RE: No MX Record ?

[Thomas Di Nardo]

Glad it worked!

Tom.

-Original Message-
From: RBHATIA [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: Wednesday, August 28, 2002 6:37 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: No MX Record ?


BRAVO  That indeed fixed the problem. It was a Win2K DNS issue - The
Exchange server would query the DNS to resolve the domain name and the
Win2K
would give a failure response. SP3 for Win2K fixed the DNS issue and all
my
emails are now going through.
Thanks to Thomas !!

-Original Message-
From: RBHATIA [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Wednesday, August 28, 2002 5:59 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: No MX Record ?


Thanks Thomas. Seems like that might be the cause of the problem. I am
running a Win2K DNS server.
I'm going to update the SP to fix this problem and check if that
resolves
the issue.
Will report back on the results.

-Original Message-
From: Thomas Di Nardo [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Wednesday, August 28, 2002 5:39 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: No MX Record ?


What DNS are you using? If you're using Win2K or NT4.0 DNS take a look
at Q295933. This would cause the behavior you are seeing.

Tom.
-Original Message-
From: RBHATIA [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: Wednesday, August 28, 2002 4:56 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: No MX Record ?

I had to relay to work around this issue. Has anyone else had similar
issues
with Exchange 5.5 not being able to send email to domains with a missing
MX
record ?


-Original Message-
From: Blunt, James H (Jim) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Wednesday, August 28, 2002 3:11 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: No MX Record ?


Our incoming mail comes through a Linux-based mail relayer, while our
outgoing goes from the IMS through our proxy server, which also doubles
as
our DNS lookup server.  And no...the proxy doesn't have 5.5 installed on
it.

-Original Message-
From: Baker, Jennifer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: Wednesday, August 28, 2002 11:54 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: No MX Record ?


After looking at his dns, I'm amazed his mail works at all.  

Is your relay server a 5.5 server?  It doesn't act like one, which is
probably why it does work.

-Original Message-
From: Blunt, James H (Jim) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: Wednesday, August 28, 2002 10:52 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: No MX Record ?


Jennifer,

I hate to argue, but that statement is incorrect.  Exchange 5.5 SP4 does
in
fact send e-mail to a domain, if no mx record exists.  I know this
because
one of our admins sends e-mail to his personal mail server from work all
the
time.  His domain name is hopeless.nu and his mail is located at
mail.hopeless.nu.  Doing an NSLOOKUP on this domain shows no mx record
for
hopeless.nu and only a cname record for mail.hopeless.nu.

Jim

-Original Message-
From: Baker, Jennifer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: Wednesday, August 28, 2002 9:35 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: No MX Record ?


5.5 requires an mx record to send mail.  This is not RFC behavior IMO.
E2k
does not require it and uses the "a" record if an "mx" record is not
present.

-Original Message-
From: RBHATIA [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: Wednesday, August 28, 2002 9:24 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: No MX Record ?


I did look up the RFC...and am soliciting a response from this list
since it
wasn't much help in resolving my problem. Here is an excerpt from the
RFC
that doesn't apply to my Exchange server : The lookup first attempts to
locate an MX record associated with the name.
If a CNAME record is found instead,the resulting name is processed
as if
it were the initial name.  If no MX records are found, but an A RR is
found,
the A RR is treated as if it was associated with an implicit MX RR, with
a
preference of 0, pointing to that host.

In this case there is an A record associated with HOUSTONFEARLESS.COM -
65.204.137.153 So why do the emails still sit in the queue ?


-Original Message-
From: Andy David [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Wednesday, August 28, 2002 12:19 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: No MX Record ?


RFC2821



-Original Message-
From: RBHATIA [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: Wednesday, August 28, 2002 12:09 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: No MX Record ?


How does Exchange 5.5 handle mail in the absence of an MX record ?


-Original Message-
From: Andy David [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Wednesday, August 28, 2002 12:13 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: No MX Record ?


One does not absolutely need a MX record to receive mail. 


-Original Message-
From: RBHATIA [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: Wednesday, August 28, 2002 12:03 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: No MX Record ?


Hi,
I've been having problems sending email to users in a domain called
houstonfearless.com The IMC queue states "Network

RE: MS Exchange Archiving Software

[Thomas Di Nardo]

I would also be looking at ComVault Galaxy.

Tom.

-Original Message-
From: Erik Vesneski [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: Tuesday, August 27, 2002 1:26 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: MS Exchange Archiving Software

Hi,

I wanted to find out if anyone has used any software application out
there
to retain/archive email off of their Exchange servers?

There are some email DL's, PF's, and mailboxes where I have to retain
email
for very long periods of time.  I want to offload it from the Exchange
servers and have been looking at:

http://www.kvsinc.com/ their 'Enterprise Vault'

http://www.storagetek.com/solutions/email/ their 'ASM Software'

http://www.wpoint.co.uk/email_archive_microsoft_exchange2000.htm their
'IXOS-eCONserver' software

http://www.legato.com/products/emailxtender/emailarchive.cfm their
'EmailArchive' software

Thanks in advance,

Erik Vesneski

_
List posting FAQ:   http://www.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: No MX Record ?

[Thomas Di Nardo]

What DNS are you using? If you're using Win2K or NT4.0 DNS take a look
at Q295933. This would cause the behavior you are seeing.

Tom.
-Original Message-
From: RBHATIA [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: Wednesday, August 28, 2002 4:56 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: No MX Record ?

I had to relay to work around this issue. Has anyone else had similar
issues
with Exchange 5.5 not being able to send email to domains with a missing
MX
record ?


-Original Message-
From: Blunt, James H (Jim) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Wednesday, August 28, 2002 3:11 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: No MX Record ?


Our incoming mail comes through a Linux-based mail relayer, while our
outgoing goes from the IMS through our proxy server, which also doubles
as
our DNS lookup server.  And no...the proxy doesn't have 5.5 installed on
it.

-Original Message-
From: Baker, Jennifer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: Wednesday, August 28, 2002 11:54 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: No MX Record ?


After looking at his dns, I'm amazed his mail works at all.  

Is your relay server a 5.5 server?  It doesn't act like one, which is
probably why it does work.

-Original Message-
From: Blunt, James H (Jim) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: Wednesday, August 28, 2002 10:52 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: No MX Record ?


Jennifer,

I hate to argue, but that statement is incorrect.  Exchange 5.5 SP4 does
in
fact send e-mail to a domain, if no mx record exists.  I know this
because
one of our admins sends e-mail to his personal mail server from work all
the
time.  His domain name is hopeless.nu and his mail is located at
mail.hopeless.nu.  Doing an NSLOOKUP on this domain shows no mx record
for
hopeless.nu and only a cname record for mail.hopeless.nu.

Jim

-Original Message-
From: Baker, Jennifer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: Wednesday, August 28, 2002 9:35 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: No MX Record ?


5.5 requires an mx record to send mail.  This is not RFC behavior IMO.
E2k
does not require it and uses the "a" record if an "mx" record is not
present.

-Original Message-
From: RBHATIA [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: Wednesday, August 28, 2002 9:24 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: No MX Record ?


I did look up the RFC...and am soliciting a response from this list
since it
wasn't much help in resolving my problem. Here is an excerpt from the
RFC
that doesn't apply to my Exchange server : The lookup first attempts to
locate an MX record associated with the name.
If a CNAME record is found instead,the resulting name is processed
as if
it were the initial name.  If no MX records are found, but an A RR is
found,
the A RR is treated as if it was associated with an implicit MX RR, with
a
preference of 0, pointing to that host.

In this case there is an A record associated with HOUSTONFEARLESS.COM -
65.204.137.153 So why do the emails still sit in the queue ?


-Original Message-
From: Andy David [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Wednesday, August 28, 2002 12:19 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: No MX Record ?


RFC2821



-Original Message-
From: RBHATIA [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: Wednesday, August 28, 2002 12:09 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: No MX Record ?


How does Exchange 5.5 handle mail in the absence of an MX record ?


-Original Message-
From: Andy David [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Wednesday, August 28, 2002 12:13 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: No MX Record ?


One does not absolutely need a MX record to receive mail. 


-Original Message-
From: RBHATIA [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: Wednesday, August 28, 2002 12:03 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: No MX Record ?


Hi,
I've been having problems sending email to users in a domain called
houstonfearless.com The IMC queue states "Network error during host
resolution". I did some troubleshooting and it seems like the domain
does
not have an MX record. I'm running Exchange 5.5. SP4 that is using DNS
to
send email externally. What's wierd though is that they are receiving
email
from other people. I even sent them a test message from my YAHOO account
and
they received it. Any ideas ??

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




--
The information contained in this email message is privileged and
confidential information intended only for the use of the individual or
entity to whom it is addressed.  If the reader of this message is not
the
intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination,
distribution or copy of this message is strictly prohibited.  If you
have
receiv

RE: Lost Password for Outlook .pst file

[Thomas Di Nardo]

A Google search using "pst password" (without the quotes) yields a
number of results you might like.

Tom.

-Original Message-
From: Benjamin, Bernie [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: Thursday, June 27, 2002 9:15 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: Lost Password for Outlook .pst file

Hi,

A user has fogotten his password for the Outlook 98 local person folder
(user.pst).

Does anyone know how to bypass the password and recover the information
in
the pst file.

Regards,

Bernie


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

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

RE: rules wizard stops working

[Thomas Di Nardo]

Q174045

-Original Message-
From: Joe Berthiaume [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: Thursday, June 27, 2002 11:48 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: rules wizard stops working

User has about 15 - 20 rules. A few days ago they all stopped running
automatically. Apparently he had recently added an additional rule, so I
was thinking that he was over the limit. Since telling him that he's
deleted and consolidated many rules, bringing him back to a state where
he has far fewer than he did before they stopped working...but they
still aren't executing automatically. If he goes into the wizard, checks
all the rules and clicks "run now," they execute. 

Exchange 2000 SP2, windows 2000 SP2 with Outlook 2002

_
List posting FAQ:   http://www.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: Veritas Netbackup error on MSX 5.5

[Thomas Di Nardo]

Whatever Hanji.

-Original Message-
From: kanee [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: Friday, June 14, 2002 6:37 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Veritas Netbackup error on MSX 5.5

thomas,

It shows how ignorant you are, no body was trying to get into a pissing
contest with environment sizes, i mentioned that to say i am not using
BLb on all my servers and mailboxes only on the server with 3600
mailbozes which are all high level execs. I dont see it as a waste of
resources, backup runs every night anyway, ya it takes roughly 3 hours
extra to run the blb and tapes are recycled anyway so its not like i am
using new tapes everytime and no reusing them. Listen what ever it is
that you do is great for you, dont assume i dont have skills just
because i am arguing a topic. Grow up. Its not delusions i was haring my
experience, thats what its all about, you have an opinion, i have an
opinion, we argue and discuss and one o fus should be over welmingly
prove that he others method of doing things is not fully efficient,
thats what this is about not a pissing contest. So far none of you have
given me an overwelming reason as to why blb is nad. Ya i understand
your points about its not necessary if you enable retention and oh you
are wasting resources and time and those are not enough reasons for me
to stop doing blb, thats an extra added cushion just incase a mailbox
gets corrupted, i can restore it all without effecting the entire
server..

now lets move on kid.





-Original Message-
From: Hunter, Lori [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Friday, June 14, 2002 12:12 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Veritas Netbackup error on MSX 5.5


hmmm, wasn't "tech buddy" basically an insult here awhile back?

But you can still be my Exchange buddy!  

-Original Message-----
From: Thomas Di Nardo [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Friday, June 14, 2002 10:30 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Veritas Netbackup error on MSX 5.5


Kanee, if you want to get into a pissing contest with folks on this list
about the size of environments, you're a bigger bonehead that most of us
already think you are. You don't know me, Andy, Lori, or Ed. It's never
safe to assume anything from the email addresses people use. Many of the
folks on this list who have been around for a while know who I am. Some
of them know where I work. You are not one of them.

Not that it matters, I am currently doing infrastructure and
supportability consulting work for multiple customers with user bases
ranging from 5K to 100K. The last dedicated environment I was
responsible for was 60 servers, 19 sites, 4 countries, and 23K users.
Not a BLB in sight. One mailbox restore in 2.5 years. You do the math.
Are the tapes, time, and energy worth it? I posit that they are a waste
of your employer's money.

There are reasons why every person that has been at this for a while
says BLB's are a bad thing. When you are hired by a company to make
their environment more efficient and less costly, you do not do things
like BLB's. If your employer knew how much of their resources you were
wasting, I think they would be less than happy.

Delusions are not a substitute for experience and good judgment. Both of
which you are obviously lacking.

Regarding the sheep comment. You'll be lucky if Lori doesn't turn you
into one. [1]

Tom.

[1] Hi Lori! Can I be your tech-buddy?


-Original Message-
From: kanee [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: Wednesday, June 12, 2002 10:24 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Veritas Netbackup error on MSX 5.5

Ao thomas shed some light and tell me what your exchange environment
is...if you dont mind

-Original Message-
From: Thomas Di Nardo [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Wednesday, June 12, 2002 8:29 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Veritas Netbackup error on MSX 5.5


That's right! Why do things the easy way when you can screw them up with
so much style! Go on, do your BLB's. Hell, while you're at it, why not
have your users copy the contents of their mailboxes into PSTs and store
them in their home-directories just in case your BLB's fail! That's a
good plan. But why stop there? You really ought to start clustering too;
after all, we all know what a great idea that is, right? 

Or, you could always learn to put the cork on the fork so you don't stab
yourself in the eye. That's a good idea too.

Tom.

-Original Message-
From: kanee [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: Wednesday, June 12, 2002 7:32 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Veritas Netbackup error on MSX 5.5

This has been a known issue with veritas products. The mapi32.dll file
is very sensitive and reports errors on messages as cannot open and thus
will show the status of backup as failed. There isnt really much you can
do about this, except ask the user to delete the message its referencing
in the error message from his mai

RE: Veritas Netbackup error on MSX 5.5

[Thomas Di Nardo]

 The insult depended on the company now didn't it?

-Original Message-
From: Hunter, Lori [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: Friday, June 14, 2002 12:12 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Veritas Netbackup error on MSX 5.5

hmmm, wasn't "tech buddy" basically an insult here awhile back?

But you can still be my Exchange buddy!  

-Original Message-----
From: Thomas Di Nardo [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Friday, June 14, 2002 10:30 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Veritas Netbackup error on MSX 5.5


Kanee, if you want to get into a pissing contest with folks on this list
about the size of environments, you're a bigger bonehead that most of us
already think you are. You don't know me, Andy, Lori, or Ed. It's never
safe to assume anything from the email addresses people use. Many of the
folks on this list who have been around for a while know who I am. Some
of them know where I work. You are not one of them.

Not that it matters, I am currently doing infrastructure and
supportability consulting work for multiple customers with user bases
ranging from 5K to 100K. The last dedicated environment I was
responsible for was 60 servers, 19 sites, 4 countries, and 23K users.
Not a BLB in sight. One mailbox restore in 2.5 years. You do the math.
Are the tapes, time, and energy worth it? I posit that they are a waste
of your employer's money.

There are reasons why every person that has been at this for a while
says BLB's are a bad thing. When you are hired by a company to make
their environment more efficient and less costly, you do not do things
like BLB's. If your employer knew how much of their resources you were
wasting, I think they would be less than happy.

Delusions are not a substitute for experience and good judgment. Both of
which you are obviously lacking.

Regarding the sheep comment. You'll be lucky if Lori doesn't turn you
into one. [1]

Tom.

[1] Hi Lori! Can I be your tech-buddy?


-Original Message-
From: kanee [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: Wednesday, June 12, 2002 10:24 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Veritas Netbackup error on MSX 5.5

Ao thomas shed some light and tell me what your exchange environment
is...if you dont mind

-Original Message-
From: Thomas Di Nardo [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Wednesday, June 12, 2002 8:29 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Veritas Netbackup error on MSX 5.5


That's right! Why do things the easy way when you can screw them up with
so much style! Go on, do your BLB's. Hell, while you're at it, why not
have your users copy the contents of their mailboxes into PSTs and store
them in their home-directories just in case your BLB's fail! That's a
good plan. But why stop there? You really ought to start clustering too;
after all, we all know what a great idea that is, right? 

Or, you could always learn to put the cork on the fork so you don't stab
yourself in the eye. That's a good idea too.

Tom.

-Original Message-
From: kanee [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: Wednesday, June 12, 2002 7:32 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Veritas Netbackup error on MSX 5.5

This has been a known issue with veritas products. The mapi32.dll file
is very sensitive and reports errors on messages as cannot open and thus
will show the status of backup as failed. There isnt really much you can
do about this, except ask the user to delete the message its referencing
in the error message from his mailbox and empty it from deleted items. 

I have spent some time with veritas and they point fingers at microsoft
and i spoke to microsoft and they point the fingers back to veritas,
veritas knows of this issue and they say they are looking at a solution
and should be out in the next build for backup exec8.6, i know you use
netbackup so maybe you should look into their next build for netbackup.
Even though this error pops up and the overall status of the backup job
shows up as failed, the backup in actuality is successful, you can
restore the users mailbox and the only thing missing would be those
messages that it reported as corrupted or cannot open. So dont loose any
sleep over this you are fine.

dONT LISTEN TO PEOPLE TELLING YOU NOT TO DO BRICK LEVEL BACKUPS, ITS
ABSOLUTELY NECCESSARY TO DO BRICK LEVEL BACKUPS, IT WILL SAVE YOU SO
MUCH HEADACHE AND HEART ACHE LATER..TRUST ME.

-Original Message-
From: Kulwinder [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Monday, June 10, 2002 10:31 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Veritas Netbackup error on MSX 5.5


Thanks for the info.




> Well then, might i suggest, as Andy and no doubt other admins would
> recommend, that you should stop doing BLB's. Here are a few links for
you to
> ponder over.
> 
> http://mail.tekscan.com/nomailboxes.htm
> 
> http://www.exchangefaq.org/recovery/0004.php3
> 
> Regards
> 
> Mr Louis Joyce
> Dat

RE: Veritas Netbackup error on MSX 5.5

[Thomas Di Nardo]

Kanee, if you want to get into a pissing contest with folks on this list
about the size of environments, you're a bigger bonehead that most of us
already think you are. You don't know me, Andy, Lori, or Ed. It's never
safe to assume anything from the email addresses people use. Many of the
folks on this list who have been around for a while know who I am. Some
of them know where I work. You are not one of them.

Not that it matters, I am currently doing infrastructure and
supportability consulting work for multiple customers with user bases
ranging from 5K to 100K. The last dedicated environment I was
responsible for was 60 servers, 19 sites, 4 countries, and 23K users.
Not a BLB in sight. One mailbox restore in 2.5 years. You do the math.
Are the tapes, time, and energy worth it? I posit that they are a waste
of your employer's money.

There are reasons why every person that has been at this for a while
says BLB's are a bad thing. When you are hired by a company to make
their environment more efficient and less costly, you do not do things
like BLB's. If your employer knew how much of their resources you were
wasting, I think they would be less than happy.

Delusions are not a substitute for experience and good judgment. Both of
which you are obviously lacking.

Regarding the sheep comment. You'll be lucky if Lori doesn't turn you
into one. [1]

Tom.

[1] Hi Lori! Can I be your tech-buddy?


-Original Message-
From: kanee [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: Wednesday, June 12, 2002 10:24 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Veritas Netbackup error on MSX 5.5

Ao thomas shed some light and tell me what your exchange environment
is...if you dont mind

-----Original Message-
From: Thomas Di Nardo [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Wednesday, June 12, 2002 8:29 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Veritas Netbackup error on MSX 5.5


That's right! Why do things the easy way when you can screw them up with
so much style! Go on, do your BLB's. Hell, while you're at it, why not
have your users copy the contents of their mailboxes into PSTs and store
them in their home-directories just in case your BLB's fail! That's a
good plan. But why stop there? You really ought to start clustering too;
after all, we all know what a great idea that is, right? 

Or, you could always learn to put the cork on the fork so you don't stab
yourself in the eye. That's a good idea too.

Tom.

-Original Message-
From: kanee [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: Wednesday, June 12, 2002 7:32 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Veritas Netbackup error on MSX 5.5

This has been a known issue with veritas products. The mapi32.dll file
is very sensitive and reports errors on messages as cannot open and thus
will show the status of backup as failed. There isnt really much you can
do about this, except ask the user to delete the message its referencing
in the error message from his mailbox and empty it from deleted items. 

I have spent some time with veritas and they point fingers at microsoft
and i spoke to microsoft and they point the fingers back to veritas,
veritas knows of this issue and they say they are looking at a solution
and should be out in the next build for backup exec8.6, i know you use
netbackup so maybe you should look into their next build for netbackup.
Even though this error pops up and the overall status of the backup job
shows up as failed, the backup in actuality is successful, you can
restore the users mailbox and the only thing missing would be those
messages that it reported as corrupted or cannot open. So dont loose any
sleep over this you are fine.

dONT LISTEN TO PEOPLE TELLING YOU NOT TO DO BRICK LEVEL BACKUPS, ITS
ABSOLUTELY NECCESSARY TO DO BRICK LEVEL BACKUPS, IT WILL SAVE YOU SO
MUCH HEADACHE AND HEART ACHE LATER..TRUST ME.

-Original Message-
From: Kulwinder [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Monday, June 10, 2002 10:31 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Veritas Netbackup error on MSX 5.5


Thanks for the info.




> Well then, might i suggest, as Andy and no doubt other admins would
> recommend, that you should stop doing BLB's. Here are a few links for
you to
> ponder over.
> 
> http://mail.tekscan.com/nomailboxes.htm
> 
> http://www.exchangefaq.org/recovery/0004.php3
> 
> Regards
> 
> Mr Louis Joyce
> Data Support Analyst
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: Kulwinder [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: 10 June 2002 15:21
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: RE: Veritas Netbackup error on MSX 5.5
> 
> 
> we get the error when doing a BLB only.  when doing normal full
backups of
> the store - everything is fine - the mailbox account that we use has
the
> exchange service account set as the nt account, sop has the
permissions
> set.
> 
> 
> > Im sorry, im getting confused now. Do you get the error w

RE: Veritas Netbackup error on MSX 5.5

[Thomas Di Nardo]

That's right! Why do things the easy way when you can screw them up with
so much style! Go on, do your BLB's. Hell, while you're at it, why not
have your users copy the contents of their mailboxes into PSTs and store
them in their home-directories just in case your BLB's fail! That's a
good plan. But why stop there? You really ought to start clustering too;
after all, we all know what a great idea that is, right? 

Or, you could always learn to put the cork on the fork so you don't stab
yourself in the eye. That's a good idea too.

Tom.

-Original Message-
From: kanee [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: Wednesday, June 12, 2002 7:32 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Veritas Netbackup error on MSX 5.5

This has been a known issue with veritas products. The mapi32.dll file
is very sensitive and reports errors on messages as cannot open and thus
will show the status of backup as failed. There isnt really much you can
do about this, except ask the user to delete the message its referencing
in the error message from his mailbox and empty it from deleted items. 

I have spent some time with veritas and they point fingers at microsoft
and i spoke to microsoft and they point the fingers back to veritas,
veritas knows of this issue and they say they are looking at a solution
and should be out in the next build for backup exec8.6, i know you use
netbackup so maybe you should look into their next build for netbackup.
Even though this error pops up and the overall status of the backup job
shows up as failed, the backup in actuality is successful, you can
restore the users mailbox and the only thing missing would be those
messages that it reported as corrupted or cannot open. So dont loose any
sleep over this you are fine.

dONT LISTEN TO PEOPLE TELLING YOU NOT TO DO BRICK LEVEL BACKUPS, ITS
ABSOLUTELY NECCESSARY TO DO BRICK LEVEL BACKUPS, IT WILL SAVE YOU SO
MUCH HEADACHE AND HEART ACHE LATER..TRUST ME.

-Original Message-
From: Kulwinder [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Monday, June 10, 2002 10:31 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Veritas Netbackup error on MSX 5.5


Thanks for the info.




