grief.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>Let me step out from behind the curtain to say I feel deep 
> >>>shock and grief
> >>>for those of you who are affected by the disasters happening 
> >>>today. Some of
> >>>you are only in shock; others have lost dear ones. Some of 
> >>>the people on
> >>>this list may have been injured or killed, even.
> >>>
> >>>The enormity of this day overwhelms us all. The images, 
> >>>reports, and losses
> >>>touch every human deeply. Let me offer myself as someone you 
> >>>can correspond
> >>>with, should you have any need. Many of you placed 
> >>>yourselves at my disposal
> >>>during my time of loss: I am here for you, should you need 
> >>>in your time of
> >>>loss.
> >>>
> >>>It is peacemaking and sharing of grief that keeps us human.
> >>>
> >>>You can reach me at [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >>>
> >>>Dean Webb
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>_
> >>>List posting FAQ:   http://www.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.swin

RE: Rejected Message

[Scharff, Chris]

Amazing... This is why content filtering is a waste of time.

-Original Message-
From: Ed Crowley
To: Exchange Discussions
Sent: 9/10/2001 8:36 PM
Subject: FW: Rejected Message

For your amusement.  Of course the admin whose system does this won't
get
this.

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]]
Sent: Monday, September 10, 2001 3:27 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Rejected Message


The attached mail message has been rejected for the following reason:

Body contains word(s)/phrase(s) 'joke'

_
List posting FAQ:   http://www.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: Send to no more than 25 at a time...

[Scharff, Chris]

A1. Hotmail is not compliant with the relevant RFCs.

Imagine that. Of course if they were RFC complaint, they'd only have to
accept a minimum of 100 recipients... Which might still be an issue. Perhaps
a 3rd party mailing list package might be more appropriate... I'm sure it
would be cheaper than writing an event sink to resolve this quandary and
more practical than trying to get Hotmail to comply with industry standards.



> -Original Message-
> From: Greg Eytcheson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
> Sent: Monday, September 10, 2001 2:42 PM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: Send to no more than 25 at a time...
> 
> 
> Exchange 2000 SP1, Windows 2000 SP2, GFI Mail Essentials 2000 
> (latest build), Dell PowerEdge 2550, dual P-III 733, 2GB RAM.
> 
> Dear Exchange Guru's and Goddesses:
> 
> Q:  Is there a way to get Exchange to limit the number of 
> recipients per message for a specific remote domain?  More 
> specifically, break a message with more than x number of 
> recipients into multiple messages.  If so, how?
> 
> Explanation:  This year, I allowed students to choose whether 
> to use their own email address (mail enabled account) or an 
> account on our system (mailbox enabled account).   All 
> students, regardless of their choice of accounts, are added 
> to the "All Students" group, allowing the staff to send 
> announcements as necessary.  This works great except for one 
> thing:  messages sent to "All Students" always get an NDR 
> with every Hotmail user listed.  
> 
> So, I ask Hotmail support why that might be happening and 
> this is their reply:  "I understand how inconvenient it is on 
> your part but I would like to inform you that we have only a 
> limit of 25 recipients per messages."
> 
> Great.  If you try to include more than 25 Hotmail recipients 
> in a single message, Hotmail will reject the entire message.  
> So, I need a way to have Exchange break up the message into 
> multiple messages with only 25 recipients per each when 
> addressed to a Hotmail address.  Any ideas?  Other solutions?  
> 
> My only idea at this time is to create several "Hotmail Users 
> #x" type groups, and then assign up to 25 Hotmail users per 
> group to each of these groups, and add these groups to the 
> All Students group.  This is way more hands-on than I want to 
> get on this; the rest of the process is completely automated.
> 
> If I am to be FAQ'ed here, please point to a specific page.  
> I have searched the FAQ, Slipstick, groups.google.com, 
> northernlight.com, etc. and have found nothing that relates 
> to this problem.
> 
> Thank you,
> Greg

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

RE: PSTUPG19

[Scharff, Chris]

If the data isn't worth $45, it's not worth recovering at all. 

> -Original Message-
> From: Natacha Rivet [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
> Sent: Monday, September 10, 2001 1:41 PM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: Re: PSTUPG19
> 
> 
> to see the password you need to have a valide license
> .
> - Original Message - 
> From: "Scharff, Chris" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: "Exchange Discussions" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sent: Monday, September 10, 2001 2:11 PM
> Subject: RE: PSTUPG19
> 
> 
> > www.lostpassword.com
> > 
> > > -Original Message-
> > > From: Natacha Rivet [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
> > > Sent: Monday, September 10, 2001 1:03 PM
> > > To: Exchange Discussions
> > > Subject: PSTUPG19
> > > 
> > > 
> > > One of our user have a password protect his pst and don't 
> > > remember it... If
> > > somebody have this tool (or another one) I'll really appreciated !
> > > 
> > > Regards
> > > 
> > > Natacha

_
List posting FAQ:   http://www.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: PSTUPG19

[Scharff, Chris]

www.lostpassword.com

> -Original Message-
> From: Natacha Rivet [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
> Sent: Monday, September 10, 2001 1:03 PM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: PSTUPG19
> 
> 
> One of our user have a password protect his pst and don't 
> remember it... If
> somebody have this tool (or another one) I'll really appreciated !
> 
> Regards
> 
> Natacha
> 
> 
> 
> _
> List posting FAQ:   http://www.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: How to use CDOEXM from VBSCRIPT on the client side

[Scharff, Chris]

Michael,

First, your English is much better than my German, and better than that of
70% of the mouth breathers produced by the American "educational" system. 

As to your question, I'm not sure I have an answer directly, but I do have
an implementation methodology question. Is there a reason that these scripts
are to be run from the client side? Personally from an administrative and
manageability perspective, I'd think I'd like to have the locations of these
scripts centralized. 

In discussions with some of my peers I always worked from the base
proposition that 3rd party management tools for Exchange are best designed
to utilize a web based interface in which the scripts reside centrally and
the ability for a user to execute a specific task is based on access
permissions to the script or within a larger access control wrapper which
encompasses the script options.

Sorry for taking the discussion off topic, but I'm just interested in the
design factors which led to one implementation methodology over another.

Regards,

Chris

*
  Chris Scharff[EMAIL PROTECTED]www.swinc.com
  Simpler-Webb, Inc.  Austin, TX +1-512-322-0071
* 

> -Original Message-
> From: mnk [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
> Sent: Saturday, September 08, 2001 5:15 AM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: How to use CDOEXM from VBSCRIPT on the client side
> 
> 
> Hello all,
> 
> this is my frist posting here, so I hope I am at the right place. I'm
> rather desparated! My colleques have programmed some very 
> nice VBScripts
> to administrate an Exchange 2000 environment. The only 
> drawback is these
> scripts run only at the server directly. From different informationen
> sources I got confirmed CDOEXM objects should also be useable from the
> client side but noone could describe the prerequisit to do so. Our
> milestones for delivering these scripts are comming closer 
> and closer so
> please give me any information you have at hand.
> 
> A very big "Thank you" in advance
>Michael
> 
> PS: Excuse my poor english I am not a native speaker.

_
List posting FAQ:   http://www.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: URGENT to Upgrade

[Scharff, Chris]

FAQ Appendix A

*
  Chris Scharff[EMAIL PROTECTED]www.swinc.com
  Simpler-Webb, Inc.  Austin, TX +1-512-322-0071
* 

> -Original Message-
> From: kumar [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
> Sent: Monday, September 10, 2001 4:03 AM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: URGENT to Upgrade
> 
> 
> 
> Hi all,
> 
> I have Exchange srver 5.5 Sp4 on WINDOWSNT 4.0 (Back office 
> 4.5), NOW we are
> shifting the OS to Windows 2000 server and partitions will 
> alsobe different.
> 
> what are the best way to take the backup.
> 
> *.edb and *.pat file i will take backup and what else I need 
> to take care
> 
> Thanks
> uk
> 
> 
> 
> _
> List posting FAQ:   http://www.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 2K truncates address book?

[Scharff, Chris]

What's your LDAP query limit set to? %g %s is an interesting way to organize
a GAL in an organization with more than 10 people.

-Original Message-
From: Bob Kersten
To: Exchange Discussions
Sent: 9/8/2001 12:19 PM
Subject: OWA 2K truncates address book?

Help!
 
Asked before but not answered, my new Exchange 2000 server is running
great with OWA except when the user tries to find an address in the
address list. If they type in the company name and choose find and the
results are more than 100 addresses found the list will only allow you
to scroll to the first 100 users. Also, the users are sorted in Alpha
order by their first name making it very difficult to find someone.
 
Outlook 2000 / 97 clients work fine, just having a problem with the web
interface.
 
Thanks!
[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: Exch DL - Force to Place Member Name in TO field

[Scharff, Chris]

Ban the usage of DLs or purchase your very own copy of ThE sTiCk [tm] for
just $49,999 and this executive will become much more compliant.

*
  Chris Scharff[EMAIL PROTECTED]www.swinc.com
  Simpler-Webb, Inc.  Austin, TX +1-512-322-0071
* 

> -Original Message-
> From: Kim Kruse [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
> Sent: Friday, September 07, 2001 12:25 PM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: Exch DL - Force to Place Member Name in TO field
> 
> 
> We use Exchange Distribution Lists - but have DL members who 
> filter their
> incoming mail to send anything not TO: their email address to the junk
> folder.
> I have confirmed this is how Exchange DL's work, vs Personal 
> Distribution
> Lists (which put the recipients name in the TO field).
> 
> Does anyone know of a way to use Exchange DL's - AND force 
> the member email
> address into the TO field?
> 
> Unfortunately, can't talk the user into refining their Junk 
> rule (they're
> too high up for arm-twisting ).
> 
> Thx
> Kim
> 
> _
> List posting FAQ:   http://www.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: NDR that I've never seen before

[Scharff, Chris]

The text is for human consumption... The only relavent bit is 550. I know of
one server which answers "550 fsck off spammer".

*
  Chris Scharff[EMAIL PROTECTED]www.swinc.com
  Simpler-Webb, Inc.  Austin, TX +1-512-322-0071
* 

> -Original Message-
> From: Michel, David [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
> Sent: Thursday, September 06, 2001 8:39 AM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: NDR that I've never seen before
> 
> 
> I attempted to send an email this recipient and received the 
> following NDR.
> Although it's clearly a 550 relay error from their server, 
> the other parts
> like "does not like recipient" and "giving up" I have never 
> seen before.
> Just wondering if this is common and I've just missed it.  Thanks.
> 
> 
> This message could not be delivered to the following recipients:
> 
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> 216.242.209.191 does not like recipient.
> Remote host said: 550 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>... Relaying denied
> Giving up.
> 
>  
> David S. Michel
> MCSE/CNE
> Systems Engineer
> Ruden McClosky Smith Schuster & Russell, P.A.
> 200 East Broward Boulevard
> Suite 1600
> Fort Lauderdale, FL  33301
> 954-527-2456  Direct Phone
> 954-333-4056  Direct Fax
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]  
>   
> 
> 
> NOTICE: This e-mail message and any attachment to this e-mail message
> contains confidential information that may be legally 
> privileged. If you are
> not the intended recipient, you must not review, retransmit, 
> convert to hard
> copy, copy, use or disseminate this e-mail or any attachments 
> to it. If you
> have received this e-mail in error, please notify us 
> immediately by return
> e-mail or by telephone at 954-764-6660 and delete this 
> message. Please note
> that if this e-mail message contains a forwarded message or 
> is a reply to a
> prior message, some or all of the contents of this message or any
> attachments may not have been produced by Ruden, McClosky, 
> Smith, Schuster,
> & Russell, P.A.
> 
> _
> List posting FAQ:   http://www.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: third party client can't send email to external address!?

