RE: Upgrading Exchange 5.5 to Exchange 2000
Is there a way to block Outlook users from connecting to an Exchange server? We are moving users from one server to another and want to block them from logging into their mailbox on the weekend. Ralph Elmerick NT Exchange Administrator Information Systems Technical Principal ** PLEASE NOTE: The above email address has recently changed from a previous naming standard -- if this does not match your records, please update them to use this new name in future email addressed to this individual. This message and any attachments are intended for the individual or entity named above. If you are not the intended recipient, please do not forward, copy, print, use or disclose this communication to others; also please notify the sender by replying to this message, and then delete it from your system. The Timken Company ** _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe via postal mail, please contact us at: Jupitermedia Corp. Attn: Discussion List Management 475 Park Avenue South New York, NY 10016 Please include the email address which you have been contacted with.
Exchange 2000 DR
All, We are about to do an off-site DR exercise. This DR site (for the test) will have no connectivity to our production environment. I have 2 domains (bm.root - which is an empty forest root placeholder domain) - (bakernet.com - peer domain to bm.root where all objects live). The Exchange server (member of bakernet.com) that will used for the DR exercise (Exchange 2000 SP 3) is on a Windows 2000 SP 3 Domain controller (bakernet.com). I have ran the Veritas IDR process on the server and have identical hardware at the DR site for the restore. Question: Will services fail because the forest root domain (bm.root) can not be contacted? Or do I need to also do a DR of a bm.root Domain controller at the DR site? I have done numerous IDR recoveries, but have all been on the production network where the bm.root domain could be contacted I hope this makes sense! Thanks _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe via postal mail, please contact us at: Jupitermedia Corp. Attn: Discussion List Management 475 Park Avenue South New York, NY 10016 Please include the email address which you have been contacted with.
RE: Exchange 2000 DR
You have valid Domain controller inplace at your test site or are you testing that part also. MS has a rather lenghty indepth white paper that spells out all of the steps and requirements. From: Miller, Robert [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Exchange 2000 DR Date: Fri, 9 Jan 2004 12:21:02 -0600 All, We are about to do an off-site DR exercise. This DR site (for the test) will have no connectivity to our production environment. I have 2 domains (bm.root - which is an empty forest root placeholder domain) - (bakernet.com - peer domain to bm.root where all objects live). The Exchange server (member of bakernet.com) that will used for the DR exercise (Exchange 2000 SP 3) is on a Windows 2000 SP 3 Domain controller (bakernet.com). I have ran the Veritas IDR process on the server and have identical hardware at the DR site for the restore. Question: Will services fail because the forest root domain (bm.root) can not be contacted? Or do I need to also do a DR of a bm.root Domain controller at the DR site? I have done numerous IDR recoveries, but have all been on the production network where the bm.root domain could be contacted I hope this makes sense! Thanks _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe via postal mail, please contact us at: Jupitermedia Corp. Attn: Discussion List Management 475 Park Avenue South New York, NY 10016 Please include the email address which you have been contacted with. _ Enjoy a special introductory offer for dial-up Internet access limited time only! http://join.msn.com/?page=dept/dialup _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe via postal mail, please contact us at: Jupitermedia Corp. Attn: Discussion List Management 475 Park Avenue South New York, NY 10016 Please include the email address which you have been contacted with.
Re: Exchange 2000 DR
That's a great question. I don't know the answer, though. It'd be nice to hear what happens - please report back when you complete your testing! - Original Message - From: Miller, Robert [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, January 09, 2004 1:21 PM Subject: Exchange 2000 DR All, We are about to do an off-site DR exercise. This DR site (for the test) will have no connectivity to our production environment. I have 2 domains (bm.root - which is an empty forest root placeholder domain) - (bakernet.com - peer domain to bm.root where all objects live). The Exchange server (member of bakernet.com) that will used for the DR exercise (Exchange 2000 SP 3) is on a Windows 2000 SP 3 Domain controller (bakernet.com). I have ran the Veritas IDR process on the server and have identical hardware at the DR site for the restore. Question: Will services fail because the forest root domain (bm.root) can not be contacted? Or do I need to also do a DR of a bm.root Domain controller at the DR site? I have done numerous IDR recoveries, but have all been on the production network where the bm.root domain could be contacted I hope this makes sense! Thanks _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe via postal mail, please contact us at: Jupitermedia Corp. Attn: Discussion List Management 475 Park Avenue South New York, NY 10016 Please include the email address which you have been contacted with. _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe via postal mail, please contact us at: Jupitermedia Corp. Attn: Discussion List Management 475 Park Avenue South New York, NY 10016 Please include the email address which you have been contacted with.
RE: Upgrading Exchange 5.5 to Exchange 2000
Yes. It's really only important to block logins to the Exchange 5.5 server. http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;en-us;218920 What's not in the KB is that the Exchange 2000 server whose System Attendant and DSA you must allow is the server on which the Site Replication Service runs. Also consider the following KB. http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;en-us;299473 Ed Crowley MCSE+Internet MVP Freelance E-Mail Philosopher Protecting the world from PSTs and Bricked Backups!T -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Elmerick, Ralph H. Sent: Friday, January 09, 2004 8:08 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Upgrading Exchange 5.5 to Exchange 2000 Is there a way to block Outlook users from connecting to an Exchange server? We are moving users from one server to another and want to block them from logging into their mailbox on the weekend. Ralph Elmerick NT Exchange Administrator Information Systems Technical Principal ** PLEASE NOTE: The above email address has recently changed from a previous naming standard -- if this does not match your records, please update them to use this new name in future email addressed to this individual. This message and any attachments are intended for the individual or entity named above. If you are not the intended recipient, please do not forward, copy, print, use or disclose this communication to others; also please notify the sender by replying to this message, and then delete it from your system. The Timken Company ** _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang =english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe via postal mail, please contact us at: Jupitermedia Corp. Attn: Discussion List Management 475 Park Avenue South New York, NY 10016 Please include the email address which you have been contacted with. _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe via postal mail, please contact us at: Jupitermedia Corp. Attn: Discussion List Management 475 Park Avenue South New York, NY 10016 Please include the email address which you have been contacted with.
RE: Exchange 2000 DR
I think you should plan on having a clone root domain controller. You could use VMWare or Microsoft Virtual Server and run it on the same box, though. Ed Crowley MCSE+Internet MVP Freelance E-Mail Philosopher Protecting the world from PSTs and Bricked Backups!T -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Miller, Robert Sent: Friday, January 09, 2004 10:21 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Exchange 2000 DR All, We are about to do an off-site DR exercise. This DR site (for the test) will have no connectivity to our production environment. I have 2 domains (bm.root - which is an empty forest root placeholder domain) - (bakernet.com - peer domain to bm.root where all objects live). The Exchange server (member of bakernet.com) that will used for the DR exercise (Exchange 2000 SP 3) is on a Windows 2000 SP 3 Domain controller (bakernet.com). I have ran the Veritas IDR process on the server and have identical hardware at the DR site for the restore. Question: Will services fail because the forest root domain (bm.root) can not be contacted? Or do I need to also do a DR of a bm.root Domain controller at the DR site? I have done numerous IDR recoveries, but have all been on the production network where the bm.root domain could be contacted I hope this makes sense! Thanks _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang =english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe via postal mail, please contact us at: Jupitermedia Corp. Attn: Discussion List Management 475 Park Avenue South New York, NY 10016 Please include the email address which you have been contacted with. _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe via postal mail, please contact us at: Jupitermedia Corp. Attn: Discussion List Management 475 Park Avenue South New York, NY 10016 Please include the email address which you have been contacted with.
Exchange 2000 Public Folder Notifications
Hi Everyone, In our environment we have 4 Public Folder dedicated servers for each of our regions in the US. This allows the user quick access to its information from that region. Well the problem we have is when a folder is over its size limit, it generates 4 warnings every night when the maintenance schedule runs. Well we wish to turn off for that specific folder or server (doesnt matter) the notification for 3 of them. So we just get 1 message instead of getting a ton of them. Every folder on the master Public server is beign replicated to all other public servers, so shutting down the messages at each server except one should yield the same results. Any suggestions would be appreciated. -Timohty _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe via postal mail, please contact us at: Jupitermedia Corp. Attn: Discussion List Management 475 Park Avenue South New York, NY 10016 Please include the email address which you have been contacted with.
RE: Exchange 2000: 2K Mailboxes cannot see Schedule+ Free/Busy System Folder.
Thanks for the reply! I forget to add that the E55 and E2k servers are in the same Admin Group/Site. I've try to replicate within the site, unsuccessfully. In Exchange Admin, I open the properties of the Schedule+ Free/Busy public folder, and under the Replica tab moved the E2k server to the Replicate Folders to column. The folder never replicated. Using the ADSI Edit util (per Q284200), I looked at the properties for the Admin Group, and it points to the E55 server (which holds the Schedule+ folder) as the SiteFolderServer. Can you think of anything else I may have missed. Thx again! You must replicate the free-busy folder between the Exchange 5.5 and 2000 public folder servers. Ed Crowley MCSE+Internet MVP Freelance E-Mail Philosopher Protecting the world from PSTs and Bricked Backups!T -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Derrick Stevenson Sent: Sunday, December 28, 2003 8:15 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Exchange 2000: 2K Mailboxes cannot see Schedule+ Free/Busy System Folder. I've introduced Exchange 2000 (E2k) into my test Exchange 5.5 (E55) Organization. After creating a few mailboxes on E2k, I tested scheduling. An E55 mailbox sees other E55 mailbox calendar info properly, but can't see any E2k mailbox calendar info. An E2k mailbox sees neither E55 nor E2k calendar info, but sees only its own calendar. E2k seems not to recognize, or is unable to access the system/public folders on the E55 box. In the Active Directory Connector (ADC), the following CA's are running: . 2-way Recipient Agreement for Mailboxes (I changed the exchange bridgehead from the E55 box to the E2k after E2k was installed for all CA's) . 1-way Recipient Agreement for Distribution Lists . Public Folder Agreement . Configuration CA I've applied the recommendations from Knowledge Base Articles 275171 and 284200 w/ no success. In case these issues are related, I've also noticed that new mailboxes, created from AD Users and Computers for either the E55 or E2k boxes, are not generating e-mail addresses - X.400, SMTP or any proxies. Thoughts? Derrick _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang =english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Exchange 2000: 2K Mailboxes cannot see Schedule+ Free/Busy System Folder.