> Well then, might i suggest, as Andy and no doubt other admins would
> recommend, that you should stop doing BLB's. Here are a few links for
you to
> ponder over.
> 
> http://mail.tekscan.com/nomailboxes.htm
> 
> http://www.exchangefaq.org/recovery/0004.php3
> 
> Regards
> 
> Mr Louis Joyce
> Data Support Analyst
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: Kulwinder [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: 10 June 2002 15:21
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: RE: Veritas Netbackup error on MSX 5.5
> 
> 
> we get the error when doing a BLB only.  when doing normal full
backups of
> the store - everything is fine - the mailbox account that we use has
the
> exchange service account set as the nt account, sop has the
permissions
> set.
> 
> 
> > Im sorry, im getting confused now. Do you get the error when doing a
brick
> > level back-up? Or when you just back up the store on its own?
> > 
> > Are you saying you only carry out BLB's when you get this type of
error?
> > 
> > Regards
> > 
> > Mr Louis Joyce
> > Data Support Specialist
> > BT Ignite eSolutions
> > 
> > 
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Kulwinder [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > Sent: 10 June 2002 14:53
> > To: Exchange Discussions
> > Subject: RE: Veritas Netbackup error on MSX 5.5
> > 
> > 
> > We do carryout Brick-level backups for when this occurs.  
> > 
> > 
> > > Are you carrying out bricklevel backups?
> > > 
> > > Regards
> > > 
> > > Mr Louis Joyce
> > > Data Support Specialist
> > > BT Ignite eSolutions
> > > 
> > > 
> > > -Original Message-
> > > From: Kulwinder [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > > Sent: 10 June 2002 10:14
> > > To: Exchange Discussions
> > > Subject: RE: Veritas Netbackup error on MSX 5.5
> > > 
> > > 
> > > Permissons are setup fine, because normal backups work, and also
the
> error
> > > comes up on only some mailboxes and others work fine, which to be
shows
> > > that permissions are setup fine.  "Service account admin" rights
on the
> IS
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > > I would check all the permissions on the Information store.
> > > > 
> > > > Regards
> > > > 
> > > > Mr Louis Joyce
> > > > Data Support Specialist
> > > > BT Ignite eSolutions
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > -Original Message-
> > > > From: Kulwinder [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > > > Sent: 10 June 2002 09:55
> > > > To: Exchange Discussions
> > > > Subject: Veritas Netbackup error on MSX 5.5
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > We use netbackup from Veritas as a backup solution.  when we
perform
> > > > mailbox backups we get the following error on some mailboxes.  I
have
> > > > looked and dealt with veritas and they are saying its an
exchange
> issue
> > > > and not veritas.  Has anyone got any idea what could be causing
this
> and
> > a
> > > > possible solution.
> > > > 
> > > > Error we get.
> > > > 
> > > > 06/09/2002 08:14:29 mastersrv ourserv

RE: Blocked Outlook attachments

[Thomas Di Nardo]

Q290499

-Original Message-
From: Mario Fernandez [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: Wednesday, June 12, 2002 2:20 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: Blocked Outlook attachments

Some of our new users got the latest Office SR-2  release with the
latest
Microsoft security fixes (pain in the ass), and now they can't open
attachments sent to them with .bat extensions.  I have my own security
policy already in place with proper virus checking and all the necessary
security checks that I'm comfortable with, don't really need MS adding
any.
Enough bitching, would anyone know of a way around it I've browsed
TechNet
and the only solution I've found is for Outlook 2002 not Outlook 200
SR-2.
Any help would be appreciated

Thanks

 
Mario Fernandez
Network Administrator
DataSynapse
632 Broadway 5th Floor
New York, NY 10012
tel. (212) 842-8849
fax. (212) 842-8843
[EMAIL PROTECTED]  

View the DataSynapse email disclaimer here:
  e-mail disclaimer  

_
List posting FAQ:   http://www.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: Wal-Mart

[Thomas Di Nardo]

Squeal like a pig?

-Original Message-
From: Andy David [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: Wednesday, June 12, 2002 12:25 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Wal-Mart

Well, they need two people for "Dueling Banjos". I cant imagine what
they
want the 3rd guy to do.



-Original Message-
From: Tony Hlabse [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: Wednesday, June 12, 2002 12:15 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: Re: Wal-Mart


Jeez where as this thread gone? Had the interview yesterday went well.
They
are hiring for 3 Exchange positions. When I asked him what is
Bentonville is
like, all he said was it has all the modern amenities.

- Original Message -
From: "Baker, Jennifer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Exchange Discussions" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Wednesday, June 12, 2002 12:01 PM
Subject: RE: Wal-Mart


> That and my own personal feather fan boy.
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Roger Seielstad [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Wednesday, June 12, 2002 4:31 AM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: RE: Wal-Mart
>
>
> Doesn't decent pay in Arkansas equate to being enough to afford the
Learjet
> to commute home to a real state every night?
>
> --
> Roger D. Seielstad - MCSE
> Sr. Systems Administrator
> Peregrine Systems
> Atlanta, GA
>
>
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Baker, Jennifer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > Sent: Tuesday, June 11, 2002 3:09 PM
> > To: Exchange Discussions
> > Subject: RE: Wal-Mart
> >
> >
> > They were hiring for that same job 2 1/2 years ago.  The pay was
> > decent...but it's still in Arkansas.
> >
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Tony Hlabse [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > Sent: Monday, June 10, 2002 7:05 PM
> > To: Exchange Discussions
> > Subject: Re: Wal-Mart
> >
> >
> > I have a opportunity to work there. Just curious if anyone
> > else worked there
> > and what they thought about the working environment. They are
> > switching from
> > 5.5 to 2000.
> >
> >
> > - Original Message -
> > From: "Soysal, Serdar" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > To: "Exchange Discussions" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > Sent: Tuesday, June 11, 2002 9:43 AM
> > Subject: RE: Wal-Mart
> >
> >
> > > Hmm, yes.  Anyone, please spill all the details about their
> > infrastructure.
> > > Juuust curious.
> > >
> > > :-)
> > >
> > >
> > > -Original Message-
> > > From: Tony Hlabse [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > > Sent: 10 June 2002 09:59
> > > To: Exchange Discussions
> > > Subject: OT: Wal-Mart
> > >
> > >
> > > Anyone here working or has worked for Wal-Mart in
> > Bentonville on their
> > email
> > > system?
> > >
> > >
> > > _
> > > List posting FAQ:   http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
> > > Archives:   http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp
> > > To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > >
> > > _
> > > List posting FAQ:   http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
> > > Archives:   http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp
> > > To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > >
> > >
> > > _
> > > List posting FAQ:   http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
> > > Archives:   http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp
> > > To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > >
> >
> > _
> > List posting FAQ:   http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
> > Archives:   http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp
> > To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >
> > _
> > List posting FAQ:   http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
> > Archives:   http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp
> > To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >
>
> _
> List posting FAQ:   http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
> Archives:   http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp
> To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> _
> List posting FAQ:   http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
> Archives:   http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp
> To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>

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

RE: kinda OT - RAID on the exchange server

[Thomas Di Nardo]

No...It would stand for Idiots. As in Idiots, Boneheads, and Morons.

-Original Message-
From: Mellott, Bill [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: Friday, May 31, 2002 2:12 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: kinda OT - RAID on the exchange server

I'll bet 'I' is for Intel..
why? one of our divisions sell's these

What do I win if I'm right?

-Original Message-
From: Mark Arnold [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Friday, May 31, 2002 2:08 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: kinda OT - RAID on the exchange server


It'll never be time to go with the D word. The D people don't make
servers, they only claim to.
Who's the I word though?

-Original Message-
From: MS Exchange Discussions [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: 31 May 2002 18:28
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: kinda OT - RAID on the exchange server

Maybe it's time to go with D or I!


-Original Message-
From: Andrey Fyodorov [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Posted At: Friday, May 31, 2002 10:19 AM
Posted To: MS Exchange Discussions
Conversation: kinda OT - RAID on the exchange server
Subject: RE: kinda OT - RAID on the exchange server


Back in 1998 we used Ed Crowley's employer's line of servers and they
were
not that good. We switched to their major competitor. But now it's not a
competitor anymore since they became the same company. But I still like
servers that start with C better than those that start with H. But I
think
Ed is also from the C side, right?

-Original Message-
From: Soysal, Serdar [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Friday, May 31, 2002 10:56 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: kinda OT - RAID on the exchange server


Drop your hardware vendor.  Been running my databases on RAID5's on Ed
Crowley's employer's fine line of servers and NEVER EVER had an issue.  

Serdar Soysal


-Original Message-
From: Mark Peoples [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: Friday, May 31, 2002 2:57 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: kinda OT - RAID on the exchange server


I apologise for the OT question...

Has anyone experienced issues with bad striping on a RAID5e disk array?
(hardware RAID)

I have had this twice in the last 6 months. When a disk dies in the
array it
is replaced ASAP. RAID5e should be able to handle this without error
right?

When the RAID5e striping has errors, it registers sectors on the logical
disk as bad and causes disk I/O errors - which screws (eventually
corrupts)
the exchange information store(s) on the logical drive and prevents
backups
from completing.

hhhmmm ... perhaps someone can enlighten me as to why RAID5e couldn't
handle
the occassional defunct drive without screwing the rest of the array in
the
process of rebuilding itself...

The hardware vendor has recommended re-creating the RAID array from
scratch
and restoring from backup

Any thoughts?

sorry again for the OT question - but I'll even throw in a Friday
afternoon
Haiku for good measure:

Friday afternoon
gotta get going home 
server is cactus

Thanks,
MP



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


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

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

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



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

_
List posting FAQ:   http://www.swinc.com/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: mail

RE: Product Support Services - Microsoft Security Bulletin -MS02 -025

[Thomas Di Nardo]

To the best of my knowledge, if you install using Terminal Services, a
reboot is required. From the console, it should not be required.

Tom.

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: Thursday, May 30, 2002 12:02 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Product Support Services - Microsoft Security Bulletin
-MS02 -025

Mine asked for a reboot.

-Original Message-
From: Charles Carerros [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: 30 May 2002 14:03
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Product Support Services - Microsoft Security Bulletin
-MS02
-025

It wasn't required for my server, but I did it just in case.

Chuck

-Original Message-
From: Andrey Fyodorov [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: Thursday, May 30, 2002 7:51 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Product Support Services - Microsoft Security Bulletin
-MS02 -025


Microsoft is probably scanning this mailing list now for everyone's
experiences :)  They want to know too if the reboot is required.

-Original Message-
From: Mikael Andersson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Thursday, May 30, 2002 2:42 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Product Support Services - Microsoft Security Bulletin
-MS02 -025


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


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


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

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

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

Best Regards, 
Dan Bartley

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

Hoooya!

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


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


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


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

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


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

Date: May 29, 2002

Software: Microsoft Exchange 2000

Impact: Denial of Service

Maximum Severity Rating: Critical

Bulletin: MS02-025

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

What Is It?

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

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

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


 Yahoo! Groups Sponsor -~-->
Save 30% on Web addresses! Get with the times, get a web site. Share
information, pictures, your hobby, or start a business. Great names

RE: Archive

[Thomas Di Nardo]

Friggin' Lyris!

Great to have you back Ed!

-Original Message-
From: Ed Crowley [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: Tuesday, May 28, 2002 7:34 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Archive

I think we agree, more or less.  I don't believe that
e-mail administrators are the best ones to decide what
information to keep or delete and for how long.  I
also happen to think that lawyers aren't either.  My
point is that document retention policies, as with
many other policies like service level agreements,
aren't based on sound business decisions, but instead
are based upon fear.

Ed Crowley
hp Services

--- David Florea <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> Users are always free to maintain whatever e-mails
> or files they want, and it's our job to help them do
> just that.  If they determine a file should be
> deleted, then we help them do that too.  That's not
> hiding anything, that's just good and efficient
> practice.  And I wouldn't think you're trying to put
> us admins in a different policy-making arena than
> that.  If you're talking about intentional
> destruction of evidence in a legal matter, that's
> different, and I agree with you.
> 
> 
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: Ed Crowley [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Tuesday, May 28, 2002 2:59 PM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: RE: Archive
> 
> 
> As I've always said, document retention will benefit
> those organizations who act ethically.  I don't
> think
> it makes sense to destroy all your evidence when
> those
> with an axe to grind keep all theirs.  Those with
> nothing to hide shouldn't be hiding it.
> 
> Ed Crowley
> hp Services
> 
> --- Dean Cunningham <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
> > Ed, as usual, is correct.
> > 
> > Depends what the risk is to people making binding
> > commitments via email that
> > may cost the company $$$.
> > Email here is considered a public record (as
> > indicated in our email policy).
> > 
> > Emails are easy to create/modify by the other
> party.
> > Having an audit trail
> > of mails sent/received may be of value to your
> > company.
> > 
> > I have every email that has gone through the mail
> > gateway for the last 5
> > years on CD.
> > This process is automated to the point where 18
> > months worth of detail in
> > held in an oracle Db and the only human
> intervention
> > is to write the monthly
> > data on to CD's
> > 
> > This may assist us in any litigation issues, and
> as
> > a public company, we
> > have nothing to hide.
> > 
> > We keep archive tapes back to '89, when we arose
> > from the ashes of about 30
> > public sector organisations
> > 
> > I have has cases of senior managers needing
> e-mails
> > from up to a year old
> > that they had inadvertently deleted ( or told the
> > other party they never
> > received it)
> > 
> > Our litigation processes here are not quickly and
> > extensively used here in
> > NZ, unlike *other* countries.
> > 
> > 
> > cheers
> > Dean
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Ed Crowley [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > Sent: Wednesday, 29 May 2002 5:46 a.m.
> > To: Exchange Discussions
> > Subject: Re: Archive
> > 
> > 
> > Another way to look at it:  What's the worth of
> old
> > e-mail?
> > 
> > Ed Crowley
> > hp Services
> > 
> > --- Tim <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > How long do most of you hold tapes?  We are
> > looking
> > > to establish a
> > > standard on how long to keep tapes in archived
> > > before reintroducing them
> > > back into the tape rotation to be overwritten. 
> I
> > > know there are many
> > > differnent ways to look at this as far as cost
> per
> > > tape, storage space,
> > > legal aspects, and disaster recovery and wanted
> to
> > > know what people
> > > thought was a good period
> > > 
> > >
> >
>
_
> > > List posting FAQ:  
> > > http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
> > > Archives:  
> > > http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp
> > > To unsubscribe:
> > > mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > 
> > > 
> > 
> > 
> > __
> > Do You Yahoo!?
> > Yahoo! - Official partner of 2002 FIFA World Cup
> > http://fifaworldcup.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]
> > 
> > 
> >
>
**
> > This email is not an official statement of the
> > Waikato
> > Regional Council unless otherwise stated.
> > Visit our website http://www.ew.govt.nz
> >
>
**
> > 
> > 
> >
>

RE: Archive

[Thomas Di Nardo]

Friggin' Lyris!

Great to have you back Ed!

-Original Message-
From: Ed Crowley [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: Tuesday, May 28, 2002 7:34 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Archive

I think we agree, more or less.  I don't believe that
e-mail administrators are the best ones to decide what
information to keep or delete and for how long.  I
also happen to think that lawyers aren't either.  My
point is that document retention policies, as with
many other policies like service level agreements,
aren't based on sound business decisions, but instead
are based upon fear.

Ed Crowley
hp Services

--- David Florea <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> Users are always free to maintain whatever e-mails
> or files they want, and it's our job to help them do
> just that.  If they determine a file should be
> deleted, then we help them do that too.  That's not
> hiding anything, that's just good and efficient
> practice.  And I wouldn't think you're trying to put
> us admins in a different policy-making arena than
> that.  If you're talking about intentional
> destruction of evidence in a legal matter, that's
> different, and I agree with you.
> 
> 
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: Ed Crowley [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Tuesday, May 28, 2002 2:59 PM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: RE: Archive
> 
> 
> As I've always said, document retention will benefit
> those organizations who act ethically.  I don't
> think
> it makes sense to destroy all your evidence when
> those
> with an axe to grind keep all theirs.  Those with
> nothing to hide shouldn't be hiding it.
> 
> Ed Crowley
> hp Services
> 
> --- Dean Cunningham <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
> > Ed, as usual, is correct.
> > 
> > Depends what the risk is to people making binding
> > commitments via email that
> > may cost the company $$$.
> > Email here is considered a public record (as
> > indicated in our email policy).
> > 
> > Emails are easy to create/modify by the other
> party.
> > Having an audit trail
> > of mails sent/received may be of value to your
> > company.
> > 
> > I have every email that has gone through the mail
> > gateway for the last 5
> > years on CD.
> > This process is automated to the point where 18
> > months worth of detail in
> > held in an oracle Db and the only human
> intervention
> > is to write the monthly
> > data on to CD's
> > 
> > This may assist us in any litigation issues, and
> as
> > a public company, we
> > have nothing to hide.
> > 
> > We keep archive tapes back to '89, when we arose
> > from the ashes of about 30
> > public sector organisations
> > 
> > I have has cases of senior managers needing
> e-mails
> > from up to a year old
> > that they had inadvertently deleted ( or told the
> > other party they never
> > received it)
> > 
> > Our litigation processes here are not quickly and
> > extensively used here in
> > NZ, unlike *other* countries.
> > 
> > 
> > cheers
> > Dean
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Ed Crowley [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > Sent: Wednesday, 29 May 2002 5:46 a.m.
> > To: Exchange Discussions
> > Subject: Re: Archive
> > 
> > 
> > Another way to look at it:  What's the worth of
> old
> > e-mail?
> > 
> > Ed Crowley
> > hp Services
> > 
> > --- Tim <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > How long do most of you hold tapes?  We are
> > looking
> > > to establish a
> > > standard on how long to keep tapes in archived
> > > before reintroducing them
> > > back into the tape rotation to be overwritten. 
> I
> > > know there are many
> > > differnent ways to look at this as far as cost
> per
> > > tape, storage space,
> > > legal aspects, and disaster recovery and wanted
> to
> > > know what people
> > > thought was a good period
> > > 
> > >
> >
>
_
> > > List posting FAQ:  
> > > http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
> > > Archives:  
> > > http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp
> > > To unsubscribe:
> > > mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > 
> > > 
> > 
> > 
> > __
> > Do You Yahoo!?
> > Yahoo! - Official partner of 2002 FIFA World Cup
> > http://fifaworldcup.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]
> > 
> > 
> >
>
**
> > This email is not an official statement of the
> > Waikato
> > Regional Council unless otherwise stated.
> > Visit our website http://www.ew.govt.nz
> >
>
**
> > 
> > 
> >
>

RE: Archive

[Thomas Di Nardo]

Friggin' Lyris!

Great to have you back Ed!

-Original Message-
From: Ed Crowley [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: Tuesday, May 28, 2002 7:34 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Archive

I think we agree, more or less.  I don't believe that
e-mail administrators are the best ones to decide what
information to keep or delete and for how long.  I
also happen to think that lawyers aren't either.  My
point is that document retention policies, as with
many other policies like service level agreements,
aren't based on sound business decisions, but instead
are based upon fear.

Ed Crowley
hp Services

--- David Florea <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> Users are always free to maintain whatever e-mails
> or files they want, and it's our job to help them do
> just that.  If they determine a file should be
> deleted, then we help them do that too.  That's not
> hiding anything, that's just good and efficient
> practice.  And I wouldn't think you're trying to put
> us admins in a different policy-making arena than
> that.  If you're talking about intentional
> destruction of evidence in a legal matter, that's
> different, and I agree with you.
> 
> 
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: Ed Crowley [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Tuesday, May 28, 2002 2:59 PM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: RE: Archive
> 
> 
> As I've always said, document retention will benefit
> those organizations who act ethically.  I don't
> think
> it makes sense to destroy all your evidence when
> those
> with an axe to grind keep all theirs.  Those with
> nothing to hide shouldn't be hiding it.
> 
> Ed Crowley
> hp Services
> 
> --- Dean Cunningham <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
> > Ed, as usual, is correct.
> > 
> > Depends what the risk is to people making binding
> > commitments via email that
> > may cost the company $$$.
> > Email here is considered a public record (as
> > indicated in our email policy).
> > 
> > Emails are easy to create/modify by the other
> party.
> > Having an audit trail
> > of mails sent/received may be of value to your
> > company.
> > 
> > I have every email that has gone through the mail
> > gateway for the last 5
> > years on CD.
> > This process is automated to the point where 18
> > months worth of detail in
> > held in an oracle Db and the only human
> intervention
> > is to write the monthly
> > data on to CD's
> > 
> > This may assist us in any litigation issues, and
> as
> > a public company, we
> > have nothing to hide.
> > 
> > We keep archive tapes back to '89, when we arose
> > from the ashes of about 30
> > public sector organisations
> > 
> > I have has cases of senior managers needing
> e-mails
> > from up to a year old
> > that they had inadvertently deleted ( or told the
> > other party they never
> > received it)
> > 
> > Our litigation processes here are not quickly and
> > extensively used here in
> > NZ, unlike *other* countries.
> > 
> > 
> > cheers
> > Dean
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Ed Crowley [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > Sent: Wednesday, 29 May 2002 5:46 a.m.
> > To: Exchange Discussions
> > Subject: Re: Archive
> > 
> > 
> > Another way to look at it:  What's the worth of
> old
> > e-mail?
> > 
> > Ed Crowley
> > hp Services
> > 
> > --- Tim <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > How long do most of you hold tapes?  We are
> > looking
> > > to establish a
> > > standard on how long to keep tapes in archived
> > > before reintroducing them
> > > back into the tape rotation to be overwritten. 
> I
> > > know there are many
> > > differnent ways to look at this as far as cost
> per
> > > tape, storage space,
> > > legal aspects, and disaster recovery and wanted
> to
> > > know what people
> > > thought was a good period
> > > 
> > >
> >
>
_
> > > List posting FAQ:  
> > > http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
> > > Archives:  
> > > http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp
> > > To unsubscribe:
> > > mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > 
> > > 
> > 
> > 
> > __
> > Do You Yahoo!?
> > Yahoo! - Official partner of 2002 FIFA World Cup
> > http://fifaworldcup.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]
> > 
> > 
> >
>
**
> > This email is not an official statement of the
> > Waikato
> > Regional Council unless otherwise stated.
> > Visit our website http://www.ew.govt.nz
> >
>
**
> > 
> > 
> >
>

RE: Archive

[Thomas Di Nardo]

Friggin' Lyris!

Great to have you back Ed!

-Original Message-
From: Ed Crowley [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: Tuesday, May 28, 2002 7:34 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Archive

I think we agree, more or less.  I don't believe that
e-mail administrators are the best ones to decide what
information to keep or delete and for how long.  I
also happen to think that lawyers aren't either.  My
point is that document retention policies, as with
many other policies like service level agreements,
aren't based on sound business decisions, but instead
are based upon fear.

Ed Crowley
hp Services

--- David Florea <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> Users are always free to maintain whatever e-mails
> or files they want, and it's our job to help them do
> just that.  If they determine a file should be
> deleted, then we help them do that too.  That's not
> hiding anything, that's just good and efficient
> practice.  And I wouldn't think you're trying to put
> us admins in a different policy-making arena than
> that.  If you're talking about intentional
> destruction of evidence in a legal matter, that's
> different, and I agree with you.
> 
> 
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: Ed Crowley [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Tuesday, May 28, 2002 2:59 PM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: RE: Archive
> 
> 
> As I've always said, document retention will benefit
> those organizations who act ethically.  I don't
> think
> it makes sense to destroy all your evidence when
> those
> with an axe to grind keep all theirs.  Those with
> nothing to hide shouldn't be hiding it.
> 
> Ed Crowley
> hp Services
> 
> --- Dean Cunningham <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
> > Ed, as usual, is correct.
> > 
> > Depends what the risk is to people making binding
> > commitments via email that
> > may cost the company $$$.
> > Email here is considered a public record (as
> > indicated in our email policy).
> > 
> > Emails are easy to create/modify by the other
> party.
> > Having an audit trail
> > of mails sent/received may be of value to your
> > company.
> > 
> > I have every email that has gone through the mail
> > gateway for the last 5
> > years on CD.
> > This process is automated to the point where 18
> > months worth of detail in
> > held in an oracle Db and the only human
> intervention
> > is to write the monthly
> > data on to CD's
> > 
> > This may assist us in any litigation issues, and
> as
> > a public company, we
> > have nothing to hide.
> > 
> > We keep archive tapes back to '89, when we arose
> > from the ashes of about 30
> > public sector organisations
> > 
> > I have has cases of senior managers needing
> e-mails
> > from up to a year old
> > that they had inadvertently deleted ( or told the
> > other party they never
> > received it)
> > 
> > Our litigation processes here are not quickly and
> > extensively used here in
> > NZ, unlike *other* countries.
> > 
> > 
> > cheers
> > Dean
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Ed Crowley [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > Sent: Wednesday, 29 May 2002 5:46 a.m.
> > To: Exchange Discussions
> > Subject: Re: Archive
> > 
> > 
> > Another way to look at it:  What's the worth of
> old
> > e-mail?
> > 
> > Ed Crowley
> > hp Services
> > 
> > --- Tim <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > How long do most of you hold tapes?  We are
> > looking
> > > to establish a
> > > standard on how long to keep tapes in archived
> > > before reintroducing them
> > > back into the tape rotation to be overwritten. 
> I
> > > know there are many
> > > differnent ways to look at this as far as cost
> per
> > > tape, storage space,
> > > legal aspects, and disaster recovery and wanted
> to
> > > know what people
> > > thought was a good period
> > > 
> > >
> >
>
_
> > > List posting FAQ:  
> > > http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
> > > Archives:  
> > > http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp
> > > To unsubscribe:
> > > mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > 
> > > 
> > 
> > 
> > __
> > Do You Yahoo!?
> > Yahoo! - Official partner of 2002 FIFA World Cup
> > http://fifaworldcup.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]
> > 
> > 
> >
>
**
> > This email is not an official statement of the
> > Waikato
> > Regional Council unless otherwise stated.
> > Visit our website http://www.ew.govt.nz
> >
>
**
> > 
> > 
> >
>

RE: Archive

[Thomas Di Nardo]

Friggin' Lyris!

Great to have you back Ed!

-Original Message-
From: Ed Crowley [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: Tuesday, May 28, 2002 7:34 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Archive

I think we agree, more or less.  I don't believe that
e-mail administrators are the best ones to decide what
information to keep or delete and for how long.  I
also happen to think that lawyers aren't either.  My
point is that document retention policies, as with
many other policies like service level agreements,
aren't based on sound business decisions, but instead
are based upon fear.