[Scharff, Chris]

> we only have one Exchange server.

We only have 2 cats.

_
List posting FAQ:   http://www.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: 2nd SMTP address

[Scharff, Chris]

Yes. Use a script to create mailboxxen.

*
  Chris Scharff[EMAIL PROTECTED]www.swinc.com
  Simpler-Webb, Inc.  Austin, TX +1-512-322-0071
* 

> -Original Message-
> From: John Bricher [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
> Sent: Thursday, September 06, 2001 12:00 PM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: 2nd SMTP address
> 
> 
> Is it possible to setup Exchange 5.5 so that every time I 
> create a mailbox
> it automatically creates 2 SMTP addresses?  (ex: [EMAIL PROTECTED] and
> [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: Trend Scanmail on 2-node cluster

[Scharff, Chris]

I've rarely had a successful installation of a new version of Trend over an
older version. I've pretty much given up trying and uninstall the older
version, clean out the bits that the uninstall fails to remove properly and
then do a fresh installation. It saves me from having to do it later when I
call SSM support because feature $foo isn't working as expected.

Never tried it on a cluster though. 

*
  Chris Scharff[EMAIL PROTECTED]www.swinc.com
  Simpler-Webb, Inc.  Austin, TX +1-512-322-0071
* 

> -Original Message-
> From: Seitz, Peter [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
> Sent: Thursday, September 06, 2001 10:49 AM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: RE: Trend Scanmail on 2-node cluster
> 
> 
> I installed over an older version and had no problems on a 
> 5.5 Clustered
> Exchange.
> And it emails virus notices.
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: Hunter, Lori [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Thursday, September 06, 2001 7:47 AM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: RE: Trend Scanmail on 2-node cluster
> 
> 
> Dan, are you installing over an existing scanmail 
> installation or is this
> new?  I had this same problem with my 5.5 cluster and we 
> finally got it to
> install by removing the older version first.
> 
> Now the thing STILL won't send any e-mail notifications when 
> it finds a
> virus, but that's another kettle of fish.
> 
> Lori Hunter
> LAN Administrator
> Citi Commerce Solutions
> (847) 597-3118
> 
> Sic gorgiamus allos subjectatos nuc
> 
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: Atkinson, Daniel [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Thursday, September 06, 2001 4:40 AM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: RE: Trend Scanmail on 2-node cluster
> 
> 
> 
> > Have you tried failing over and then installing on the (then) 
> > passive node?
> 
> no, but i would not expect that to work since the installer 
> requires both
> nodes to be installed at one time, or it reports failure...
> 
> maybe this is worth a try as a last resort, although I am 
> aiming for a clean
> installation since this is a production server.
> 
> thanks for your reply.
> 
> regards,
> dan.

_
List posting FAQ:   http://www.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: MTA Problems with Exchange 5.5 sp4

[Scharff, Chris]

Does one or more of these servers have multiple IP addresses? If so, try
using a hosts file.

*
  Chris Scharff[EMAIL PROTECTED]www.swinc.com
  Simpler-Webb, Inc.  Austin, TX +1-512-322-0071
* 

> -Original Message-
> From: Nizar El-Assaad [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
> Sent: Thursday, September 06, 2001 9:57 AM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: MTA Problems with Exchange 5.5 sp4
> 
> 
> Hello all
> 
> I have two Exchange 5.5 sites with one server in each site (Windows NT
> Server 4.0/sp6a, Exchange 5.5/sp3 on both servers). I am 
> using Exchange
> behind Proxy 2.0 in one site, and in order to make inter-site 
> communication
> possible, I had to assign a fixed TCP port for the MTA (I am 
> using port
> 6000). It was working fine, until I upgraded from sp3 to sp4. 
> Since then,
> messages are stuck in the MTA queue, and I get error messages every 10
> minutes that say:
> "An RPC communications error occurred. Unable to bind over 
> RPC. Locality
> Table (LTAB) index: 4, NT/MTA error code: 1753. Comms error 
> 1753, Bind error
> 0, Remote Server Name TOM [MAIN BASE 1 500 %10] (14)"
> I had this same problem in the first place (with Exchange 
> sp3) before I
> assigned a static TCP port for the MTA (because of MS Proxy), and the
> solution was to assign this static port.
> Is there a way to fix this problem? And if not, can I revert 
> back to sp3?
> 
> Best Regards
> Nizar El-Assaad
> 
> 
> _
> List posting FAQ:   http://www.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 2000 adding an contact via a scritp

[Scharff, Chris]

MSDN is a fairly useful resource for this.
http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/default.asp?url=/library/en-us/wss/_cdo_cr
eating_a_contact.asp (Link wrap yadda yadda)

*
  Chris Scharff[EMAIL PROTECTED]www.swinc.com
  Simpler-Webb, Inc.  Austin, TX +1-512-322-0071
* 

> -Original Message-
> From: wade robinson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
> Sent: Thursday, September 06, 2001 9:01 AM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: Exchange 2000 adding an contact via a scritp
> 
> 
> I am looking for the context for scripting the creation of custom
> recipients (AD Contacts)

_
List posting FAQ:   http://www.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 2000 adding an contact via a scritp

[Scharff, Chris]

I believe a good book on Exchange might be required to answer that question
sufficiently. Here are a few: http://www.swinc.com/resource/books.htm

> -Original Message-
> From: T Brown [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
> Sent: Thursday, September 06, 2001 9:33 AM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: Re: Exchange 2000 adding an contact via a scritp
> 
> 
> What is the use of "custom recipients"?
> 
> - Original Message - 
> From: "wade robinson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: "Exchange Discussions" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sent: Thursday, September 06, 2001 7:01 AM
> Subject: Exchange 2000 adding an contact via a scritp
> 
> 
> I am looking for the context for scripting the creation of custom
> recipients (AD Contacts)

_
List posting FAQ:   http://www.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: Gloabl Address Book

[Scharff, Chris]

www.cdolive.com

*
  Chris Scharff[EMAIL PROTECTED]www.swinc.com
  Simpler-Webb, Inc.  Austin, TX +1-512-322-0071
* 

> -Original Message-
> From: David [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
> Sent: Wednesday, September 05, 2001 2:16 PM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: Gloabl Address Book
> 
> 
> I would like to intergrate the Gloabl Address Book with a web page we
> have. Anybody do this and if so can I take a look at your 
> HTML code? Any
> help qould be appreciated.
> 
> Regards,
> 
> David Jaffe

_
List posting FAQ:   http://www.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: Fax server - What is the best solution?

[Scharff, Chris]

Oh please. 

I was simply trying to be nice and not point out so bluntly that Gordon's
question was a fscking stupid one. "What's the best $foo" is, in general a
poor question indicative of a poster who either doesn't understand the area
into which they are delving at all or who is too lazy to actually do a needs
analysis for their organization and is hoping for an easy answer. 

I'm aware that every vendor tries to pass off their product as the best of
breed solution for the industry and as being capable of meeting the needs of
anyone and everyone. I'm also aware that it's generally complete bullshit.
However, that doesn't excuse one from doing some basic internal research
into the needs of ones organization with regards to faxing and developing a
set of requirements with which to judge the available packages. 

"What's the best $foo?"

Based on cost?
Based on reliability?
Based on integration with Exchange?
Based on vendor support?
Based on required feature $feature?
Based on interoperability with $other_application?
Based on ease of administration?
Based on the name of the vendor whose sales rep your CIO is banging?

So, Gordon I'm sorry I pointed out your question was feeble. Rocky, I'm
sorry you lacked the ability to clue into what was being said. Discussing
fax products isn't off limits, but christ on a cracker, it'd be nice if
those wanting to get information about fax products would at least take the
time to articulate their needs before asking for a product recommendation.
The fax solution I use might be a piss poor solution for Gordon and I fail
to see how my mentioning it is of any value to him in determining what
subset of products to evaluate.   

As to Haiku and Fish Tacos... Those are pretty feeble off topic threads as
well and I've mentioned that off list to more than one aspiring poet and
food critic. 

This list is a useful resource for getting information quick... Ask a poorly
phrased question and you get lots of bad information quickly. Taking the
time to do some perfunctory research and to develop an intelligent question
often yields better answers, although they come a bit slower, as meaningful
information can rarely be conveyed as quickly as bullshit. 

*
  Chris Scharff[EMAIL PROTECTED]www.swinc.com

  "Cheshire-Puss," she began, "would you tell me, please, 
  which way I ought to go from here?"
  "That depends a good deal on where you want to get to," 
  said the Cat.
  "I don't care much where--" said Alice.
  "Then it doesn't matter which way you go," said the Cat.
* 

> -Original Message-
> From: Rocky Stefano [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
> Sent: Tuesday, September 04, 2001 7:39 PM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: RE: Fax server - What is the best solution?
> 
> C'mon Chris,
> 
> What you are telling me is that you are advocating the use of 
> the list NOT
> for Exchange discussions (because a newbie might ask dumb 
> questions) but
> rather for the stupid and ENDLESS conversations about bloody 
> tacos and which
> hole in my body produces the most gas? How about some haiku 
> Friday? I have
> no problem listening to that endless drivel all day or most 
> of the drivel
> out of the list all week and its "gang" but please don't tell me that
> someone can't ask a question just because its partially 
> covered by a FAQ.
> Almost every question asked on this list could be answered 
> with some well
> done research off the net. People use lists because they are 
> useful for
> getting the information they need quick without a lot of 
> research. Once they
> have narrowed their choices down from list responses then 
> they can do their
> own homework. Every companies website (for exchange faxing) 
> will tell you
> that theirs is the best. Let's not forget the 100 or so FAQU 
> responses to
> people's questions about something legitimate. How is someone 
> to know if a
> solution is problematic or not without soliciting the help of 
> the list?
> 
> Regards
> 
> 
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of 
> Scharff, Chris
> Sent: September 4, 2001 5:09 PM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: RE: Fax server - What is the best solution?
> 
> 
> 
> The topic has been discussed ad nauseum. Rather than turn a 
> discussion list
> into a re-hash list, those who were strong advocates of their 
> products made
> arguments for inclusion of their product in the FAQ.. and in 
> some cases
> exclusion of their products from the FAQ. Of course the FAQ

RE: Mailbox move rates

[Scharff, Chris]

.:: ponders the effect SIS has on move rates ::.