There are several posts and replies in this forum about folders not replicating properly. I suggest you check the archives and try some of the suggestions posted. Ed Crowley MCSE+Internet MVP Freelance E-Mail Philosopher Protecting the world from PSTs and Bricked Backups!T -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Derrick Stevenson Sent: Monday, December 29, 2003 6:35 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Exchange 2000: 2K Mailboxes cannot see Schedule+ Free/Busy System Folder. Thanks for the reply! I forget to add that the E55 and E2k servers are in the same Admin Group/Site. I've try to replicate within the site, unsuccessfully. In Exchange Admin, I open the properties of the Schedule+ Free/Busy public folder, and under the Replica tab moved the E2k server to the Replicate Folders to column. The folder never replicated. Using the ADSI Edit util (per Q284200), I looked at the properties for the Admin Group, and it points to the E55 server (which holds the Schedule+ folder) as the SiteFolderServer. Can you think of anything else I may have missed. Thx again! You must replicate the free-busy folder between the Exchange 5.5 and 2000 public folder servers. Ed Crowley MCSE+Internet MVP Freelance E-Mail Philosopher Protecting the world from PSTs and Bricked Backups!T -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Derrick Stevenson Sent: Sunday, December 28, 2003 8:15 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Exchange 2000: 2K Mailboxes cannot see Schedule+ Free/Busy System Folder. I've introduced Exchange 2000 (E2k) into my test Exchange 5.5 (E55) Organization. After creating a few mailboxes on E2k, I tested scheduling. An E55 mailbox sees other E55 mailbox calendar info properly, but can't see any E2k mailbox calendar info. An E2k mailbox sees neither E55 nor E2k calendar info, but sees only its own calendar. E2k seems not to recognize, or is unable to access the system/public folders on the E55 box. In the Active Directory Connector (ADC), the following CA's are running: . 2-way Recipient Agreement for Mailboxes (I changed the exchange bridgehead from the E55 box to the E2k after E2k was installed for all CA's) . 1-way Recipient Agreement for Distribution Lists . Public Folder Agreement . Configuration CA I've applied the recommendations from Knowledge Base Articles 275171 and 284200 w/ no success. In case these issues are related, I've also noticed that new mailboxes, created from AD Users and Computers for either the E55 or E2k boxes, are not generating e-mail addresses - X.400, SMTP or any proxies. Thoughts? Derrick _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode =lang =english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang =english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Exchange 2000: 2K Mailboxes cannot see Schedule+ Free/Busy System Folder.
Ive introduced Exchange 2000 (E2k) into my test Exchange 5.5 (E55) Organization. After creating a few mailboxes on E2k, I tested scheduling. An E55 mailbox sees other E55 mailbox calendar info properly, but cant see any E2k mailbox calendar info. An E2k mailbox sees neither E55 nor E2k calendar info, but sees only its own calendar. E2k seems not to recognize, or is unable to access the system/public folders on the E55 box. In the Active Directory Connector (ADC), the following CAs are running: · 2-way Recipient Agreement for Mailboxes (I changed the exchange bridgehead from the E55 box to the E2k after E2k was installed for all CAs) · 1-way Recipient Agreement for Distribution Lists · Public Folder Agreement · Configuration CA Ive applied the recommendations from Knowledge Base Articles 275171 and 284200 w/ no success. In case these issues are related, Ive also noticed that new mailboxes, created from AD Users and Computers for either the E55 or E2k boxes, are not generating e-mail addresses X.400, SMTP or any proxies. Thoughts? Derrick _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Exchange 2000: 2K Mailboxes cannot see Schedule+ Free/Busy System Folder.
You must replicate the free-busy folder between the Exchange 5.5 and 2000 public folder servers. Ed Crowley MCSE+Internet MVP Freelance E-Mail Philosopher Protecting the world from PSTs and Bricked Backups!T -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Derrick Stevenson Sent: Sunday, December 28, 2003 8:15 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Exchange 2000: 2K Mailboxes cannot see Schedule+ Free/Busy System Folder. I've introduced Exchange 2000 (E2k) into my test Exchange 5.5 (E55) Organization. After creating a few mailboxes on E2k, I tested scheduling. An E55 mailbox sees other E55 mailbox calendar info properly, but can't see any E2k mailbox calendar info. An E2k mailbox sees neither E55 nor E2k calendar info, but sees only its own calendar. E2k seems not to recognize, or is unable to access the system/public folders on the E55 box. In the Active Directory Connector (ADC), the following CA's are running: . 2-way Recipient Agreement for Mailboxes (I changed the exchange bridgehead from the E55 box to the E2k after E2k was installed for all CA's) . 1-way Recipient Agreement for Distribution Lists . Public Folder Agreement . Configuration CA I've applied the recommendations from Knowledge Base Articles 275171 and 284200 w/ no success. In case these issues are related, I've also noticed that new mailboxes, created from AD Users and Computers for either the E55 or E2k boxes, are not generating e-mail addresses - X.400, SMTP or any proxies. Thoughts? Derrick _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang =english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Upgrading Exchange 5.5 to Exchange 2000
What is the best way to upgrade Exchange 5.5. to Exchange 2000? Is it the Mailbox move method or the In place method? _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Upgrading Exchange 5.5 to Exchange 2000
All other things being equal? The former. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Posted At: Saturday, December 27, 2003 8:43 AM Posted To: swynk Conversation: Upgrading Exchange 5.5 to Exchange 2000 Subject: Upgrading Exchange 5.5 to Exchange 2000 What is the best way to upgrade Exchange 5.5. to Exchange 2000? Is it the Mailbox move method or the In place method? _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Upgrading Exchange 5.5 to Exchange 2000
The move mailbox method would be my recommendation. No extended downtime, no risk to the current environment. - Original Message - From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, December 27, 2003 9:43 AM Subject: Upgrading Exchange 5.5 to Exchange 2000 What is the best way to upgrade Exchange 5.5. to Exchange 2000? Is it the Mailbox move method or the In place method? _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Upgrading to Exchange 2000
Finally got the budget for an upgrade of Exchange 5.5! I just started to research the upgrade process and I have a couple real quick questions...If I am missing a Service Account Admin ONLY on the recipients container (I have SAA rights for site and server and admin rights for recipients) will there be any problems upgrading (using a domain admin account). Currently we are running AD in mixed mode with one Exchange 5.5 server on Win2k. Only 90 mailboxes. On another note...can anyone recommend the BEST way to upgrade to Exchange 2000...eg:in-place or swing method or server move method. Thanks for any suggestions or pointers to help me get started. Merry X-mas everyone! _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Upgrading to Exchange 2000
Upgrade to Exchange 2003 using the swing server method. Skip Exchange 2000 entirely. Exchange 2003 is superior in just about every way and why do the upgrade twice? Ed Crowley MCSE+Internet MVP Freelance E-Mail Philosopher Protecting the world from PSTs and Bricked Backups!T -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Dolphin, Jeff Sent: Wednesday, December 24, 2003 11:13 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Upgrading to Exchange 2000 Finally got the budget for an upgrade of Exchange 5.5! I just started to research the upgrade process and I have a couple real quick questions...If I am missing a Service Account Admin ONLY on the recipients container (I have SAA rights for site and server and admin rights for recipients) will there be any problems upgrading (using a domain admin account). Currently we are running AD in mixed mode with one Exchange 5.5 server on Win2k. Only 90 mailboxes. On another note...can anyone recommend the BEST way to upgrade to Exchange 2000...eg:in-place or swing method or server move method. Thanks for any suggestions or pointers to help me get started. Merry X-mas everyone! _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang =english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
MTA error on Exchange 2000 server
I am getting the following errors on my first exchange 2k server in exchange 5.5 organization: A sockets error 0 on a bind() call was detected. The MTA will attempt to recover the sockets connection. Control block index: 0. [BASE IL TCP/IP DRVR 11 258] (12) The source is MSEXCHANGEMTA and category is OPERATING SYSTEM. Any ideas?? Davinder _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: MTA error on Exchange 2000 server
I found this by searching for the first sentence on support.microsoft.com. It's an old article, but have you checked it out? http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;en-us;170056 -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Davinder Gupta Sent: Tuesday, December 23, 2003 1:33 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: MTA error on Exchange 2000 server I am getting the following errors on my first exchange 2k server in exchange 5.5 organization: A sockets error 0 on a bind() call was detected. The MTA will attempt to recover the sockets connection. Control block index: 0. [BASE IL TCP/IP DRVR 11 258] (12) The source is MSEXCHANGEMTA and category is OPERATING SYSTEM. Any ideas?? Davinder _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=; lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Exchange 2000 permissions error
Any ideas? -Ryan N. Ryan Fennema, MCSE Network Administrator X-Rite Incorporated - Grandville, MI Phone: (616) 257-2165 Fax: (616) 257-2165 [EMAIL PROTECTED] www.XRite.com -Original Message- From: Ryan Fennema Sent: Tuesday, December 16, 2003 12:29 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Exchange 2000 permissions error We have several users that are all of a sudden receiving this error when trying to open their mailbox on the server: Unable to display the selected folder or item. You do not have permission to log on while no permissions have changed and their accounts are not locked out. Any ideas? Exchange 2000 SP3 Outlook 2000 and 2002 Win2k Domain Thanks, Ryan N. Ryan Fennema, MCSE Network Administrator X-Rite Incorporated - Grandville, MI Phone: (616) 257-2165 Fax: (616) 257-2165 [EMAIL PROTECTED] www.XRite.com _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Exchange 2000 permissions error
Has something changed on the network? For example, something that would make domain controllers, expecially GCs invisible to the clients (like port 389 or port 3268 closure)? My thinking is that they can't correctly authenticate, or Outlook can't confirm that the user is a valid user because it can't see the Global Address List. Or maybe someone closed port 135 somewhere? Sincerely, Andrey Fyodorov, Exchange MVP Systems Engineer Messaging and Collaboration Spherion -Original Message- From: Ryan Fennema [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, December 17, 2003 2:14 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Exchange 2000 permissions error Any ideas? -Ryan N. Ryan Fennema, MCSE Network Administrator X-Rite Incorporated - Grandville, MI Phone: (616) 257-2165 Fax: (616) 257-2165 [EMAIL PROTECTED] www.XRite.com -Original Message- From: Ryan Fennema Sent: Tuesday, December 16, 2003 12:29 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Exchange 2000 permissions error We have several users that are all of a sudden receiving this error when trying to open their mailbox on the server: Unable to display the selected folder or item. You do not have permission to log on while no permissions have changed and their accounts are not locked out. Any ideas? Exchange 2000 SP3 Outlook 2000 and 2002 Win2k Domain Thanks, Ryan N. Ryan Fennema, MCSE Network Administrator X-Rite Incorporated - Grandville, MI Phone: (616) 257-2165 Fax: (616) 257-2165 [EMAIL PROTECTED] www.XRite.com _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Exchange 2000 permissions error