Ed Crowley
hp Services

--- David Florea <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> Users are always free to maintain whatever e-mails
> or files they want, and it's our job to help them do
> just that.  If they determine a file should be
> deleted, then we help them do that too.  That's not
> hiding anything, that's just good and efficient
> practice.  And I wouldn't think you're trying to put
> us admins in a different policy-making arena than
> that.  If you're talking about intentional
> destruction of evidence in a legal matter, that's
> different, and I agree with you.
> 
> 
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: Ed Crowley [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Tuesday, May 28, 2002 2:59 PM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: RE: Archive
> 
> 
> As I've always said, document retention will benefit
> those organizations who act ethically.  I don't
> think
> it makes sense to destroy all your evidence when
> those
> with an axe to grind keep all theirs.  Those with
> nothing to hide shouldn't be hiding it.
> 
> Ed Crowley
> hp Services
> 
> --- Dean Cunningham <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
> > Ed, as usual, is correct.
> > 
> > Depends what the risk is to people making binding
> > commitments via email that
> > may cost the company $$$.
> > Email here is considered a public record (as
> > indicated in our email policy).
> > 
> > Emails are easy to create/modify by the other
> party.
> > Having an audit trail
> > of mails sent/received may be of value to your
> > company.
> > 
> > I have every email that has gone through the mail
> > gateway for the last 5
> > years on CD.
> > This process is automated to the point where 18
> > months worth of detail in
> > held in an oracle Db and the only human
> intervention
> > is to write the monthly
> > data on to CD's
> > 
> > This may assist us in any litigation issues, and
> as
> > a public company, we
> > have nothing to hide.
> > 
> > We keep archive tapes back to '89, when we arose
> > from the ashes of about 30
> > public sector organisations
> > 
> > I have has cases of senior managers needing
> e-mails
> > from up to a year old
> > that they had inadvertently deleted ( or told the
> > other party they never
> > received it)
> > 
> > Our litigation processes here are not quickly and
> > extensively used here in
> > NZ, unlike *other* countries.
> > 
> > 
> > cheers
> > Dean
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Ed Crowley [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > Sent: Wednesday, 29 May 2002 5:46 a.m.
> > To: Exchange Discussions
> > Subject: Re: Archive
> > 
> > 
> > Another way to look at it:  What's the worth of
> old
> > e-mail?
> > 
> > Ed Crowley
> > hp Services
> > 
> > --- Tim <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > How long do most of you hold tapes?  We are
> > looking
> > > to establish a
> > > standard on how long to keep tapes in archived
> > > before reintroducing them
> > > back into the tape rotation to be overwritten. 
> I
> > > know there are many
> > > differnent ways to look at this as far as cost
> per
> > > tape, storage space,
> > > legal aspects, and disaster recovery and wanted
> to
> > > know what people
> > > thought was a good period
> > > 
> > >
> >
>
_
> > > List posting FAQ:  
> > > http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
> > > Archives:  
> > > http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp
> > > To unsubscribe:
> > > mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > 
> > > 
> > 
> > 
> > __
> > Do You Yahoo!?
> > Yahoo! - Official partner of 2002 FIFA World Cup
> > http://fifaworldcup.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]
> > 
> > 
> >
>
**
> > This email is not an official statement of the
> > Waikato
> > Regional Council unless otherwise stated.
> > Visit our website http://www.ew.govt.nz
> >
>
**
> > 
> > 
> >
>

RE: Archive

[Thomas Di Nardo]

Friggin' Lyris!

Great to have you back Ed!

-Original Message-
From: Ed Crowley [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: Tuesday, May 28, 2002 7:34 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Archive

I think we agree, more or less.  I don't believe that
e-mail administrators are the best ones to decide what
information to keep or delete and for how long.  I
also happen to think that lawyers aren't either.  My
point is that document retention policies, as with
many other policies like service level agreements,
aren't based on sound business decisions, but instead
are based upon fear.

Ed Crowley
hp Services

--- David Florea <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> Users are always free to maintain whatever e-mails
> or files they want, and it's our job to help them do
> just that.  If they determine a file should be
> deleted, then we help them do that too.  That's not
> hiding anything, that's just good and efficient
> practice.  And I wouldn't think you're trying to put
> us admins in a different policy-making arena than
> that.  If you're talking about intentional
> destruction of evidence in a legal matter, that's
> different, and I agree with you.
> 
> 
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: Ed Crowley [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Tuesday, May 28, 2002 2:59 PM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: RE: Archive
> 
> 
> As I've always said, document retention will benefit
> those organizations who act ethically.  I don't
> think
> it makes sense to destroy all your evidence when
> those
> with an axe to grind keep all theirs.  Those with
> nothing to hide shouldn't be hiding it.
> 
> Ed Crowley
> hp Services
> 
> --- Dean Cunningham <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
> > Ed, as usual, is correct.
> > 
> > Depends what the risk is to people making binding
> > commitments via email that
> > may cost the company $$$.
> > Email here is considered a public record (as
> > indicated in our email policy).
> > 
> > Emails are easy to create/modify by the other
> party.
> > Having an audit trail
> > of mails sent/received may be of value to your
> > company.
> > 
> > I have every email that has gone through the mail
> > gateway for the last 5
> > years on CD.
> > This process is automated to the point where 18
> > months worth of detail in
> > held in an oracle Db and the only human
> intervention
> > is to write the monthly
> > data on to CD's
> > 
> > This may assist us in any litigation issues, and
> as
> > a public company, we
> > have nothing to hide.
> > 
> > We keep archive tapes back to '89, when we arose
> > from the ashes of about 30
> > public sector organisations
> > 
> > I have has cases of senior managers needing
> e-mails
> > from up to a year old
> > that they had inadvertently deleted ( or told the
> > other party they never
> > received it)
> > 
> > Our litigation processes here are not quickly and
> > extensively used here in
> > NZ, unlike *other* countries.
> > 
> > 
> > cheers
> > Dean
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Ed Crowley [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > Sent: Wednesday, 29 May 2002 5:46 a.m.
> > To: Exchange Discussions
> > Subject: Re: Archive
> > 
> > 
> > Another way to look at it:  What's the worth of
> old
> > e-mail?
> > 
> > Ed Crowley
> > hp Services
> > 
> > --- Tim <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > How long do most of you hold tapes?  We are
> > looking
> > > to establish a
> > > standard on how long to keep tapes in archived
> > > before reintroducing them
> > > back into the tape rotation to be overwritten. 
> I
> > > know there are many
> > > differnent ways to look at this as far as cost
> per
> > > tape, storage space,
> > > legal aspects, and disaster recovery and wanted
> to
> > > know what people
> > > thought was a good period
> > > 
> > >
> >
>
_
> > > List posting FAQ:  
> > > http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
> > > Archives:  
> > > http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp
> > > To unsubscribe:
> > > mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > 
> > > 
> > 
> > 
> > __
> > Do You Yahoo!?
> > Yahoo! - Official partner of 2002 FIFA World Cup
> > http://fifaworldcup.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]
> > 
> > 
> >
>
**
> > This email is not an official statement of the
> > Waikato
> > Regional Council unless otherwise stated.
> > Visit our website http://www.ew.govt.nz
> >
>
**
> > 
> > 
> >
>

RE: Archive

[Thomas Di Nardo]

Friggin' Lyris!

Great to have you back Ed!

-Original Message-
From: Ed Crowley [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: Tuesday, May 28, 2002 7:34 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Archive

I think we agree, more or less.  I don't believe that
e-mail administrators are the best ones to decide what
information to keep or delete and for how long.  I
also happen to think that lawyers aren't either.  My
point is that document retention policies, as with
many other policies like service level agreements,
aren't based on sound business decisions, but instead
are based upon fear.

Ed Crowley
hp Services

--- David Florea <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> Users are always free to maintain whatever e-mails
> or files they want, and it's our job to help them do
> just that.  If they determine a file should be
> deleted, then we help them do that too.  That's not
> hiding anything, that's just good and efficient
> practice.  And I wouldn't think you're trying to put
> us admins in a different policy-making arena than
> that.  If you're talking about intentional
> destruction of evidence in a legal matter, that's
> different, and I agree with you.
> 
> 
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: Ed Crowley [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Tuesday, May 28, 2002 2:59 PM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: RE: Archive
> 
> 
> As I've always said, document retention will benefit
> those organizations who act ethically.  I don't
> think
> it makes sense to destroy all your evidence when
> those
> with an axe to grind keep all theirs.  Those with
> nothing to hide shouldn't be hiding it.
> 
> Ed Crowley
> hp Services
> 
> --- Dean Cunningham <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
> > Ed, as usual, is correct.
> > 
> > Depends what the risk is to people making binding
> > commitments via email that
> > may cost the company $$$.
> > Email here is considered a public record (as
> > indicated in our email policy).
> > 
> > Emails are easy to create/modify by the other
> party.
> > Having an audit trail
> > of mails sent/received may be of value to your
> > company.
> > 
> > I have every email that has gone through the mail
> > gateway for the last 5
> > years on CD.
> > This process is automated to the point where 18
> > months worth of detail in
> > held in an oracle Db and the only human
> intervention
> > is to write the monthly
> > data on to CD's
> > 
> > This may assist us in any litigation issues, and
> as
> > a public company, we
> > have nothing to hide.
> > 
> > We keep archive tapes back to '89, when we arose
> > from the ashes of about 30
> > public sector organisations
> > 
> > I have has cases of senior managers needing
> e-mails
> > from up to a year old
> > that they had inadvertently deleted ( or told the
> > other party they never
> > received it)
> > 
> > Our litigation processes here are not quickly and
> > extensively used here in
> > NZ, unlike *other* countries.
> > 
> > 
> > cheers
> > Dean
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Ed Crowley [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > Sent: Wednesday, 29 May 2002 5:46 a.m.
> > To: Exchange Discussions
> > Subject: Re: Archive
> > 
> > 
> > Another way to look at it:  What's the worth of
> old
> > e-mail?
> > 
> > Ed Crowley
> > hp Services
> > 
> > --- Tim <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > How long do most of you hold tapes?  We are
> > looking
> > > to establish a
> > > standard on how long to keep tapes in archived
> > > before reintroducing them
> > > back into the tape rotation to be overwritten. 
> I
> > > know there are many
> > > differnent ways to look at this as far as cost
> per
> > > tape, storage space,
> > > legal aspects, and disaster recovery and wanted
> to
> > > know what people
> > > thought was a good period
> > > 
> > >
> >
>
_
> > > List posting FAQ:  
> > > http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
> > > Archives:  
> > > http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp
> > > To unsubscribe:
> > > mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > 
> > > 
> > 
> > 
> > __
> > Do You Yahoo!?
> > Yahoo! - Official partner of 2002 FIFA World Cup
> > http://fifaworldcup.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]
> > 
> > 
> >
>
**
> > This email is not an official statement of the
> > Waikato
> > Regional Council unless otherwise stated.
> > Visit our website http://www.ew.govt.nz
> >
>
**
> > 
> > 
> >
>

RE: Archive

[Thomas Di Nardo]

Friggin' Lyris!

Great to have you back Ed!

-Original Message-
From: Ed Crowley [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: Tuesday, May 28, 2002 7:34 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Archive

I think we agree, more or less.  I don't believe that
e-mail administrators are the best ones to decide what
information to keep or delete and for how long.  I
also happen to think that lawyers aren't either.  My
point is that document retention policies, as with
many other policies like service level agreements,
aren't based on sound business decisions, but instead
are based upon fear.

Ed Crowley
hp Services

--- David Florea <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> Users are always free to maintain whatever e-mails
> or files they want, and it's our job to help them do
> just that.  If they determine a file should be
> deleted, then we help them do that too.  That's not
> hiding anything, that's just good and efficient
> practice.  And I wouldn't think you're trying to put
> us admins in a different policy-making arena than
> that.  If you're talking about intentional
> destruction of evidence in a legal matter, that's
> different, and I agree with you.
> 
> 
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: Ed Crowley [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Tuesday, May 28, 2002 2:59 PM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: RE: Archive
> 
> 
> As I've always said, document retention will benefit
> those organizations who act ethically.  I don't
> think
> it makes sense to destroy all your evidence when
> those
> with an axe to grind keep all theirs.  Those with
> nothing to hide shouldn't be hiding it.
> 
> Ed Crowley
> hp Services
> 
> --- Dean Cunningham <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
> > Ed, as usual, is correct.
> > 
> > Depends what the risk is to people making binding
> > commitments via email that
> > may cost the company $$$.
> > Email here is considered a public record (as
> > indicated in our email policy).
> > 
> > Emails are easy to create/modify by the other
> party.
> > Having an audit trail
> > of mails sent/received may be of value to your
> > company.
> > 
> > I have every email that has gone through the mail
> > gateway for the last 5
> > years on CD.
> > This process is automated to the point where 18
> > months worth of detail in
> > held in an oracle Db and the only human
> intervention
> > is to write the monthly
> > data on to CD's
> > 
> > This may assist us in any litigation issues, and
> as
> > a public company, we
> > have nothing to hide.
> > 
> > We keep archive tapes back to '89, when we arose
> > from the ashes of about 30
> > public sector organisations
> > 
> > I have has cases of senior managers needing
> e-mails
> > from up to a year old
> > that they had inadvertently deleted ( or told the
> > other party they never
> > received it)
> > 
> > Our litigation processes here are not quickly and
> > extensively used here in
> > NZ, unlike *other* countries.
> > 
> > 
> > cheers
> > Dean
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Ed Crowley [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > Sent: Wednesday, 29 May 2002 5:46 a.m.
> > To: Exchange Discussions
> > Subject: Re: Archive
> > 
> > 
> > Another way to look at it:  What's the worth of
> old
> > e-mail?
> > 
> > Ed Crowley
> > hp Services
> > 
> > --- Tim <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > How long do most of you hold tapes?  We are
> > looking
> > > to establish a
> > > standard on how long to keep tapes in archived
> > > before reintroducing them
> > > back into the tape rotation to be overwritten. 
> I
> > > know there are many
> > > differnent ways to look at this as far as cost
> per
> > > tape, storage space,
> > > legal aspects, and disaster recovery and wanted
> to
> > > know what people
> > > thought was a good period
> > > 
> > >
> >
>
_
> > > List posting FAQ:  
> > > http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
> > > Archives:  
> > > http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp
> > > To unsubscribe:
> > > mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > 
> > > 
> > 
> > 
> > __
> > Do You Yahoo!?
> > Yahoo! - Official partner of 2002 FIFA World Cup
> > http://fifaworldcup.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]
> > 
> > 
> >
>
**
> > This email is not an official statement of the
> > Waikato
> > Regional Council unless otherwise stated.
> > Visit our website http://www.ew.govt.nz
> >
>
**
> > 
> > 
> >
>

RE: Archive

[Thomas Di Nardo]

Friggin' Lyris!

Great to have you back Ed!

-Original Message-
From: Ed Crowley [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: Tuesday, May 28, 2002 7:34 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Archive

I think we agree, more or less.  I don't believe that
e-mail administrators are the best ones to decide what
information to keep or delete and for how long.  I
also happen to think that lawyers aren't either.  My
point is that document retention policies, as with
many other policies like service level agreements,
aren't based on sound business decisions, but instead
are based upon fear.

Ed Crowley
hp Services

--- David Florea <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> Users are always free to maintain whatever e-mails
> or files they want, and it's our job to help them do
> just that.  If they determine a file should be
> deleted, then we help them do that too.  That's not
> hiding anything, that's just good and efficient
> practice.  And I wouldn't think you're trying to put
> us admins in a different policy-making arena than
> that.  If you're talking about intentional
> destruction of evidence in a legal matter, that's
> different, and I agree with you.
> 
> 
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: Ed Crowley [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Tuesday, May 28, 2002 2:59 PM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: RE: Archive
> 
> 
> As I've always said, document retention will benefit
> those organizations who act ethically.  I don't
> think
> it makes sense to destroy all your evidence when
> those
> with an axe to grind keep all theirs.  Those with
> nothing to hide shouldn't be hiding it.
> 
> Ed Crowley
> hp Services
> 
> --- Dean Cunningham <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
> > Ed, as usual, is correct.
> > 
> > Depends what the risk is to people making binding
> > commitments via email that
> > may cost the company $$$.
> > Email here is considered a public record (as
> > indicated in our email policy).
> > 
> > Emails are easy to create/modify by the other
> party.
> > Having an audit trail
> > of mails sent/received may be of value to your
> > company.
> > 
> > I have every email that has gone through the mail
> > gateway for the last 5
> > years on CD.
> > This process is automated to the point where 18
> > months worth of detail in
> > held in an oracle Db and the only human
> intervention
> > is to write the monthly
> > data on to CD's
> > 
> > This may assist us in any litigation issues, and
> as
> > a public company, we
> > have nothing to hide.
> > 
> > We keep archive tapes back to '89, when we arose
> > from the ashes of about 30
> > public sector organisations
> > 
> > I have has cases of senior managers needing
> e-mails
> > from up to a year old
> > that they had inadvertently deleted ( or told the
> > other party they never
> > received it)
> > 
> > Our litigation processes here are not quickly and
> > extensively used here in
> > NZ, unlike *other* countries.
> > 
> > 
> > cheers
> > Dean
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Ed Crowley [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > Sent: Wednesday, 29 May 2002 5:46 a.m.
> > To: Exchange Discussions
> > Subject: Re: Archive
> > 
> > 
> > Another way to look at it:  What's the worth of
> old
> > e-mail?
> > 
> > Ed Crowley
> > hp Services
> > 
> > --- Tim <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > How long do most of you hold tapes?  We are
> > looking
> > > to establish a
> > > standard on how long to keep tapes in archived
> > > before reintroducing them
> > > back into the tape rotation to be overwritten. 
> I
> > > know there are many
> > > differnent ways to look at this as far as cost
> per
> > > tape, storage space,
> > > legal aspects, and disaster recovery and wanted
> to
> > > know what people
> > > thought was a good period
> > > 
> > >
> >
>
_
> > > List posting FAQ:  
> > > http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
> > > Archives:  
> > > http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp
> > > To unsubscribe:
> > > mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > 
> > > 
> > 
> > 
> > __
> > Do You Yahoo!?
> > Yahoo! - Official partner of 2002 FIFA World Cup
> > http://fifaworldcup.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]
> > 
> > 
> >
>
**
> > This email is not an official statement of the
> > Waikato
> > Regional Council unless otherwise stated.
> > Visit our website http://www.ew.govt.nz
> >
>
**
> > 
> > 
> >
>

RE: Archive

[Thomas Di Nardo]

Friggin' Lyris!

Great to have you back Ed!

-Original Message-
From: Ed Crowley [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: Tuesday, May 28, 2002 7:34 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Archive

I think we agree, more or less.  I don't believe that
e-mail administrators are the best ones to decide what
information to keep or delete and for how long.  I
also happen to think that lawyers aren't either.  My
point is that document retention policies, as with
many other policies like service level agreements,
aren't based on sound business decisions, but instead
are based upon fear.

Ed Crowley
hp Services

--- David Florea <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> Users are always free to maintain whatever e-mails
> or files they want, and it's our job to help them do
> just that.  If they determine a file should be
> deleted, then we help them do that too.  That's not
> hiding anything, that's just good and efficient
> practice.  And I wouldn't think you're trying to put
> us admins in a different policy-making arena than
> that.  If you're talking about intentional
> destruction of evidence in a legal matter, that's
> different, and I agree with you.
> 
> 
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: Ed Crowley [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Tuesday, May 28, 2002 2:59 PM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: RE: Archive
> 
> 
> As I've always said, document retention will benefit
> those organizations who act ethically.  I don't
> think
> it makes sense to destroy all your evidence when
> those
> with an axe to grind keep all theirs.  Those with
> nothing to hide shouldn't be hiding it.
> 
> Ed Crowley
> hp Services
> 
> --- Dean Cunningham <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
> > Ed, as usual, is correct.
> > 
> > Depends what the risk is to people making binding
> > commitments via email that
> > may cost the company $$$.
> > Email here is considered a public record (as
> > indicated in our email policy).
> > 
> > Emails are easy to create/modify by the other
> party.
> > Having an audit trail
> > of mails sent/received may be of value to your
> > company.
> > 
> > I have every email that has gone through the mail
> > gateway for the last 5
> > years on CD.
> > This process is automated to the point where 18
> > months worth of detail in
> > held in an oracle Db and the only human
> intervention
> > is to write the monthly
> > data on to CD's
> > 
> > This may assist us in any litigation issues, and
> as
> > a public company, we
> > have nothing to hide.
> > 
> > We keep archive tapes back to '89, when we arose
> > from the ashes of about 30
> > public sector organisations
> > 
> > I have has cases of senior managers needing
> e-mails
> > from up to a year old
> > that they had inadvertently deleted ( or told the
> > other party they never
> > received it)
> > 
> > Our litigation processes here are not quickly and
> > extensively used here in
> > NZ, unlike *other* countries.
> > 
> > 
> > cheers
> > Dean
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Ed Crowley [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > Sent: Wednesday, 29 May 2002 5:46 a.m.
> > To: Exchange Discussions
> > Subject: Re: Archive
> > 
> > 
> > Another way to look at it:  What's the worth of
> old
> > e-mail?
> > 
> > Ed Crowley
> > hp Services
> > 
> > --- Tim <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > How long do most of you hold tapes?  We are
> > looking
> > > to establish a
> > > standard on how long to keep tapes in archived
> > > before reintroducing them
> > > back into the tape rotation to be overwritten. 
> I
> > > know there are many
> > > differnent ways to look at this as far as cost
> per
> > > tape, storage space,
> > > legal aspects, and disaster recovery and wanted
> to
> > > know what people
> > > thought was a good period
> > > 
> > >
> >
>
_
> > > List posting FAQ:  
> > > http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
> > > Archives:  
> > > http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp
> > > To unsubscribe:
> > > mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > 
> > > 
> > 
> > 
> > __
> > Do You Yahoo!?
> > Yahoo! - Official partner of 2002 FIFA World Cup
> > http://fifaworldcup.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]
> > 
> > 
> >
>
**
> > This email is not an official statement of the
> > Waikato
> > Regional Council unless otherwise stated.
> > Visit our website http://www.ew.govt.nz
> >
>
**
> > 
> > 
> >
>

RE: Archive

[Thomas Di Nardo]

Friggin' Lyris!

Great to have you back Ed!

-Original Message-
From: Ed Crowley [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: Tuesday, May 28, 2002 7:34 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Archive

I think we agree, more or less.  I don't believe that
e-mail administrators are the best ones to decide what
information to keep or delete and for how long.  I
also happen to think that lawyers aren't either.  My
point is that document retention policies, as with
many other policies like service level agreements,
aren't based on sound business decisions, but instead
are based upon fear.

Ed Crowley
hp Services

--- David Florea <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> Users are always free to maintain whatever e-mails
> or files they want, and it's our job to help them do
> just that.  If they determine a file should be
> deleted, then we help them do that too.  That's not
> hiding anything, that's just good and efficient
> practice.  And I wouldn't think you're trying to put
> us admins in a different policy-making arena than
> that.  If you're talking about intentional
> destruction of evidence in a legal matter, that's
> different, and I agree with you.
> 
> 
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: Ed Crowley [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Tuesday, May 28, 2002 2:59 PM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: RE: Archive
> 
> 
> As I've always said, document retention will benefit
> those organizations who act ethically.  I don't
> think
> it makes sense to destroy all your evidence when
> those
> with an axe to grind keep all theirs.  Those with
> nothing to hide shouldn't be hiding it.
> 
> Ed Crowley
> hp Services
> 
> --- Dean Cunningham <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
> > Ed, as usual, is correct.
> > 
> > Depends what the risk is to people making binding
> > commitments via email that
> > may cost the company $$$.
> > Email here is considered a public record (as
> > indicated in our email policy).
> > 
> > Emails are easy to create/modify by the other
> party.
> > Having an audit trail
> > of mails sent/received may be of value to your
> > company.
> > 
> > I have every email that has gone through the mail
> > gateway for the last 5
> > years on CD.
> > This process is automated to the point where 18
> > months worth of detail in
> > held in an oracle Db and the only human
> intervention
> > is to write the monthly
> > data on to CD's
> > 
> > This may assist us in any litigation issues, and
> as
> > a public company, we
> > have nothing to hide.
> > 
> > We keep archive tapes back to '89, when we arose
> > from the ashes of about 30
> > public sector organisations
> > 
> > I have has cases of senior managers needing
> e-mails
> > from up to a year old
> > that they had inadvertently deleted ( or told the
> > other party they never
> > received it)
> > 
> > Our litigation processes here are not quickly and
> > extensively used here in
> > NZ, unlike *other* countries.
> > 
> > 
> > cheers
> > Dean
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Ed Crowley [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > Sent: Wednesday, 29 May 2002 5:46 a.m.
> > To: Exchange Discussions
> > Subject: Re: Archive
> > 
> > 
> > Another way to look at it:  What's the worth of
> old
> > e-mail?
> > 
> > Ed Crowley
> > hp Services
> > 
> > --- Tim <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > How long do most of you hold tapes?  We are
> > looking
> > > to establish a
> > > standard on how long to keep tapes in archived
> > > before reintroducing them
> > > back into the tape rotation to be overwritten. 
> I
> > > know there are many
> > > differnent ways to look at this as far as cost
> per
> > > tape, storage space,
> > > legal aspects, and disaster recovery and wanted
> to
> > > know what people
> > > thought was a good period
> > > 
> > >
> >
>
_
> > > List posting FAQ:  
> > > http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
> > > Archives:  
> > > http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp
> > > To unsubscribe:
> > > mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > 
> > > 
> > 
> > 
> > __
> > Do You Yahoo!?
> > Yahoo! - Official partner of 2002 FIFA World Cup
> > http://fifaworldcup.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]
> > 
> > 
> >
>
**
> > This email is not an official statement of the
> > Waikato
> > Regional Council unless otherwise stated.
> > Visit our website http://www.ew.govt.nz
> >
>
**
> > 
> > 
> >
>

RE: Archive

[Thomas Di Nardo]

Friggin' Lyris!

Great to have you back Ed!

-Original Message-
From: Ed Crowley [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: Tuesday, May 28, 2002 7:34 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Archive

I think we agree, more or less.  I don't believe that
e-mail administrators are the best ones to decide what
information to keep or delete and for how long.  I
also happen to think that lawyers aren't either.  My
point is that document retention policies, as with
many other policies like service level agreements,
aren't based on sound business decisions, but instead
are based upon fear.