> -Original Message-
> From: David Grimstone (DSLWN) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
> Sent: Tuesday, September 04, 2001 4:55 PM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: RE: Mailbox move rates
> 
> 
> 3-4Gb per hour.
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: Ed Crowley [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
> Sent: Wednesday, 5 September 2001 9:11 a.m.
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: Mailbox move rates
> 
> 
> Assuming relatively contemporary target system hardware and 
> relatively aged
> source system hardware, and a 100MB LAN in between, what 
> average data rates
> are y'all seeing in terms of megabytes per hour when moving 
> mailboxes from
> an Exchange 5.5 to Exchange 2000?
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Ed Crowley MCSE+Internet MVP
> Tech Consultant
> Compaq Computer Corporation (soon to be HP)
> All your base are belong to us.
> 
> 
> _
> List posting FAQ:   http://www.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: Fax server - What is the best solution?

[Scharff, Chris]

The topic has been discussed ad nauseum. Rather than turn a discussion list
into a re-hash list, those who were strong advocates of their products made
arguments for inclusion of their product in the FAQ.. and in some cases
exclusion of their products from the FAQ. Of course the FAQ is a living
growing thing, so if someone had something more intelligent to add than
"I've been using X for 3 days now in my home lab and really like it" it
might be added to the FAQ as well. 

If Gordon had asked if anyone knew of a fax product which offered a unique
subset of features then perhaps calling FAQ would have been in error. "What
do you feel is the best fax solution" however is at least 6 hours of solid
reading in the archives.

*
  Chris Scharff[EMAIL PROTECTED]www.swinc.com
  Simpler-Webb, Inc.  Austin, TX +1-512-322-0071
* 

> -Original Message-
> From: Rocky Stefano [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
> Sent: Tuesday, September 04, 2001 3:45 PM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: RE: Fax server - What is the best solution?
> 
> 
> 
> What's the point of a discussion list then?
> 
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Ed Crowley
> Sent: September 4, 2001 4:34 PM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: RE: Fax server - What is the best solution?
> 
> 
> 
> It gets no less confusing when everyone chimes in with his or her
> preferences, either.  I suggest you review the products based 
> on your own
> need and cost parameters.
> 
> 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 Gordon Olson
> Sent: Tuesday, September 04, 2001 1:14 PM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: RE: Fax server - What is the best solution?
> 
> 
> Missy,
> 
> I actually looked at that, I even have my printed copy of the 
> FAQ. I was
> just wondering what people were using here on the fourm. 
> There is so mnay
> different ones that it gets sort of confusing.
> 
> Gordon
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: missy koslosky [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Tuesday, September 04, 2001 12:27 PM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: Re: Fax server - What is the best solution?
> 
> 
> I'd suggest checking the handy-dandy FAQ at
> http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm.  It's so good I 
> even memorized
> the URL.
> 
> Missy
> - Original Message -
> From: "Gordon Olson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: "Exchange Discussions" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sent: Tuesday, September 04, 2001 3:18 PM
> Subject: Fax server - What is the best solution?
> 
> 
> I would like to get your opinion on what you feel is the best 
> Fax Solution.
> We are Running Exchange 5.5 SP4 and no plans to move to 
> Exchange 2000 until
> May 2002. We have a Terminal Server \ Citrix XP enviroment 
> using Outlook
> 2000. We have 52 remote locations and would like a Fax 
> solution that would
> use Outlook, what do you suggest?
> 
> TIA
> 
> Gordon

_
List posting FAQ:   http://www.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: SMTP Addressing

[Scharff, Chris]

I think you're looking for section 4.1.2.

Partial excerpt:

 ::=  "@" 

 ::=  | 

 ::=   

 ::=  |  

 ::=  | 

 ::=  |  | "-"

 ::=  |  "." 

 ::=  |  

 ::=  """  """

 ::=  "\"  | "\"   |  |  

 ::=  | "\" 

 ::=  "."  "."  "." 

 ::=  |  

 ::= one, two, or three digits representing a decimal
  integer value in the range 0 through 255

 ::= any one of the 52 alphabetic characters A through Z
  in upper case and a through z in lower case

 ::= any one of the 128 ASCII characters, but not any
   or 

 ::= any one of the ten digits 0 through 9

 ::= any one of the 128 ASCII characters except ,
  , quote ("), or backslash (\)

 ::= any one of the 128 ASCII characters (no exceptions)

 ::= "<" | ">" | "(" | ")" | "[" | "]" | "\" | "."
  | "," | ";" | ":" | "@"  """ | the control
  characters (ASCII codes 0 through 31 inclusive and
  127)


*
  Chris Scharff[EMAIL PROTECTED]www.swinc.com
  Simpler-Webb, Inc.  Austin, TX +1-512-322-0071
  "Are you pondering what I'm pondering?"
  "I think so Brain, but . . . if we give peas a chance,
  won't the lima beans feel left out?"
* 

> -Original Message-
> From: Fryer, Daniel M [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
> Sent: Monday, September 03, 2001 8:16 AM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: SMTP Addressing
> 
> 
>   All,
> 
>   does anyone know where I can get a list of all valid SMTP
> characters? I have checked RFC821 and there seems to be info regarding
> length of username and domain name etc, but not specific 
> character lists.
> 
>   thanks
> 
>   Dan Fryer
>   Project Manager
>   GSK Messaging 

_
List posting FAQ:   http://www.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: Adding Message to all outgoing email

[Scharff, Chris]

Certainly something other than to transmit my medical data thankyouverymuch.

> -Original Message-
> From: Drewski [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
> Sent: Friday, August 31, 2001 3:59 PM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: RE: Adding Message to all outgoing email
> 
> 
> That's an interesting idea.  What does one use email for, then?
> 
> Drew (MOS)
> 
> KWAR2001 website: www.schoolofdefence.org/kwar.html
> Read my Column on OUTLOOKEXCHANGE.COM:
> http://www.outlookexchange.com/articles/drewnicholson/default.asp
> Pics of Max are BACK!  http://www.drewncapris.net
> 
> On the other hand, you have different fingers.
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Benjamin Scott
> Sent: Friday, August 31, 2001 3:43 PM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: Re: Adding Message to all outgoing email
> 
> 
> On Fri, 31 Aug 2001, Patrick Hudson wrote:
> > Can someone please tell me how to add a message to all 
> outgoing email.
> > I work for a hospital and we need to add a confidentiality 
> statement to
> > all outgoing email.
> 
>   One should not use public email for confidential correspondence.
> 
> --
> 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]

RE: Exchange 2000 SMTP Relay problem

[Scharff, Chris]

Yes.

-Original Message-
From: Duane Purcell
To: Exchange Discussions
Sent: 8/31/2001 12:46 AM
Subject: RE: Exchange 2000 SMTP Relay problem

There isn't a recipient policy for quest.skilled.com.au, however, the 50
or so (out of 1000 odd) users have had their new email address entered
in Exchange 5.5 Admin.  This has successfully replicated to AD and I can
send test messages from the E2k server to E5.5 recipients so the new
addresses are working internally.  Do I still need you add a recipient
policy for these particular users?  

Thanks for your input.

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Julian Stone
Sent: Friday, 31 August 2001 3:18 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Exchange 2000 SMTP Relay problem


Have you added the new domain to the recipient policies ? Otherwise it
will not be seen as an 'internal' domain.


Yours, 

Julian Stone 
Exchange 2000 Consultant 





-Original Message-
From: Duane Purcell [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: Friday, August 31, 2001 1:54 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: Exchange 2000 SMTP Relay problem


Background:  Exchange2000/5.5 mixed organisation with Exchange 2000 in
DMZ handling outgoing smtp traffic (We are phasing out our solaris
machine which currently handles incoming email).  We (skilled.com.au)
have recently purchased a company and the bosses want their email
address to be @quest.skilled.com.au.  

Our internet DNS has been setup with an A host "quest.skilled.com.au" to
point to the Ex2k server. Our MX record for skilled.com.au points to the
solaris server.

My problem is that I have found that the only way email will flow from
the internet to quest.skilled.com.au users is to enable relaying on the
smtp virtual server.  If I disable relaying, the sender gets an NDR
"...smtp;550 5.7.1 Unable to relay for [EMAIL PROTECTED]"

The email is arriving at the E2k smtp so why do I need relaying enabled
to allow it to be delivered internally?


_
List posting FAQ:   http://www.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: How to set up exchange server

[Scharff, Chris]

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

*
  Chris Scharff[EMAIL PROTECTED]www.swinc.com
  Simpler-Webb, Inc.  Austin, TX +1-512-322-0071
* 

> -Original Message-
> From: Jim [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
> Sent: Thursday, August 30, 2001 5:07 PM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: How to set up exchange server
> 
> 
> Dear All:
> 
> We have an Exchange server 5.5 as an internal email
> system. We want to use Seattle Lab mail engine. How to
> connect Exchange server as internal email to Seattle
> Lab server as external email system.
> 
> Many thanks!
> 
> Jim
> 
> __
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Get email alerts & NEW webcam video instant messaging with 
> Yahoo! Messenger
> http://im.yahoo.com
> 
> _
> List posting FAQ:   http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
> Archives:   http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp
> To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 

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

RE: Mailbox sizes: Incoming/Outgoing message limits

[Scharff, Chris]

If one of my clients wants to send me a 30MB file, they are welcome to do
so. 

Confucius says, "Proper methods take backseat to paying customer".

*
  Chris Scharff[EMAIL PROTECTED]www.swinc.com
  Simpler-Webb, Inc.  Austin, TX +1-512-322-0071
* 

> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
> Sent: Thursday, August 30, 2001 3:34 PM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: RE: Mailbox sizes: Incoming/Outgoing message limits
> 
> 
> The argument is that E-mail is not the proper method for 
> transferring files.  Why?  Because E-mail is not 
> point-to-point.  If you have a 30Mb file you'd like to send 
> me, it would make much more sense to make it available to a 
> browser or FTP client and then send me a link.  If you decide 
> to send me an E-mail, you will first bog down Outlook while 
> it drops the message in your outgoing MTA.  And then God 
> forbid you actually have more than one Exchange server or 
> site - let alone Exchange 5.5.  If so, get ready to wait 
> about 6 hours for the X.400 connector to slug that thing 
> across the pipe.  Uh-oh, this thing is internal - better let 
> the IMC take care of it.  What?  We have a virus and content 
> scanning gateway?  Hold on, you can scan it in about 15 minutes.  
> 
> SCANSCANSCANSCANSCANSCANSCANSCANSCANSCANSCANSCANSCANSCANSCANSC
> ANSCANSCAN
> 
> Ok done.  Now lemme route this to mail.speakeasy.net - WHAT?  
> THEY DON'T ACCEPT ANYTHING OVER 4MB?  I'm gonna have to send 
> it back.  Here you go IMC.
> 
> The alternative of course is FTP or HTTP.  Client:  Lemme 
> have that file.  IIS:  Okie hereya go.
> 
> My argument has nothing to do with the time it takes to 
> deliver such a large message, although that might be a 
> consideration for the user.  My job is to try and maintain 
> the message routing and mailbox servers that become 
> unavailable while choking on and trying to deliver large files.
> 
> Eric (drama queen for a day)
> 
> >  Original Message ---
> > From: Schwartz, Jim <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > Date: Thu, 30 Aug 2001 16:25:38 -0400
> > 
> > I'll have to disagree. If your business is graphic design 
> or something
> > similar, then you have a real need to send and receive 
> large attachments.
> > Your design should reflect your need. If I need to have 
> bigger servers,
> > mailboxes and or internet connections to meet these needs 
> then you should
> > be
> > able to write a justification for the purchase. Having no 
> limits at all in
> > place would not be a great idea unless you like having 
> users call because
> > their mailbox is over the limit or your IMS is trying to 
> deliver a 1GB
> > video
> > that someone made. 
> > 
> > It is a business decision with technical implications.
> > 
> > > -Original Message-
> > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > > Sent: Thursday, August 30, 2001 4:18 PM
> > > To:   Exchange Discussions
> > > Subject:  RE: Mailbox sizes:  Incoming/Outgoing message limits
> > > 
> > > Where I used to work, the most common reason for me 
> getting paged at 3
> > am
> > > was because someone was sending their Napster directories 
> from work to
> > > home using E-mail (this was a very large and well-known 
> organization
> > that
> > > happened to be run by idiots).  While the need for limits 
> should be
> > > obvious to everyone on this group, we are often not in a 
> position to
> > > impose these policies.
> > > 
> > > The truth is that if anything it is more a technical decision than
> > > business, due to the fact that the main implication is system
> > performance.
> > > 
> > > Eric
> > > 
> > > >  Original Message ---
> > > > From: Steve Johnston <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > > > Date: Thu, 30 Aug 2001 16:01:59 -0400
> > > > 
> > > > The need for limits is not obvious at all.
> > > > 
> > > > >>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] 08/30/01 03:48PM >>>
> > > > Wouldn't this be more of a business decision than a 
> technical one?
> > > > Obviously
> > > > there are limits that need to be in place. If you set 
> prohibit send
> > and
> > > > receive at 50MB on the mailboxes, then you should set 
> the IMS lower.
> > > Other
> > > > than that, the question is, what do your users need to send and
> > receive?
> > > > 
> > > > Us = 8MB in, 5MB out.
> > > > 
> > > > > -Original Message-
> > > > > From: Sethi, Ali [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
> > > > > Sent: Thursday, August 30, 2001 11:44 AM
> > > > > To:   Exchange Discussions
> > > > > Subject:  Mailbox sizes:  Incoming/Outgoing message limits
> > > > > 
> > > > > 
> > > > > Hello,
> > > > > 
> > > > > We are beginning to implement a policy of limiting all
> > > incoming/outgoing
> > > > > messages to 5mb.  I just wanted a consensus of size 
> limits are set
> > by
> > > > > other
> > > > > companies.  What si

RE: Replaying logs on Exc2000 DB/offline restore

[Scharff, Chris]

Change your configuration to 2 storage groups with 1 database in each or
better yet... Do online backups.

*
  Chris Scharff[EMAIL PROTECTED]www.swinc.com
  Simpler-Webb, Inc.  Austin, TX +1-512-322-0071
  "With sufficient thrust, pigs fly just fine." - RFC 1925
* 

> -Original Message-
> From: Exchange Discussions [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
> Sent: Thursday, August 30, 2001 10:50 AM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: Replaying logs on Exc2000 DB/offline restore
> 
> 
> I have a question for you regarding how, if possible, 
> transaction logs be
> replayed against a single database for an offline restore:
> 
> I have Exc2000 (SP1) servers on an EMC storage area network.  
> Configuration
> is 1 storage group with 2 Databases.  DBs and logs all on 
> separate logical
> drives.
> 
> We are using EMC's Timefinder to perform nightly Offline 
> backups.  In the
> event 1 database goes south, it can be successfully restored, 
> however log
> files do not roll forward.  Using "eseutil /cc" does not 
> appear to work
> since it's not an online backup/restore (no "restore.env").
> 
> Any suggestions to roll logs without bringing down the second 
> database?
> 
> Thank you very much.
> Louise
> 
> _
> List posting FAQ:   http://www.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: Relaying email probelms

[Scharff, Chris]

Oh, so if I were to use [EMAIL PROTECTED] as the from field in my spam
through your server that'd be OK? 

Without either limiting relay to a specific range of IP addresses or
requiring authorization, the only other options are allow yourself to be
abused as an open relay or don't allow relaying at all. I've got 17 million
"Earn $2000 per week working from home" mailings I need to send out... so I
think you ought to just opt for open relay.

> -Original Message-
> From: Mailing List per Exchange [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
> Sent: Thursday, August 30, 2001 10:35 AM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: R: Relaying email probelms
> 
> 
> I would like that just email addresses valid can relay.. 
> obviously someone
> could send mails on behalf of others without being authorized...
> 
> Which is the best solutions for you?
> Stefano
> 
> -Messaggio originale-
> Da: Andy David [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Inviato: giovedì 30 agosto 2001 17.42
> A: Exchange Discussions
> Oggetto: RE: Relaying email probelms
> 
> 
> m
> beans...
> 
> 
> Andy David 
> J Muller International
> 
> 
> 
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: Scharff, Chris [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Thursday, August 30, 2001 11:34 AM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: RE: Relaying email probelms
> 
> 
> So, if I send mail using a bogus from address which is the 
> same as your
> domain, I can spam as much as I want? Cool beans.
> 
> *
>   Chris Scharff[EMAIL PROTECTED]www.swinc.com
>   Simpler-Webb, Inc.  Austin, TX +1-512-322-0071
> * 
> 
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Mailing List per Exchange [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
> > Sent: Thursday, August 30, 2001 10:27 AM
> > To: Exchange Discussions
> > Subject: Relaying email probelms
> > 
> > 
> > Hi all,
> > 
> > I have thi problem.
> > 
> > I have Exchange 5.5 SP4 Win NT 4.0/6a
> > 
> > I would like to stop mail relaying but with these restrictions:
> > 
> > 1) My users (e.g. users that have the domain set as 'inbound 
> > routing') have
> > to relay everywhere. Other users can send mail just to the 
> > 'inbound' domais.
> > 2) I dont want to use the Authentication.
> > 
> > Can anyone help me?
> > Stefano.

_
List posting FAQ:   http://www.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: Relaying email probelms

[Scharff, Chris]

So, if I send mail using a bogus from address which is the same as your
domain, I can spam as much as I want? Cool beans.

*
  Chris Scharff[EMAIL PROTECTED]www.swinc.com
  Simpler-Webb, Inc.  Austin, TX +1-512-322-0071
* 

> -Original Message-
> From: Mailing List per Exchange [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
> Sent: Thursday, August 30, 2001 10:27 AM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: Relaying email probelms
> 
> 
> Hi all,
> 
> I have thi problem.
> 
> I have Exchange 5.5 SP4 Win NT 4.0/6a
> 
> I would like to stop mail relaying but with these restrictions:
> 
> 1) My users (e.g. users that have the domain set as 'inbound 
> routing') have
> to relay everywhere. Other users can send mail just to the 
> 'inbound' domais.
> 2) I dont want to use the Authentication.
> 
> Can anyone help me?
> Stefano.

_
List posting FAQ:   http://www.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 XP - cant read .EXE attachment

[Scharff, Chris]

XP receives .exe and .com files just fine. It simply blocks access to them
as part of the updated security model which has been discussed here and
elsewhere ad infinitum. 

Q. ... Outlook ...?
A. www.slipstick.com

-Original Message-
From: BY
To: Exchange Discussions
Sent: 8/30/2001 6:40 AM
Subject: Outlook XP - cant read .EXE attachment

Dear all,

I am sure you have noticed that Outlook XP by default would not receive
attachment files that with file extensions .exe or .com.

Do you anyone know how to enable them to be readable?

Thanks in advanced.

BY

_
List posting FAQ:   http://www.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: Exporting Outlook 2000 User Profiles

[Scharff, Chris]

Yes.

> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
> Sent: Wednesday, August 29, 2001 2:05 PM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: Exporting Outlook 2000 User Profiles
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Is their a way to export outlook2000 user profiles, rules so when you
> rebuild a computer or move a user you can just import their rules into
> Outlook instead of having to rebuild everything, we are using 
> psts not the
> exchange store I dont know if that makes a difference or 
> not... So most
> profiles consist of 5 to 6 Internet email accounts and a 
> bunch of rules
> thanks in advance
> 
> 
> _
> List posting FAQ:   http://www.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: I need to block messages from a spammer

[Scharff, Chris]

3 domains or 1? What version of Exchange? What service pack?

Mailinglist 101... There is sometimes a delay between the time a message is
sent and when it appears in your inbox. This list has over 4k subscribers,
not all of them can get the message immediately.

> -Original Message-
> From: Karen Swart [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
> Sent: Wednesday, August 29, 2001 12:50 PM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: I need to block messages from a spammer
> 
> 
> Using Exchange 5.5, how do I block all messages from a 
> specific domain?

_
List posting FAQ:   http://www.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: POP3 client using another user's IMS SMTP address

[Scharff, Chris]

Because that's how SMTP mail works? [EMAIL PROTECTED] just
sent you a mail message in a completely RFC compliant manner.. and I'm
fairly sure he wasn't logged onto your network or using a POP3 client at the
time.

RFC821 & 822 explain it all in amazing detail.

*
  Chris Scharff[EMAIL PROTECTED]www.swinc.com
  Simpler-Webb, Inc.  Austin, TX +1-512-322-0071
* 

> -Original Message-
> From: McCrary Earl Contr 411 FLTS/TSF 
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
> Sent: Wednesday, August 29, 2001 9:36 AM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: RE: POP3 client using another user's IMS SMTP address
> 
> 
> If that's the case, then why would an ISP ever use Exchange 
> as their Email
> server?
> 
> Earl McCrary,  MCSE, CCNA
> F-22 Combined Test Force
> CSC, Federal Sector - Defense Group
> 661.277.7993
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Wednesday, August 29, 2001 5:05 AM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: RE: POP3 client using another user's IMS SMTP address
> 
> 
> I don't believe you can.
> 
> -Michèle
> Immigration site:  
> Our new 2001 Miata:  
> Tiggercam:  
> -
> WARNING: The consumption of alcohol may make you think you 
> are whispering
> when you are not. 
> -
> 
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: McCrary Earl Contr 411 FLTS/TSF
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Tuesday, August 28, 2001 6:53 PM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: POP3 client using another user's IMS SMTP address
> 
> 
> How can I prevent a POP3 email client from using another 
> user's SMTP address
> in the From: field of an email message?
> 
> Here's the situation:   When configuring a POP3 email client 
> on a networked
> connected workstation using a valid network user account;  I 
> can configure
> the POP3 client to use any users' Exchange container name as 
> the username
> (blank password) and once configured, send an email to the 
> Exchange Server
> IMS connector for delivery via SMTP.  The email arrives at 
> the destination
> with the "forged" user's address in the FROM field.
> 
> Is there some setting on the IMS connector to prevent this?  
> 
> Earl McCrary,  MCSE, CCNA
> F-22 Combined Test Force
> CSC, Federal Sector - Defense Group
> 661.277.7993

_
List posting FAQ:   http://www.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: script to change from field?

[Scharff, Chris]

Not that the Exchange server even needs to be authoritative in order for
someone to be assigned a particular e-mail address in Exchange 5.5... but it
would be made authoritative for a domain (as far as Exchange 5.5 is
concerned) by adding it as inbound on the IMS. There are plenty of folks who
use an Exchange 5.5 server to host multiple domains... Exchange sends
outgoing mail using whatever the primary SMTP address is defined on the
mailbox. You could send mail as [EMAIL PROTECTED] if that's the
SMTP address you assigned your mailbox in Exchange.