Make sure to read this: XCCC: How Outlook 2000 Accesses Active Directory http://support.microsoft.com/?kbid=302914 And this: XCLN: How MAPI Clients Access Active Directory http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;EN-US;256976 Sincerely, Andrey Fyodorov, Exchange MVP Systems Engineer Messaging and Collaboration Spherion -Original Message- From: Ryan Fennema [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, December 17, 2003 2:14 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Exchange 2000 permissions error Any ideas? -Ryan N. Ryan Fennema, MCSE Network Administrator X-Rite Incorporated - Grandville, MI Phone: (616) 257-2165 Fax: (616) 257-2165 [EMAIL PROTECTED] www.XRite.com -Original Message- From: Ryan Fennema Sent: Tuesday, December 16, 2003 12:29 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Exchange 2000 permissions error We have several users that are all of a sudden receiving this error when trying to open their mailbox on the server: Unable to display the selected folder or item. You do not have permission to log on while no permissions have changed and their accounts are not locked out. Any ideas? Exchange 2000 SP3 Outlook 2000 and 2002 Win2k Domain Thanks, Ryan N. Ryan Fennema, MCSE Network Administrator X-Rite Incorporated - Grandville, MI Phone: (616) 257-2165 Fax: (616) 257-2165 [EMAIL PROTECTED] www.XRite.com _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Day 2 Lessons Learned: GW6.5 to Exchange 2000
GD wrote: I am not sure why you are so certain that the project was severly underscoped Erm, could it be down to the fact that the budget was allocated before the consultant even knew which GroupWise client was most suitable for the task? The information contained in this e-mail is intended for the recipient or entity to whom it is addressed. It may contain confidential information that is exempt from disclosure by law and if you are not the intended recipient, you must not copy, distribute or take any act in reliance on it. If you have received this e-mail in error, please notify the sender immediately and delete from your system. _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Day 2 Lessons Learned: GW6.5 to Exchange 2000
GD wrote: I am not sure why you are so certain that the project was severly underscoped Erm, could it be down to the fact that the budget was allocated before the consultant even knew which GroupWise client was most suitable for the task? The information contained in this e-mail is intended for the recipient or entity to whom it is addressed. It may contain confidential information that is exempt from disclosure by law and if you are not the intended recipient, you must not copy, distribute or take any act in reliance on it. If you have received this e-mail in error, please notify the sender immediately and delete from your system. _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Day 3: Lessons Learned GW6.5 to Exchange 2000
Would that make the rest of us Deckler's Hecklers? -Original Message- From: Ed Crowley [MVP] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 15 December 2003 23:41 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Day 3: Lessons Learned GW6.5 to Exchange 2000 We should change the name of this list to Deckler's Blog. The information contained in this e-mail is intended for the recipient or entity to whom it is addressed. It may contain confidential information that is exempt from disclosure by law and if you are not the intended recipient, you must not copy, distribute or take any act in reliance on it. If you have received this e-mail in error, please notify the sender immediately and delete from your system. _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Exchange 2000 permissions error
We have several users that are all of a sudden receiving this error when trying to open their mailbox on the server: Unable to display the selected folder or item. You do not have permission to log on while no permissions have changed and their accounts are not locked out. Any ideas? Exchange 2000 SP3 Outlook 2000 and 2002 Win2k Domain Thanks, Ryan N. Ryan Fennema, MCSE Network Administrator X-Rite Incorporated - Grandville, MI Phone: (616) 257-2165 Fax: (616) 257-2165 [EMAIL PROTECTED] www.XRite.com _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Exchange 2000 permissions error
Did they recently change their passwords? -Original Message- From: Ryan Fennema [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, December 16, 2003 12:29 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Exchange 2000 permissions error We have several users that are all of a sudden receiving this error when trying to open their mailbox on the server: Unable to display the selected folder or item. You do not have permission to log on while no permissions have changed and their accounts are not locked out. Any ideas? Exchange 2000 SP3 Outlook 2000 and 2002 Win2k Domain Thanks, Ryan N. Ryan Fennema, MCSE Network Administrator X-Rite Incorporated - Grandville, MI Phone: (616) 257-2165 Fax: (616) 257-2165 [EMAIL PROTECTED] www.XRite.com _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang =english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Exchange 2000 Service Account Permissions
Hi All, I was wondering if you all have maybe heard of a resolution for the following problem: As of Exchange 2k SP2, MS has removed the ability for teh service account to view users email content. This means I cannot bind to a user mailbox with my service account for maintenance or programming realated features. I tried a work arround that basically took me to the properties of an exchange store, then to the permissions. I then made a copy of the inherited permissions and allowed my service account full access to mailboxes in that store. I figgured that would be enough. We ll interrestingly enough, I have an application that counts the email (read and unread items) in a users mailbox. I have created a custom VB.Net control that I have placed on our intranet pages that shows the user how much email is in their box and how many new items. I would usually just use the account the user logged in with, but teh intranet login is fed from a SQL database and not an NTLM login. SO I dont have the real credentials of the user, just the mailbox alias. I figgured if I used the service account I could work arround the permissions issue. It works from some users but not others. All of our users that use this APP are all besed on the same server, storage group, and store. Does anyone know why I would get a login error for some accounts but not all? Timothy H. Schilbach Alpha Omega Design Inc. [EMAIL PROTECTED] visit our NEW website at www.aodinc.com _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Exchange 2000 Service Account Permissions
http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;en-us;262054 Mike -Original Message- From: Timothy Schilbach [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, December 16, 2003 3:34 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Exchange 2000 Service Account Permissions Hi All, I was wondering if you all have maybe heard of a resolution for the following problem: As of Exchange 2k SP2, MS has removed the ability for teh service account to view users email content. This means I cannot bind to a user mailbox with my service account for maintenance or programming realated features. I tried a work arround that basically took me to the properties of an exchange store, then to the permissions. I then made a copy of the inherited permissions and allowed my service account full access to mailboxes in that store. I figgured that would be enough. We ll interrestingly enough, I have an application that counts the email (read and unread items) in a users mailbox. I have created a custom VB.Net control that I have placed on our intranet pages that shows the user how much email is in their box and how many new items. I would usually just use the account the user logged in with, but teh intranet login is fed from a SQL database and not an NTLM login. SO I dont have the real credentials of the user, just the mailbox alias. I figgured if I used the service account I could work arround the permissions issue. It works from some users but not others. All of our users that use this APP are all besed on the same server, storage group, and store. Does anyone know why I would get a login error for some accounts but not all? Timothy H. Schilbach Alpha Omega Design Inc. [EMAIL PROTECTED] visit our NEW website at www.aodinc.com _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=; lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Exchange 2000 Service Account Permissions
A) Exchange 2000 doesn't have a service account. This would explain why you can't get your service account to access a mailbox. :) B) If you want an account to have the ability to open another users' mailbox, grant it Send As and Receive As rights. Jason -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Timothy Schilbach Sent: Tuesday, December 16, 2003 3:34 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Exchange 2000 Service Account Permissions Hi All, I was wondering if you all have maybe heard of a resolution for the following problem: As of Exchange 2k SP2, MS has removed the ability for teh service account to view users email content. This means I cannot bind to a user mailbox with my service account for maintenance or programming realated features. I tried a work arround that basically took me to the properties of an exchange store, then to the permissions. I then made a copy of the inherited permissions and allowed my service account full access to mailboxes in that store. I figgured that would be enough. We ll interrestingly enough, I have an application that counts the email (read and unread items) in a users mailbox. I have created a custom VB.Net control that I have placed on our intranet pages that shows the user how much email is in their box and how many new items. I would usually just use the account the user logged in with, but teh intranet login is fed from a SQL database and not an NTLM login. SO I dont have the real credentials of the user, just the mailbox alias. I figgured if I used the service account I could work arround the permissions issue. It works from some users but not others. All of our users that use this APP are all besed on the same server, storage group, and store. Does anyone know why I would get a login error for some accounts but not all? Timothy H. Schilbach Alpha Omega Design Inc. [EMAIL PROTECTED] visit our NEW website at www.aodinc.com _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=; lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Exchange 2000 Service Account Permissions
Thank you the Q article was exactly what I was looking for. -Timothy _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Day 2 Lessons Learned: GW6.5 to Exchange 2000
You do not know the specifics of their situation so I am not sure why you are so certain that the project was severly underscoped and underbid. Rushed, yes. Underscoped and underbid, no. The scope is to get them from GroupWise 6.5 to Exchange 2000 and that is what is being delivered. Underbid, again no. I can get a client of this size and much larger migrated with only spending 5 days or less on sight. I bring all my own software and tools, set them up, configure them and train them on their use. I can actually install all the software and have all the processes up and running in about a day. Once you've done as many email migrations as I have, you tend to get your process worked out pretty thoroughly. So no, I would not characterize this project as underscoped or underbid. It's a public school system and so yes, they are concerned about costs, but I can deliver everything they need, cover my costs with an acceptable profit and they get everything they asked for, so it has been scoped and bid correctly. As for the rest. Yes, everything that I say is my opinion. And no, I do not say that everyone that is an MVP is unethical. What I say is that the act of being an MVP is accepting compensation from a vendor and hence not something that professional IT people should engage in. MCSE? First, I am not an MCSE and would not advertise that fact if I were one. Yes, I do hold certain vendor certifications. The difference is that I PAY for these certifications. I PAY Microsoft to take the test and then I PAY Microsoft to get their software. It is at a discount, but I still have to pay for it. With the MVP, you are not doing any PAYING. Microsoft is PAYING you with a title and gifts, not the other way around. I fail to see how you can miss this obvious distinction, but hey, whatever man. Yes, we disagree on this point. I am not sure why you feel that I am being closed-minded. I am close-minded because you cannot convince me to believe in your point of view? No, I have my point of view and I am quite open-minded enough to understand your point of view. I do not have any bile towards vendors although I do believe that they CAN have a corrupting influence. That's why the AMA is concerned over vendors (drug companies) paying for clinical studies, etc. The AMA does not want doctors being paid to recommend particular prescriptions because it is a conflict of interest. The doctor is supposed to be looking out for the patient's best interests, not their own or the interests of a drug company that is paying them. This is all basic stuff. What I cannot understand is why people keep bringing this up. My position on this subject is well known and not likely to change. I have given this issue a