Ed Crowley
hp Services

--- David Florea <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> Users are always free to maintain whatever e-mails
> or files they want, and it's our job to help them do
> just that.  If they determine a file should be
> deleted, then we help them do that too.  That's not
> hiding anything, that's just good and efficient
> practice.  And I wouldn't think you're trying to put
> us admins in a different policy-making arena than
> that.  If you're talking about intentional
> destruction of evidence in a legal matter, that's
> different, and I agree with you.
> 
> 
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: Ed Crowley [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Tuesday, May 28, 2002 2:59 PM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: RE: Archive
> 
> 
> As I've always said, document retention will benefit
> those organizations who act ethically.  I don't
> think
> it makes sense to destroy all your evidence when
> those
> with an axe to grind keep all theirs.  Those with
> nothing to hide shouldn't be hiding it.
> 
> Ed Crowley
> hp Services
> 
> --- Dean Cunningham <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
> > Ed, as usual, is correct.
> > 
> > Depends what the risk is to people making binding
> > commitments via email that
> > may cost the company $$$.
> > Email here is considered a public record (as
> > indicated in our email policy).
> > 
> > Emails are easy to create/modify by the other
> party.
> > Having an audit trail
> > of mails sent/received may be of value to your
> > company.
> > 
> > I have every email that has gone through the mail
> > gateway for the last 5
> > years on CD.
> > This process is automated to the point where 18
> > months worth of detail in
> > held in an oracle Db and the only human
> intervention
> > is to write the monthly
> > data on to CD's
> > 
> > This may assist us in any litigation issues, and
> as
> > a public company, we
> > have nothing to hide.
> > 
> > We keep archive tapes back to '89, when we arose
> > from the ashes of about 30
> > public sector organisations
> > 
> > I have has cases of senior managers needing
> e-mails
> > from up to a year old
> > that they had inadvertently deleted ( or told the
> > other party they never
> > received it)
> > 
> > Our litigation processes here are not quickly and
> > extensively used here in
> > NZ, unlike *other* countries.
> > 
> > 
> > cheers
> > Dean
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Ed Crowley [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > Sent: Wednesday, 29 May 2002 5:46 a.m.
> > To: Exchange Discussions
> > Subject: Re: Archive
> > 
> > 
> > Another way to look at it:  What's the worth of
> old
> > e-mail?
> > 
> > Ed Crowley
> > hp Services
> > 
> > --- Tim <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > How long do most of you hold tapes?  We are
> > looking
> > > to establish a
> > > standard on how long to keep tapes in archived
> > > before reintroducing them
> > > back into the tape rotation to be overwritten. 
> I
> > > know there are many
> > > differnent ways to look at this as far as cost
> per
> > > tape, storage space,
> > > legal aspects, and disaster recovery and wanted
> to
> > > know what people
> > > thought was a good period
> > > 
> > >
> >
>
_
> > > List posting FAQ:  
> > > http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
> > > Archives:  
> > > http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp
> > > To unsubscribe:
> > > mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > 
> > > 
> > 
> > 
> > __
> > Do You Yahoo!?
> > Yahoo! - Official partner of 2002 FIFA World Cup
> > http://fifaworldcup.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]
> > 
> > 
> >
>
**
> > This email is not an official statement of the
> > Waikato
> > Regional Council unless otherwise stated.
> > Visit our website http://www.ew.govt.nz
> >
>
**
> > 
> > 
> >
>

RE: Archive

[Thomas Di Nardo]

Friggin' Lyris!

Great to have you back Ed!

-Original Message-
From: Ed Crowley [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: Tuesday, May 28, 2002 7:34 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Archive

I think we agree, more or less.  I don't believe that
e-mail administrators are the best ones to decide what
information to keep or delete and for how long.  I
also happen to think that lawyers aren't either.  My
point is that document retention policies, as with
many other policies like service level agreements,
aren't based on sound business decisions, but instead
are based upon fear.

Ed Crowley
hp Services

--- David Florea <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> Users are always free to maintain whatever e-mails
> or files they want, and it's our job to help them do
> just that.  If they determine a file should be
> deleted, then we help them do that too.  That's not
> hiding anything, that's just good and efficient
> practice.  And I wouldn't think you're trying to put
> us admins in a different policy-making arena than
> that.  If you're talking about intentional
> destruction of evidence in a legal matter, that's
> different, and I agree with you.
> 
> 
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: Ed Crowley [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Tuesday, May 28, 2002 2:59 PM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: RE: Archive
> 
> 
> As I've always said, document retention will benefit
> those organizations who act ethically.  I don't
> think
> it makes sense to destroy all your evidence when
> those
> with an axe to grind keep all theirs.  Those with
> nothing to hide shouldn't be hiding it.
> 
> Ed Crowley
> hp Services
> 
> --- Dean Cunningham <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
> > Ed, as usual, is correct.
> > 
> > Depends what the risk is to people making binding
> > commitments via email that
> > may cost the company $$$.
> > Email here is considered a public record (as
> > indicated in our email policy).
> > 
> > Emails are easy to create/modify by the other
> party.
> > Having an audit trail
> > of mails sent/received may be of value to your
> > company.
> > 
> > I have every email that has gone through the mail
> > gateway for the last 5
> > years on CD.
> > This process is automated to the point where 18
> > months worth of detail in
> > held in an oracle Db and the only human
> intervention
> > is to write the monthly
> > data on to CD's
> > 
> > This may assist us in any litigation issues, and
> as
> > a public company, we
> > have nothing to hide.
> > 
> > We keep archive tapes back to '89, when we arose
> > from the ashes of about 30
> > public sector organisations
> > 
> > I have has cases of senior managers needing
> e-mails
> > from up to a year old
> > that they had inadvertently deleted ( or told the
> > other party they never
> > received it)
> > 
> > Our litigation processes here are not quickly and
> > extensively used here in
> > NZ, unlike *other* countries.
> > 
> > 
> > cheers
> > Dean
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Ed Crowley [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > Sent: Wednesday, 29 May 2002 5:46 a.m.
> > To: Exchange Discussions
> > Subject: Re: Archive
> > 
> > 
> > Another way to look at it:  What's the worth of
> old
> > e-mail?
> > 
> > Ed Crowley
> > hp Services
> > 
> > --- Tim <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > How long do most of you hold tapes?  We are
> > looking
> > > to establish a
> > > standard on how long to keep tapes in archived
> > > before reintroducing them
> > > back into the tape rotation to be overwritten. 
> I
> > > know there are many
> > > differnent ways to look at this as far as cost
> per
> > > tape, storage space,
> > > legal aspects, and disaster recovery and wanted
> to
> > > know what people
> > > thought was a good period
> > > 
> > >
> >
>
_
> > > List posting FAQ:  
> > > http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
> > > Archives:  
> > > http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp
> > > To unsubscribe:
> > > mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > 
> > > 
> > 
> > 
> > __
> > Do You Yahoo!?
> > Yahoo! - Official partner of 2002 FIFA World Cup
> > http://fifaworldcup.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]
> > 
> > 
> >
>
**
> > This email is not an official statement of the
> > Waikato
> > Regional Council unless otherwise stated.
> > Visit our website http://www.ew.govt.nz
> >
>
**
> > 
> > 
> >
>

RE: Archive

[Thomas Di Nardo]

Friggin' Lyris!

Great to have you back Ed!

-Original Message-
From: Ed Crowley [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: Tuesday, May 28, 2002 7:34 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Archive

I think we agree, more or less.  I don't believe that
e-mail administrators are the best ones to decide what
information to keep or delete and for how long.  I
also happen to think that lawyers aren't either.  My
point is that document retention policies, as with
many other policies like service level agreements,
aren't based on sound business decisions, but instead
are based upon fear.

Ed Crowley
hp Services

--- David Florea <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> Users are always free to maintain whatever e-mails
> or files they want, and it's our job to help them do
> just that.  If they determine a file should be
> deleted, then we help them do that too.  That's not
> hiding anything, that's just good and efficient
> practice.  And I wouldn't think you're trying to put
> us admins in a different policy-making arena than
> that.  If you're talking about intentional
> destruction of evidence in a legal matter, that's
> different, and I agree with you.
> 
> 
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: Ed Crowley [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Tuesday, May 28, 2002 2:59 PM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: RE: Archive
> 
> 
> As I've always said, document retention will benefit
> those organizations who act ethically.  I don't
> think
> it makes sense to destroy all your evidence when
> those
> with an axe to grind keep all theirs.  Those with
> nothing to hide shouldn't be hiding it.
> 
> Ed Crowley
> hp Services
> 
> --- Dean Cunningham <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
> > Ed, as usual, is correct.
> > 
> > Depends what the risk is to people making binding
> > commitments via email that
> > may cost the company $$$.
> > Email here is considered a public record (as
> > indicated in our email policy).
> > 
> > Emails are easy to create/modify by the other
> party.
> > Having an audit trail
> > of mails sent/received may be of value to your
> > company.
> > 
> > I have every email that has gone through the mail
> > gateway for the last 5
> > years on CD.
> > This process is automated to the point where 18
> > months worth of detail in
> > held in an oracle Db and the only human
> intervention
> > is to write the monthly
> > data on to CD's
> > 
> > This may assist us in any litigation issues, and
> as
> > a public company, we
> > have nothing to hide.
> > 
> > We keep archive tapes back to '89, when we arose
> > from the ashes of about 30
> > public sector organisations
> > 
> > I have has cases of senior managers needing
> e-mails
> > from up to a year old
> > that they had inadvertently deleted ( or told the
> > other party they never
> > received it)
> > 
> > Our litigation processes here are not quickly and
> > extensively used here in
> > NZ, unlike *other* countries.
> > 
> > 
> > cheers
> > Dean
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Ed Crowley [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > Sent: Wednesday, 29 May 2002 5:46 a.m.
> > To: Exchange Discussions
> > Subject: Re: Archive
> > 
> > 
> > Another way to look at it:  What's the worth of
> old
> > e-mail?
> > 
> > Ed Crowley
> > hp Services
> > 
> > --- Tim <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > How long do most of you hold tapes?  We are
> > looking
> > > to establish a
> > > standard on how long to keep tapes in archived
> > > before reintroducing them
> > > back into the tape rotation to be overwritten. 
> I
> > > know there are many
> > > differnent ways to look at this as far as cost
> per
> > > tape, storage space,
> > > legal aspects, and disaster recovery and wanted
> to
> > > know what people
> > > thought was a good period
> > > 
> > >
> >
>
_
> > > List posting FAQ:  
> > > http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
> > > Archives:  
> > > http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp
> > > To unsubscribe:
> > > mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > 
> > > 
> > 
> > 
> > __
> > Do You Yahoo!?
> > Yahoo! - Official partner of 2002 FIFA World Cup
> > http://fifaworldcup.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]
> > 
> > 
> >
>
**
> > This email is not an official statement of the
> > Waikato
> > Regional Council unless otherwise stated.
> > Visit our website http://www.ew.govt.nz
> >
>
**
> > 
> > 
> >
>

RE: Archive

[Thomas Di Nardo]

Friggin' Lyris!

Great to have you back Ed!

-Original Message-
From: Ed Crowley [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: Tuesday, May 28, 2002 7:34 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Archive

I think we agree, more or less.  I don't believe that
e-mail administrators are the best ones to decide what
information to keep or delete and for how long.  I
also happen to think that lawyers aren't either.  My
point is that document retention policies, as with
many other policies like service level agreements,
aren't based on sound business decisions, but instead
are based upon fear.

Ed Crowley
hp Services

--- David Florea <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> Users are always free to maintain whatever e-mails
> or files they want, and it's our job to help them do
> just that.  If they determine a file should be
> deleted, then we help them do that too.  That's not
> hiding anything, that's just good and efficient
> practice.  And I wouldn't think you're trying to put
> us admins in a different policy-making arena than
> that.  If you're talking about intentional
> destruction of evidence in a legal matter, that's
> different, and I agree with you.
> 
> 
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: Ed Crowley [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Tuesday, May 28, 2002 2:59 PM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: RE: Archive
> 
> 
> As I've always said, document retention will benefit
> those organizations who act ethically.  I don't
> think
> it makes sense to destroy all your evidence when
> those
> with an axe to grind keep all theirs.  Those with
> nothing to hide shouldn't be hiding it.
> 
> Ed Crowley
> hp Services
> 
> --- Dean Cunningham <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
> > Ed, as usual, is correct.
> > 
> > Depends what the risk is to people making binding
> > commitments via email that
> > may cost the company $$$.
> > Email here is considered a public record (as
> > indicated in our email policy).
> > 
> > Emails are easy to create/modify by the other
> party.
> > Having an audit trail
> > of mails sent/received may be of value to your
> > company.
> > 
> > I have every email that has gone through the mail
> > gateway for the last 5
> > years on CD.
> > This process is automated to the point where 18
> > months worth of detail in
> > held in an oracle Db and the only human
> intervention
> > is to write the monthly
> > data on to CD's
> > 
> > This may assist us in any litigation issues, and
> as
> > a public company, we
> > have nothing to hide.
> > 
> > We keep archive tapes back to '89, when we arose
> > from the ashes of about 30
> > public sector organisations
> > 
> > I have has cases of senior managers needing
> e-mails
> > from up to a year old
> > that they had inadvertently deleted ( or told the
> > other party they never
> > received it)
> > 
> > Our litigation processes here are not quickly and
> > extensively used here in
> > NZ, unlike *other* countries.
> > 
> > 
> > cheers
> > Dean
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Ed Crowley [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > Sent: Wednesday, 29 May 2002 5:46 a.m.
> > To: Exchange Discussions
> > Subject: Re: Archive
> > 
> > 
> > Another way to look at it:  What's the worth of
> old
> > e-mail?
> > 
> > Ed Crowley
> > hp Services
> > 
> > --- Tim <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > How long do most of you hold tapes?  We are
> > looking
> > > to establish a
> > > standard on how long to keep tapes in archived
> > > before reintroducing them
> > > back into the tape rotation to be overwritten. 
> I
> > > know there are many
> > > differnent ways to look at this as far as cost
> per
> > > tape, storage space,
> > > legal aspects, and disaster recovery and wanted
> to
> > > know what people
> > > thought was a good period
> > > 
> > >
> >
>
_
> > > List posting FAQ:  
> > > http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
> > > Archives:  
> > > http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp
> > > To unsubscribe:
> > > mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > 
> > > 
> > 
> > 
> > __
> > Do You Yahoo!?
> > Yahoo! - Official partner of 2002 FIFA World Cup
> > http://fifaworldcup.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]
> > 
> > 
> >
>
**
> > This email is not an official statement of the
> > Waikato
> > Regional Council unless otherwise stated.
> > Visit our website http://www.ew.govt.nz
> >
>
**
> > 
> > 
> >
>

RE: Archive

[Thomas Di Nardo]

Friggin' Lyris!

Great to have you back Ed!

-Original Message-
From: Ed Crowley [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: Tuesday, May 28, 2002 7:34 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Archive

I think we agree, more or less.  I don't believe that
e-mail administrators are the best ones to decide what
information to keep or delete and for how long.  I
also happen to think that lawyers aren't either.  My
point is that document retention policies, as with
many other policies like service level agreements,
aren't based on sound business decisions, but instead
are based upon fear.

Ed Crowley
hp Services

--- David Florea <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> Users are always free to maintain whatever e-mails
> or files they want, and it's our job to help them do
> just that.  If they determine a file should be
> deleted, then we help them do that too.  That's not
> hiding anything, that's just good and efficient
> practice.  And I wouldn't think you're trying to put
> us admins in a different policy-making arena than
> that.  If you're talking about intentional
> destruction of evidence in a legal matter, that's
> different, and I agree with you.
> 
> 
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: Ed Crowley [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Tuesday, May 28, 2002 2:59 PM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: RE: Archive
> 
> 
> As I've always said, document retention will benefit
> those organizations who act ethically.  I don't
> think
> it makes sense to destroy all your evidence when
> those
> with an axe to grind keep all theirs.  Those with
> nothing to hide shouldn't be hiding it.
> 
> Ed Crowley
> hp Services
> 
> --- Dean Cunningham <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
> > Ed, as usual, is correct.
> > 
> > Depends what the risk is to people making binding
> > commitments via email that
> > may cost the company $$$.
> > Email here is considered a public record (as
> > indicated in our email policy).
> > 
> > Emails are easy to create/modify by the other
> party.
> > Having an audit trail
> > of mails sent/received may be of value to your
> > company.
> > 
> > I have every email that has gone through the mail
> > gateway for the last 5
> > years on CD.
> > This process is automated to the point where 18
> > months worth of detail in
> > held in an oracle Db and the only human
> intervention
> > is to write the monthly
> > data on to CD's
> > 
> > This may assist us in any litigation issues, and
> as
> > a public company, we
> > have nothing to hide.
> > 
> > We keep archive tapes back to '89, when we arose
> > from the ashes of about 30
> > public sector organisations
> > 
> > I have has cases of senior managers needing
> e-mails
> > from up to a year old
> > that they had inadvertently deleted ( or told the
> > other party they never
> > received it)
> > 
> > Our litigation processes here are not quickly and
> > extensively used here in
> > NZ, unlike *other* countries.
> > 
> > 
> > cheers
> > Dean
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Ed Crowley [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > Sent: Wednesday, 29 May 2002 5:46 a.m.
> > To: Exchange Discussions
> > Subject: Re: Archive
> > 
> > 
> > Another way to look at it:  What's the worth of
> old
> > e-mail?
> > 
> > Ed Crowley
> > hp Services
> > 
> > --- Tim <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > How long do most of you hold tapes?  We are
> > looking
> > > to establish a
> > > standard on how long to keep tapes in archived
> > > before reintroducing them
> > > back into the tape rotation to be overwritten. 
> I
> > > know there are many
> > > differnent ways to look at this as far as cost
> per
> > > tape, storage space,
> > > legal aspects, and disaster recovery and wanted
> to
> > > know what people
> > > thought was a good period
> > > 
> > >
> >
>
_
> > > List posting FAQ:  
> > > http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
> > > Archives:  
> > > http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp
> > > To unsubscribe:
> > > mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > 
> > > 
> > 
> > 
> > __
> > Do You Yahoo!?
> > Yahoo! - Official partner of 2002 FIFA World Cup
> > http://fifaworldcup.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]
> > 
> > 
> >
>
**
> > This email is not an official statement of the
> > Waikato
> > Regional Council unless otherwise stated.
> > Visit our website http://www.ew.govt.nz
> >
>
**
> > 
> > 
> >
>

RE: Archive

[Thomas Di Nardo]

Friggin' Lyris!

Great to have you back Ed!

-Original Message-
From: Ed Crowley [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: Tuesday, May 28, 2002 7:34 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Archive

I think we agree, more or less.  I don't believe that
e-mail administrators are the best ones to decide what
information to keep or delete and for how long.  I
also happen to think that lawyers aren't either.  My
point is that document retention policies, as with
many other policies like service level agreements,
aren't based on sound business decisions, but instead
are based upon fear.

Ed Crowley
hp Services

--- David Florea <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> Users are always free to maintain whatever e-mails
> or files they want, and it's our job to help them do
> just that.  If they determine a file should be
> deleted, then we help them do that too.  That's not
> hiding anything, that's just good and efficient
> practice.  And I wouldn't think you're trying to put
> us admins in a different policy-making arena than
> that.  If you're talking about intentional
> destruction of evidence in a legal matter, that's
> different, and I agree with you.
> 
> 
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: Ed Crowley [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Tuesday, May 28, 2002 2:59 PM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: RE: Archive
> 
> 
> As I've always said, document retention will benefit
> those organizations who act ethically.  I don't
> think
> it makes sense to destroy all your evidence when
> those
> with an axe to grind keep all theirs.  Those with
> nothing to hide shouldn't be hiding it.
> 
> Ed Crowley
> hp Services
> 
> --- Dean Cunningham <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
> > Ed, as usual, is correct.
> > 
> > Depends what the risk is to people making binding
> > commitments via email that
> > may cost the company $$$.
> > Email here is considered a public record (as
> > indicated in our email policy).
> > 
> > Emails are easy to create/modify by the other
> party.
> > Having an audit trail
> > of mails sent/received may be of value to your
> > company.
> > 
> > I have every email that has gone through the mail
> > gateway for the last 5
> > years on CD.
> > This process is automated to the point where 18
> > months worth of detail in
> > held in an oracle Db and the only human
> intervention
> > is to write the monthly
> > data on to CD's
> > 
> > This may assist us in any litigation issues, and
> as
> > a public company, we
> > have nothing to hide.
> > 
> > We keep archive tapes back to '89, when we arose
> > from the ashes of about 30
> > public sector organisations
> > 
> > I have has cases of senior managers needing
> e-mails
> > from up to a year old
> > that they had inadvertently deleted ( or told the
> > other party they never
> > received it)
> > 
> > Our litigation processes here are not quickly and
> > extensively used here in
> > NZ, unlike *other* countries.
> > 
> > 
> > cheers
> > Dean
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Ed Crowley [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > Sent: Wednesday, 29 May 2002 5:46 a.m.
> > To: Exchange Discussions
> > Subject: Re: Archive
> > 
> > 
> > Another way to look at it:  What's the worth of
> old
> > e-mail?
> > 
> > Ed Crowley
> > hp Services
> > 
> > --- Tim <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > How long do most of you hold tapes?  We are
> > looking
> > > to establish a
> > > standard on how long to keep tapes in archived
> > > before reintroducing them
> > > back into the tape rotation to be overwritten. 
> I
> > > know there are many
> > > differnent ways to look at this as far as cost
> per
> > > tape, storage space,
> > > legal aspects, and disaster recovery and wanted
> to
> > > know what people
> > > thought was a good period
> > > 
> > >
> >
>
_
> > > List posting FAQ:  
> > > http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
> > > Archives:  
> > > http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp
> > > To unsubscribe:
> > > mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > 
> > > 
> > 
> > 
> > __
> > Do You Yahoo!?
> > Yahoo! - Official partner of 2002 FIFA World Cup
> > http://fifaworldcup.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]
> > 
> > 
> >
>
**
> > This email is not an official statement of the
> > Waikato
> > Regional Council unless otherwise stated.
> > Visit our website http://www.ew.govt.nz
> >
>
**
> > 
> > 
> >
>

RE: Archive

[Thomas Di Nardo]

Friggin' Lyris!

Great to have you back Ed!

-Original Message-
From: Ed Crowley [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: Tuesday, May 28, 2002 7:34 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Archive

I think we agree, more or less.  I don't believe that
e-mail administrators are the best ones to decide what
information to keep or delete and for how long.  I
also happen to think that lawyers aren't either.  My
point is that document retention policies, as with
many other policies like service level agreements,
aren't based on sound business decisions, but instead
are based upon fear.

Ed Crowley
hp Services

--- David Florea <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> Users are always free to maintain whatever e-mails
> or files they want, and it's our job to help them do
> just that.  If they determine a file should be
> deleted, then we help them do that too.  That's not
> hiding anything, that's just good and efficient
> practice.  And I wouldn't think you're trying to put
> us admins in a different policy-making arena than
> that.  If you're talking about intentional
> destruction of evidence in a legal matter, that's
> different, and I agree with you.
> 
> 
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: Ed Crowley [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Tuesday, May 28, 2002 2:59 PM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: RE: Archive
> 
> 
> As I've always said, document retention will benefit
> those organizations who act ethically.  I don't
> think
> it makes sense to destroy all your evidence when
> those
> with an axe to grind keep all theirs.  Those with
> nothing to hide shouldn't be hiding it.
> 
> Ed Crowley
> hp Services
> 
> --- Dean Cunningham <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
> > Ed, as usual, is correct.
> > 
> > Depends what the risk is to people making binding
> > commitments via email that
> > may cost the company $$$.
> > Email here is considered a public record (as
> > indicated in our email policy).
> > 
> > Emails are easy to create/modify by the other
> party.
> > Having an audit trail
> > of mails sent/received may be of value to your
> > company.
> > 
> > I have every email that has gone through the mail
> > gateway for the last 5
> > years on CD.
> > This process is automated to the point where 18
> > months worth of detail in
> > held in an oracle Db and the only human
> intervention
> > is to write the monthly
> > data on to CD's
> > 
> > This may assist us in any litigation issues, and
> as
> > a public company, we
> > have nothing to hide.
> > 
> > We keep archive tapes back to '89, when we arose
> > from the ashes of about 30
> > public sector organisations
> > 
> > I have has cases of senior managers needing
> e-mails
> > from up to a year old
> > that they had inadvertently deleted ( or told the
> > other party they never
> > received it)
> > 
> > Our litigation processes here are not quickly and
> > extensively used here in
> > NZ, unlike *other* countries.
> > 
> > 
> > cheers
> > Dean
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Ed Crowley [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > Sent: Wednesday, 29 May 2002 5:46 a.m.
> > To: Exchange Discussions
> > Subject: Re: Archive
> > 
> > 
> > Another way to look at it:  What's the worth of
> old
> > e-mail?
> > 
> > Ed Crowley
> > hp Services
> > 
> > --- Tim <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > How long do most of you hold tapes?  We are
> > looking
> > > to establish a
> > > standard on how long to keep tapes in archived
> > > before reintroducing them
> > > back into the tape rotation to be overwritten. 
> I
> > > know there are many
> > > differnent ways to look at this as far as cost
> per
> > > tape, storage space,
> > > legal aspects, and disaster recovery and wanted
> to
> > > know what people
> > > thought was a good period
> > > 
> > >
> >
>
_
> > > List posting FAQ:  
> > > http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
> > > Archives:  
> > > http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp
> > > To unsubscribe:
> > > mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > 
> > > 
> > 
> > 
> > __
> > Do You Yahoo!?
> > Yahoo! - Official partner of 2002 FIFA World Cup
> > http://fifaworldcup.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]
> > 
> > 
> >
>
**
> > This email is not an official statement of the
> > Waikato
> > Regional Council unless otherwise stated.
> > Visit our website http://www.ew.govt.nz
> >
>
**
> > 
> > 
> >
>

RE: Archive

[Thomas Di Nardo]

Friggin' Lyris!