Chris Scharff
Senior Systems Consultant
Simpler-Webb, Inc.
Reading is a right, not a feature. Set Dmitry free today.

-Original Message-
From: The Geek Q
To: Exchange Discussions
Sent: 8/28/2001 3:53 PM
Subject: RE: script to change from field?

How do you make the Exchange server authoritative?


>From: "Scharff, Chris" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Reply-To: "Exchange Discussions" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>To: "Exchange Discussions" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Subject: RE: script to change from field?
>Date: Mon, 27 Aug 2001 15:40:28 -0500
>
>Why not just make the Exchange server authoritative for both and give
them
>the correct SMTP address as the primary one on their mailbox. No script
>needed that I can see.
>
>*
>   Chris Scharff[EMAIL PROTECTED]www.swinc.com
>   Simpler-Webb, Inc.  Austin, TX +1-512-322-0071
>*
>
> > -Original Message-
> > From: BW Brandt Ward (5320) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > Sent: Monday, August 27, 2001 1:47 PM
> > To: Exchange Discussions
> > Subject: script to change from field?
> >
> >
> > We have a single Exchange 5.5 sp4 server on nt 4...with the
> > clients using
> > o2000...the exhcange server is mydomain1.com and we have some
> > employees from
> > a company we recently purchased, popping mail off a sendmail server
in
> > mydomain2.comThey are complaining about not being able to see
our
> > (mydomain1.com) calendar and use it for shceduling...
> > I told my boss that if we added mydomain1.com as another
> > email domain...then
> > they could utilize the scheduling function exchange gives you
> > (granted..we
> > move them to the exchange service)...he said that all we
> > needed to do was to
> > add them to our domain but have some script run that would
> > change their from
> > address to reflect thier mydomain2.com address...
> >
> > I'm am looking to see if he is rightif we both are wrong
> > or what other
> > solutions are out there
> >
> > thanks,
> > b

_
List posting FAQ:   http://www.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: Plain Text Only

[Scharff, Chris]

I'm sorry, I haven't been paying attention again.[1] Is it only HTML mail
which is an issue (e.g. Does RTF work?). If so, use the zaphtml script from
slipstick.com.

[1][ And desire not to grep through 100 posts to see if someone else
suggested the obvious.

*
  Chris Scharff[EMAIL PROTECTED]www.swinc.com
  Simpler-Webb, Inc.  Austin, TX +1-512-322-0071
* 

> -Original Message-
> From: Ewart, Vicki L. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
> Sent: Tuesday, August 28, 2001 11:52 AM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: Plain Text Only
> 
> 
> I have a user who can't read HTML due to a hardware problem that is
> unresolved. Is there a way to set up a user so that they receive mail
> only in plain text?  
> 
> V. Ewart

_
List posting FAQ:   http://www.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 2000 Relay

[Scharff, Chris]

That is the default setting on E2K out of the box.

*
  Chris Scharff[EMAIL PROTECTED]www.swinc.com
  Simpler-Webb, Inc.  Austin, TX +1-512-322-0071
* 

> -Original Message-
> From: Alex Lazen [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
> Sent: Tuesday, August 28, 2001 2:19 PM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: Exchange 2000 Relay
> 
> 
> Preventing mail relay is covered on the FAQ, but applies only to
> Exchange 5.5.
> Currently users who connect from home, get their mail via 
> POP. I need to
> be able to allow them to also send mail (SMTP) but no one else. The
> relay settings don't seem to have any effect on the intended outcome.
> 
> Is there a method, in Exchange 2000, to SMTP Authorize clients and
> prevent relaying for anyone else?
> 
> Thanks !!!
> 
> Alex Lazen
> Triene INC
> 
> _
> List posting FAQ:   http://www.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: Address Book Views

[Scharff, Chris]

ABVs in 5.5 are built dynamically based on the value of the field used on
the objects.

NT user groups don't have any input or effect on them. Views can be edited
or deleted after the fact.

If you have 3 different department types populated (e.g. Sales, Marketing
and Development) you get 3 ABVs. Fire all the Salesweasels and you
automagically only have 2 ABV containers after the last salesweasel mailbox
is deleted. Add a user using the non-standard department Dev and you now
have Marketing, Dev and Development.

*
  Chris Scharff[EMAIL PROTECTED]www.swinc.com
  Simpler-Webb, Inc.  Austin, TX +1-512-322-0071
* 

> -Original Message-
> From: Dave [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
> Sent: Tuesday, August 28, 2001 1:15 PM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: Address Book Views
> 
> 
> We are looking into creating a few different address book 
> views based on
> department need.  What is the recomended steps for creating 
> these views? 
> Should we create the NT user groups for the different views 
> first?  Also,
> can we delete or edit any views we create after the fact?  We 
> are running
> Exchange 5.5 on an NT 4.0 platform.  Any answers would be greatly
> appreciated.thanks in advance.
> 
> _
> List posting FAQ:   http://www.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: Sent and Received times are way off ???

[Scharff, Chris]

What do the message headers tell you?

> -Original Message-
> From: VSmith [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
> Sent: Monday, August 27, 2001 3:42 PM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: Sent and Received times are way off ???
> 
> 
> I have been asked several times why messages from listservers 
> arrive late
> and\or in bulk (10-20 messages at a time).  We seem to receive other
> Internet mail OK.  Often though some listserver messages show the sent
> time and the received time hours and up to a day apart.
> Do listservers hold mail and send them in bulk?? Could it be my server
> bogged down and unable to deliver it right away?
> 
> Any feedback is appreciated.
> 
> Thanks,
> Valerie
> 
> 
> _
> List posting FAQ:   http://www.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: Attaching Files as Shortcuts

[Scharff, Chris]

He don't NEED any officeXP thankyouverymuch, so just take your off-topic
flamebait answer on up outa here. 

> -Original Message-
> From: Don Ely [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
> Sent: Monday, August 27, 2001 3:02 PM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: RE: Attaching Files as Shortcuts
> 
> 
> Well let me tell you all about Office XP.  Now you have to 
> understand I
> just know how to run Office Apps, I could care less about supporting
> them nor will I ever.  
> 
> Anyway, the IT Director and I are working on this lovely Word document
> and when I sent him my first copy, he sent me the same copy back with
> the changes he had noted.  As soon as I opened the attachment, Word
> asked me if I wanted to integrate these changes into the original
> document which was stored on a remote server.
> 
> Now how slick is that for collaboration and document management?
> 
> Simple solution...  Upgrade to Office XP, it kicks major A$$.  :o)

_
List posting FAQ:   http://www.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: Attaching Files as Shortcuts

[Scharff, Chris]

He don't NEED a document management system thankyouverymuch, so just take
your off-topic flamebait answer on up outa here.

> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
> Sent: Monday, August 27, 2001 2:34 PM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: RE: Attaching Files as Shortcuts
> 
> 
> That's EXACTLY the sort of thing a Document Management System 
> is designed to
> handle!!
>

_
List posting FAQ:   http://www.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: script to change from field?

[Scharff, Chris]

Why not just make the Exchange server authoritative for both and give them
the correct SMTP address as the primary one on their mailbox. No script
needed that I can see.

*
  Chris Scharff[EMAIL PROTECTED]www.swinc.com
  Simpler-Webb, Inc.  Austin, TX +1-512-322-0071
* 

> -Original Message-
> From: BW Brandt Ward (5320) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
> Sent: Monday, August 27, 2001 1:47 PM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: script to change from field?
> 
> 
> We have a single Exchange 5.5 sp4 server on nt 4...with the 
> clients using
> o2000...the exhcange server is mydomain1.com and we have some 
> employees from
> a company we recently purchased, popping mail off a sendmail server in
> mydomain2.comThey are complaining about not being able to see our
> (mydomain1.com) calendar and use it for shceduling...
> I told my boss that if we added mydomain1.com as another 
> email domain...then
> they could utilize the scheduling function exchange gives you 
> (granted..we
> move them to the exchange service)...he said that all we 
> needed to do was to
> add them to our domain but have some script run that would 
> change their from
> address to reflect thier mydomain2.com address...
> 
> I'm am looking to see if he is rightif we both are wrong 
> or what other
> solutions are out there
> 
> thanks,
> b
> 
> _
> List posting FAQ:   http://www.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: Sharing contact files

[Scharff, Chris]

Sorry, I haven't been following along too closely.

This is E2K correct?
How many AD domains?
Native W2K or are there still NT 4 domains?
Native E2K or are there still Exchange 5.5 servers hanging about?
If you assign an individual user rights instead of the default group... Can
they edit as expected?



*
  Chris Scharff[EMAIL PROTECTED]www.swinc.com
  Simpler-Webb, Inc.  Austin, TX +1-512-322-0071
* 

> -Original Message-
> From: Ewart, Vicki L. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
> Sent: Friday, August 24, 2001 11:18 AM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: RE: Sharing contact files
> 
> 
> No,still not working correctly. I even tried creating a new one and it
> still wouldn't let other users edit entries.

_
List posting FAQ:   http://www.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: secondary domain inbound failing

[Scharff, Chris]

Damn gremlins are stealing entire words from my messages and adding in
unneeded punctuation over the place's.

> -Original Message-
> From: Scharff, Chris [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
> Sent: Friday, August 24, 2001 10:03 AM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: RE: secondary domain inbound failing
> 
> 
> Oh, here in Texas a domain. Still, the configuration of the 
> Exchange server
> is completely irrelevant at this point as it's could be 
> encased in a block
> of concrete at the bottom of Lake Michigan and the error 
> message would be
> the same.
>  
> *
>   Chris Scharff[EMAIL PROTECTED]www.swinc.com
>   Simpler-Webb, Inc.  Austin, TX +1-512-322-0071
> * 
> 
> > -Original Message-
> > From: NetAdmin [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
> > Sent: Friday, August 24, 2001 9:52 AM
> > To: Exchange Discussions
> > Subject: RE: secondary domain inbound failing
> > 
> > 
> > A "tail" is the part of the address after the @ symbol.
> > 
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Tom Meunier [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > Sent: Friday, August 24, 2001 10:17 AM
> > To: Exchange Discussions
> > Subject: RE: secondary domain inbound failing
> > 
> > 
> > Oh great, we've found another knowledge gap in my brain.  
> > Like I needed
> > more.  What on earth is a "tail for outbound mail", and how would I
> > enter it as an SMTP address?  In general, I mean.  I don't 
> > use Exchange
> > 5.5 anymore, so maybe they've replaced it in Exchange 2000 
> > with another
> > animal body part; say, an udder or a beak.
> > 
> > -Original Message-
> > From: NetAdmin [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > Posted At: Friday, August 24, 2001 9:02 AM
> > Posted To: MSExchange Mailing List
> > Conversation: secondary domain inbound failing
> > Subject: RE: secondary domain inbound failing
> > 
> > 
> > Please see the last paragraph of my original message - you 
> can't set a
> > tail
> > for outbound mail without entering the tail as an SMTP 
> > address. So that
> > has
> > been done. What else ?
> > 
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Bob Sadler [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > Sent: Friday, August 24, 2001 8:20 AM
> > To: Exchange Discussions
> > Subject: RE: secondary domain inbound failing
> > 
> > 
> > Have you added a secondary SMTP address for that domain, for 
> > that user?
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > Bob Sadler
> > City of Leawood, KS, USA
> > 
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Joshua [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > Sent: Friday, August 24, 2001 7:07 AM
> > To: Exchange Discussions
> > Subject: secondary domain inbound failing
> > 
> > 
> > I have an Echange 5.5 server with the following entries in the IMS
> > routing
> > tab:
> > 
> > Sent to Route to
> > mydomain1.com   
> > mydomain2.com   
> > 
> > The server has been rebooted since that entry was made. I 
> get mail on
> > the
> > first domain, but I get this when I send mail to the second 
> > domain from
> > the outside:
> > 
> > From:   Mail Delivery Subsystem
> > [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > Sent:   Wednesday, August 22, 2001 6:49 AM
> > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Subject:Returned mail: User unknown
> > 
> >  
> > The original message was received at Wed, 22 Aug 2001 06:48:57 -0400
> > (EDT)
> > from mailgate@localhost
> > 
> >- The following addresses had permanent fatal errors -
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > 
> >- Transcript of session follows -
> > ... while talking to mail.mydomain1.com.:
> > >>> RCPT To:<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > <<< 550 not local host mydomain2.com, not a gateway
> > 550 [EMAIL PROTECTED] User unknown
> > 
> > The mailbox insideuser exists, and his outbound tail is set to
> > mydomain2.com. It looks like there is an attempt to deliver to the
> > Exchange server, but the server refuses to recognize the 
> > user. The same
> > user receives mail regularly at the 
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] What is
> > wrong here ?
> > 
> > _
> > List posting FAQ:   http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
> > Archives:  