lot of thought and this is my position on it. And we all know the positions involved and all know who thinks what and all of this conversation is simply a rehash of the six or seven other times this subject has come up. So why keep bringing it up? Seems odd to me that a bunch of people would continually bring up the subject and then get mad at ME and blame ME for bringing it up. My position on this is well known and hasn't changed in 8 years. We disagree, great. No big thang. Let it go. If $1200 is 25% of a GW-Ex migration for 700 people then the project was severely underscoped and underbid. It seems like the customer has chosen cost over quality. C'est la vie. As for your positions, they are your opinion. Not fact. Not an opinion that many people agree with either. There are folks on these lists with medical and jurisprudence and engineering and MBA degrees who have been through all the professional certification processes and few if any have come to your defense here. The ones I know agree with me. =20 I don't think I've mischaracterized your position at all. You say that we are all unethical solely because of the vendor relationship and without respect to any other facts. You say you got an MCSE to get cheaper software. That's a recognition from the vendor with monetary value. I really don't see the difference. I've given a lot of thought to your arguments over the years and I respectfully disagree. IT is not the same as building roads. Within the areas you call professions there are specializations. Within IT there are specializations too. It just so happens that those areas of /deep/ technical knowledge are sometimes on a particular product in addition to the specializations on generic process. There really is no precedent stating that there is ipso facto unprofessionalism or an issue with ethics. You say you got an MCSE to get cheaper software. That's a recognition from the vendor with monetary value. I really don't see the difference. I wish you could stop being so closed minded about this one particular issue. The venom and bile with which you say the word vendor is also really puzzling. When you go to a chiropractor, everything is a chiropractic problem
RE: Day 2 Lessons Learned: GW6.5 to Exchange 2000
Tl;dr. Will everyone just drop this discussion? We don't need another 75 e-mails on this today. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Greg Deckler Sent: Monday, December 15, 2003 8:17 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Day 2 Lessons Learned: GW6.5 to Exchange 2000 You do not know the specifics of their situation so I am not sure why you are so certain that the project was severly underscoped and underbid. Rushed, yes. Underscoped and underbid, no. The scope is to get them from GroupWise 6.5 to Exchange 2000 and that is what is being delivered. Underbid, again no. I can get a client of this size and much larger migrated with only spending 5 days or less on sight. I bring all my own software and tools, set them up, configure them and train them on their use. I can actually install all the software and have all the processes up and running in about a day. Once you've done as many email migrations as I have, you tend to get your process worked out pretty thoroughly. So no, I would not characterize this project as underscoped or underbid. It's a public school system and so yes, they are concerned about costs, but I can deliver everything they need, cover my costs with an acceptable profit and they get everything they asked for, so it has been scoped and bid correctly. As for the rest. Yes, everything that I say is my opinion. And no, I do not say that everyone that is an MVP is unethical. What I say is that the act of being an MVP is accepting compensation from a vendor and hence not something that professional IT people should engage in. MCSE? First, I am not an MCSE and would not advertise that fact if I were one. Yes, I do hold certain vendor certifications. The difference is that I PAY for these certifications. I PAY Microsoft to take the test and then I PAY Microsoft to get their software. It is at a discount, but I still have to pay for it. With the MVP, you are not doing any PAYING. Microsoft is PAYING you with a title and gifts, not the other way around. I fail to see how you can miss this obvious distinction, but hey, whatever man. Yes, we disagree on this point. I am not sure why you feel that I am being closed-minded. I am close-minded because you cannot convince me to believe in your point of view? No, I have my point of view and I am quite open-minded enough to understand your point of view. I do not have any bile towards vendors although I do believe that they CAN have a corrupting influence. That's why the AMA is concerned over vendors (drug companies) paying for clinical studies, etc. The AMA does not want doctors being paid to recommend particular prescriptions because it is a conflict of interest. The doctor is supposed to be looking out for the patient's best interests, not their own or the interests of a drug company that is paying them. This is all basic stuff. What I cannot understand is why people keep bringing this up. My position on this subject is well known and not likely to change. I have given this issue a lot of thought and this is my position on it. And we all know the positions involved and all know who thinks what and all of this conversation is simply a rehash of the six or seven other times this subject has come up. So why keep bringing it up? Seems odd to me that a bunch of people would continually bring up the subject and then get mad at ME and blame ME for bringing it up. My position on this is well known and hasn't changed in 8 years. We disagree, great. No big thang. Let it go. If $1200 is 25% of a GW-Ex migration for 700 people then the project was severely underscoped and underbid. It seems like the customer has chosen cost over quality. C'est la vie. As for your positions, they are your opinion. Not fact. Not an opinion that many people agree with either. There are folks on these lists with medical and jurisprudence and engineering and MBA degrees who have been through all the professional certification processes and few if any have come to your defense here. The ones I know agree with me. =20 I don't think I've mischaracterized your position at all. You say that we are all unethical solely because of the vendor relationship and without respect to any other facts. You say you got an MCSE to get cheaper software. That's a recognition from the vendor with monetary value. I really don't see the difference. I've given a lot of thought to your arguments over the years and I respectfully disagree. IT is not the same as building roads. Within the areas you call professions there are specializations. Within IT there are specializations too. It just so happens that those areas of /deep/ technical knowledge are sometimes on a particular product in addition to the specializations on generic process. There really is no precedent stating that there is ipso facto unprofessionalism or an issue with ethics. You say you got an MCSE to get cheaper software
RE: Day 2 Lessons Learned: GW6.5 to Exchange 2000
My cat's breath smells like cat food. -Original Message- From: Christopher Hummert [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, December 15, 2003 11:18 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Day 2 Lessons Learned: GW6.5 to Exchange 2000 Tl;dr. Will everyone just drop this discussion? We don't need another 75 e-mails on this today. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Greg Deckler Sent: Monday, December 15, 2003 8:17 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Day 2 Lessons Learned: GW6.5 to Exchange 2000 You do not know the specifics of their situation so I am not sure why you are so certain that the project was severly underscoped and underbid. Rushed, yes. Underscoped and underbid, no. The scope is to get them from GroupWise 6.5 to Exchange 2000 and that is what is being delivered. Underbid, again no. I can get a client of this size and much larger migrated with only spending 5 days or less on sight. I bring all my own software and tools, set them up, configure them and train them on their use. I can actually install all the software and have all the processes up and running in about a day. Once you've done as many email migrations as I have, you tend to get your process worked out pretty thoroughly. So no, I would not characterize this project as underscoped or underbid. It's a public school system and so yes, they are concerned about costs, but I can deliver everything they need, cover my costs with an acceptable profit and they get everything they asked for, so it has been scoped and bid correctly. As for the rest. Yes, everything that I say is my opinion. And no, I do not say that everyone that is an MVP is unethical. What I say is that the act of being an MVP is accepting compensation from a vendor and hence not something that professional IT people should engage in. MCSE? First, I am not an MCSE and would not advertise that fact if I were one. Yes, I do hold certain vendor certifications. The difference is that I PAY for these certifications. I PAY Microsoft to take the test and then I PAY Microsoft to get their software. It is at a discount, but I still have to pay for it. With the MVP, you are not doing any PAYING. Microsoft is PAYING you with a title and gifts, not the other way around. I fail to see how you can miss this obvious distinction, but hey, whatever man. Yes, we disagree on this point. I am not sure why you feel that I am being closed-minded. I am close-minded because you cannot convince me to believe in your point of view? No, I have my point of view and I am quite open-minded enough to understand your point of view. I do not have any bile towards vendors although I do believe that they CAN have a corrupting influence. That's why the AMA is concerned over vendors (drug companies) paying for clinical studies, etc. The AMA does not want doctors being paid to recommend particular prescriptions because it is a conflict of interest. The doctor is supposed to be looking out for the patient's best interests, not their own or the interests of a drug company that is paying them. This is all basic stuff. What I cannot understand is why people keep bringing this up. My position on this subject is well known and not likely to change. I have given this issue a lot of thought and this is my position on it. And we all know the positions involved and all know who thinks what and all of this conversation is simply a rehash of the six or seven other times this subject has come up. So why keep bringing it up? Seems odd to me that a bunch of people would continually bring up the subject and then get mad at ME and blame ME for bringing it up. My position on this is well known and hasn't changed in 8 years. We disagree, great. No big thang. Let it go. If $1200 is 25% of a GW-Ex migration for 700 people then the project was severely underscoped and underbid. It seems like the customer has chosen cost over quality. C'est la vie. As for your positions, they are your opinion. Not fact. Not an opinion that many people agree with either. There are folks on these lists with medical and jurisprudence and engineering and MBA degrees who have been through all the professional certification processes and few if any have come to your defense here. The ones I know agree with me. =20 I don't think I've mischaracterized your position at all. You say that we are all unethical solely because of the vendor relationship and without respect to any other facts. You say you got an MCSE to get cheaper software. That's a recognition from the vendor with monetary value. I really don't see the difference. I've given a lot of thought to your arguments over the years and I respectfully disagree. IT is not the same as building roads. Within the areas you
RE: Day 2 Lessons Learned: GW6.5 to Exchange 2000