Great to have you back Ed!

-Original Message-
From: Ed Crowley [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: Tuesday, May 28, 2002 7:34 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Archive

I think we agree, more or less.  I don't believe that
e-mail administrators are the best ones to decide what
information to keep or delete and for how long.  I
also happen to think that lawyers aren't either.  My
point is that document retention policies, as with
many other policies like service level agreements,
aren't based on sound business decisions, but instead
are based upon fear.

Ed Crowley
hp Services

--- David Florea <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> Users are always free to maintain whatever e-mails
> or files they want, and it's our job to help them do
> just that.  If they determine a file should be
> deleted, then we help them do that too.  That's not
> hiding anything, that's just good and efficient
> practice.  And I wouldn't think you're trying to put
> us admins in a different policy-making arena than
> that.  If you're talking about intentional
> destruction of evidence in a legal matter, that's
> different, and I agree with you.
> 
> 
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: Ed Crowley [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Tuesday, May 28, 2002 2:59 PM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: RE: Archive
> 
> 
> As I've always said, document retention will benefit
> those organizations who act ethically.  I don't
> think
> it makes sense to destroy all your evidence when
> those
> with an axe to grind keep all theirs.  Those with
> nothing to hide shouldn't be hiding it.
> 
> Ed Crowley
> hp Services
> 
> --- Dean Cunningham <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
> > Ed, as usual, is correct.
> > 
> > Depends what the risk is to people making binding
> > commitments via email that
> > may cost the company $$$.
> > Email here is considered a public record (as
> > indicated in our email policy).
> > 
> > Emails are easy to create/modify by the other
> party.
> > Having an audit trail
> > of mails sent/received may be of value to your
> > company.
> > 
> > I have every email that has gone through the mail
> > gateway for the last 5
> > years on CD.
> > This process is automated to the point where 18
> > months worth of detail in
> > held in an oracle Db and the only human
> intervention
> > is to write the monthly
> > data on to CD's
> > 
> > This may assist us in any litigation issues, and
> as
> > a public company, we
> > have nothing to hide.
> > 
> > We keep archive tapes back to '89, when we arose
> > from the ashes of about 30
> > public sector organisations
> > 
> > I have has cases of senior managers needing
> e-mails
> > from up to a year old
> > that they had inadvertently deleted ( or told the
> > other party they never
> > received it)
> > 
> > Our litigation processes here are not quickly and
> > extensively used here in
> > NZ, unlike *other* countries.
> > 
> > 
> > cheers
> > Dean
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Ed Crowley [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > Sent: Wednesday, 29 May 2002 5:46 a.m.
> > To: Exchange Discussions
> > Subject: Re: Archive
> > 
> > 
> > Another way to look at it:  What's the worth of
> old
> > e-mail?
> > 
> > Ed Crowley
> > hp Services
> > 
> > --- Tim <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > How long do most of you hold tapes?  We are
> > looking
> > > to establish a
> > > standard on how long to keep tapes in archived
> > > before reintroducing them
> > > back into the tape rotation to be overwritten. 
> I
> > > know there are many
> > > differnent ways to look at this as far as cost
> per
> > > tape, storage space,
> > > legal aspects, and disaster recovery and wanted
> to
> > > know what people
> > > thought was a good period
> > > 
> > >
> >
>
_
> > > List posting FAQ:  
> > > http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
> > > Archives:  
> > > http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp
> > > To unsubscribe:
> > > mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > 
> > > 
> > 
> > 
> > __
> > Do You Yahoo!?
> > Yahoo! - Official partner of 2002 FIFA World Cup
> > http://fifaworldcup.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]
> > 
> > 
> >
>
**
> > This email is not an official statement of the
> > Waikato
> > Regional Council unless otherwise stated.
> > Visit our website http://www.ew.govt.nz
> >
>
**
> > 
> > 
> >
>

RE: Archive

[Thomas Di Nardo]

Friggin' Lyris!

Great to have you back Ed!

-Original Message-
From: Ed Crowley [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: Tuesday, May 28, 2002 7:34 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Archive

I think we agree, more or less.  I don't believe that
e-mail administrators are the best ones to decide what
information to keep or delete and for how long.  I
also happen to think that lawyers aren't either.  My
point is that document retention policies, as with
many other policies like service level agreements,
aren't based on sound business decisions, but instead
are based upon fear.

Ed Crowley
hp Services

--- David Florea <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> Users are always free to maintain whatever e-mails
> or files they want, and it's our job to help them do
> just that.  If they determine a file should be
> deleted, then we help them do that too.  That's not
> hiding anything, that's just good and efficient
> practice.  And I wouldn't think you're trying to put
> us admins in a different policy-making arena than
> that.  If you're talking about intentional
> destruction of evidence in a legal matter, that's
> different, and I agree with you.
> 
> 
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: Ed Crowley [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Tuesday, May 28, 2002 2:59 PM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: RE: Archive
> 
> 
> As I've always said, document retention will benefit
> those organizations who act ethically.  I don't
> think
> it makes sense to destroy all your evidence when
> those
> with an axe to grind keep all theirs.  Those with
> nothing to hide shouldn't be hiding it.
> 
> Ed Crowley
> hp Services
> 
> --- Dean Cunningham <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
> > Ed, as usual, is correct.
> > 
> > Depends what the risk is to people making binding
> > commitments via email that
> > may cost the company $$$.
> > Email here is considered a public record (as
> > indicated in our email policy).
> > 
> > Emails are easy to create/modify by the other
> party.
> > Having an audit trail
> > of mails sent/received may be of value to your
> > company.
> > 
> > I have every email that has gone through the mail
> > gateway for the last 5
> > years on CD.
> > This process is automated to the point where 18
> > months worth of detail in
> > held in an oracle Db and the only human
> intervention
> > is to write the monthly
> > data on to CD's
> > 
> > This may assist us in any litigation issues, and
> as
> > a public company, we
> > have nothing to hide.
> > 
> > We keep archive tapes back to '89, when we arose
> > from the ashes of about 30
> > public sector organisations
> > 
> > I have has cases of senior managers needing
> e-mails
> > from up to a year old
> > that they had inadvertently deleted ( or told the
> > other party they never
> > received it)
> > 
> > Our litigation processes here are not quickly and
> > extensively used here in
> > NZ, unlike *other* countries.
> > 
> > 
> > cheers
> > Dean
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Ed Crowley [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > Sent: Wednesday, 29 May 2002 5:46 a.m.
> > To: Exchange Discussions
> > Subject: Re: Archive
> > 
> > 
> > Another way to look at it:  What's the worth of
> old
> > e-mail?
> > 
> > Ed Crowley
> > hp Services
> > 
> > --- Tim <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > How long do most of you hold tapes?  We are
> > looking
> > > to establish a
> > > standard on how long to keep tapes in archived
> > > before reintroducing them
> > > back into the tape rotation to be overwritten. 
> I
> > > know there are many
> > > differnent ways to look at this as far as cost
> per
> > > tape, storage space,
> > > legal aspects, and disaster recovery and wanted
> to
> > > know what people
> > > thought was a good period
> > > 
> > >
> >
>
_
> > > List posting FAQ:  
> > > http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
> > > Archives:  
> > > http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp
> > > To unsubscribe:
> > > mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > 
> > > 
> > 
> > 
> > __
> > Do You Yahoo!?
> > Yahoo! - Official partner of 2002 FIFA World Cup
> > http://fifaworldcup.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]
> > 
> > 
> >
>
**
> > This email is not an official statement of the
> > Waikato
> > Regional Council unless otherwise stated.
> > Visit our website http://www.ew.govt.nz
> >
>
**
> > 
> > 
> >
>

RE: MEC Registration now OPEN

[Thomas Di Nardo]

If they're paying to send you to MEC, they're not wasting their money.
Therefore you don't need to tell them.

-Original Message-
From: Callan, Chris [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: Friday, May 24, 2002 9:20 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: MEC Registration now OPEN

Yeah, sure and what shall I tell my future in-laws about them wasting so
much money.

-Original Message-
From: Clark, John A (FUSA) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Friday, May 24, 2002 8:57 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: MEC Registration now OPEN


Chris, go to the Exchange Conference instead

-Original Message-
From: Callan, Chris [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Friday, May 24, 2002 8:44 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: MEC Registration now OPEN


I would ask my management to let me go, but I am getting married on the
12th, and it would interfere.


-Original Message-
From: Martin Blackstone [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Friday, May 24, 2002 8:42 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: MEC Registration now OPEN


Where are my pants?

-Original Message-
From: Andy David [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: Thursday, May 23, 2002 4:58 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: MEC Registration now OPEN


What is the best AV software?


-Original Message-
From: Mellott, Bill [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Thursday, May 23, 2002 5:31 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: MEC Registration now OPEN


October 8-11 Anaheim, CA

right off the page

-Original Message-
From: Martin Blackstone [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Thursday, May 23, 2002 5:26 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: MEC Registration now OPEN


Compton CA!!!

-Original Message-
From: Andy David [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: Thursday, May 23, 2002 2:24 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: MEC Registration now OPEN


Does anyone know where MEC is this year?


-Original Message-
From: Tom Meunier [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: Thursday, May 23, 2002 5:21 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: MEC Registration now OPEN


I have begun begging in the hope that before October, my boss will get
sick
of me and shell out the funds.

> -Original Message-
> From: Martin Blackstone [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Posted At: Thursday, May 23, 2002 04:18 PM
> Posted To: MSExchange Mailing List
> Conversation: MEC Registration now OPEN
> Subject: MEC Registration now OPEN
> 
> 
> http://www.microsoft.com/corpevents/mec2002
> 
> Martin Blackstone
> Director, Information Technologies
> Superior Access Insurance Services
> 949.470.2111 x279
> 
> -Better not take a dog on the space shuttle, because if he sticks his 
> head out when you're coming home his face might burn up.
> 
> _
> List posting FAQ:   http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
> Archives:   http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp
> To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 

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



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



==


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

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

_
List posting FAQ:   http://www.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: Win2K DNS is PISSING ME OFF

[Thomas Di Nardo]

Did you try the hotfixes yet?

-Original Message-
From: Andrey Fyodorov [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: Thursday, May 23, 2002 3:51 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Win2K DNS is PISSING ME OFF

I tried disabling the DNS client but it did not help

-Original Message-
From: Roger Seielstad [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Thursday, May 23, 2002 3:11 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Win2K DNS is PISSING ME OFF


Because forwarders suck?

I've got a fairly high traffic Win2k SP2 + hotfixes DNS server that
exhibited the same problems you're seeing until I killed the DNS Client
service, and it hasn't happened since - and that's been 6-8 weeks now.

--
Roger D. Seielstad - MCSE
Sr. Systems Administrator
Peregrine Systems
Atlanta, GA


> -Original Message-
> From: Andrey Fyodorov [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
> Sent: Thursday, May 23, 2002 11:31 AM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: RE: Win2K DNS is PISSING ME OFF
> 
> 
> Many times. Sometimes it starts working right after clearing 
> the DNS cache
> (so I don't have to restart the DNS server service), but sometimes it
> doesn't. But sooner or later it craps out again.
> 
> Using forwarders (BIND 8) servers seems to eliminate this 
> problem. The issue
> is that we want to avoid using forwarders, we have other 
> reasons for that.
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: Roger Seielstad [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Thursday, May 23, 2002 10:25 AM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: RE: Win2K DNS is PISSING ME OFF
> 
> 
> Did you also clear the DNS cache in the DNS service?
> 
> 
> --
> Roger D. Seielstad - MCSE
> Sr. Systems Administrator
> Peregrine Systems
> Atlanta, GA
> 
> 
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Andrey Fyodorov [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
> > Sent: Wednesday, May 22, 2002 4:56 PM
> > To: Exchange Discussions
> > Cc: Humberto Perez; Joe Gonzalez
> > Subject: RE: Win2K DNS is PISSING ME OFF
> > 
> > 
> > Stopped the DNS client but DNS still crapped out.
> > 
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Roger Seielstad [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > Sent: Wednesday, May 22, 2002 2:55 PM
> > To: Exchange Discussions
> > Subject: RE: Win2K DNS is PISSING ME OFF
> > 
> > 
> > That's all fine and good, but you need to read up on what the 
> > DNS Client
> > service does.
> > 
> > The DNS Client Service acts as a client side DNS cache. There 
> > is no need for
> > the DNS Client to run on ANY machine on the network. It can 
> > help, but on an
> > active server running the DNS service, it causes problems.
> > 
> > Disable it and you'll stop having the issue.
> > 
> > --
> > Roger D. Seielstad - MCSE
> > Sr. Systems Administrator
> > Peregrine Systems
> > Atlanta, GA
> > 
> > 
> > > -Original Message-
> > > From: Andrey Fyodorov [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
> > > Sent: Wednesday, May 22, 2002 2:44 PM
> > > To: Exchange Discussions
> > > Subject: RE: Win2K DNS is PISSING ME OFF
> > > 
> > > 
> > > But... the server is its own client. For example in order for 
> > > Netdiag to
> > > pass all the tests, the IP configuration needs its own IP 
> > > address for the
> > > DNS server.
> > > 
> > > -Original Message-
> > > From: Roger Seielstad [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > > Sent: Wednesday, May 22, 2002 2:01 PM
> > > To: Exchange Discussions
> > > Subject: RE: Win2K DNS is PISSING ME OFF
> > > 
> > > 
> > > Although this is more NT/Win2k than anything, disable the DNS 
> > > Client service
> > > on the DNS server.
> > > 
> > > --
> > > Roger D. Seielstad - MCSE
> > > Sr. Systems Administrator
> > > Peregrine Systems
> > > Atlanta, GA
> > > 
> > > 
> > > > -Original Message-
> > > > From: Andrey Fyodorov [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
> > > > Sent: Wednesday, May 22, 2002 12:16 PM
> > > > To: Exchange Discussions
> > > > Subject: Win2K DNS is PISSING ME OFF
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > Hi all.
> > > > 
> > > > I have two Win2K AD DNS servers. Recently they have been 
> > > > acting up: all of a
> > > > sudden one of them stops using root hints and can't resolve a 
> > > > lot of good
> > > > domain names (request timed-out). I restart the DNS server 
> > > service and
> > > > everything is OK again. Then 10-15 minutes later, it starts 
> > > > giving request
> > > > timed-out. Both DNS servers experience this at different times.
> > > > 
> > > > Has anyone here seen this?
> > > > 
> > > > 
> _
> > > > List posting FAQ:   
> http://www.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: Why won't two Ex 2k servers connect and replicate directory info?

[Thomas Di Nardo]

That being the case, you might consider letting us know what you have
tried, what research you have done, and what the results were. :)

I'm presuming, based on the sparse information that you gave, that you
have two separate Forests with two Exchange Orgs that you are trying to
replicate information between. Is that accurate?

What are you trying to accomplish...exactly?

-Original Message-
From: Arch Willingham [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: Wednesday, May 22, 2002 7:17 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Why won't two Ex 2k servers connect and replicate directory
info?

That was not the answer I was hoping for!

Arch

_
List posting FAQ:   http://www.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: Found out how to create an exchange mailbox!

[Thomas Di Nardo]

Nope it's a secret. Don't mention a word of this to anyone.

-Original Message-
From: Tom Meunier [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: Wednesday, May 22, 2002 7:05 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Found out how to create an exchange mailbox!
Sensitivity: Confidential

So we shouldn't tell anyone about this, just the 4,000 of us, right?
Plus anyone who searches the archives on the internet, too.

-Original Message-
From: Robert WALKER [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Posted At: Wednesday, May 22, 2002 5:56 PM
Posted To: MSExchange Mailing List
Conversation: Found out how to create an exchange mailbox!
Subject: Found out how to create an exchange mailbox!
Sensitivity: Confidential


Hi,

I eventually worked out what I was doing wrong and have got it
to work. That is creating a mailbox for exchange. Fairly Simple
really.

dim obj as iadscontainer
dim mobj as cdoexm.imailboxstore

set obj = getobject("LDAP://"; & Server & "/cn=" & UserName & _
"cn=users" & Domain ' as dc=x,dc=y,dc=z
' Your site as in x.y.z eg host.microsoft.com

set mobj = obj ' overlay mailbox to user container.

mobj.createmailbox "LDAP://cn=mailbox store (" & exServer & ")"
& _
"cn=first storage group,cn=information store," & _
"cn=" & exserver & ",cn=servers," & _
"cn=first administration group,cn=administrative group,"
& _
"cn=" & ExchangeOrganization & ",cn=microsoft exchange,"
& _
"cn=services,cn=configuration," & Domain

' Exchange Organization appears in Exchange system managers
' Exchange Server is the targeted exchange box to create mailbox

obj.setinfo ' write cached data back to active directory.

set obj = nothing
set mobj = nothing


There you have it! Quite simple really.

Robert.



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

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

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

RE: Why won't two Ex 2k servers connect and replicate directory info?

[Thomas Di Nardo]

Sounds like a consulting engagement to me...

-Original Message-
From: Arch Willingham [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: Wednesday, May 22, 2002 6:55 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: Why won't two Ex 2k servers connect and replicate directory
info?

I'm new to Exchange 2K and I'm having problems figuring out how to get
my two servers to connect and replicate directory info. I'm running 2
windows 2k servers in 2 different, untrusted domains and in 2 different
locations connected via WAN link. I had the same setup with Exchange 5.5
and it ran perfectly for years. If anyone could share a simple step by
step way to do this I would greatly appreciate it.

Thanks,

Arch

_
List posting FAQ:   http://www.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: Group Mail

[Thomas Di Nardo]

There is no excuse There is only Zuel.

-Original Message-
From: Julian Stone [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: Wednesday, May 22, 2002 4:29 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Group Mail

And that's an excuse ??

Yours,

Julian Stone


-Original Message-
From: John Matteson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: Wednesday, May 22, 2002 9:26 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Group Mail


Okay everyone be nice.. she's a Programmer.

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

Defeat is a state of mind. No one is ever defeated until defeat has been
accepted as a reality. To me, defeat in anything is merely temporary,
and its punishment is but an urge for me to greater effort to achieve my
goal. Defeat simply tells me that something is wrong in my doing; it is
a path leading to success and truth. --Bruce Lee



-Original Message-
From: John Allhiser [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Wednesday, May 22, 2002 3:52 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Group Mail


::Biting tongue::

-Original Message-
From: Felicity Smith [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Wednesday, May 22, 2002 2:47 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Group Mail


Pardon me Chris, but what does fsck mean? I am new to this list and
Exchange.

I checked the resource kit and it is not mentioned there.

TIA

--Felicity

> What the fsck is a Group Mail Pro?
> 
> Is it too much to ask for a properly phrased technical question once 
> in a while? Christ on cracker you people...
> 
> 
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Woodruff, Michael [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > Sent: Wednesday, May 22, 2002 2:31 PM
> > To: Exchange Discussions
> > Subject: Group Mail
> > 
> > 
> > How exactly does Group Mail Pro send without and SMTP server?

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

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

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



This e-mail and any attachments may be confidential and/or legally 
privileged. If you have received this e-mail and you are not a named 
addressee, please inform the Netstore Technical Support Desk on 
+44 1344 444342 and then delete the e-mail from your system. If you are 
not a named addressee you must not use, disclose, distribute, copy, 
print or rely on this e-mail. Although Netstore routinely screens for 
viruses, addressees should scan this e-mail and any attachments for 
viruses. This mail has been processed with the Netstore Content 
Filtering Service.

Visit our website at www.netstore.net 



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

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

RE: 3rd party utility to check for mailboxes that are no longer b eing used....

[Thomas Di Nardo]

S&M's...is that a new candy?

-Original Message-
From: Mark Arnold () [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: Wednesday, May 22, 2002 4:23 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: 3rd party utility to check for mailboxes that are no longer
b eing used

Why should he fish when others can answer his question afresh and then
create a nice thread taking the rise out of him. Perhaps he's into S&M
or something, not that I know what S&M means, any more than I know what
FSCK means (if you're following the other threads)


-Original Message-
From: Hunter, Lori [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: 22 May 2002 20:50
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: 3rd party utility to check for mailboxes that are no longer
b eing used

Hope so.  This man refuses to learn to fish, so he can just starve.

-Original Message-
From: Mark Arnold () [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Wednesday, May 22, 2002 2:14 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: 3rd party utility to check for mailboxes that are no longer
b eing used


That got him where it hurts Lori.


-Original Message-
From: Hunter, Lori [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: 22 May 2002 19:26
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: 3rd party utility to check for mailboxes that are no longer
b
eing used

Except you're not new Mike.  You've been asking questions of this
caliber
for over a year.  I'm beginning to believe that you cannot read.

-Original Message-
From: Mitchell Mike [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Tuesday, May 21, 2002 4:45 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: 3rd party utility to check for mailboxes that are no longer
b eing used


You all are my friends here.  Thanks...

-Original Message-
From: John Allhiser [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Tuesday, 21 May, 2002 4:42 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: 3rd party utility to check for mailboxes that are no longer
b eing used


A popular (read effective) antivirus for mail servers.

Google is your friend here.  :^)

-Original Message-
From: Mitchell Mike [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Tuesday, May 21, 2002 4:41 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: 3rd party utility to check for mailboxes that are no longer
b eing used


Yeah really...  I am a new administrator and I haven't a clue.  Sorry.

-Original Message-
From: John Allhiser [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Tuesday, 21 May, 2002 4:38 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: 3rd party utility to check for mailboxes that are no longer
b eing used


Really?

-Original Message-
From: Mitchell Mike [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Tuesday, May 21, 2002 4:39 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: 3rd party utility to check for mailboxes that are no longer
b eing used


What is Scanmail and what is it used for?

Thanks..

-Original Message-
From: James Casstevens [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Monday, 20 May, 2002 12:02 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: 3rd party utility to check for mailboxes that are no longer
being used


Does anyone know of a 3rd party utility that can calculate the mailboxes
that are not currently being used.  Since we are using Trend Micro's
Scanmail, we cannot depend on using the last time a user logs onto
his/her
mailbox, since Scanmail does so on a regular basis.  Any help would be
appreciated.

James Casstevens.

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

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

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

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

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

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

RE: Group Mail

[Thomas Di Nardo]

I resemble that remark!

-Original Message-
From: Felicity Smith [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: Wednesday, May 22, 2002 4:10 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Group Mail

BTW- I think most of you guys are a bunch of perverts, in case you were
somehow unaware of this fact.

--Felicity
> I searched on the internet and it is a unix utility that does File
System
> Consistency ChecKing.
> 
> I thought it was a Unix applet, only I thought is was a finger like
> utility.  It thought maybe is was a Microsoft port like eseutil.
> 
> --Felicity
> 
> > Sometimes you feel like a fsck.  Sometimes you don't.
> > 
> > > -Original Message-
> > > From: Orr, Dale [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
> > > Sent: Wednesday, May 22, 2002 3:57 PM
> > > To: Exchange Discussions
> > > Subject: RE: Group Mail
> > > 
> > > 
> > > ! fsck.
> > > 
> > > -Original Message-
> > > From: Soysal, Serdar [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > > Sent: Wednesday, May 22, 2002 3:53 PM
> > > To: Exchange Discussions
> > > Subject: RE: Group Mail
> > > 
> > > 
> > > It is a candy bar.
> > > 
> > > Serdar Soysal
> > > 
> > > 
> > > -Original Message-
> > > From: Felicity Smith [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
> > > Sent: Wednesday, May 22, 2002 3:47 PM
> > > To: Exchange Discussions
> > > Subject: RE: Group Mail
> > > 
> > > 
> > > Pardon me Chris, but what does fsck mean? I am new to this list
and
> > > Exchange.
> > > 
> > > I checked the resource kit and it is not mentioned there.
> > > 
> > > TIA
> > > 
> > > --Felicity
> > > 
> > > > What the fsck is a Group Mail Pro?
> > > > 
> > > > Is it too much to ask for a properly phrased technical 
> > > question once 
> > > > in a while? Christ on cracker you people...
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > > -Original Message-
> > > > > From: Woodruff, Michael [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > > > > Sent: Wednesday, May 22, 2002 2:31 PM
> > > > > To: Exchange Discussions
> > > > > Subject: Group Mail
> > > > > 
> > > > > 
> > > > > How exactly does Group Mail Pro send without and SMTP server?
> > > 
> > > _
> > > List posting FAQ:   http://www.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: Group Mail

[Thomas Di Nardo]

Yes!

Fsck! New from Hershey!

The commercials are like the "Make 7-UP yours!" one's; only different.

-Original Message-
From: Soysal, Serdar [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: Wednesday, May 22, 2002 3:53 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Group Mail

It is a candy bar.

Serdar Soysal


-Original Message-
From: Felicity Smith [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: Wednesday, May 22, 2002 3:47 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Group Mail


Pardon me Chris, but what does fsck mean? I am new to this list and
Exchange.

I checked the resource kit and it is not mentioned there.