RE: secondary domain inbound failing

[Scharff, Chris]

Oh, here in Texas a domain. Still, the configuration of the Exchange server
is completely irrelevant at this point as it's could be encased in a block
of concrete at the bottom of Lake Michigan and the error message would be
the same.
 
*
  Chris Scharff[EMAIL PROTECTED]www.swinc.com
  Simpler-Webb, Inc.  Austin, TX +1-512-322-0071
* 

> -Original Message-
> From: NetAdmin [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
> Sent: Friday, August 24, 2001 9:52 AM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: RE: secondary domain inbound failing
> 
> 
> A "tail" is the part of the address after the @ symbol.
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: Tom Meunier [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Friday, August 24, 2001 10:17 AM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: RE: secondary domain inbound failing
> 
> 
> Oh great, we've found another knowledge gap in my brain.  
> Like I needed
> more.  What on earth is a "tail for outbound mail", and how would I
> enter it as an SMTP address?  In general, I mean.  I don't 
> use Exchange
> 5.5 anymore, so maybe they've replaced it in Exchange 2000 
> with another
> animal body part; say, an udder or a beak.
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: NetAdmin [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Posted At: Friday, August 24, 2001 9:02 AM
> Posted To: MSExchange Mailing List
> Conversation: secondary domain inbound failing
> Subject: RE: secondary domain inbound failing
> 
> 
> Please see the last paragraph of my original message - you can't set a
> tail
> for outbound mail without entering the tail as an SMTP 
> address. So that
> has
> been done. What else ?
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: Bob Sadler [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Friday, August 24, 2001 8:20 AM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: RE: secondary domain inbound failing
> 
> 
> Have you added a secondary SMTP address for that domain, for 
> that user?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Bob Sadler
> City of Leawood, KS, USA
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: Joshua [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Friday, August 24, 2001 7:07 AM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: secondary domain inbound failing
> 
> 
> I have an Echange 5.5 server with the following entries in the IMS
> routing
> tab:
> 
> Sent to Route to
> mydomain1.com   
> mydomain2.com   
> 
> The server has been rebooted since that entry was made. I get mail on
> the
> first domain, but I get this when I send mail to the second 
> domain from
> the outside:
> 
> From: Mail Delivery Subsystem
> [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Wednesday, August 22, 2001 6:49 AM
> To:   [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject:  Returned mail: User unknown
> 
>  
> The original message was received at Wed, 22 Aug 2001 06:48:57 -0400
> (EDT)
> from mailgate@localhost
> 
>- The following addresses had permanent fatal errors -
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 
>- Transcript of session follows -
> ... while talking to mail.mydomain1.com.:
> >>> RCPT To:<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> <<< 550 not local host mydomain2.com, not a gateway
> 550 [EMAIL PROTECTED] User unknown
> 
> The mailbox insideuser exists, and his outbound tail is set to
> mydomain2.com. It looks like there is an attempt to deliver to the
> Exchange server, but the server refuses to recognize the 
> user. The same
> user receives mail regularly at the [EMAIL PROTECTED] What is
> wrong here ?
> 
> _
> List posting FAQ:   http://www.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: secondary domain inbound failing

[Scharff, Chris]

Exchange isn't generating the errors below. If real domains had been used,
I'd tell you what server had... but it isn't Exchange.

-Original Message-
From: Joshua
To: Exchange Discussions
Sent: 8/24/2001 7:07 AM
Subject: secondary domain inbound failing

I have an Echange 5.5 server with the following entries in the IMS
routing
tab:

Sent to Route to
mydomain1.com   
mydomain2.com   

The server has been rebooted since that entry was made. I get mail on
the
first domain, but I get this when I send mail to the second domain from
the outside:

From:   Mail Delivery Subsystem
[SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent:   Wednesday, August 22, 2001 6:49 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject:Returned mail: User unknown

 
The original message was received at Wed, 22 Aug 2001 06:48:57 -0400
(EDT)
from mailgate@localhost

   - The following addresses had permanent fatal errors -
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

   - Transcript of session follows -
... while talking to mail.mydomain1.com.:
>>> RCPT To:<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
<<< 550 not local host mydomain2.com, not a gateway
550 [EMAIL PROTECTED] User unknown

The mailbox insideuser exists, and his outbound tail is set to
mydomain2.com. It looks like there is an attempt to deliver to the
Exchange server, but the server refuses to recognize the user. The same
user receives mail regularly at the [EMAIL PROTECTED] What is
wrong here ?

_
List posting FAQ:   http://www.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: An Academic Exercise (was: RE: Minions (was RE: Undelete comm and) )

[Scharff, Chris]

Doh. Had an extra quote in the line below... Fixed now I think.

Set User = GetObject("WinNT://" & UserDomain & "/" & Username & ",user")

> 2. Disable the user's NT account.
> 
> VB:
> Dim User as IADsUser
> Dim UserName as String
> Dim UserDomain as String
> UserDomin = "Your_NT_Domain"
> UserName = "User_To_Be_Axed"
> Set User = GetObject("WinNT://" & UserDomain & "/" & 
> "Username & ",user")
> 
> Dim NewValue as Boolean
> NewValue = True
> User.AccountDisabled = NewValue
> User.SetInfo

_
List posting FAQ:   http://www.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: All users can view two other users inbox

[Scharff, Chris]

They granted the default group permissions on their inbox via Outlook.

> -Original Message-
> From: Wagnitz, Trevor [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
> Sent: Thursday, August 23, 2001 4:04 PM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: All users can view two other users inbox
> 
> 
> I am running Exchange 5.5 sp4 and clients are using Outlook 
> 98.  I have 2
> particular users in which all users are able to see their 
> Inbox by going to
> File-->Open-->Other Users Folder.  I have checked the 
> permissions tab for
> the mailbox properties and only their secretaries are there 
> besides the
> appropriate user.  I have removed all permissions and readded 
> and still
> anyone can see their mail.  The only delegates they have 
> setup are their
> secretaries as well.  Anyone have any ideas?  Thanx
> 
> TW
> 
> 
> - JENKENS & GILCHRIST E-MAIL CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE - 
> This transmission may be: (1) subject to the Attorney-Client 
> Privilege, (2)
> an attorney work product, or (3) strictly confidential. If 
> you are not the
> intended recipient of this message, you may not disclose, 
> print, copy or
> disseminate this information.  If you have received this in 
> error, please
> reply and notify the sender (only) and delete the message. 
> Unauthorized
> interception of this e-mail is a violation of federal criminal law. 
> 
> 
> 
> _
> List posting FAQ:   http://www.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: An Academic Exercise (was: RE: Minions (was RE: Undelete comm and) )

[Scharff, Chris]

> 2. Disable the user's NT account.

VB:
Dim User as IADsUser
Dim UserName as String
Dim UserDomain as String
UserDomin = "Your_NT_Domain"
UserName = "User_To_Be_Axed"
Set User = GetObject("WinNT://" & UserDomain & "/" & "Username & ",user")

Dim NewValue as Boolean
NewValue = True
User.AccountDisabled = NewValue
User.SetInfo


Perl:
if( Win32::AdminMisc::UserGetMiscAttributes( '', $User, \%Hash ) )
{
# Turn on the "eAccount Disable"e flag...
$Hash{USER_FLAGS} = $Hash{USER_FLAGS} | UF_ACCOUNTDISABLE;
Win32::AdminMisc::UserSetMiscAttributes( '', $User, USER_FLAGS,
$Hash{USER_FLAGS} );
}


> 1. Determine the user to be terminated.
> 3. Grant the primary NT account of the Manger's mailbox and 
> the Admins group
> owner rights to the terminated employee's mailbox.
> 4. Remove the Mailbox from any Exchange DLs for which it is a member.
> 5. Notify the manager and have them add the mailbox to the profile.
> 6. Once manager has added mailbox to profile, hide mailbox from GAL.
> 6.5 Make administrative note of pending deletion.
> 7. Run exmerge against mailbox.
> 8. Copy G: drive c: drive and pst files to CD burner machine.
> 9. Zip files (I hope).
> 10. Burn baby burn.
> 10.5 Interoffice to supervisor.
> 11. 90 days out.. Notify supervisor account is to be deleted.
> 12. Determine ownership of archived data.
> 13. Delete mailbox.
> 14. Delete NT account.
> 
> Comments? Suggestions? Problems?

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

[Scharff, Chris]

> Apparently not.  Also, I've never seen the format domain\userid\alias
> anywhere.  I guess Tom was trying to say domain\alias and password?

No, he wasn't.

*
  Chris Scharff[EMAIL PROTECTED]www.swinc.com
  Simpler-Webb, Inc.  Austin, TX +1-512-322-0071
* 

_
List posting FAQ:   http://www.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: auto booking conf. rooms w/ Outlook 2000 & permissions

[Scharff, Chris]

www.exchangecode.com

> -Original Message-
> From: Curry, Kristin [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
> Sent: Wednesday, August 22, 2001 3:55 PM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: auto booking conf. rooms w/ Outlook 2000 & permissions
> 
> 
> 
> Quick question regarding permissions and direct booking Conference
> Room/Resources with Outlook 2000:
> 
>   Outlook 2000 requires Author permissions on the 
> Resource Calendar to
> do direct booking.  This part works great.  But with Author 
> permissions,
> they can also still use File, Open Special to book a meeting on top of
> another meeting - resulting in conflicts & double-bookings.  
> Yikes!   So..I
> thought I'd take off the "View" permissions but then users 
> can't at least
> see the meetings are already booked in the room other than just the
> free/busy.  
> 
>   So...how are you configured to Direct Book conf. Rooms. 
> with Outlook
> 2000 without compromising permissions (and double-bookings)?  
> Or do you
> still use the notorious "Delegate" mailbox that auto accepts 
> instead of
> direct-booking?
> 
>   Thanks for any ideas!
>   Kristin
> 
>   
>   Kristin Curry
>   Systems Engineer, MCSE
>   Enterprise Server Group - Best Buy Co., Inc.
>   Direct:  952-324-0787
>   E-Mail:  [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: Mail Flow Configuration Question

[Scharff, Chris]

Assuming a lot of facts not in evidence.. Option 2.