My brain tickles when I pick my nose -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Erik Sojka Sent: Monday, December 15, 2003 8:23 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Day 2 Lessons Learned: GW6.5 to Exchange 2000 My cat's breath smells like cat food. -Original Message- From: Christopher Hummert [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, December 15, 2003 11:18 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Day 2 Lessons Learned: GW6.5 to Exchange 2000 Tl;dr. Will everyone just drop this discussion? We don't need another 75 e-mails on this today. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Greg Deckler Sent: Monday, December 15, 2003 8:17 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Day 2 Lessons Learned: GW6.5 to Exchange 2000 You do not know the specifics of their situation so I am not sure why you are so certain that the project was severly underscoped and underbid. Rushed, yes. Underscoped and underbid, no. The scope is to get them from GroupWise 6.5 to Exchange 2000 and that is what is being delivered. Underbid, again no. I can get a client of this size and much larger migrated with only spending 5 days or less on sight. I bring all my own software and tools, set them up, configure them and train them on their use. I can actually install all the software and have all the processes up and running in about a day. Once you've done as many email migrations as I have, you tend to get your process worked out pretty thoroughly. So no, I would not characterize this project as underscoped or underbid. It's a public school system and so yes, they are concerned about costs, but I can deliver everything they need, cover my costs with an acceptable profit and they get everything they asked for, so it has been scoped and bid correctly. As for the rest. Yes, everything that I say is my opinion. And no, I do not say that everyone that is an MVP is unethical. What I say is that the act of being an MVP is accepting compensation from a vendor and hence not something that professional IT people should engage in. MCSE? First, I am not an MCSE and would not advertise that fact if I were one. Yes, I do hold certain vendor certifications. The difference is that I PAY for these certifications. I PAY Microsoft to take the test and then I PAY Microsoft to get their software. It is at a discount, but I still have to pay for it. With the MVP, you are not doing any PAYING. Microsoft is PAYING you with a title and gifts, not the other way around. I fail to see how you can miss this obvious distinction, but hey, whatever man. Yes, we disagree on this point. I am not sure why you feel that I am being closed-minded. I am close-minded because you cannot convince me to believe in your point of view? No, I have my point of view and I am quite open-minded enough to understand your point of view. I do not have any bile towards vendors although I do believe that they CAN have a corrupting influence. That's why the AMA is concerned over vendors (drug companies) paying for clinical studies, etc. The AMA does not want doctors being paid to recommend particular prescriptions because it is a conflict of interest. The doctor is supposed to be looking out for the patient's best interests, not their own or the interests of a drug company that is paying them. This is all basic stuff. What I cannot understand is why people keep bringing this up. My position on this subject is well known and not likely to change. I have given this issue a lot of thought and this is my position on it. And we all know the positions involved and all know who thinks what and all of this conversation is simply a rehash of the six or seven other times this subject has come up. So why keep bringing it up? Seems odd to me that a bunch of people would continually bring up the subject and then get mad at ME and blame ME for bringing it up. My position on this is well known and hasn't changed in 8 years. We disagree, great. No big thang. Let it go. If $1200 is 25% of a GW-Ex migration for 700 people then the project was severely underscoped and underbid. It seems like the customer has chosen cost over quality. C'est la vie. As for your positions, they are your opinion. Not fact. Not an opinion that many people agree with either. There are folks on these lists with medical and jurisprudence and engineering and MBA degrees who have been through all the professional certification processes and few if any have come to your defense here. The ones I know agree with me. =20 I don't think I've mischaracterized your position at all. You say that we are all unethical solely because of the vendor relationship and without respect to any other facts. You say you got an MCSE to get cheaper software. That's a recognition from
RE: Day 2 Lessons Learned: GW6.5 to Exchange 2000
Sometimes I feel funny when I climb the rope in Gym class. Eric Fretz L-3 Communications ComCept Division 2800 Discovery Blvd. Rockwall, TX 75032 tel: 972.772.7501 fax: 972.772.7510 -Original Message- From: Christopher Hummert [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, December 15, 2003 10:24 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Day 2 Lessons Learned: GW6.5 to Exchange 2000 My brain tickles when I pick my nose -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Erik Sojka Sent: Monday, December 15, 2003 8:23 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Day 2 Lessons Learned: GW6.5 to Exchange 2000 My cat's breath smells like cat food. -Original Message- From: Christopher Hummert [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, December 15, 2003 11:18 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Day 2 Lessons Learned: GW6.5 to Exchange 2000 Tl;dr. Will everyone just drop this discussion? We don't need another 75 e-mails on this today. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Greg Deckler Sent: Monday, December 15, 2003 8:17 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Day 2 Lessons Learned: GW6.5 to Exchange 2000 You do not know the specifics of their situation so I am not sure why you are so certain that the project was severly underscoped and underbid. Rushed, yes. Underscoped and underbid, no. The scope is to get them from GroupWise 6.5 to Exchange 2000 and that is what is being delivered. Underbid, again no. I can get a client of this size and much larger migrated with only spending 5 days or less on sight. I bring all my own software and tools, set them up, configure them and train them on their use. I can actually install all the software and have all the processes up and running in about a day. Once you've done as many email migrations as I have, you tend to get your process worked out pretty thoroughly. So no, I would not characterize this project as underscoped or underbid. It's a public school system and so yes, they are concerned about costs, but I can deliver everything they need, cover my costs with an acceptable profit and they get everything they asked for, so it has been scoped and bid correctly. As for the rest. Yes, everything that I say is my opinion. And no, I do not say that everyone that is an MVP is unethical. What I say is that the act of being an MVP is accepting compensation from a vendor and hence not something that professional IT people should engage in. MCSE? First, I am not an MCSE and would not advertise that fact if I were one. Yes, I do hold certain vendor certifications. The difference is that I PAY for these certifications. I PAY Microsoft to take the test and then I PAY Microsoft to get their software. It is at a discount, but I still have to pay for it. With the MVP, you are not doing any PAYING. Microsoft is PAYING you with a title and gifts, not the other way around. I fail to see how you can miss this obvious distinction, but hey, whatever man. Yes, we disagree on this point. I am not sure why you feel that I am being closed-minded. I am close-minded because you cannot convince me to believe in your point of view? No, I have my point of view and I am quite open-minded enough to understand your point of view. I do not have any bile towards vendors although I do believe that they CAN have a corrupting influence. That's why the AMA is concerned over vendors (drug companies) paying for clinical studies, etc. The AMA does not want doctors being paid to recommend particular prescriptions because it is a conflict of interest. The doctor is supposed to be looking out for the patient's best interests, not their own or the interests of a drug company that is paying them. This is all basic stuff. What I cannot understand is why people keep bringing this up. My position on this subject is well known and not likely to change. I have given this issue a lot of thought and this is my position on it. And we all know the positions involved and all know who thinks what and all of this conversation is simply a rehash of the six or seven other times this subject has come up. So why keep bringing it up? Seems odd to me that a bunch of people would continually bring up the subject and then get mad at ME and blame ME for bringing it up. My position on this is well known and hasn't changed in 8 years. We disagree, great. No big thang. Let it go. If $1200 is 25% of a GW-Ex migration for 700 people then the project was severely underscoped and underbid. It seems like the customer has chosen cost over quality. C'est la vie. As for your positions, they are your opinion. Not fact. Not an opinion that many people agree with either. There are folks on these lists with medical and jurisprudence and engineering and MBA degrees who have been through all
RE: Day 2 Lessons Learned: GW6.5 to Exchange 2000
Obviously, you're either sticking your finger all the way past the second knuckle again or you've had too many facelifts -Original Message- From: Christopher Hummert [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, December 15, 2003 11:24 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Day 2 Lessons Learned: GW6.5 to Exchange 2000 My brain tickles when I pick my nose -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Erik Sojka Sent: Monday, December 15, 2003 8:23 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Day 2 Lessons Learned: GW6.5 to Exchange 2000 My cat's breath smells like cat food. -Original Message- From: Christopher Hummert [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, December 15, 2003 11:18 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Day 2 Lessons Learned: GW6.5 to Exchange 2000 Tl;dr. Will everyone just drop this discussion? We don't need another 75 e-mails on this today. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Greg Deckler Sent: Monday, December 15, 2003 8:17 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Day 2 Lessons Learned: GW6.5 to Exchange 2000 You do not know the specifics of their situation so I am not sure why you are so certain that the project was severly underscoped and underbid. Rushed, yes. Underscoped and underbid, no. The scope is to get them from GroupWise 6.5 to Exchange 2000 and that is what is being delivered. Underbid, again no. I can get a client of this size and much larger migrated with only spending 5 days or less on sight. I bring all my own software and tools, set them up, configure them and train them on their use. I can actually install all the software and have all the processes up and running in about a day. Once you've done as many email migrations as I have, you tend to get your process worked out pretty thoroughly. So no, I would not characterize this project as underscoped or underbid. It's a public school system and so yes, they are concerned about costs, but I can deliver everything they need, cover my costs with an acceptable profit and they get everything they asked for, so it has been scoped and bid correctly. As for the rest. Yes, everything that I say is my opinion. And no, I do not say that everyone that is an MVP is unethical. What I say is that the act of being an MVP is accepting compensation from a vendor and hence not something that professional IT people should engage in. MCSE? First, I am not an MCSE and would not advertise that fact if I were one. Yes, I do hold certain vendor certifications. The difference is that I PAY for these certifications. I PAY Microsoft to take the test and then I PAY Microsoft to get their software. It is at a discount, but I still have to pay for it. With the MVP, you are not doing any PAYING. Microsoft is PAYING you with a title and gifts, not the other way around. I fail to see how you can miss this obvious distinction, but hey, whatever man. Yes, we disagree on this point. I am not sure why you feel that I am being closed-minded. I am close-minded because you cannot convince me to believe in your point of view? No, I have my point of view and I am quite open-minded enough to understand your point of view. I do not have any bile towards vendors although I do believe that they CAN have a corrupting influence. That's why the AMA is concerned over vendors (drug companies) paying for clinical studies, etc. The AMA does not want doctors being paid to recommend particular prescriptions because it is a conflict of interest. The doctor is supposed to be looking out for the patient's best interests, not their own or the interests of a drug company that is paying them. This is all basic stuff. What I cannot understand is why people keep bringing this up. My position on this subject is well known and not likely to change. I have given this issue a lot of thought and this is my position on it. And we all know the positions involved and all know who thinks what and all of this conversation is simply a rehash of the six or seven other times this subject has come up. So why keep bringing it up? Seems odd to me that a bunch of people would continually bring up the subject and then get mad at ME and blame ME for bringing it up. My position on this is well known and hasn't changed in 8 years. We disagree, great. No big thang. Let it go. If $1200 is 25% of a GW-Ex migration for 700 people then the project was severely underscoped and underbid. It seems like the customer has chosen cost over quality. C'est la vie. As for your positions, they are your opinion. Not fact. Not an opinion that many people agree with either. There are folks on these lists with medical and jurisprudence and engineering and MBA degrees who have been through all the professional certification processes and few if any have come