TIA

--Felicity

> What the fsck is a Group Mail Pro?
> 
> Is it too much to ask for a properly phrased technical question once 
> in a while? Christ on cracker you people...
> 
> 
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Woodruff, Michael [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > Sent: Wednesday, May 22, 2002 2:31 PM
> > To: Exchange Discussions
> > Subject: Group Mail
> > 
> > 
> > How exactly does Group Mail Pro send without and SMTP server?

_
List posting FAQ:   http://www.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: Group Mail

[Thomas Di Nardo]

You must be kidding

-Original Message-
From: Felicity Smith [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: Wednesday, May 22, 2002 3:47 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Group Mail

Pardon me Chris, but what does fsck mean? I am new to this list and
Exchange.

I checked the resource kit and it is not mentioned there.

TIA

--Felicity

> What the fsck is a Group Mail Pro? 
> 
> Is it too much to ask for a properly phrased technical question once
in a
> while? Christ on cracker you people...
> 
> 
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Woodruff, Michael [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
> > Sent: Wednesday, May 22, 2002 2:31 PM
> > To: Exchange Discussions
> > Subject: Group Mail
> > 
> > 
> > How exactly does Group Mail Pro send without and SMTP server?

_
List posting FAQ:   http://www.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: Win2K DNS is PISSING ME OFF

[Thomas Di Nardo]

H

-Original Message-
From: Andrey Fyodorov [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: Wednesday, May 22, 2002 1:53 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Win2K DNS is PISSING ME OFF

Actually the  "secure cache against pollution" is not checked.

-Original Message-----
From: Thomas Di Nardo [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Wednesday, May 22, 2002 1:32 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Win2K DNS is PISSING ME OFF


Does clearing the cache resolve the issue too (rather than restarting
the service)? Do you have "secure cache against pollution" checked? If
so, disable that and test. Sometimes, when that is enabled, it times out
before it can hit subsequent servers in the hints list.

-Original Message-
From: Andrey Fyodorov [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: Wednesday, May 22, 2002 1:08 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Win2K DNS is PISSING ME OFF

just the external resources

-Original Message-----
From: Thomas Di Nardo [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Wednesday, May 22, 2002 12:55 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Win2K DNS is PISSING ME OFF


Does the DNS stop resolving everything, including internal resources, or
is it just a problem with external resources?

-Original Message-
From: Andrey Fyodorov [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: Wednesday, May 22, 2002 12:45 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Win2K DNS is PISSING ME OFF

Haven't done NetMon yet.

There are no errors in the logs. Only warnings that the DNS server
received
an invalid packet from this or that IP address (some of those IP
addresses
are our BIND DNS servers)

When it gets hosed, it even stops resolving names that are already in
the
cache. For example I could be sitting in NSLOOKUP, punching in
edmunds.com,
edmunds.com... no problem... all of a sudden, edmunds.com - request
timed-out.

Tried running NSLOOKUP -d2 and when it fails, the last thing it says is
"SendRequest failed"


Thanks for your help. I will see if I can run NetMon on it.

-Original Message-
From: Thomas Di Nardo [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Wednesday, May 22, 2002 12:29 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Win2K DNS is PISSING ME OFF


Have you run a netmon to see what the box is doing when it gets hosed?
Are there any errors in the logs? Is it still resolving stuff in the
cache, but not anything new?

-Original Message-
From: Andrey Fyodorov [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: Wednesday, May 22, 2002 12:24 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Win2K DNS is PISSING ME OFF

No ISA. We have an access list with all the necessary ports open. The
DNS
servers have no problem communicating with root hints at the beginning.

-Original Message-
From: Thomas Di Nardo [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Wednesday, May 22, 2002 12:17 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Win2K DNS is PISSING ME OFF


Are you using ISA as a firewall?

-Original Message-
From: Andrey Fyodorov [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: Wednesday, May 22, 2002 12:16 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: Win2K DNS is PISSING ME OFF

Hi all.

I have two Win2K AD DNS servers. Recently they have been acting up: all
of a
sudden one of them stops using root hints and can't resolve a lot of
good
domain names (request timed-out). I restart the DNS server service and
everything is OK again. Then 10-15 minutes later, it starts giving
request
timed-out. Both DNS servers experience this at different times.

Has anyone here seen this?

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

RE: Win2K DNS is PISSING ME OFF

[Thomas Di Nardo]

Does clearing the cache resolve the issue too (rather than restarting
the service)? Do you have "secure cache against pollution" checked? If
so, disable that and test. Sometimes, when that is enabled, it times out
before it can hit subsequent servers in the hints list.

-Original Message-
From: Andrey Fyodorov [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: Wednesday, May 22, 2002 1:08 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Win2K DNS is PISSING ME OFF

just the external resources

-Original Message-----
From: Thomas Di Nardo [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Wednesday, May 22, 2002 12:55 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Win2K DNS is PISSING ME OFF


Does the DNS stop resolving everything, including internal resources, or
is it just a problem with external resources?

-Original Message-
From: Andrey Fyodorov [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: Wednesday, May 22, 2002 12:45 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Win2K DNS is PISSING ME OFF

Haven't done NetMon yet.

There are no errors in the logs. Only warnings that the DNS server
received
an invalid packet from this or that IP address (some of those IP
addresses
are our BIND DNS servers)

When it gets hosed, it even stops resolving names that are already in
the
cache. For example I could be sitting in NSLOOKUP, punching in
edmunds.com,
edmunds.com... no problem... all of a sudden, edmunds.com - request
timed-out.

Tried running NSLOOKUP -d2 and when it fails, the last thing it says is
"SendRequest failed"


Thanks for your help. I will see if I can run NetMon on it.

-Original Message-----
From: Thomas Di Nardo [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Wednesday, May 22, 2002 12:29 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Win2K DNS is PISSING ME OFF


Have you run a netmon to see what the box is doing when it gets hosed?
Are there any errors in the logs? Is it still resolving stuff in the
cache, but not anything new?

-Original Message-
From: Andrey Fyodorov [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: Wednesday, May 22, 2002 12:24 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Win2K DNS is PISSING ME OFF

No ISA. We have an access list with all the necessary ports open. The
DNS
servers have no problem communicating with root hints at the beginning.

-Original Message-----
From: Thomas Di Nardo [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Wednesday, May 22, 2002 12:17 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Win2K DNS is PISSING ME OFF


Are you using ISA as a firewall?

-Original Message-
From: Andrey Fyodorov [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: Wednesday, May 22, 2002 12:16 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: Win2K DNS is PISSING ME OFF

Hi all.

I have two Win2K AD DNS servers. Recently they have been acting up: all
of a
sudden one of them stops using root hints and can't resolve a lot of
good
domain names (request timed-out). I restart the DNS server service and
everything is OK again. Then 10-15 minutes later, it starts giving
request
timed-out. Both DNS servers experience this at different times.

Has anyone here seen this?

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

RE: Win2K DNS is PISSING ME OFF

[Thomas Di Nardo]

Does the DNS stop resolving everything, including internal resources, or
is it just a problem with external resources?

-Original Message-
From: Andrey Fyodorov [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: Wednesday, May 22, 2002 12:45 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Win2K DNS is PISSING ME OFF

Haven't done NetMon yet.

There are no errors in the logs. Only warnings that the DNS server
received
an invalid packet from this or that IP address (some of those IP
addresses
are our BIND DNS servers)

When it gets hosed, it even stops resolving names that are already in
the
cache. For example I could be sitting in NSLOOKUP, punching in
edmunds.com,
edmunds.com... no problem... all of a sudden, edmunds.com - request
timed-out.

Tried running NSLOOKUP -d2 and when it fails, the last thing it says is
"SendRequest failed"


Thanks for your help. I will see if I can run NetMon on it.

-Original Message-----
From: Thomas Di Nardo [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Wednesday, May 22, 2002 12:29 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Win2K DNS is PISSING ME OFF


Have you run a netmon to see what the box is doing when it gets hosed?
Are there any errors in the logs? Is it still resolving stuff in the
cache, but not anything new?

-Original Message-
From: Andrey Fyodorov [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: Wednesday, May 22, 2002 12:24 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Win2K DNS is PISSING ME OFF

No ISA. We have an access list with all the necessary ports open. The
DNS
servers have no problem communicating with root hints at the beginning.

-Original Message-----
From: Thomas Di Nardo [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Wednesday, May 22, 2002 12:17 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Win2K DNS is PISSING ME OFF


Are you using ISA as a firewall?

-Original Message-
From: Andrey Fyodorov [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: Wednesday, May 22, 2002 12:16 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: Win2K DNS is PISSING ME OFF

Hi all.

I have two Win2K AD DNS servers. Recently they have been acting up: all
of a
sudden one of them stops using root hints and can't resolve a lot of
good
domain names (request timed-out). I restart the DNS server service and
everything is OK again. Then 10-15 minutes later, it starts giving
request
timed-out. Both DNS servers experience this at different times.

Has anyone here seen this?

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

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

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

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

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

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

RE: Win2K DNS is PISSING ME OFF

[Thomas Di Nardo]

Have you run a netmon to see what the box is doing when it gets hosed?
Are there any errors in the logs? Is it still resolving stuff in the
cache, but not anything new?

-Original Message-
From: Andrey Fyodorov [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: Wednesday, May 22, 2002 12:24 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Win2K DNS is PISSING ME OFF

No ISA. We have an access list with all the necessary ports open. The
DNS
servers have no problem communicating with root hints at the beginning.

-Original Message-
From: Thomas Di Nardo [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Wednesday, May 22, 2002 12:17 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Win2K DNS is PISSING ME OFF


Are you using ISA as a firewall?

-Original Message-
From: Andrey Fyodorov [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: Wednesday, May 22, 2002 12:16 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: Win2K DNS is PISSING ME OFF

Hi all.

I have two Win2K AD DNS servers. Recently they have been acting up: all
of a
sudden one of them stops using root hints and can't resolve a lot of
good
domain names (request timed-out). I restart the DNS server service and
everything is OK again. Then 10-15 minutes later, it starts giving
request
timed-out. Both DNS servers experience this at different times.

Has anyone here seen this?

_
List posting FAQ:   http://www.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: Win2K DNS is PISSING ME OFF

[Thomas Di Nardo]

Are you using ISA as a firewall?

-Original Message-
From: Andrey Fyodorov [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: Wednesday, May 22, 2002 12:16 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: Win2K DNS is PISSING ME OFF

Hi all.

I have two Win2K AD DNS servers. Recently they have been acting up: all
of a
sudden one of them stops using root hints and can't resolve a lot of
good
domain names (request timed-out). I restart the DNS server service and
everything is OK again. Then 10-15 minutes later, it starts giving
request
timed-out. Both DNS servers experience this at different times.

Has anyone here seen this?

_
List posting FAQ:   http://www.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: Other Exchange mailing lists?

[Thomas Di Nardo]

Just because it was shut down doesn't mean that we can't send people
there, does it?

-Original Message-
From: Martin Blackstone [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: Wednesday, May 22, 2002 10:56 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Other Exchange mailing lists?

The carebear list shut down. Too many people were getting the flu from
all
the hugging.

-Original Message-----
From: Thomas Di Nardo [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: Wednesday, May 22, 2002 7:53 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Other Exchange mailing lists?


Your solution can be found at the bottom of your email:
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]

There is more knowledge on this list than you can imagine. We just
prefer to
have a bit of fun during the day too. It helps make up for the "What is
ScanMail and what is it used for?" Questions.

If you don't like it, request a refund and go try the CareBears list.
It's
down the road and to the left.

Tom.

-Original Message-
From: Jon Butler (Mailing Lists) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: Wednesday, May 22, 2002 10:48 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: Other Exchange mailing lists?

Can someone please recommend an Exchange mailing list with more skilled
professionals and less comedians?  All this useless chatter is driving
me up
the wall ...



_
List posting FAQ:   http://www.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: Other Exchange mailing lists?

[Thomas Di Nardo]

Your solution can be found at the bottom of your email:
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]

There is more knowledge on this list than you can imagine. We just
prefer to have a bit of fun during the day too. It helps make up for the
"What is ScanMail and what is it used for?" Questions.

If you don't like it, request a refund and go try the CareBears list.
It's down the road and to the left.

Tom.

-Original Message-
From: Jon Butler (Mailing Lists) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: Wednesday, May 22, 2002 10:48 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: Other Exchange mailing lists?

Can someone please recommend an Exchange mailing list with more skilled
professionals and less comedians?  All this useless chatter is driving
me up
the wall ...



_
List posting FAQ:   http://www.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: Drive m:????

[Thomas Di Nardo]

Another tip... Don't snip the thread from your emails. It make is kind
of difficult to tell who your response is for.

Tom.

-Original Message-
From: Felicity Smith [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: Wednesday, May 22, 2002 10:16 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Drive m:

oh, sorry, thanks for being so patient with me.  I am new here and I
didn't realize you weren't being serious.

--Felicity

_
List posting FAQ:   http://www.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: Drive m:????

[Thomas Di Nardo]

Sarcasm is the word you need to become familiar with.

Tom.

-Original Message-
From: Felicity Smith [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: Wednesday, May 22, 2002 8:30 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Drive m:

pardon me for sounding so partonizing, but the M drive is the
installable
file system that ships with exchange.  As you know all internet
protocols
(http, smtp, nntp, pop, imap) are now server by the same engine that
does
IIS.  IIS consults the Exhcange store and a file handle to the item you
are looking for in the Exchange store is returned.

This is a true NTFS file handle and is provided by the EPoxy or EXIPC
mechanism which masquarades exchange items as NTFS file handles using an
asynchornous work queue which is extremely fast and provides little
context switching.  Think of it as another file system driver just the
same as FAT, NTFS, CDFS, HPFS.

The reason some of you do and some of you don't see an M drive is
because
IIS launches (specifically the W3svc service) before your exchange store
service completes it start up process.  Hence no M drive.  All you do is
bounce your w3svc service and you will have an M Drive.

I chose to change
HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SYSTEM\CurrentControlSet\Services\W3SVC and make
DependOnService have the value of MSExchangeIS.

You can change the drive letter by editing the following registry key.
HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SYSTEM\CurrentControlSet\Services\EXIFS\Parameters 
On the Edit menu, click Add Value, and then add the following registry
value:
Value Name: DriveLetter Data Type: REG_SZ Value: P
NOTE: If the DriveLetter value already exists, double-click the value,
and
then change the drive to n: or another letter.

One more point about the EXIFS (Exchange Installable File System) -
there
are three methods of application deployment - xcopy from the file
system,
ftp, or email or sending data to an exchange public folder.  NT admins
like xcopy, web admins like ftp or webdave, exchange admins like to
deploy
to public folders.  EXIFS provides a mechisim to keep everyone happy.

--Felicity



_
List posting FAQ:   http://www.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: Friday Haiku

[Thomas Di Nardo]

I have gone insane
The StIcK is required
HelpDesk must die now

-Original Message-
From: Orr, Dale [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: Friday, May 03, 2002 3:58 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: Friday Haiku

Just three more minutes
And my intense searching will
be over for two days

-Original Message-
From: Bennett, Warren [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Friday, May 03, 2002 3:55 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Exchange 5.5/Win 2k/SSL


I have done some intense searching for info on how this is done but no
one
seems to have the answer.


Warren J. Bennett

_
List posting FAQ:   http://www.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

[Thomas Di Nardo]

Very curious. Everywhere else only says OL2002. Hm

-Original Message-
From: Andy David [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: Friday, May 03, 2002 11:26 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Outlook XP

Not according the website:
http://office.microsoft.com/downloads/2002/oxpauiu.aspx



-Original Message-
From: Thomas Di Nardo [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: Friday, May 03, 2002 11:15 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Outlook XP


It's an Office XP (OL02) update. AFAIK, you need it irrespective of OS.

-Original Message-
From: Andy David [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: Friday, May 03, 2002 11:03 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Outlook XP

Interesting:  If you are running Windows(r)XP, you do not need this
update.
Im on XP here. What O/S are you using?


-Original Message-
From: Crumbaker, Ron [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: Friday, May 03, 2002 10:59 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Outlook XP


OK, I applied that patch...all I can say..

YESMUCH BETTER.

Thanks a $5 bill. (thats all I have)


Thank you,
 
Ron Crumbaker, MCP


-Original Message-
From: Woodruff, Michael [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: Friday, May 03, 2002 9:51 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Outlook XP


Well it's pretty much all around slow.  Slow opening attachments, slow
selecting multiple messages, slow connecting to other mailboxes. Opening
other users folders is slow even on same server.

-Original Message-----
From: Thomas Di Nardo [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: Friday, May 03, 2002 10:47 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Outlook XP


When you say slow connecting to the server, what do you mean? Is it slow
connecting to the server on startup or is it slow opening attachments
after
OL is already up?

If it's attachments, try Q300904.

Tom.

-Original Message-
From: Woodruff, Michael [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: Friday, May 03, 2002 7:28 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: Outlook XP

Has any one noticed that Outlook XP is so damn slow when connecting to
the
exchange server? 5.5 and 2k.  Whats the deal?  

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


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


==


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

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


--
The information contained in this email message is privileged and
confidential information intended only for the use of the individual or
entity to whom it is addressed.  If the reader of this message is not
the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination,
distribution or copy of 

RE: Re Personal Mail Archiving

[Thomas Di Nardo]

That won't work - CD's are read only. You need R/W access to the PST.
You might be able to do it with an RW disk though (I haven't tried it).

-Original Message-
From: Tener, Richard [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: Friday, May 03, 2002 11:23 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Re Personal Mail Archiving

Just make a folder on the cd and move the messages to that folder on the
cd.


rich

-Original Message-
From: Mustafa Ibrahim [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Friday, May 03, 2002 11:16 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: Re Personal Mail Archiving



Hi all,

Guys, I got a lot of technical/knowledgebase type messages I have
compiled
over the last couple of years I wana archive these and have them
accessible
on self-contained CD-ROM. So, when I require access to these messages, I
can
just use the CD without the need for outlook personal folder
configurations,
etc. Is there some sort of self executable app or utility that will
allow me
to do this on a cd? or is there another way. Thanks very much.

Mustafa

_
List posting FAQ:   http://www.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

[Thomas Di Nardo]

I have found Outlook XP to be substantially better.

Have you applied SP1 and the hotfix I mentioned?

Tom.

-Original Message-
From: Andrey Fyodorov [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: Friday, May 03, 2002 11:19 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Outlook XP

Every time one of my users get Outlook XP, there are problems. Outlook
2000
was much better

-Original Message-
From: Thomas Di Nardo [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Friday, May 03, 2002 11:15 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Outlook XP


It's an Office XP (OL02) update. AFAIK, you need it irrespective of OS.

-Original Message-
From: Andy David [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: Friday, May 03, 2002 11:03 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Outlook XP

Interesting:  If you are running Windows(r)XP, you do not need this
update.
Im on XP here. What O/S are you using?


-Original Message-
From: Crumbaker, Ron [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: Friday, May 03, 2002 10:59 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Outlook XP


OK, I applied that patch...all I can say..

YESMUCH BETTER.

Thanks a $5 bill. (thats all I have)


Thank you,
 
Ron Crumbaker, MCP


-Original Message-
From: Woodruff, Michael [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: Friday, May 03, 2002 9:51 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Outlook XP


Well it's pretty much all around slow.  Slow opening attachments, slow
selecting multiple messages, slow connecting to other mailboxes. Opening
other users folders is slow even on same server.

-Original Message-----
From: Thomas Di Nardo [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: Friday, May 03, 2002 10:47 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Outlook XP


When you say slow connecting to the server, what do you mean? Is it slow
connecting to the server on startup or is it slow opening attachments
after
OL is already up?

If it's attachments, try Q300904.

Tom.

-Original Message-
From: Woodruff, Michael [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: Friday, May 03, 2002 7:28 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: Outlook XP

Has any one noticed that Outlook XP is so damn slow when connecting to
the
exchange server? 5.5 and 2k.  Whats the deal?  

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


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


==


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

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

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

RE: Outlook XP

[Thomas Di Nardo]

It's an Office XP (OL02) update. AFAIK, you need it irrespective of OS.

-Original Message-
From: Andy David [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: Friday, May 03, 2002 11:03 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Outlook XP

Interesting:  If you are running Windows(r)XP, you do not need this
update.
Im on XP here. What O/S are you using?


-Original Message-
From: Crumbaker, Ron [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: Friday, May 03, 2002 10:59 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Outlook XP


OK, I applied that patch...all I can say..

YESMUCH BETTER.

Thanks a $5 bill. (thats all I have)


Thank you,
 
Ron Crumbaker, MCP


-Original Message-
From: Woodruff, Michael [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: Friday, May 03, 2002 9:51 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Outlook XP


Well it's pretty much all around slow.  Slow opening attachments, slow
selecting multiple messages, slow connecting to other mailboxes. Opening
other users folders is slow even on same server.

-Original Message-----
From: Thomas Di Nardo [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: Friday, May 03, 2002 10:47 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Outlook XP


When you say slow connecting to the server, what do you mean? Is it slow
connecting to the server on startup or is it slow opening attachments
after
OL is already up?

If it's attachments, try Q300904.

Tom.

-Original Message-
From: Woodruff, Michael [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: Friday, May 03, 2002 7:28 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: Outlook XP

Has any one noticed that Outlook XP is so damn slow when connecting to
the
exchange server? 5.5 and 2k.  Whats the deal?  

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


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


==


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

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

RE: Outlook XP

[Thomas Di Nardo]

A beer at MEC will be fine. :)

-Original Message-
From: Crumbaker, Ron [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: Friday, May 03, 2002 10:59 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Outlook XP

OK, I applied that patch...all I can say..

YESMUCH BETTER.

Thanks a $5 bill. (thats all I have)


Thank you,
 
Ron Crumbaker, MCP


-Original Message-
From: Woodruff, Michael [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: Friday, May 03, 2002 9:51 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Outlook XP


Well it's pretty much all around slow.  Slow opening attachments, slow
selecting multiple messages, slow connecting to other mailboxes.
Opening other users folders is slow even on same server.

-Original Message-
From: Thomas Di Nardo [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: Friday, May 03, 2002 10:47 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Outlook XP


When you say slow connecting to the server, what do you mean? Is it slow
connecting to the server on startup or is it slow opening attachments
after OL is already up?

If it's attachments, try Q300904.

Tom.

-Original Message-
From: Woodruff, Michael [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: Friday, May 03, 2002 7:28 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: Outlook XP

Has any one noticed that Outlook XP is so damn slow when connecting to
the exchange server? 5.5 and 2k.  Whats the deal?  

_
List posting FAQ:   http://www.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: Outlook XP

[Thomas Di Nardo]

When you say slow connecting to the server, what do you mean? Is it slow
connecting to the server on startup or is it slow opening attachments
after OL is already up?

If it's attachments, try Q300904.

Tom.

-Original Message-
From: Woodruff, Michael [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: Friday, May 03, 2002 7:28 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: Outlook XP

Has any one noticed that Outlook XP is so damn slow when connecting to
the
exchange server? 5.5 and 2k.  Whats the deal?  

_
List posting FAQ:   http://www.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: Cerification question

[Thomas Di Nardo]

The three movies you don't want to hear (in the order they were given)
are:

"You've got Mail"
"Gone with the Wind" - note that the reason given was something other
than the burning of Atlanta.
And ... the remake of "Three Men and a Baby".

Those three answers, unheeded, resulted in a wall-licking troglodyte
with an MCSE.

I agree with Serdar completely. That question should always be the
deciding one in a hiring situation.

Tom.

-Original Message-
From: Tony Hlabse [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: Thursday, May 02, 2002 10:44 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: Re: Cerification question

What are the 3 movies?

- Original Message -
From: "Soysal, Serdar" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Exchange Discussions" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Thursday, May 02, 2002 10:34 AM
Subject: RE: Cerification question


> This may sound odd but there is one golden question that will tell you
> exactly if the candidate will fit the group or not: "What are your
three
> favorite movies?"  If the person likes similar movies as the general
team
> and sounds smart, than he/she is a good buy.
>
> Serdar Soysal
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Stephen Mynhier [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Thursday, May 02, 2002 8:17 AM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: RE: Cerification question
>
>
> I deal with (new and different) people daily who have "worked with
Exchange
> for years" but don't know their database from their check file. I
wouldn't
> let them within 20 feet of any Exchange server that I worked on but
they
are
> the hired "Exchange expert" for their company.  The fact is that
people
are
> people, and certified people are not inherently better than
experienced
> people or vice versa.  I think that the best bet is the person who
realizes
> that, regardless of how much he knows, he does not know everything and
is
> always willing and wanting to learn more than he currently knows.
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Ray Zorz [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Posted At: Wednesday, May 01, 2002 4:43 PM
> Posted To: Exchange Discussion List
> Conversation: Cerification question
> Subject: RE: Cerification question
>
>
> Very good points.
>
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Tim
> Sent: Wednesday, May 01, 2002 2:22 PM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: RE: Cerification question
>
>
> You people talk like you can't have both. Sure there are some paper
MCSEs
> out there but there are also many MCSEs that have mucho experience.
Most
> hiring managers, all things being equal will look at experience first
but...
> then certs.  Additionally while experience is the best there are
people
that
> have worked in one environment for so long that they know NOTHING
about
any
> other capabilities of the hardware/software.  They are nearly as bad
as
the
> paper MSCE because the scope of their knowledge is so very limited and
> because of their experience think the only way to run a network is the
way
> they did it at their last job.  At least the Paper boyz know they are
> limited, are willing to learn, cost half as much and don't cause half
the
> drama the "experience" guy does.  They piss me off so much more, that
and
> they usually have no idea as to WHY their last network was set up that
way
> but that it is just the best way.  Experience is NOT always the best
> qualifier either
>
> _
> List posting FAQ:   http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
> Archives:   http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp
> To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>
> _
> List posting FAQ:   http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
> Archives:   http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp
> To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> _
> List posting FAQ:   http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
> Archives:   http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp
> To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>
> _
> List posting FAQ:   http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
> Archives:   http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp
> To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>

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

_
List posting FAQ:   http://www.