> -Original Message-
> From: Walbert, Bryan (Bryan) ** CTR ** [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
> Sent: Wednesday, August 22, 2001 8:15 AM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: Mail Flow Configuration Question
> 
> 
> We have an Exchange enterprise of about 10 000 mailboxes.  We 
> have a mixture
> of clients ranging from Exchange clients to Outlook 2000 to 
> Netscape IMAP
> clients using SMTP to relay outbound email.  Currently, in 
> some of our more
> remote sites we have some of the IMAP users who need a local 
> relay host, to
> prevent slowing of the client while sending mail.  We have 
> narrowed it down
> to 2 solutions.  I would like some external opinions as to 
> which is the
> better solution. (more reliable, more secure, more efficient) 
> Our enterprise
> is Exchange 5.5 SP 4 running on Windows 2000 Advanced server.  
> 
>  
> 
>  
> 
> Option 1.  Install a local IMS and allow relaying of mail traffic.
> 
> Option 2.  Use the IIS SMTP service installed on the box to 
> relay all SMTP
> traffic to the backbone relay hosts.  
> 
> _
> List posting FAQ:   http://www.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: Sharing contact files

[Scharff, Chris]

Let's all step back a moment please

Vicki,

The best way to get help from this group is to describe in as much detail as
possible the problems you're experiencing. This means steps to reproduce the
problem, error messages, client & server versions, 3rd party software and SP
levels, OS and anything else that might even be remotely relevant.

Now, I can understand why looking through the sorry ass posts the average
questioner brings to this list the proper format might not be immediately
obvious, but there are at least 8 *highly* skilled people in this thread
trying to understand your problem and who want desperately for you to tell
them the information they need to be your knight in shining armor. Repeating
"it's broke" repeatedly doesn't give them the information they need.

Most of us were new here once.. We've all been flamed. We've asked silly
questions and we've failed to mention critical pieces of information. 

So.. Assuming you still would like our help... A few minutes to collect the
relevant information might be useful to us all.

*
  Chris Scharff[EMAIL PROTECTED]www.swinc.com
  Simpler-Webb, Inc.  Austin, TX +1-512-322-0071
* 

> -Original Message-
> From: Ewart, Vicki L. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
> Sent: Wednesday, August 22, 2001 1:21 PM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: RE: Sharing contact files
> 
> 
> Well, excuse me  I'm here trying to get help because I don't know
> EVERYTHING.  In fact, I have not had the luxury of formal training.
> I've had to learn everything on the job, on the fly and from 
> books.  The
> questions you are asking me don't make sense to me because 
> I'm using the
> terminology that is in Outlook.  If you look on the Outlook toolbar,
> you'll see a picture of a rolodex and it's called Contacts. 
> As you know,
> it has a whole bunch of names and addresses in it.   You can 
> create more
> of those rolodex things (Contact lists?) and put them in the Public
> Folder, as I'm sure you already know.  Maybe I created my 
> "Contact list"
> in the wrong place.  Maybe there's a permissions tab somewhere I don't
> know about.  I don't know.  That's why I'm here.  
> 
> V. Ewart
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: Don Ely [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Wednesday, August 22, 2001 10:58 AM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: RE: Sharing contact files
> 
> 
> Do I use Outlook!?!?!  
> 
> Listen here knucklehead who has no clue.  I'm trying to help you out
> here and you are using incorrect terms and have no clue what you are
> doing.  I have no clue what the hell you are doing because you have no
> clue how to word things nor use the proper terminology.
> 
> I do know WTF a contacts FOLDER is and I know how to use and configure
> the stupid F'in thing.  Apparently you don't.
> 
> Now oddly enough when I setup the config you're trying to setup, it
> works just fine for me.  No problems at all.  Of course, I know how to
> configure my server.
> 
> Have you looked in Xadmin to make sure all the permissions are correct
> there?
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Ewart, Vicki
> L.
> Sent: Wednesday, August 22, 2001 10:59 AM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: RE: Sharing contact files
> 
> 
> Do you use Outlook?  It is an address book, basically.  It has names,
> addresses, phone number, email addresses.  The email 
> addresses will come
> up on your outlook addresses list if you check that box in the
> properties.
> 
> ve
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: Don Ely [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Wednesday, August 22, 2001 10:46 AM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: RE: Sharing contact files
> 
> 
> OK, you're really confusing me with this "contacts file", is this an
> actual file like a spreadsheet or is it a folder containing a bunch of
> contacts?
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Ewart, Vicki
> L.
> Sent: Wednesday, August 22, 2001 10:53 AM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: RE: Sharing contact files
> 
> 
> Specifically, I created a contact file named "clients" and 
> put it in the
> public folder and set the default to "Editor".  It did not 
> allow others
> to edit the contents of the "Client" file.
> 
> V. Ewart
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: Don Ely [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Wednesday, August 22, 2001 10:35 AM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: RE: Sharing contact files
> 
> 
> Explain basically.  I'm a stickler for details, "basically" 
> doesn't tell
> me jack S**t.
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Ewart, Vicki
> L.
> Sent: Wednesday, August 22, 2001 10:41 AM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: RE: Sharing contact files
> 
> 
> That is basically correct.
> 
> V. Ewart
> 

RE: Sharing contact files

[Scharff, Chris]

Ok. Everything in the folder list is a folder. They might be a special kind
of folder to some applications (e.g. Outlook, which I plan to try someday),
but they're just a folder.

> -Original Message-
> From: Ewart, Vicki L. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
> Sent: Wednesday, August 22, 2001 1:23 PM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: RE: Sharing contact files
> 
> 
> I actually have both on.
> 
> ve
> 
> -----Original Message-
> From: Scharff, Chris [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Wednesday, August 22, 2001 11:06 AM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: RE: Sharing contact files
> 
> 
> Turn off the Outlook Bar and turn on the folder list please. 
> The Outlook
> Bar
> is for users.  
> 
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Ewart, Vicki L. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
> > Sent: Wednesday, August 22, 2001 1:07 PM
> > To: Exchange Discussions
> > Subject: RE: Sharing contact files
> > 
> > 
> > Well what would you call the whole ball of wax?  I'm not 
> talking about
> > just one entry, I'm talking about the whole collection of names
> > contained in that entity.  It's called a "file" when you 
> create it in
> > Outlook. It doesn't appear on the list with a folder icon.  
> It appears
> > on the list with a rolodex icon.  I'd call that a file, but 
> > that's just
> > semantics, and not really important. I'll give up that 
> > apellation if it
> > helps to solve the problem.  
> > 
> > Meanwhile, I had a user create a new contact 
> > item/name/whatever, and she
> > was able to do that just fine, but was still unable to edit 
> a previous
> > entry.  And this was after I changed her permissions to "Publishing
> > Editor" last night!
> > 
> > ve
> > 
> > -Original Message-
> > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > Sent: Wednesday, August 22, 2001 10:51 AM
> > To: Exchange Discussions
> > Subject: RE: Sharing contact files
> > 
> > 
> > You're confusing us with the "file" business.  If it's just 
> a CONTACT,
> > then
> > don't call it a "file".
> > 
> > -Michèle
> > Immigration site:  <http://LadySun1969.tripod.com>
> > Our new 2001 Miata:  <http://members.cardomain.com/bpituley>
> > Tiggercam:  <http://www.tiggercam.co.uk>
> > -
> > "We are the music makers and we are the dreamers of 
> dreams."  - Willy
> > Wonka 
> > -
> > 
> > 
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Ewart, Vicki L. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > Sent: Wednesday, August 22, 2001 1:58 PM
> > To: Exchange Discussions
> > Subject: RE: Sharing contact files
> > 
> > 
> > No attachements!  This is a CONTACT file.
> > 
> > ve
> > 
> > -Original Message-
> > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > Sent: Wednesday, August 22, 2001 10:46 AM
> > To: Exchange Discussions
> > Subject: RE: Sharing contact files
> > 
> > 
> > is this an attachment to a message contained in the PF?
> > 
> > -Michèle
> > Immigration site:  <http://LadySun1969.tripod.com>
> > Our new 2001 Miata:  <http://members.cardomain.com/bpituley>
> > Tiggercam:  <http://www.tiggercam.co.uk>
> > -
> > "Caution: Cape does not enable user to fly." -Batman Costume warning
> > label 
> > -
> > 
> > 
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Ewart, Vicki L. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > Sent: Wednesday, August 22, 2001 1:53 PM
> > To: Exchange Discussions
> > Subject: RE: Sharing contact files
> > 
> > 
> > Specifically, I created a contact file named "clients" and 
> > put it in the
> > public folder and set the default to "Editor".  It did not 
> > allow others
> > to edit the contents of the "Client" file.
> > 
> > V. Ewart
> > 
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Don Ely [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > Sent: Wednesday, August 22, 2001 10:35 AM
> > To: Exchange Discussions
> > Subject: RE: Sharing contact files
> > 
> > 
> > Explain basically.  I'm a stickler for details, "basically" 
> > doesn't tell
> > me jack S**

RE: Sharing contact files

[Scharff, Chris]

Turn off the Outlook Bar and turn on the folder list please. The Outlook Bar
is for users.  