RE: Day 2 Lessons Learned: GW6.5 to Exchange 2000
Me fail english? Thats unpossible! -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Eric Fretz Sent: Monday, December 15, 2003 8:26 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Day 2 Lessons Learned: GW6.5 to Exchange 2000 Sometimes I feel funny when I climb the rope in Gym class. Eric Fretz L-3 Communications ComCept Division 2800 Discovery Blvd. Rockwall, TX 75032 tel: 972.772.7501 fax: 972.772.7510 -Original Message- From: Christopher Hummert [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, December 15, 2003 10:24 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Day 2 Lessons Learned: GW6.5 to Exchange 2000 My brain tickles when I pick my nose -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Erik Sojka Sent: Monday, December 15, 2003 8:23 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Day 2 Lessons Learned: GW6.5 to Exchange 2000 My cat's breath smells like cat food. -Original Message- From: Christopher Hummert [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, December 15, 2003 11:18 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Day 2 Lessons Learned: GW6.5 to Exchange 2000 Tl;dr. Will everyone just drop this discussion? We don't need another 75 e-mails on this today. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Greg Deckler Sent: Monday, December 15, 2003 8:17 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Day 2 Lessons Learned: GW6.5 to Exchange 2000 You do not know the specifics of their situation so I am not sure why you are so certain that the project was severly underscoped and underbid. Rushed, yes. Underscoped and underbid, no. The scope is to get them from GroupWise 6.5 to Exchange 2000 and that is what is being delivered. Underbid, again no. I can get a client of this size and much larger migrated with only spending 5 days or less on sight. I bring all my own software and tools, set them up, configure them and train them on their use. I can actually install all the software and have all the processes up and running in about a day. Once you've done as many email migrations as I have, you tend to get your process worked out pretty thoroughly. So no, I would not characterize this project as underscoped or underbid. It's a public school system and so yes, they are concerned about costs, but I can deliver everything they need, cover my costs with an acceptable profit and they get everything they asked for, so it has been scoped and bid correctly. As for the rest. Yes, everything that I say is my opinion. And no, I do not say that everyone that is an MVP is unethical. What I say is that the act of being an MVP is accepting compensation from a vendor and hence not something that professional IT people should engage in. MCSE? First, I am not an MCSE and would not advertise that fact if I were one. Yes, I do hold certain vendor certifications. The difference is that I PAY for these certifications. I PAY Microsoft to take the test and then I PAY Microsoft to get their software. It is at a discount, but I still have to pay for it. With the MVP, you are not doing any PAYING. Microsoft is PAYING you with a title and gifts, not the other way around. I fail to see how you can miss this obvious distinction, but hey, whatever man. Yes, we disagree on this point. I am not sure why you feel that I am being closed-minded. I am close-minded because you cannot convince me to believe in your point of view? No, I have my point of view and I am quite open-minded enough to understand your point of view. I do not have any bile towards vendors although I do believe that they CAN have a corrupting influence. That's why the AMA is concerned over vendors (drug companies) paying for clinical studies, etc. The AMA does not want doctors being paid to recommend particular prescriptions because it is a conflict of interest. The doctor is supposed to be looking out for the patient's best interests, not their own or the interests of a drug company that is paying them. This is all basic stuff. What I cannot understand is why people keep bringing this up. My position on this subject is well known and not likely to change. I have given this issue a lot of thought and this is my position on it. And we all know the positions involved and all know who thinks what and all of this conversation is simply a rehash of the six or seven other times this subject has come up. So why keep bringing it up? Seems odd to me that a bunch of people would continually bring up the subject and then get mad at ME and blame ME for bringing it up. My position on this is well known and hasn't changed in 8 years. We disagree, great. No big thang. Let it go. If $1200 is 25% of a GW-Ex migration for 700 people then the project was severely underscoped and underbid. It seems like the customer has chosen cost over quality
RE: Day 2 Lessons Learned: GW6.5 to Exchange 2000
You've got the women just lining up for you don't ya... -Original Message- From: Christopher Hummert [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, December 15, 2003 11:24 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Day 2 Lessons Learned: GW6.5 to Exchange 2000 My brain tickles when I pick my nose -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Erik Sojka Sent: Monday, December 15, 2003 8:23 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Day 2 Lessons Learned: GW6.5 to Exchange 2000 My cat's breath smells like cat food. -Original Message- From: Christopher Hummert [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, December 15, 2003 11:18 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Day 2 Lessons Learned: GW6.5 to Exchange 2000 Tl;dr. Will everyone just drop this discussion? We don't need another 75 e-mails on this today. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Greg Deckler Sent: Monday, December 15, 2003 8:17 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Day 2 Lessons Learned: GW6.5 to Exchange 2000 You do not know the specifics of their situation so I am not sure why you are so certain that the project was severly underscoped and underbid. Rushed, yes. Underscoped and underbid, no. The scope is to get them from GroupWise 6.5 to Exchange 2000 and that is what is being delivered. Underbid, again no. I can get a client of this size and much larger migrated with only spending 5 days or less on sight. I bring all my own software and tools, set them up, configure them and train them on their use. I can actually install all the software and have all the processes up and running in about a day. Once you've done as many email migrations as I have, you tend to get your process worked out pretty thoroughly. So no, I would not characterize this project as underscoped or underbid. It's a public school system and so yes, they are concerned about costs, but I can deliver everything they need, cover my costs with an acceptable profit and they get everything they asked for, so it has been scoped and bid correctly. As for the rest. Yes, everything that I say is my opinion. And no, I do not say that everyone that is an MVP is unethical. What I say is that the act of being an MVP is accepting compensation from a vendor and hence not something that professional IT people should engage in. MCSE? First, I am not an MCSE and would not advertise that fact if I were one. Yes, I do hold certain vendor certifications. The difference is that I PAY for these certifications. I PAY Microsoft to take the test and then I PAY Microsoft to get their software. It is at a discount, but I still have to pay for it. With the MVP, you are not doing any PAYING. Microsoft is PAYING you with a title and gifts, not the other way around. I fail to see how you can miss this obvious distinction, but hey, whatever man. Yes, we disagree on this point. I am not sure why you feel that I am being closed-minded. I am close-minded because you cannot convince me to believe in your point of view? No, I have my point of view and I am quite open-minded enough to understand your point of view. I do not have any bile towards vendors although I do believe that they CAN have a corrupting influence. That's why the AMA is concerned over vendors (drug companies) paying for clinical studies, etc. The AMA does not want doctors being paid to recommend particular prescriptions because it is a conflict of interest. The doctor is supposed to be looking out for the patient's best interests, not their own or the interests of a drug company that is paying them. This is all basic stuff. What I cannot understand is why people keep bringing this up. My position on this subject is well known and not likely to change. I have given this issue a lot of thought and this is my position on it. And we all know the positions involved and all know who thinks what and all of this conversation is simply a rehash of the six or seven other times this subject has come up. So why keep bringing it up? Seems odd to me that a bunch of people would continually bring up the subject and then get mad at ME and blame ME for bringing it up. My position on this is well known and hasn't changed in 8 years. We disagree, great. No big thang. Let it go. If $1200 is 25% of a GW-Ex migration for 700 people then the project was severely underscoped and underbid. It seems like the customer has chosen cost over quality. C'est la vie. As for your positions, they are your opinion. Not fact. Not an opinion that many people agree with either. There are folks on these lists with medical and jurisprudence and engineering and MBA degrees who have been through all the professional certification processes and few if any have come to your defense here. The ones I know agree with me. =20
RE: Day 2 Lessons Learned: GW6.5 to Exchange 2000
You can fix fat, but you can't fix ugly... -Original Message- From: Eric Fretz [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, December 15, 2003 11:26 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Day 2 Lessons Learned: GW6.5 to Exchange 2000 Sometimes I feel funny when I climb the rope in Gym class. Eric Fretz L-3 Communications ComCept Division 2800 Discovery Blvd. Rockwall, TX 75032 tel: 972.772.7501 fax: 972.772.7510 -Original Message- From: Christopher Hummert [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, December 15, 2003 10:24 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Day 2 Lessons Learned: GW6.5 to Exchange 2000 My brain tickles when I pick my nose -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Erik Sojka Sent: Monday, December 15, 2003 8:23 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Day 2 Lessons Learned: GW6.5 to Exchange 2000 My cat's breath smells like cat food. -Original Message- From: Christopher Hummert [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, December 15, 2003 11:18 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Day 2 Lessons Learned: GW6.5 to Exchange 2000 Tl;dr. Will everyone just drop this discussion? We don't need another 75 e-mails on this today. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Greg Deckler Sent: Monday, December 15, 2003 8:17 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Day 2 Lessons Learned: GW6.5 to Exchange 2000 You do not know the specifics of their situation so I am not sure why you are so certain that the project was severly underscoped and underbid. Rushed, yes. Underscoped and underbid, no. The scope is to get them from GroupWise 6.5 to Exchange 2000 and that is what is being delivered. Underbid, again no. I can get a client of this size and much larger migrated with only spending 5 days or less on sight. I bring all my own software and tools, set them up, configure them and train them on their use. I can actually install all the software and have all the processes up and running in about a day. Once you've done as many email migrations as I have, you tend to get your process worked out pretty thoroughly. So no, I would not characterize this project as underscoped or underbid. It's a public school system and so yes, they are concerned about costs, but I can deliver everything they need, cover my costs with an acceptable profit and they get everything they asked for, so it has been scoped and bid correctly. As for the rest. Yes, everything that I say is my opinion. And no, I do not say that everyone that is an MVP is unethical. What I say is that the act of being an MVP is accepting compensation from a vendor and hence not something that professional IT people should engage in. MCSE? First, I am not an MCSE and would not advertise that fact if I were one. Yes, I do hold certain vendor certifications. The difference is that I PAY for these certifications. I PAY Microsoft to take the test and then I PAY Microsoft to get their software. It is at a discount, but I still have to pay for it. With the MVP, you are not doing any PAYING. Microsoft is PAYING you with a title and gifts, not the other way around. I fail to see how you can miss this obvious distinction, but hey, whatever man. Yes, we disagree on this point. I am not sure why you feel that I am being closed-minded. I am close-minded because you cannot convince me to believe in your point of view? No, I have my point of view and I am quite open-minded enough to understand your point of view. I do not have any bile towards vendors although I do believe that they CAN have a corrupting influence. That's why the AMA is concerned over vendors (drug companies) paying for clinical studies, etc. The AMA does not want doctors being paid to recommend particular prescriptions because it is a conflict of interest. The doctor is supposed to be looking out for the patient's best interests, not their own or the interests of a drug company that is paying them. This is all basic stuff. What I cannot understand is why people keep bringing this up. My position on this subject is well known and not likely to change. I have given this issue a lot of thought and this is my position on it. And we all know the positions involved and all know who thinks what and all of this conversation is simply a rehash of the six or seven other times this subject has come up. So why keep bringing it up? Seems odd to me that a bunch of people would continually bring up the subject and then get mad at ME and blame ME for bringing it up. My position on this is well known and hasn't changed in 8 years. We disagree, great. No big thang. Let it go. If $1200 is 25% of a GW-Ex migration for 700 people then the project was severely underscoped and underbid. It seems like the customer has chosen cost over quality. C'est la vie