RE: Small business server

[Thomas Di Nardo]

I understand how SBS works. I've gotten it to work without any problems
previously. I would assume with a shop as small as he is talking about
(15 users) they don't have a huge pipe; therefore, the caching would
probably be a big benefit.

The question asked was whether it works. Not whether it's the best
solution for his situation.

Given, I personally would prefer, and best practices dictate, a
standalone firewall, but you can get ISA working just fine on an SBS
system.

All things considered, it wouldn't be a bad idea to do both. No added
cost to run ISA, and less than $1K for the PIX. In his position, I'd
probably do both.

Tom.


-Original Message-
From: Myles, Damian [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: Wednesday, April 24, 2002 8:07 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Small business server

ISA is fine but in this case (SBS) your mail server is your ISA server
is your file and print etc..  Not as secure as the PIX solution... I'd
go with that.

Mylo


-----Original Message-
From: Thomas Di Nardo [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: 24 April 2002 05:08
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Small business server


ISA works fine as long as you know how to configure it.

Tom.

-Original Message-
From: Ryan Finnesey [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: Tuesday, April 23, 2002 11:02 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Small business server

Yes go with the PIX.  I have had lots of problem is ISA.




Ryan,


-Original Message-
From: Martin Blackstone [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: Tuesday, April 16, 2002 5:10 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Small business server


But should they lose the idea as well?

Don, what does your network admin think about this?

-Original Message-
From: Ely, Don [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: Tuesday, April 16, 2002 1:55 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Small business server


Keep the PIX idea handy, lost the idea of ISA unless they want some
Proxy filtering...


Don Ely
Network Engineer
Tripath Imaging, Inc.
(336) 290-8293 - Direct
(336) 516-4519 - Mobile
[EMAIL PROTECTED] - email
http://www.tripathimaging.com




-Original Message-
From: Ken Cornetet [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: Tuesday, April 16, 2002 1:35 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: OT: Small business server


A small company (15 people) is asking me about installing Exchange. I've
been looking at Small Business Server and it looks almost too good to be
true. The obvious limitations (50 workstations, no trusts) are not a
problem for this company.

Am I missing something here? Has anyone had any experience with SBS
2000? ISA server also looks interesting (the company originally wanted a
PIX). Does it live up to it's promises?

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

RE: Small business server

[Thomas Di Nardo]

ISA works fine as long as you know how to configure it.

Tom.

-Original Message-
From: Ryan Finnesey [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: Tuesday, April 23, 2002 11:02 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Small business server

Yes go with the PIX.  I have had lots of problem is ISA.




Ryan,


-Original Message-
From: Martin Blackstone [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: Tuesday, April 16, 2002 5:10 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Small business server


But should they lose the idea as well?

Don, what does your network admin think about this?

-Original Message-
From: Ely, Don [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: Tuesday, April 16, 2002 1:55 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Small business server


Keep the PIX idea handy, lost the idea of ISA unless they want some
Proxy filtering...


Don Ely
Network Engineer
Tripath Imaging, Inc.
(336) 290-8293 - Direct
(336) 516-4519 - Mobile
[EMAIL PROTECTED] - email
http://www.tripathimaging.com




-Original Message-
From: Ken Cornetet [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: Tuesday, April 16, 2002 1:35 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: OT: Small business server


A small company (15 people) is asking me about installing Exchange. I've
been looking at Small Business Server and it looks almost too good to be
true. The obvious limitations (50 workstations, no trusts) are not a
problem for this company.

Am I missing something here? Has anyone had any experience with SBS
2000? ISA server also looks interesting (the company originally wanted a
PIX). Does it live up to it's promises?

_
List posting FAQ:   http://www.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: Exchange traffic to 10.10.10.10

[Thomas Di Nardo]

Did your network guys stick a sniffer out there? What did the sniff
show?

Tom.

-Original Message-
From: McMahon, Terry [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: Tuesday, April 23, 2002 10:50 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Exchange traffic to 10.10.10.10

Right, sorry.

When stopping the MTA, I stopped it for about 10 minutes, I got about 30
messages in the queue to the hub server about 2/3 public folder
replication
and 1/3 mail.  Inbound was a lot bigger, some 200 Public folder rep and
100
or so mail.  That's what made me think it was public folder replication.
. .
but, this is where I get lost, while the MTA is down, there's still this
traffic to 10.10.10.10.  Windows Directory replication?  There is no
10.10.10.10 that I can find and the network guys say the traffic isn't
going
anywhere.

By a lot of traffic I mean, if left "un-shaped" it would fill a 3meg
pipe.
Normal traffic from this server averages 200k.

I've decided computers are too complicated and I'm going to work at
Dairy
Queen.

-Original Message-
From: Soysal, Serdar [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Tuesday, April 23, 2002 9:12 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Exchange traffic to 10.10.10.10


Also, can you define "loads of traffic"?

Serdar Soysal


-Original Message-
From: McMahon, Terry [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: Tuesday, April 23, 2002 10:00 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Exchange traffic to 10.10.10.10


I thought it might be public folder replication, goes off every four
hours.
But this is constant.  All I get from the transport guys is the source
name
and the destination, is there any way to check which process is sending
the
traffic?I've got NAV running and updated on the server so I'm pretty
sure (not completely sure, getting less sure every couple of minutes)
that
it's not a virus.  

-Original Message-
From: Soysal, Serdar [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Tuesday, April 23, 2002 8:51 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Exchange traffic to 10.10.10.10


Directory replication?
Virus?

Serdar Soysal


-Original Message-
From: McMahon, Terry [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: Tuesday, April 23, 2002 9:48 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: Exchange traffic to 10.10.10.10


Hello,

One of our Exchange servers (5.5 Sp4) is sending loads of traffic to
10.10.10.10. It's an internal mailbox server, not a relay, has an IMC
and a
site connector.  NAV for exchange and Pagemaster.  I can't find anything
wrong with it, but there has to be some kind of configuration error.
Anyone
else have this problem?  

Terry McMahon
Enterprise e-mail team
AEGON

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


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

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


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

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

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

RE: Ghosting WIN 2K PC's

[Thomas Di Nardo]

Keep in mind that MSFT doesn't support deployments that are made without
the use of Sysprep. Best to use it even if you think it's not necessary.

Tom.

-Original Message-
From: Kevin Miller [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: Wednesday, April 10, 2002 10:51 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Ghosting WIN 2K PC's

Good point oh wise one.
Simple answer just for the fun of it. SID. You need to walk the SID's.
That is about the only concern. And if the hardware does not match you
need to Sysprep.


--Kevinm CHFR, M, WLKMMAS, UCC+WCA, And Beyond
http://www.daughtry.ca/ For Graphics and WebDesign, GO here!


-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of William
Lefkovics
Sent: Tuesday, April 09, 2002 6:17 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Ghosting WIN 2K PC's


You don't ghost exchange servers for roll out.

What does the Windows forum suggest?

William

-Original Message-
From: Van Huissteden, Adriaan [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Tuesday, April 09, 2002 5:46 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: Ghosting WIN 2K PC's


Hi All,

We need to do a roll out with win 2K... I have heard there are a few
issues with ghosting 2K PC's and Sid changes...?

What is the recommended method and software to use?

Cheers



> Adriaan Van Huissteden
> 
> Network Administrator
> Connect Credit Union
> Phone: (03) 6233 0660
> 
> 
Disclaimer: The information in this message or attachments (if any) may
be confidential or legally privileged material. It is intended solely
for the addressee.  Access to this message by anyone else is
unauthorised. If you are not the intended recipient, disclosure, copying
or distribution of the message, or any action or omission taken by you
in reliance on it, is prohibited and may be unlawful. If you receive
this communication in error, please contact the sender immediately and
delete this e-mail and associated material from any computer. Any views
expressed in this communication are those of the individual sender,
except where the sender specifically states them to be views of CONNECT
Credit Union. Whilst virus-scanning software is utilised by CONNECT, no
responsibility is taken for virus damage that may originate from this
transmission.

_
List posting FAQ:   http://www.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: please some1 tell me that there is anyway to recver from an ost file

[Thomas Di Nardo]

http://www.officerecovery.com


-Original Message-
From: brenda [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: Monday, April 08, 2002 7:28 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: please some1 tell me that there is anyway to recver from an ost
file

hello.
i know that i am stupid.
but my problem is:
i have a ost file of all my exchange mail box.
the exchange server died. but i still had most of my data from the ost
file.
an hour ago i did a mistake and removed the exchange server from the
outlook xp profile.
after that i cant get my data back.
i read now that it is a problem to recover in such case, but maybe since
i
just did the mistake maybe some angel/wixard here could suggest
something
that may help? please?
thanks  
Brenda

_
List posting FAQ:   http://www.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: 9318 and 9322 bind and bindback errors

[Thomas Di Nardo]

Are you getting any other errors? 1330, 9215, 1722...

Are all the servers on the same build (SP, hotfixes, etc.)? What SP?

Have you looked at Q279537 and Q303156?

Tom.

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: Monday, April 08, 2002 4:07 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: 9318 and 9322 bind and bindback errors

I've got a 5.5 organization, and the Exchange server in one of my sites
is
getting 9318 bind errors to all other servers in other sites.  I've
verified
name resolution both ways, and everything seems to be in order.  I'm
able to
net use shares both ways with no problem.  I'm also able to ping by name
both ways with no problem.  I've added the other servers to it's hosts
and
lmhosts files for good measure with no luck.

Any suggestions???

Will

Will Zimmerman MCSE
Exchange Administrator
Meristar Hotels and Resorts


_
List posting FAQ:   http://www.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: host ureachable

[Thomas Di Nardo]

FAQ

-Original Message-
From: Tener, Richard [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: Friday, April 05, 2002 3:48 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: host ureachable

Does anyone know how to check a communications problem between two mail
server.  We have a client in japan that we cant send messages too.  I
have
no problems sending to the rest of the world.  If I recall there is a
set of
commands in telnet that I can type to check this sort of thing out.   I
also
checked the queues in ims and it say host unreachable.  If anyone can
help i
would appreciate it.

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]

_
List posting FAQ:   http://www.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: Bad Mime decode?

[Thomas Di Nardo]

What version of the scan engine are you running? I had this issue a
while ago. In my case, it was resolved with a newer version of the
engine.

Tom.

-Original Message-
From: Martin, Greg (CSC) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: Monday, April 01, 2002 11:55 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Bad Mime decode?

Thanks for the reply.  The boundry was part of my munging.

It looks like Interscan is having it's way with some of these messages.
I
wonder why it seems to work with so much other mail and only
occasionally
goofs something up.  

Any chance you would explain the difference between
multipart/alternative
and multipart/mixed?


\\Greg


> -Original Message-
> From: Daniel Chenault [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
> Sent: Monday, April 01, 2002 10:09 AM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: Re: Bad Mime decode?
> 
> 
> It's malformed. It should be sent with multipart/alternative. 
> Additionally the line: boundry="InterScan_NT_MIME_Boundry"
> should be equivalent to "--=_938802==_.ALT"
> 
> and finally the correct word is "boundary" not "boundry". If 
> that's not a result of your munging than that's the problem.
> 
> - Original Message -
> From: "Martin, Greg (CSC)" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: "Exchange Discussions" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sent: Monday, April 01, 2002 7:38 AM
> Subject: FW: Bad Mime decode?
> 
> 
> >
> > I have a user receiving a message from an external client and the 
> > message
> is
> > getting to Outlook with the body of the message blank.  I 
> was able to 
> > retrieve the headers from the message and sure enough the 
> content was 
> > in there just not displayed by Outlook.  I suspect Intercan is 
> > screwing up
> the
> > mime header but never did learn to read mime) I wonder if you could 
> > steer
> me
> > towards a culprit.
> >
> > Thanks
> >
> > (Had to munge the mime stuff a little (Content replaced 
> with Cntnt & 
> > boundary with boundry) to get it past the no-attachment police)
> >
> > \\Greg
> >
> > Specs:
> > Exch 5.5 sp3
> > Outlook 2000 SP1 (same results with Outlook 2002)
> > Sender's mail client Eudora Pro 4.1
> > All mail passes through Interscan Virus wall
> >
> > Message details (most text deleted for privacy):
> >
> > Received: from mc2.etslan.org (mc.ets.org [144.81.127.16]) by 
> > rosnt47.ets.org with SMTP (Microsoft Exchange Internet Mail Service
> Version
> > 5.5.2650.21)
> > id 108WMXSC; Wed, 20 Mar 2002 20:35:03 -0500
> > Received: from 144.81.97.12 by mc2.etslan.org (InterScan E-Mail 
> > VirusWall NT); Wed, 20 Mar 2002 20:35:03 -0500
> > Received: from smtp.pa.net ([205.166.61.100]) by ets.org 
> (PMDF V6.1-1
> > #39460)  with SMTP id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> for 
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED] (ORCPT [EMAIL PROTECTED]); Wed, 
> 20 Mar 2002 
> > 20:35:03 -0500 (EST)
> > Received: from fsu.edu.fsu.edu (duppp259.chm9.franklin.pa.net
> [63.164.59.7])
> > by smtp.pa.net (Postfix) with SMTP id 2716B4C8D4 for 
> > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Wed,  20 Mar 2002 20:29:49 -0500 (EST)
> > Date: Wed, 20 Mar 2002 20:24:35 -0500
> > From: User <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > Subject: Re: CLEP US Hist Comm.
> > In-reply-to: 
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > X-Sender: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Message-id: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > MIME-vrsion: 1.0
> > X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 4.0.1
> > Cntnt-type: multipart/mixed;
> > boundry="InterScan_NT_MIME_Boundry"
> >
> > --=_938802==_.ALT
> > Cntnt-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
> >
> > Hi Margy -
> >
> > ...SNIP...
> >
> >
> > --==_938802==_.ALT
> > Cntent-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii"
> >
> > 
> > Hi Margy - 
> > I think it would be better for me...
> >
> > ...SNIP...
> >
> >
> > 
> >
> > --=_938802==_.ALT--
> >
> >
> > --InterScan_NT_MIME_Boundry--
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > \\Greg
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > 
> **
> > 
> > This e-mail and any files transmitted with it may contain 
> privileged or
> > confidential information. It is solely for use by the 
> individual for whom
> > it is intended, even if addressed incorrectly. If you 
> received this e-mail
> > in error, please notify the sender; do not disclose, copy, 
> distribute, or
> > take any action in reliance on the contents of this information; and
> delete
> > it from your system. Any other use of this e-mail is 
> prohibited. Thank 
> > you for your compliance.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > _
> > List posting FAQ:   http://www.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.

RE: Using Exchange 5.5 in different Orgs.

[Thomas Di Nardo]

Take a look in TechNet for information on the InterOrg Synchronization
Tool.

Tom.

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: Monday, March 25, 2002 2:27 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: Using Exchange 5.5 in different Orgs.

How can I configure Exchange 5.5 to work (sync) between two different
organizations.  I have two existing companies who want to send and
receive
e-mails no matter what office or domain they are in.

_
List posting FAQ:   http://www.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: Interorg replication

[Thomas Di Nardo]

I don't know how you can say that. I just did a search in TechNet using
just "interorg" and found a pile of stuff ranging from configuration to
troubleshooting replication issues. TechNet is your friend; use it.

Tom.

-Original Message-
From: javier villalpando [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: Monday, March 25, 2002 8:58 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: Interorg replication

Hi,
I want to implement this and I'm looking for info. Microsoft has little
info
on interorg replication.
Does anyone can pass me some additional resources?
Thanks in advance
Javier


_
List posting FAQ:   http://www.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: Yahoo! SPAM

[Thomas Di Nardo]

If you want POP access after 4/24 you have to pay. They sent out a
notice a while ago. You can check the notice on the POP Access and
Forwarding section.

Tom.

-Original Message-
From: Nikki Peterson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: Friday, March 29, 2002 8:37 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: Re: Yahoo! SPAM

UPDATE: When I changed my "Marketing Preferences" to NO on all SPAM,
Yahoo! shut me out of POP. I can't POP any of my accounts that I turned
off the SPAM on.

Has any one else noticed this phenomon? 

_
List posting FAQ:   http://www.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: promoting E2K to a DC

[Thomas Di Nardo]

Shows how much I'm paying attention today; responding to this again,
after we already beat it into the ground two weeks ago. *sigh*

-Original Message-
From: Thomas Di Nardo 
Sent: Friday, March 29, 2002 5:03 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: promoting E2K to a DC

I'd be looking for a network issue first. Have you checked to make sure
the affected client machines, the Exchange server, and the switches are
not configured for auto-sense? Any unusual network traffic happening at
the point you see the issue?

Tom.

-Original Message-
From: Andrey Fyodorov [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: Friday, March 29, 2002 4:59 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: promoting E2K to a DC

I have seen Outlook XP doing this all the time for no reason. It seems
that
a smallest network hickup would cause this. But at the same time I have
seen
Outlook XP do this with Exchange server sitting next door. It is
annoying.

-Original Message-
From: John Q Jr. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Tuesday, March 19, 2002 2:44 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: Re: promoting E2K to a DC


I have a E2K, SP2 box that continues to give "Requesting data from
Exchange
server" errors to users.
All users are using OLK2002. I have tried everything I know. To no
avail.
I have also tried to reset the OLK clients, still an issues.
It's odd it seams to rotate, one day a user will work fine and then not,
then a nother user will expirence the same isse.
I would think it's a load issue, but w/ only 25 users on this ssytem,
there
is no way. Even checked w Prof monitor.
1GB mem, dual 550 Procs, 36 GB of free space
So I am thinking it's an issue with E2K DC communication.
So my fix is to promote the E2K Server to a DC w/ a GC on it.
Any reason I should not?

Thank You,
 - John Q Jr.


_
List posting FAQ:   http://www.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: promoting E2K to a DC

[Thomas Di Nardo]

I'd be looking for a network issue first. Have you checked to make sure
the affected client machines, the Exchange server, and the switches are
not configured for auto-sense? Any unusual network traffic happening at
the point you see the issue?

Tom.

-Original Message-
From: Andrey Fyodorov [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: Friday, March 29, 2002 4:59 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: promoting E2K to a DC

I have seen Outlook XP doing this all the time for no reason. It seems
that
a smallest network hickup would cause this. But at the same time I have
seen
Outlook XP do this with Exchange server sitting next door. It is
annoying.

-Original Message-
From: John Q Jr. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Tuesday, March 19, 2002 2:44 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: Re: promoting E2K to a DC


I have a E2K, SP2 box that continues to give "Requesting data from
Exchange
server" errors to users.
All users are using OLK2002. I have tried everything I know. To no
avail.
I have also tried to reset the OLK clients, still an issues.
It's odd it seams to rotate, one day a user will work fine and then not,
then a nother user will expirence the same isse.
I would think it's a load issue, but w/ only 25 users on this ssytem,
there
is no way. Even checked w Prof monitor.
1GB mem, dual 550 Procs, 36 GB of free space
So I am thinking it's an issue with E2K DC communication.
So my fix is to promote the E2K Server to a DC w/ a GC on it.
Any reason I should not?

Thank You,
 - John Q Jr.


_
List posting FAQ:   http://www.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: E2K Migration & Groups

[Thomas Di Nardo]

Did you follow Q296051?

Tom.

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: Friday, March 29, 2002 4:00 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: E2K Migration & Groups

I established the Native-Mode domain to host the Universal Group and
created a CA to replicate only distribution lists to it. I also
installed
the first Exchange 2000 server into the same site as the Exchange 5.5.
The
information store suppose to detect what distribution list being used to
assign permission on Public Folder and convert them to a Universal
Security Group. They only exist in the native mode domain and not the
other domain. The Information store suppose to automatically convert
them
to USG. I verified that the group are being used to assign permission to
PF.

Any idea why there are still UDG and not being converted to USG? They
are
too many to convert manually.

Thanks,
TMS

_
List posting FAQ:   http://www.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: Instant Messaging ???

[Thomas Di Nardo]

Why you no answer my question!

-Original Message-
From: Ben Schorr [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: Thursday, March 28, 2002 3:49 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Instant Messaging ???
Sensitivity: Private

Sometimes it's best to lead by example.  :)

-Ben-
Ben M. Schorr, MVP-Outlook, CNA, MCPx3
Director of Information Services
Damon Key Leong Kupchak Hastert
http://www.hawaiilawyer.com


> -Original Message-
> From: Andy David [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
> Sent: Thursday, March 28, 2002 10:37 AM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: RE: Instant Messaging ???
> Sensitivity: Private
> 
> 
> Very subtle, but funny!
> 
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: Ben Schorr [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Thursday, March 28, 2002 3:31 PM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: RE: Instant Messaging ???
> Importance: Low
> 
> 
> http://www.microsoft.com/exchange/techinfo/administration/2000
> /IM_FAQ.asp
> http://www.isaserver.org/pages/learning%20zone.htm
> http://www.msexchange.org/authors/schmied/tutorials/exchange_2
> 000_server_mes
> saging_service.htm
> 
> That should get you started.
> 
> -Ben-
> Ben M. Schorr, MVP-Outlook, CNA, MCPx3
> Director of Information Services
> Damon Key Leong Kupchak Hastert
> http://www.hawaiilawyer.com
> 
> 
> > -Original Message-
> > From: test [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > Sent: Thursday, March 28, 2002 10:14 AM
> > To: Exchange Discussions
> > Subject: Instant Messaging ???
> > Importance: High
> > 
> > 
> > Can someone point me to a resource with a detailed
> > description of the Instant Messaging configuration (FQDN 
> > format, DNS, etc.) on a multihomed DC with ISA or Proxy for 
> > web sharing? 
> > 
> > _

_
List posting FAQ:   http://www.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: Dell Diags

[Thomas Di Nardo]

I'm 100% with you Serdar. I have yet to have a positive DELL experience.
I have yet to have a service call that resulted in a satisfactory
resolution to the problem I call about. This applies to both technical
answers to questions as well as parts replacement and onsite service.
Very low quality across the board. I'm not going to get into a long
rant. If you've never experienced good service, you have no frame of
reference; therefore, Dell service must look good. I'll just leave it at
that.

In contrast, while I've had occasional issues with particular service
technicians from Compaq, HP, and IBM during the last 14 years, I can say
that those companies generally take care of the issue in a much more
satisfactory and timely manner. I would rate Compaq highest, followed
closely by HP, and a distant 3rd being IBM. Dell would not make my list
of enterprise players.

As far as the desktop arena goes, I think Dells basic machines are
better than they used to be. I think Compaq's Professional Workstation
line is probably the best that's out there. Although, I must say I was
very disappointed when they stopped supporting their server level array
controllers in the PW lineup. I always thought it was cool to be able to
run a 2DH in my workstation. :)

Tom.

 

-Original Message-
From: Soysal, Serdar [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: Wednesday, March 27, 2002 6:03 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Dell Diags

Bravo.  Bis bis bis.  You made a Kmart joke.  You must be so proud.

Clarification:  I didn't say "there isn't anybody who likes Dell".  I
said
"I haven't met anybody in person who had a pleasant experience with
Dell".  

*Sigh*

I am not trying to solicit "Hey, it works for me.  I like Dell."
comments.
I personally wouldn't recommend their server products to any customer,
but
YMMV.  

Serdar Soysal


-Original Message-
From: Exchange List [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: Wednesday, March 27, 2002 5:55 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Dell Diags


Hey, I like Dell. PCs, laptops and servers. And I've worked with them
all
HP, Compaq, IBM, Dell.

Now Kmart, that's a different story.

-Original Message-
From: Soysal, Serdar [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Wednesday, March 27, 2002 4:40 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Dell Diags



Nobody that I have ever met had positive experiences with Dell.  I've
read
"Dell is wonderful" type comments on newsgroups, but I have yet to meet
somebody in person that had a pleasant experience with this company.

Serdar Soysal


-Original Message-
From: Alverson, Thomas M. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: Wednesday, March 27, 2002 5:36 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Cc: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]'
Subject: RE: Dell Diags


We recently got some dells with bogus off brand network cards in them
(we
specified 3com- not sure if dell or our purchasing fouled up).  These
bogus
cards would not work with the 8 port switching hub they were connected
to.
We had to switch to a different 24port hub to get things running.  The
network would barely work (very slowly) and if you ran the built in net
diag
it would show many dropped packets (when connected to the 8 port
switch).  

Tom

-Original Message-
From: Bill Kuhl [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: Wednesday, March 27, 2002 5:17 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Dell Diags


I had to vent, thought maybe someone who I could have contact at Dell to
resolve our issues. The first Dell had intermittent problems in Windows
98,
support was no help, but when it was updated to Windows 2000 the problem
disappeared. Our latest GX240's lockup once a day on the network.
Support
said there are no issues but I found the issue on their web site.
Installed
new NIC driver, seem to help but not total answer. Support sent a
restore CD
and I used that on a couple of pc's, that has helped also. 

I feel the same way about ComPaq.

They are worse.

Bill Kuhl (probably in trouble with Dell)

William [1] 

[1] Who now runs a plethora of happy Dells.


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

RE: NAS support for Exchange 2000

[Thomas Di Nardo]

devices that are not WHQL certified,
Microsoft
will refer you to your storage vendor for support.

-Original Message-
From: Thomas Di Nardo [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Wednesday, March 27, 2002 2:39 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: NAS support for Exchange 2000


Read these articles carefully. One notable vendor is trying to tell some
of my customers that these articles mean MSFT now supports NAS. I don't
see how that conclusion can be drawn from the language in the articles.
Until a NAS device is WHQL, you need to go to your NAS vendor if your
database gets pooched. I don't know about you, but I wouldn't feel
comfortable with that. I have yet to see a NAS device with WHQL
certification (though I admit I've not checked in the last couple weeks,
so things could have changed).