> -Original Message-
> From: Ewart, Vicki L. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
> Sent: Wednesday, August 22, 2001 1:07 PM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: RE: Sharing contact files
> 
> 
> Well what would you call the whole ball of wax?  I'm not talking about
> just one entry, I'm talking about the whole collection of names
> contained in that entity.  It's called a "file" when you create it in
> Outlook. It doesn't appear on the list with a folder icon.  It appears
> on the list with a rolodex icon.  I'd call that a file, but 
> that's just
> semantics, and not really important. I'll give up that 
> apellation if it
> helps to solve the problem.  
> 
> Meanwhile, I had a user create a new contact 
> item/name/whatever, and she
> was able to do that just fine, but was still unable to edit a previous
> entry.  And this was after I changed her permissions to "Publishing
> Editor" last night!
> 
> ve
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Wednesday, August 22, 2001 10:51 AM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: RE: Sharing contact files
> 
> 
> You're confusing us with the "file" business.  If it's just a CONTACT,
> then
> don't call it a "file".
> 
> -Michèle
> Immigration site:  
> Our new 2001 Miata:  
> Tiggercam:  
> -
> "We are the music makers and we are the dreamers of dreams."  - Willy
> Wonka 
> -
> 
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: Ewart, Vicki L. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Wednesday, August 22, 2001 1:58 PM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: RE: Sharing contact files
> 
> 
> No attachements!  This is a CONTACT file.
> 
> ve
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Wednesday, August 22, 2001 10:46 AM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: RE: Sharing contact files
> 
> 
> is this an attachment to a message contained in the PF?
> 
> -Michèle
> Immigration site:  
> Our new 2001 Miata:  
> Tiggercam:  
> -
> "Caution: Cape does not enable user to fly." -Batman Costume warning
> label 
> -
> 
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: Ewart, Vicki L. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Wednesday, August 22, 2001 1:53 PM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: RE: Sharing contact files
> 
> 
> Specifically, I created a contact file named "clients" and 
> put it in the
> public folder and set the default to "Editor".  It did not 
> allow others
> to edit the contents of the "Client" file.
> 
> V. Ewart
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: Don Ely [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Wednesday, August 22, 2001 10:35 AM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: RE: Sharing contact files
> 
> 
> Explain basically.  I'm a stickler for details, "basically" 
> doesn't tell
> me jack S**t.
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Ewart, Vicki
> L.
> Sent: Wednesday, August 22, 2001 10:41 AM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: RE: Sharing contact files
> 
> 
> That is basically correct.
> 
> V. Ewart
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: Don Ely [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Wednesday, August 22, 2001 10:28 AM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: RE: Sharing contact files
> 
> 
> So let me get this straight...
> 
> You created a new public folder in Outlook called "contacts" 
> and set it
> up to contain contact items.  You then went to the properties of the
> newly created Public Folder, clicked on the permissions tab, and then
> set the permissions to "Default=Editor" and it has not worked yet.
> 
> 
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Ewart, Vicki
> L.
> Sent: Wednesday, August 22, 2001 10:27 AM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: RE: Sharing contact files
> 
> 
> Well, that's exactly what I did, but now they're not able to make any
> changes to it.  That's what this is all about.
> 
> ve
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: Don Ely [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Wednesday, August 22, 2001 10:00 AM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: RE: Sharing contact files
> 
> 
> Depends...  I don't know what you're trying to accomplish, but I would
> create a Contacts folder, that your people could use to enter contact
> information for clients or whatever into.  You know, kinda 
> like the one
> in Outlook.  That way you don't have to worry about them 
> mucking up the
> file and such.  But hey, that's me.
> 
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAI

RE: Am I being blocked?

[Scharff, Chris]

It's failing on the RCPT TO command rather than the MAIL FROM command.


> -Original Message-
> From: Martin Blackstone [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
> Sent: Wednesday, August 22, 2001 11:42 AM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: RE: Am I being blocked?
> 
> 
> I wouldn't say you are blocked.
> It looks more like they use an access list of domains they 
> allow to send
> email to them. I would appear you are not on that list.
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Warren Cundy
> Sent: Wednesday, August 22, 2001 9:35 AM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: NDR: Am I being blocked?
> 
> 
> Hi All,
> 
> Below is an excerpt from an NDR I received, does this mean my 
> domain is
> being blocked by this particular mail server?  
> 
> Our Exchange has been configured to deny relaying for a long time now,
> and this is my first message like this.
> 
> Thanks.
> 
> -Warren
> 
> 
> > Your message did not reach some or all of the intended recipients.
> > 
> >   Subject:  test
> >   Sent: 8/22/2001 9:26 AM
> > 
> > The following recipient(s) could not be reached:
> > 
> >   Sean Berry (E-mail) on 8/22/2001 9:27 AM
> > The recipient name is not recognized
> > The MTS-ID of the original message is: c=US;a=
> ;p=ORGNAME;l=SERVERNAME-010822162616Z-20
> > MSEXCH:IMS:ORGNAME:SITENAME:SERVERNAME 3553 
> (000B099C) 553
> sorry, that domain isn't in my list of allowed rcpthosts (#5.7.1)
> > 
> 
> _
> List posting FAQ:   http://www.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: Sharing contact files

[Scharff, Chris]

And the exact error message was? 
What are all fo the users and groups who have access to this folder and what
are their permissions levels?

*
  Chris Scharff[EMAIL PROTECTED]www.swinc.com
  Simpler-Webb, Inc.  Austin, TX +1-512-322-0071
* 

> -Original Message-
> From: Ewart, Vicki L. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
> Sent: Wednesday, August 22, 2001 1:00 PM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: RE: Sharing contact files
> 
> 
> Already been done.  
> 
> ve
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: Mike Morrison [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Wednesday, August 22, 2001 10:48 AM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: RE: Sharing contact files
> 
> 
> Try creating a new public folder the way that Don outlined below, and
> set
> the permissions on it to have default as Editor. Create a 
> contact, then
> have
> someone else try to edit it. If it works, copy the contacts out of the
> old
> location and into the new one, and try editing again.
> 
> Mike Morrison
> NT/SMS/Exchange Administrator
> Ben & Jerry's Homemade, Inc.
> 
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: Ewart, Vicki L. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Wednesday, August 22, 2001 1:53 PM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: RE: Sharing contact files
> 
> 
> Specifically, I created a contact file named "clients" and 
> put it in the
> public folder and set the default to "Editor".  It did not 
> allow others
> to edit the contents of the "Client" file.
> 
> V. Ewart
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: Don Ely [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Wednesday, August 22, 2001 10:35 AM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: RE: Sharing contact files
> 
> 
> Explain basically.  I'm a stickler for details, "basically" 
> doesn't tell
> me jack S**t.
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Ewart, Vicki
> L.
> Sent: Wednesday, August 22, 2001 10:41 AM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: RE: Sharing contact files
> 
> 
> That is basically correct.
> 
> V. Ewart
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: Don Ely [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Wednesday, August 22, 2001 10:28 AM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: RE: Sharing contact files
> 
> 
> So let me get this straight...
> 
> You created a new public folder in Outlook called "contacts" 
> and set it
> up to contain contact items.  You then went to the properties of the
> newly created Public Folder, clicked on the permissions tab, and then
> set the permissions to "Default=Editor" and it has not worked yet.
> 
> 
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Ewart, Vicki
> L.
> Sent: Wednesday, August 22, 2001 10:27 AM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: RE: Sharing contact files
> 
> 
> Well, that's exactly what I did, but now they're not able to make any
> changes to it.  That's what this is all about.
> 
> ve
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: Don Ely [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Wednesday, August 22, 2001 10:00 AM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: RE: Sharing contact files
> 
> 
> Depends...  I don't know what you're trying to accomplish, but I would
> create a Contacts folder, that your people could use to enter contact
> information for clients or whatever into.  You know, kinda 
> like the one
> in Outlook.  That way you don't have to worry about them 
> mucking up the
> file and such.  But hey, that's me.
> 
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Ewart, Vicki
> L.
> Sent: Wednesday, August 22, 2001 10:03 AM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: RE: Sharing contact files
> 
> 
> Well, it's a file that's IN a folder, but I don't see what that has to
> do with it.  Do you not use contact files in your situation?
> 
> ve
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: Don Ely [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Wednesday, August 22, 2001 9:47 AM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: RE: Sharing contact files
> 
> 
> Why is it a file and not a folder?
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Ewart, Vicki
> L.
> Sent: Wednesday, August 22, 2001 9:44 AM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: RE: Sharing contact files
> 
> 
> This is a Contact file - names and addresses.  Not an email file.
> Permissions have been set (I thought) to let everyone edit the
> information, but they are unable to do so.  They can go to the
> appropriate name, open the item and make the changes, but the system
> will not let them save the changes.  I'm trying to figure out why not.
> We have a mirror site at another location.  I thought maybe it had to
> replicate to that location before the permissions would be 
> updated, but
> that doesn't seem to be the case.  
> 
> V. Ewart 
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: Lynne July [mailto:

RE: Over limits message

[Scharff, Chris]

I'm sure they'd be happy to package that as an MMC snap-in as well at no
additional charge right?

> -Original Message-
> From: Siegfried Weber [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
> Sent: Wednesday, August 22, 2001 12:09 PM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: RE: Over limits message
> 
> 
> Sure there will be a taker, Chris ;-)
> 
> 
> 
> > -----Original Message-
> > From: Scharff, Chris [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > Sent: Wednesday, August 22, 2001 5:23 PM
> > To: Exchange Discussions
> > Subject: RE: Over limits message
> > 
> > I agree it's not a scam, but it seems to me it's indicative of a
> larger
> > problem.
> > 
> > Registry manipulation is a far sight different than an event sink.
> When I
> > have to hire a developer to implement a "feature", I don't 
> consider it
> to
> > be
> > included. This isn't a trivial issue to solve via an event sink
> either,
> > and
> > implementing a homegrown solution on a mission critical system would
> give
> > me
> > reason for pause.
> > 
> > Microsoft's feedback loop with the administrative community is far
> from
> > ideal Clearly there's room for improvement no? Or 
> should we all be
> > content to let Microsoft tell us what we need in a messaging system
> and
> > hold
> > our tongue on an issue when it's clear that they have 
> missed the mark?
> > 
> > Of course I could be wrong... I'm willing to pay someone (work for
> hire)
> > out
> > of my own pocket for an hour of work at my billable rate if they can
> give
> > me
> > a working event sink (along with the source code that I can freely
> > redistribute under any terms I like) to rewrite any system message
> > Exchange
> > generates with replacement text for messages of that type. 
> If it's not
> a
> > complete and utter PITA to implement, I'm sure there will 
> be at least
> 1
> > taker (right Sig?).
> > 
> > *
> >   Chris Scharff[EMAIL PROTECTED]www.swinc.com
> >   Simpler-Webb, Inc.  Austin, TX +1-512-322-0071
> >   The surest way to corrupt a youth is to instruct him to
> >   hold in higher esteem those who think alike than those who
> >   think differently.  -- Nietzsche
> > *
> > 
> > > -Original Message-
> > > From: Erik Sojka [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > > Sent: Wednesday, August 22, 2001 10:07 AM
> > > To: Exchange Discussions
> > > Subject: RE: Over limits message
> > >
> > >
> > > Ghod forbid an Exchange admin should actually dig a bit under
> > > the hood.  The
> > > features is still available.
> > >
> > > Not every config option is available in the GUI.  Would 
> you consider
> > > Registry manipulation a scam?
> > >
> > > If the single most pressing feature you require in an email
> > > system, ask for
> > > your money back, because clearly MS doesn't know anything...
> > >
> > >
> > > *
> > > * Erik Sojka, MCSE  *
> > > * Manager, Network Services *
> > > * [EMAIL PROTECTED]   *
> > > *
> > >
> > > > -Original Message-
> > > > From: Bueffel, Scott M - CNF [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > > > Sent: Wednesday, August 22, 2001 11:02 AM
> > > > To: Exchange Discussions
> > > > Subject: RE: Over limits message
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Oh, please.  You think it has been included in 2000?  Only
> > > > through Event
> > > > sinks.  "Included" would mean a nice little GUI that lets you
> > > > type exactly
> > > > what you want to say.  People have been asking for this
> > > since the very
> > > > beginning.  And with each service pack it never came.  They
> > > > simply chose not
> > > > to do it.  So scam could be considered appropriate by some.
> > > >
> > > > -Original Message-
> > > > From: Erik Sojka [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > > > Sent: Wednesday, August 22, 2001 7:13 AM
> > > > To: Exchange Discussions
> > > > Subject: RE: Over limits message
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > What's the scam?
> > > >