RE: Day 2 Lessons Learned: GW6.5 to Exchange 2000
I like crickets and figs John Parker, MCSE IS Admin. Senior Technical Specialist Alpha Display Systems. Alpha Video 7711 Computer Ave. Edina, MN. 55435 952-896-9898 Local 800-388-0008 Watts 952-896-9899 Fax 612-804-8769 Cell 952-841-3327 Direct [EMAIL PROTECTED] Be excellent to each other ---End of Line--- -Original Message- From: Ely, Don [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, December 15, 2003 10:26 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Day 2 Lessons Learned: GW6.5 to Exchange 2000 You can fix fat, but you can't fix ugly... -Original Message- From: Eric Fretz [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, December 15, 2003 11:26 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Day 2 Lessons Learned: GW6.5 to Exchange 2000 Sometimes I feel funny when I climb the rope in Gym class. Eric Fretz L-3 Communications ComCept Division 2800 Discovery Blvd. Rockwall, TX 75032 tel: 972.772.7501 fax: 972.772.7510 -Original Message- From: Christopher Hummert [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, December 15, 2003 10:24 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Day 2 Lessons Learned: GW6.5 to Exchange 2000 My brain tickles when I pick my nose -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Erik Sojka Sent: Monday, December 15, 2003 8:23 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Day 2 Lessons Learned: GW6.5 to Exchange 2000 My cat's breath smells like cat food. -Original Message- From: Christopher Hummert [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, December 15, 2003 11:18 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Day 2 Lessons Learned: GW6.5 to Exchange 2000 Tl;dr. Will everyone just drop this discussion? We don't need another 75 e-mails on this today. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Greg Deckler Sent: Monday, December 15, 2003 8:17 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Day 2 Lessons Learned: GW6.5 to Exchange 2000 You do not know the specifics of their situation so I am not sure why you are so certain that the project was severly underscoped and underbid. Rushed, yes. Underscoped and underbid, no. The scope is to get them from GroupWise 6.5 to Exchange 2000 and that is what is being delivered. Underbid, again no. I can get a client of this size and much larger migrated with only spending 5 days or less on sight. I bring all my own software and tools, set them up, configure them and train them on their use. I can actually install all the software and have all the processes up and running in about a day. Once you've done as many email migrations as I have, you tend to get your process worked out pretty thoroughly. So no, I would not characterize this project as underscoped or underbid. It's a public school system and so yes, they are concerned about costs, but I can deliver everything they need, cover my costs with an acceptable profit and they get everything they asked for, so it has been scoped and bid correctly. As for the rest. Yes, everything that I say is my opinion. And no, I do not say that everyone that is an MVP is unethical. What I say is that the act of being an MVP is accepting compensation from a vendor and hence not something that professional IT people should engage in. MCSE? First, I am not an MCSE and would not advertise that fact if I were one. Yes, I do hold certain vendor certifications. The difference is that I PAY for these certifications. I PAY Microsoft to take the test and then I PAY Microsoft to get their software. It is at a discount, but I still have to pay for it. With the MVP, you are not doing any PAYING. Microsoft is PAYING you with a title and gifts, not the other way around. I fail to see how you can miss this obvious distinction, but hey, whatever man. Yes, we disagree on this point. I am not sure why you feel that I am being closed-minded. I am close-minded because you cannot convince me to believe in your point of view? No, I have my point of view and I am quite open-minded enough to understand your point of view. I do not have any bile towards vendors although I do believe that they CAN have a corrupting influence. That's why the AMA is concerned over vendors (drug companies) paying for clinical studies, etc. The AMA does not want doctors being paid to recommend particular prescriptions because it is a conflict of interest. The doctor is supposed to be looking out for the patient's best interests, not their own or the interests of a drug company that is paying them. This is all basic stuff. What I cannot understand is why people keep bringing this up. My position on this subject is well known and not likely to change. I have given this issue a lot of thought and this is my position on it. And we all know the positions involved and all know who thinks what and all of this conversation is simply a rehash of the six or seven
Day 3: Lessons Learned GW6.5 to Exchange 2000
Day 3 was pretty much finishing up some details with nothing much new and exciting to report. Was able to bring up the GW 6.5 client connected to both GW and Exchange and this allows one to drag and drop contacts but not PDL's. Also tried with the GW 5.2.6 client with similar results. Created a manual process for PDL migration, which is manually intensive but works and does not cost any money. Other than that, reconfigured Rocket to migrate using each user's account and password versus a single, Migration account. Tested this out thoroughly and this seems to work great. I finally got a message back from the creator of GBMT. He has never tested it with any client 6.x client since Microsoft's tools do not officially support migrating from anything other than 5.x. Did recommend using the GW5.5 client, which I have used in the past and does seem to work better with GBMT, although I have found that the Migration Wizard works worse with this version of the client. If anyone has any questions or comments or additional insights, please forward them along. _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Day 2 Lessons Learned: GW6.5 to Exchange 2000
You do too? I thought I was the only one. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Eric Fretz Sent: Monday, December 15, 2003 11:26 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Day 2 Lessons Learned: GW6.5 to Exchange 2000 Sometimes I feel funny when I climb the rope in Gym class. Eric Fretz L-3 Communications ComCept Division 2800 Discovery Blvd. Rockwall, TX 75032 tel: 972.772.7501 fax: 972.772.7510 -Original Message- From: Christopher Hummert [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, December 15, 2003 10:24 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Day 2 Lessons Learned: GW6.5 to Exchange 2000 My brain tickles when I pick my nose -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Erik Sojka Sent: Monday, December 15, 2003 8:23 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Day 2 Lessons Learned: GW6.5 to Exchange 2000 My cat's breath smells like cat food. -Original Message- From: Christopher Hummert [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, December 15, 2003 11:18 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Day 2 Lessons Learned: GW6.5 to Exchange 2000 Tl;dr. Will everyone just drop this discussion? We don't need another 75 e-mails on this today. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Greg Deckler Sent: Monday, December 15, 2003 8:17 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Day 2 Lessons Learned: GW6.5 to Exchange 2000 You do not know the specifics of their situation so I am not sure why you are so certain that the project was severly underscoped and underbid. Rushed, yes. Underscoped and underbid, no. The scope is to get them from GroupWise 6.5 to Exchange 2000 and that is what is being delivered. Underbid, again no. I can get a client of this size and much larger migrated with only spending 5 days or less on sight. I bring all my own software and tools, set them up, configure them and train them on their use. I can actually install all the software and have all the processes up and running in about a day. Once you've done as many email migrations as I have, you tend to get your process worked out pretty thoroughly. So no, I would not characterize this project as underscoped or underbid. It's a public school system and so yes, they are concerned about costs, but I can deliver everything they need, cover my costs with an acceptable profit and they get everything they asked for, so it has been scoped and bid correctly. As for the rest. Yes, everything that I say is my opinion. And no, I do not say that everyone that is an MVP is unethical. What I say is that the act of being an MVP is accepting compensation from a vendor and hence not something that professional IT people should engage in. MCSE? First, I am not an MCSE and would not advertise that fact if I were one. Yes, I do hold certain vendor certifications. The difference is that I PAY for these certifications. I PAY Microsoft to take the test and then I PAY Microsoft to get their software. It is at a discount, but I still have to pay for it. With the MVP, you are not doing any PAYING. Microsoft is PAYING you with a title and gifts, not the other way around. I fail to see how you can miss this obvious distinction, but hey, whatever man. Yes, we disagree on this point. I am not sure why you feel that I am being closed-minded. I am close-minded because you cannot convince me to believe in your point of view? No, I have my point of view and I am quite open-minded enough to understand your point of view. I do not have any bile towards vendors although I do believe that they CAN have a corrupting influence. That's why the AMA is concerned over vendors (drug companies) paying for clinical studies, etc. The AMA does not want doctors being paid to recommend particular prescriptions because it is a conflict of interest. The doctor is supposed to be looking out for the patient's best interests, not their own or the interests of a drug company that is paying them. This is all basic stuff. What I cannot understand is why people keep bringing this up. My position on this subject is well known and not likely to change. I have given this issue a lot of thought and this is my position on it. And we all know the positions involved and all know who thinks what and all of this conversation is simply a rehash of the six or seven other times this subject has come up. So why keep bringing it up? Seems odd to me that a bunch of people would continually bring up the subject and then get mad at ME and blame ME for bringing it up. My position on this is well known and hasn't changed in 8 years. We disagree, great. No big thang. Let it go. If $1200 is 25% of a GW-Ex migration for 700 people then the project was severely underscoped and underbid. It seems like the customer has chosen cost over
RE: Day 2 Lessons Learned: GW6.5 to Exchange 2000