Another thing to keep in mind is that NAS devices have multiple single
points of failure (fans, processors, etc.) and as the size of the NAS
increases your probabilities of multiple disc failures in the same RAID
set increases. Also bear in mind that all data transfers must ride the
network stack; I would be very concerned with database integrity in this
scenario (even if you are directly attaching the NAS to Exchange via
fiber) - no matter what your vendor says, it's not the same as SCSI or
SAN.

I would be very careful if you are thinking of doing this.

Tom.

-Original Message-
From: Akerlund, Scott [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: Wednesday, March 27, 2002 5:25 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: NAS support for Exchange 2000

The Knowledge Base articles can be found at the following links:

http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;en-us;Q317173
http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;en-us;Q317172

-Original Message-
From: RB [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Wednesday, March 27, 2002 2:22 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: NAS support for Exchange 2000


Has Microsoft changed it's stance on NAS attached devices for Exchange
at
all?

My understanding was that any NAS attached storage for Exchange 2000 is
not supported as all Exchange 2000 data needs to be local to the server
(i.e. Local disks or a SAN via a dedicated connection is supported).

If this is still the case does anyone have a reference to a web page
that
makes this statement about NAS.

If it has changed a reference to this would be appreciated also.

Regards

_
List posting FAQ:   http://www.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: NAS support for Exchange 2000

[Thomas Di Nardo]

Read these articles carefully. One notable vendor is trying to tell some
of my customers that these articles mean MSFT now supports NAS. I don't
see how that conclusion can be drawn from the language in the articles.
Until a NAS device is WHQL, you need to go to your NAS vendor if your
database gets pooched. I don't know about you, but I wouldn't feel
comfortable with that. I have yet to see a NAS device with WHQL
certification (though I admit I've not checked in the last couple weeks,
so things could have changed).

Another thing to keep in mind is that NAS devices have multiple single
points of failure (fans, processors, etc.) and as the size of the NAS
increases your probabilities of multiple disc failures in the same RAID
set increases. Also bear in mind that all data transfers must ride the
network stack; I would be very concerned with database integrity in this
scenario (even if you are directly attaching the NAS to Exchange via
fiber) - no matter what your vendor says, it's not the same as SCSI or
SAN.

I would be very careful if you are thinking of doing this.

Tom.

-Original Message-
From: Akerlund, Scott [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: Wednesday, March 27, 2002 5:25 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: NAS support for Exchange 2000

The Knowledge Base articles can be found at the following links:

http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;en-us;Q317173
http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;en-us;Q317172

-Original Message-
From: RB [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Wednesday, March 27, 2002 2:22 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: NAS support for Exchange 2000


Has Microsoft changed it's stance on NAS attached devices for Exchange
at
all?

My understanding was that any NAS attached storage for Exchange 2000 is
not supported as all Exchange 2000 data needs to be local to the server
(i.e. Local disks or a SAN via a dedicated connection is supported).

If this is still the case does anyone have a reference to a web page
that
makes this statement about NAS.

If it has changed a reference to this would be appreciated also.

Regards

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

[Thomas Di Nardo]

If there ever was a fast way to get on a kill list, you just found it.
You haven't been here long, and with comments like that (particularly to
Andy), you won't be staying long.

Plunk.

-Original Message-
From: Christopher Hummert [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: Tuesday, March 26, 2002 3:13 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Prep

Ha ha.why don't you just keep on topic asshole


-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Andy David
Sent: Tuesday, March 26, 2002 12:05 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Prep


Well Sir, you obviously have the writing skills I need to take my show
on the road. My agent will be contacting you.


-Original Message-
From: Christopher Hummert [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Tuesday, March 26, 2002 2:47 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Prep


Ha ha your funny..with your talent why are you in the comedy
industry and not the comic circuit? 

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Andy David
Sent: Tuesday, March 26, 2002 11:39 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Prep


No, that would be fdisk.


-Original Message-
From: Christopher Hummert [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Tuesday, March 26, 2002 2:31 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Prep


So you can run it even after the exchange server has been installed?
-Chris

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of William
Lefkovics
Sent: Tuesday, March 26, 2002 10:41 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Prep


You can run them anytime.

If you have a large enterprise with remote DC's, it's best to leave some
time.

William

-Original Message-
From: Mike Woodruff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Tuesday, March 26, 2002 10:41 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: Prep


Can I run Forest and Domain Prep on AD and not install exchange2k until
later?

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


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


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


==


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


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


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


==


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


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

RE: Prep

[Thomas Di Nardo]

Why you no answer my question!

-Original Message-
From: Amit Hanji [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: Tuesday, March 26, 2002 7:13 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Prep

helo mr hummert,

my gurl friend say she want to give me good hummert
job. i no B sure what she B talking about. i thunk it
involving sum sex stuff. she say it B very good 4 me.

U must B hummert job expurt. U please explan 2 me waht
she meen.

10Q

UR friend
==
Amit the CyberDooD
==

-Original Message-
From: Christopher Hummert [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]

Sent: Tuesday, March 26, 2002 12:13 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Prep


Ha ha.why don't you just keep on topic asshole


-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf
Of Andy David
Sent: Tuesday, March 26, 2002 12:05 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Prep


Well Sir, you obviously have the writing skills I need
to take my show on the road. My agent will be
contacting you.


-Original Message-
From: Christopher Hummert [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Tuesday, March 26, 2002 2:47 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Prep


Ha ha your funny..with your talent why are you in
the comedy industry and not the comic circuit? 

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf
Of Andy David
Sent: Tuesday, March 26, 2002 11:39 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Prep


No, that would be fdisk.


-Original Message-
From: Christopher Hummert [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Tuesday, March 26, 2002 2:31 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Prep


So you can run it even after the exchange server has
been installed? -Chris

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf
Of William Lefkovics
Sent: Tuesday, March 26, 2002 10:41 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Prep


You can run them anytime.

If you have a large enterprise with remote DC's, it's
best to leave some time.

William

-Original Message-
From: Mike Woodruff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Tuesday, March 26, 2002 10:41 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: Prep


Can I run Forest and Domain Prep on AD and not install
exchange2k until later?


__
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Movies - coverage of the 74th Academy Awards(r)
http://movies.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: Global Contacts

[Thomas Di Nardo]

No, we can make fun of you first. :)

-Original Message-
From: Christopher Hummert [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: Friday, March 22, 2002 5:04 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Global Contacts

Oh come onyou have to help first and then make fun of me later
-Chris

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Baker,
Jennifer
Sent: Friday, March 22, 2002 1:58 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Global Contacts


Sounds more like constipation.

-Original Message-
From: Christopher Hummert [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: Friday, March 22, 2002 1:43 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: Global Contacts


I'm having a brain fart over here..how do you add contacts to the
global contact list?

Thanks
Chris Hummert


Network Administrator - Albany Agency of Insurance
Webmaster for Noghri.net
http://www.noghri.net
MS Beta tester ID #: 388366

Sometimes I think the surest sign that intelligent life exists elsewhere
in the universe is that none of it has tried to contacts us." 

- from Calvin and Hobbes



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

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


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

_
List posting FAQ:   http://www.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: IMC Queues

[Thomas Di Nardo]

Have you looked in the FAQ yet?

-Original Message-
From: Chris Haaker [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: Friday, March 22, 2002 4:55 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: Re: IMC Queues

Perhaps I am dim but I can only find 1 entry with no replies for IMS or
IMC
queue has <> in Originator Field.
Any other ideas?
The weird thing is there is something like 6 entries for each outgoing
address

co.boing.com  <>
co.boing.com  <>
co.boing.com  <>
co.boing.com  <>
yahoo.com  <>
yahoo.com  <>
yahoo.com  <>
yahoo.com  <>

etc. all with the same exact timestamp . . .

- Original Message -
From: "Andy David" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Exchange Discussions" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Friday, March 22, 2002 3:53 PM
Subject: RE: IMC Queues


> Burrow your way to the FAQ.
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Chris Haaker [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Friday, March 22, 2002 3:45 PM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: IMC Queues
>
>
> Looking in the IMC Queue for Outbound Mail awaiting delivery I see
10-20
> enteries to the same address all with <> as the originator . . .
> Has the worm struck you think?
>
> "It is the province of knowledge to speak,
> and it is the privilege of wisdom to listen".
> Oliver Wendell Holmes, Sr. (1809-94); U.S. writer, physician.
>
>
>
>
>
>
> _
> List posting FAQ:   http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
> Archives:   http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp
> To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>

--

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


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



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

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

RE: Exchange with 2 domains

[Thomas Di Nardo]

Mmm. Beer.

-Original Message-
From: Andy David [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: Friday, March 22, 2002 4:06 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Exchange with 2 domains

I could use a beer.


-Original Message-
From: Jason [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Friday, March 22, 2002 10:03 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: Exchange with 2 domains


Would it be possible for my organization to use 1 Exchange server for 2
domains? If so would they be able to share the same @domainname.com? or
would I need to purchase another domain name to come after the @ on one
of
the Windows domains?

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


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


==


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

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

RE: Haiku Friday <1st Attempt be nice :>)

[Thomas Di Nardo]

CIO is roach
Turn on light and crush
Ten more will come now

-Original Message-
From: Chris Haaker [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: Friday, March 22, 2002 1:04 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: Haiku Friday <1st Attempt be nice :>)

Cannot migrate now
Why explain the obvious
Die CIO die

"It is the province of knowledge to speak,
and it is the privilege of wisdom to listen".
Oliver Wendell Holmes, Sr. (1809-94); U.S. writer, physician.






_
List posting FAQ:   http://www.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: Haiku Friday

[Thomas Di Nardo]

Etch-A-sketch is
The solution to problems
Must shake to reboot



-Original Message-
From: Ben Schorr [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: Friday, March 22, 2002 1:32 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Haiku Friday

It could be worse Tom
Their desires could be clear.
You install.  Oh, wait.

-Ben-
Ben M. Schorr, MVP-Outlook, CNA, MCPx3
Director of Information Services
Damon Key Leong Kupchak Hastert
http://www.hawaiilawyer.com


> -Original Message-
> From: Thomas Di Nardo [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
> Sent: Friday, March 22, 2002 8:20 AM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: RE: Haiku Friday
> 
> 
> I am stuck in hell
> My customers do not know
> What the hell they want
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: Soysal, Serdar [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
> Sent: Friday, March 22, 2002 1:05 PM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: RE: Haiku Friday
> 
> 
> Couldn't stay awake
> No cookies after pizza 
> On to happy hour
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: Soysal, Serdar [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Friday, March 22, 2002 10:48 AM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: Haiku Friday
> 
> 
> 
> Vendor lunch now
> Free pizzas for not sleeping
> Only benefit
> 
> Serdar Soysal
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _
> List posting FAQ:   http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
> Archives:   http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp
> To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 
> _
> List posting FAQ:   http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
> Archives:   http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp
> To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 
> 
> _
> List posting FAQ:   http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
> Archives:   http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp
> To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 
> _
> List posting FAQ:   http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
> Archives:   http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp
> To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 

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

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

RE: Haiku Friday

[Thomas Di Nardo]

I am stuck in hell
My customers do not know
What the hell they want

-Original Message-
From: Soysal, Serdar [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: Friday, March 22, 2002 1:05 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Haiku Friday


Couldn't stay awake
No cookies after pizza 
On to happy hour

-Original Message-
From: Soysal, Serdar [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Friday, March 22, 2002 10:48 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: Haiku Friday



Vendor lunch now
Free pizzas for not sleeping
Only benefit

Serdar Soysal




_
List posting FAQ:   http://www.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: Move Mailbox

[Thomas Di Nardo]

He's talking about moving the mailbox between servers.

T.

-Original Message-
From: Mitchell Mike [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: Friday, March 22, 2002 11:19 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Move Mailbox

When moving a mailbox.  Could you define why you would move a mailbox?
Like
from one container to another?

If you move from on container to another would you need to rebuild the
profile or add any type of SMTP address
to link the old mail to the new mailbox?  

Regards,

Mike Mitchell
Systems eMAIL Administrator
Alverno Information Services
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
(317) 532-7800 ext. 6211


-Original Message-
From: Kevin Miller [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Friday, March 22, 2002 11:15 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Move Mailbox


His client will tell him his mail box is not available until it is all
moved. Then he will be fine.

--Kevinm M, WLKMMAS, UCC+WCA, And Beyond
What are you on about mate?


-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Chris Haaker
Sent: Friday, March 22, 2002 8:06 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: Move Mailbox


Does anyone know the impact of moving a user's mailbox while they hae it
open in Outlook? I am sure it is not preferred, but we have one user we
cannot get ahold of . . .

"It is the province of knowledge to speak,
and it is the privilege of wisdom to listen".
Oliver Wendell Holmes, Sr. (1809-94); U.S. writer, physician.






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



_

Do You Yahoo!?

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




_
List posting FAQ:   http://www.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: What is this?

[Thomas Di Nardo]

This should have read: 

I fixed the problem by disabling sending both plain text and html in
global settings/IMF and then configuring either a CR or a domain policy
for internet.com forcing everything to plain text. No more issues after
that.

-Original Message-
From: Thomas Di Nardo 
Sent: Thursday, March 21, 2002 3:06 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: What is this?

I fixed the problem with disabling sending both plain text and html in
global settings/IMF and then configuring either a CR or a domain policy
for internet.com forcing everything to plain text. No more issues after
that. 

-Original Message-
From: Hunter, Lori [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: Thursday, March 21, 2002 2:58 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: What is this?

internet.com sux.  I get it all the time and I don't even allow html to
go
out the ims.

-Original Message-
From: Mike Woodruff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Thursday, March 21, 2002 1:31 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: What is this?


I get this from the list when I try to send a message to it.  I'm using
plain text.  It has always worked fine until today?


-
Sorry, your stylized text, or HTML mail can not be distributed through
the
Internet.Com.

The only acceptable format for posting to the Internet.Com is ASCII
Text.

Please, re-send your post to continue your discussion on the
Internet.Com.
-

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

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

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

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

RE: What is this?

[Thomas Di Nardo]

I fixed the problem with disabling sending both plain text and html in
global settings/IMF and then configuring either a CR or a domain policy
for internet.com forcing everything to plain text. No more issues after
that. 

-Original Message-
From: Hunter, Lori [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: Thursday, March 21, 2002 2:58 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: What is this?

internet.com sux.  I get it all the time and I don't even allow html to
go
out the ims.

-Original Message-
From: Mike Woodruff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Thursday, March 21, 2002 1:31 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: What is this?


I get this from the list when I try to send a message to it.  I'm using
plain text.  It has always worked fine until today?


-
Sorry, your stylized text, or HTML mail can not be distributed through
the
Internet.Com.

The only acceptable format for posting to the Internet.Com is ASCII
Text.

Please, re-send your post to continue your discussion on the
Internet.Com.
-

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

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

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

RE: What is this?

[Thomas Di Nardo]

Good movie. One of Billy Crystal's better one's. ;)

-Original Message-
From: Andy David [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: Thursday, March 21, 2002 2:42 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: What is this?

Im running scared.


-Original Message-----
From: Thomas Di Nardo [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Thursday, March 21, 2002 2:36 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: What is this?


Are you running E2K?

-Original Message-
From: Mike Woodruff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: Thursday, March 21, 2002 2:31 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: What is this?

I get this from the list when I try to send a message to it.  I'm using
plain text.  It has always worked fine until today?


-
Sorry, your stylized text, or HTML mail can not be distributed through
the
Internet.Com.

The only acceptable format for posting to the Internet.Com is ASCII
Text.

Please, re-send your post to continue your discussion on the
Internet.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]


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


==


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

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

RE: Sharing info. between two orgs.

[Thomas Di Nardo]

I already answered this for you on Tuesday. Asking the same question
twice won't change the answer you are given.

Tom.

-Original Message-
From: Minero Hector B DLVA [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: Thursday, March 21, 2002 10:15 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: Sharing info. between two orgs.


Hi all, due to some breakup in our company we're being forced to break
our
Org into two.

If we have two organizations, is there a way to replicate (share)
Address
books?
Is it possible to replicate (share) public folders?

What other issues should we consider?

Thanks in advance.


Hector Minero
Systems Engineer
NSWCDD Code K55
Ph: (540)653-8859
Fax: (540)653-8575
Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]


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

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

RE: What is this?

[Thomas Di Nardo]

Are you running E2K?

-Original Message-
From: Mike Woodruff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: Thursday, March 21, 2002 2:31 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: What is this?

I get this from the list when I try to send a message to it.  I'm using
plain text.  It has always worked fine until today?


-
Sorry, your stylized text, or HTML mail can not be distributed through
the
Internet.Com.

The only acceptable format for posting to the Internet.Com is ASCII
Text.

Please, re-send your post to continue your discussion on the
Internet.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: Transaction Logs

[Thomas Di Nardo]

No, the other thing. That.

-Original Message-
From: Andy David [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: Wednesday, March 20, 2002 8:04 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Transaction Logs

it


-Original Message-
From: William Lefkovics [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Wednesday, March 20, 2002 8:00 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Transaction Logs


Reuses what?

-Original Message-
From: Arshad Rafat Khan [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Wednesday, March 20, 2002 1:15 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: Re: Transaction Logs


Exchange reuses 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]

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


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


==


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

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

RE: promoting E2K to a DC

[Thomas Di Nardo]

I didn't want him to spend money unnecessarily either. I just wanted him
to have all the information I had.

Anyway, it'll probably be something silly like having auto-negotiation
enabled on the switch. :)

Tom.

-Original Message-
From: Paul Bouzan [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: Wednesday, March 20, 2002 4:08 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: promoting E2K to a DC

Thomas, I was not doubting that your response was factually correct, it
is.
I'm just trying to save the guy some money!

PBB


-Original Message-----
From: Thomas Di Nardo [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: 20 March 2002 00:49
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: promoting E2K to a DC


Agreed, however, I never speculated about anything. I merely stated that
this message box is generally caused by network congestion and that IF
this
was the culprit in John's case, to call PSS for the solution. That's why
I
prefaced it the way I did.

Note that he said there are only 25 on this particular server, not on
his
whole network. He did not say how many users are on the network. I have
no
idea how much traffic is on the segment his E2K box resides on, or on
his
network as a whole. He hasn't provided that information.

I mentioned what I did because this is known to be caused by network
congestion and other connectivity based issues. As I said, IF this is
caused
by network congestion, the fix is a few registry settings that must be
obtained from PSS (unless you are under an MS NDA, in which case you can
get
the info from MPO).

I figured that since I was aware, I would mention it so that if John
confirmed the cause was network congestion, he'd know there was a
potential
solution available for that particular scenario.

Tom.

-Original Message-
From: Paul Bouzan [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: Tuesday, March 19, 2002 7:28 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: promoting E2K to a DC

John has 25 users and I would hate to speculate on what is causing the
network congestion!  

I have 400 users over thirty sites and PSS is not even an option yet
until I
have checked the cable etc.  See my previous post.

PBB
~ndi


-Original Message-
From: Thomas Di Nardo [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: 20 March 2002 00:09
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: promoting E2K to a DC


This is usually caused by network congestion. You can run a netmon trace
to
confirm this is the cause in your case. If that's what's causing the
problem
in your case, you can call PSS and get some information for registry
changes
to tune the length of time that will pass before the message box is
presented or disable it altogether. 

Tom.

-Original Message-
From: John Q Jr. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: Tuesday, March 19, 2002 2:44 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: Re: promoting E2K to a DC

I have a E2K, SP2 box that continues to give "Requesting data from
Exchange
server" errors to users. All users are using OLK2002. I have tried
everything I know. To no avail. I have also tried to reset the OLK
clients,
still an issues. It's odd it seams to rotate, one day a user will work
fine
and then not, then a nother user will expirence the same isse. I would
think
it's a load issue, but w/ only 25 users on this ssytem, there is no way.
Even checked w Prof monitor. 1GB mem, dual 550 Procs, 36 GB of free
space So
I am thinking it's an issue with E2K DC communication. So my fix is to
promote the E2K Server to a DC w/ a GC on it. Any reason I should not?

Thank You,
 - John Q Jr.


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

RE: Exchange Server Maintenance 5.5

[Thomas Di Nardo]

The space was freed up within the database. The database won't reduce in
size without compacting it. 

You might want to review the list archives. We've covered this at least
two times in the last week.

Tom.

-Original Message-
From: Jeff Toates [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: Tuesday, March 19, 2002 10:01 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: Exchange Server Maintenance 5.5

My exchange database seems to keep growing and growing.  We moved some
users from one server to another thinking that this would free up some
space on the original server.  Once we moved users it didn't free up any
additional space.  How do I free up that space?

Thanks,
Jeff

_
List posting FAQ:   http://www.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 info. between two Orgs

[Thomas Di Nardo]

The InterOrg Synchronization Tool and the InterOrg Replication Utility
are the tools you need.

Search TechNet for interorg and you'll find everything you need.

Tom.

-Original Message-
From: Minero Hector B DLVA [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: Tuesday, March 19, 2002 9:06 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: Sharing info. between two Orgs


Hi all, due to some breakup in our company we're being forced to break
our
Org into two.

If we have two organizations, is there a way to replicate (share)
Address
books?
Is it possible to replicate (share) public folders?

What other issues should we consider?

Thanks in advance.


Hector Minero



_
List posting FAQ:   http://www.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: promoting E2K to a DC

[Thomas Di Nardo]

This is usually caused by network congestion. You can run a netmon trace
to confirm this is the cause in your case. If that's what's causing the
problem in your case, you can call PSS and get some information for
registry changes to tune the length of time that will pass before the
message box is presented or disable it altogether. 

Tom.

-Original Message-
From: John Q Jr. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: Tuesday, March 19, 2002 2:44 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: Re: promoting E2K to a DC

I have a E2K, SP2 box that continues to give "Requesting data from
Exchange
server" errors to users.
All users are using OLK2002. I have tried everything I know. To no
avail.
I have also tried to reset the OLK clients, still an issues.
It's odd it seams to rotate, one day a user will work fine and then not,
then a nother user will expirence the same isse.
I would think it's a load issue, but w/ only 25 users on this ssytem,
there
is no way. Even checked w Prof monitor.
1GB mem, dual 550 Procs, 36 GB of free space
So I am thinking it's an issue with E2K DC communication.
So my fix is to promote the E2K Server to a DC w/ a GC on it.
Any reason I should not?

Thank You,
 - John Q Jr.


_
List posting FAQ:   http://www.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 Home Edition

[Thomas Di Nardo]

Home Edition will work fine.

-Original Message-
From: Peter Blouin [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: Tuesday, March 19, 2002 5:31 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: Outlook & XP Home Edition

I have a dialup user who needs to run Outlook at home and is connecting
to
Exchange 5.5 server. Can this be done on a system running XP Home
Edition
or does it need to be XP Pro because of domain authentication for the
mailbox?

TIA, Peter

_
List posting FAQ:   http://www.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: Digital Signatures and Custom Forms

[Thomas Di Nardo]

Q279106

-Original Message-
From: Stephens, Tara [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: Tuesday, March 19, 2002 2:44 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: Digital Signatures and Custom Forms

Is anyone using digital signatures with custom forms?  We've been asked
to implement a form for an approval process that must route to several
levels of management within the company.  We want to use digital
signatures to make this a "legal" document.  Right now, I have the form
made (first draft) and can route it to different people, but it only
seems to keep track of the signature of the last person to send the
form.  Is there a way to track multiple signatures on a custom form?  We
are running E2K Sp1.  The certificates were issued internally by our CA.

Thanks.
Tara


_
List posting FAQ:   http://www.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: Forms Assessment

[Thomas Di Nardo]

I know you already have the answer, but just in case someone else is
looking to do it, take a look at Q258959. If you save a copy of the
forms to a folder you should be able to accomplish the task using
mdbvu32.exe.

Tom.
 
-Original Message-
From: Hatley, Ken [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: Tuesday, March 19, 2002 12:51 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Forms Assessment

I wasn't asking how to back them up I wanted to export the list to a
file so
I didn't have to go through and manually do it...it is already done
though
thanks.

 -Original Message-
From:   Soysal, Serdar [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent:   Tuesday, March 19, 2002 11:41 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject:RE: Forms Assessment

I can't believe that MCS doesn't know how to backup forms.  You can
achieve
what you want very easily.  It's in Outlook, Options, Other...

Serdar Soysal


-Original Message-
From: Hatley, Ken [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: Wednesday, March 13, 2002 3:42 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Forms Assessment


I was not intending to be sarcastic.  I am working with MCS now, and
they
didn't know how to do it...I was trying to find out if any of you guys
knew
how before I started a very long and tedious process of manually
collecting
the information.


 -Original Message-
From:   Thomas Di Nardo [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent:   Tuesday, March 12, 2002 3:08 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject:RE: Forms Assessment

If you want a faster response, call PSS.

-Original Message-
From: Hatley, Ken [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: Tuesday, March 12, 2002 3:42 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Forms Assessment

Does no one know how to do this or was this a dumb question?

-Original Message-
From: Hatley, Ken 
Sent: Tuesday, March 12, 2002 9:59 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: Forms Assessment


Is there a way to export all of the organizational form data and or
information?  At the very least I would like to be able to extract all
of
the names of the forms so I can go in manually and add information, but
would like to be able to quickly download all of the forms for quicker
access.  Any help would be appreciated.  I have hundreds of forms that I
need to gather information on in preperation for Ex2K.

thanks
Ken

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

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

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

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


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

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

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