Oh. My. I think that was TMI, Eric. Ben Winzenz Network Engineer Gardner White (317) 581-1580 ext 418 -Original Message- From: Eric Fretz [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Posted At: Monday, December 15, 2003 11:26 AM Posted To: Exchange (Swynk) Conversation: Day 2 Lessons Learned: GW6.5 to Exchange 2000 Subject: RE: Day 2 Lessons Learned: GW6.5 to Exchange 2000 Sometimes I feel funny when I climb the rope in Gym class. Eric Fretz L-3 Communications ComCept Division 2800 Discovery Blvd. Rockwall, TX 75032 tel: 972.772.7501 fax: 972.772.7510 -Original Message- From: Christopher Hummert [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, December 15, 2003 10:24 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Day 2 Lessons Learned: GW6.5 to Exchange 2000 My brain tickles when I pick my nose -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Erik Sojka Sent: Monday, December 15, 2003 8:23 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Day 2 Lessons Learned: GW6.5 to Exchange 2000 My cat's breath smells like cat food. -Original Message- From: Christopher Hummert [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, December 15, 2003 11:18 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Day 2 Lessons Learned: GW6.5 to Exchange 2000 Tl;dr. Will everyone just drop this discussion? We don't need another 75 e-mails on this today. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Greg Deckler Sent: Monday, December 15, 2003 8:17 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Day 2 Lessons Learned: GW6.5 to Exchange 2000 You do not know the specifics of their situation so I am not sure why you are so certain that the project was severly underscoped and underbid. Rushed, yes. Underscoped and underbid, no. The scope is to get them from GroupWise 6.5 to Exchange 2000 and that is what is being delivered. Underbid, again no. I can get a client of this size and much larger migrated with only spending 5 days or less on sight. I bring all my own software and tools, set them up, configure them and train them on their use. I can actually install all the software and have all the processes up and running in about a day. Once you've done as many email migrations as I have, you tend to get your process worked out pretty thoroughly. So no, I would not characterize this project as underscoped or underbid. It's a public school system and so yes, they are concerned about costs, but I can deliver everything they need, cover my costs with an acceptable profit and they get everything they asked for, so it has been scoped and bid correctly. As for the rest. Yes, everything that I say is my opinion. And no, I do not say that everyone that is an MVP is unethical. What I say is that the act of being an MVP is accepting compensation from a vendor and hence not something that professional IT people should engage in. MCSE? First, I am not an MCSE and would not advertise that fact if I were one. Yes, I do hold certain vendor certifications. The difference is that I PAY for these certifications. I PAY Microsoft to take the test and then I PAY Microsoft to get their software. It is at a discount, but I still have to pay for it. With the MVP, you are not doing any PAYING. Microsoft is PAYING you with a title and gifts, not the other way around. I fail to see how you can miss this obvious distinction, but hey, whatever man. Yes, we disagree on this point. I am not sure why you feel that I am being closed-minded. I am close-minded because you cannot convince me to believe in your point of view? No, I have my point of view and I am quite open-minded enough to understand your point of view. I do not have any bile towards vendors although I do believe that they CAN have a corrupting influence. That's why the AMA is concerned over vendors (drug companies) paying for clinical studies, etc. The AMA does not want doctors being paid to recommend particular prescriptions because it is a conflict of interest. The doctor is supposed to be looking out for the patient's best interests, not their own or the interests of a drug company that is paying them. This is all basic stuff. What I cannot understand is why people keep bringing this up. My position on this subject is well known and not likely to change. I have given this issue a lot of thought and this is my position on it. And we all know the positions involved and all know who thinks what and all of this conversation is simply a rehash of the six or seven other times this subject has come up. So why keep bringing it up? Seems odd to me that a bunch of people would continually bring up the subject and then get mad at ME and blame ME for bringing it up. My position on this is well known and hasn't changed in 8 years. We disagree, great. No big thang. Let it go. If $1200 is 25% of a GW-Ex migration for 700 people
RE: Day 2 Lessons Learned: GW6.5 to Exchange 2000
You forget that you're comparing me to the guy that tickles his brain when he picks his nose. Frankly, I seem a bit tame. =) Eric Fretz L-3 Communications ComCept Division 2800 Discovery Blvd. Rockwall, TX 75032 tel: 972.772.7501 fax: 972.772.7510 -Original Message- From: Ben Winzenz [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, December 15, 2003 1:49 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Day 2 Lessons Learned: GW6.5 to Exchange 2000 Oh. My. I think that was TMI, Eric. Ben Winzenz Network Engineer Gardner White (317) 581-1580 ext 418 -Original Message- From: Eric Fretz [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Posted At: Monday, December 15, 2003 11:26 AM Posted To: Exchange (Swynk) Conversation: Day 2 Lessons Learned: GW6.5 to Exchange 2000 Subject: RE: Day 2 Lessons Learned: GW6.5 to Exchange 2000 Sometimes I feel funny when I climb the rope in Gym class. Eric Fretz L-3 Communications ComCept Division 2800 Discovery Blvd. Rockwall, TX 75032 tel: 972.772.7501 fax: 972.772.7510 -Original Message- From: Christopher Hummert [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, December 15, 2003 10:24 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Day 2 Lessons Learned: GW6.5 to Exchange 2000 My brain tickles when I pick my nose -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Erik Sojka Sent: Monday, December 15, 2003 8:23 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Day 2 Lessons Learned: GW6.5 to Exchange 2000 My cat's breath smells like cat food. -Original Message- From: Christopher Hummert [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, December 15, 2003 11:18 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Day 2 Lessons Learned: GW6.5 to Exchange 2000 Tl;dr. Will everyone just drop this discussion? We don't need another 75 e-mails on this today. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Greg Deckler Sent: Monday, December 15, 2003 8:17 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Day 2 Lessons Learned: GW6.5 to Exchange 2000 You do not know the specifics of their situation so I am not sure why you are so certain that the project was severly underscoped and underbid. Rushed, yes. Underscoped and underbid, no. The scope is to get them from GroupWise 6.5 to Exchange 2000 and that is what is being delivered. Underbid, again no. I can get a client of this size and much larger migrated with only spending 5 days or less on sight. I bring all my own software and tools, set them up, configure them and train them on their use. I can actually install all the software and have all the processes up and running in about a day. Once you've done as many email migrations as I have, you tend to get your process worked out pretty thoroughly. So no, I would not characterize this project as underscoped or underbid. It's a public school system and so yes, they are concerned about costs, but I can deliver everything they need, cover my costs with an acceptable profit and they get everything they asked for, so it has been scoped and bid correctly. As for the rest. Yes, everything that I say is my opinion. And no, I do not say that everyone that is an MVP is unethical. What I say is that the act of being an MVP is accepting compensation from a vendor and hence not something that professional IT people should engage in. MCSE? First, I am not an MCSE and would not advertise that fact if I were one. Yes, I do hold certain vendor certifications. The difference is that I PAY for these certifications. I PAY Microsoft to take the test and then I PAY Microsoft to get their software. It is at a discount, but I still have to pay for it. With the MVP, you are not doing any PAYING. Microsoft is PAYING you with a title and gifts, not the other way around. I fail to see how you can miss this obvious distinction, but hey, whatever man. Yes, we disagree on this point. I am not sure why you feel that I am being closed-minded. I am close-minded because you cannot convince me to believe in your point of view? No, I have my point of view and I am quite open-minded enough to understand your point of view. I do not have any bile towards vendors although I do believe that they CAN have a corrupting influence. That's why the AMA is concerned over vendors (drug companies) paying for clinical studies, etc. The AMA does not want doctors being paid to recommend particular prescriptions because it is a conflict of interest. The doctor is supposed to be looking out for the patient's best interests, not their own or the interests of a drug company that is paying them. This is all basic stuff. What I cannot understand is why people keep bringing this up. My position on this subject is well known and not likely to change. I have given this issue a lot of thought and this is my position on it. And we all know the positions involved and all know who thinks
RE: Day 2 Lessons Learned: GW6.5 to Exchange 2000
When I grow up I want to be a principalor a caterpillar. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Eric Fretz Sent: Monday, December 15, 2003 12:01 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Day 2 Lessons Learned: GW6.5 to Exchange 2000 You forget that you're comparing me to the guy that tickles his brain when he picks his nose. Frankly, I seem a bit tame. =) Eric Fretz L-3 Communications ComCept Division 2800 Discovery Blvd. Rockwall, TX 75032 tel: 972.772.7501 fax: 972.772.7510 -Original Message- From: Ben Winzenz [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, December 15, 2003 1:49 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Day 2 Lessons Learned: GW6.5 to Exchange 2000 Oh. My. I think that was TMI, Eric. Ben Winzenz Network Engineer Gardner White (317) 581-1580 ext 418 -Original Message- From: Eric Fretz [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Posted At: Monday, December 15, 2003 11:26 AM Posted To: Exchange (Swynk) Conversation: Day 2 Lessons Learned: GW6.5 to Exchange 2000 Subject: RE: Day 2 Lessons Learned: GW6.5 to Exchange 2000 Sometimes I feel funny when I climb the rope in Gym class. Eric Fretz L-3 Communications ComCept Division 2800 Discovery Blvd. Rockwall, TX 75032 tel: 972.772.7501 fax: 972.772.7510 -Original Message- From: Christopher Hummert [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, December 15, 2003 10:24 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Day 2 Lessons Learned: GW6.5 to Exchange 2000 My brain tickles when I pick my nose -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Erik Sojka Sent: Monday, December 15, 2003 8:23 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Day 2 Lessons Learned: GW6.5 to Exchange 2000 My cat's breath smells like cat food. -Original Message- From: Christopher Hummert [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, December 15, 2003 11:18 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Day 2 Lessons Learned: GW6.5 to Exchange 2000 Tl;dr. Will everyone just drop this discussion? We don't need another 75 e-mails on this today. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Greg Deckler Sent: Monday, December 15, 2003 8:17 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Day 2 Lessons Learned: GW6.5 to Exchange 2000 You do not know the specifics of their situation so I am not sure why you are so certain that the project was severly underscoped and underbid. Rushed, yes. Underscoped and underbid, no. The scope is to get them from GroupWise 6.5 to Exchange 2000 and that is what is being delivered. Underbid, again no. I can get a client of this size and much larger migrated with only spending 5 days or less on sight. I bring all my own software and tools, set them up, configure them and train them on their use. I can actually install all the software and have all the processes up and running in about a day. Once you've done as many email migrations as I have, you tend to get your process worked out pretty thoroughly. So no, I would not characterize this project as underscoped or underbid. It's a public school system and so yes, they are concerned about costs, but I can deliver everything they need, cover my costs with an acceptable profit and they get everything they asked for, so it has been scoped and bid correctly. As for the rest. Yes, everything that I say is my opinion. And no, I do not say that everyone that is an MVP is unethical. What I say is that the act of being an MVP is accepting compensation from a vendor and hence not something that professional IT people should engage in. MCSE? First, I am not an MCSE and would not advertise that fact if I were one. Yes, I do hold certain vendor certifications. The difference is that I PAY for these certifications. I PAY Microsoft to take the test and then I PAY Microsoft to get their software. It is at a discount, but I still have to pay for it. With the MVP, you are not doing any PAYING. Microsoft is PAYING you with a title and gifts, not the other way around. I fail to see how you can miss this obvious distinction, but hey, whatever man. Yes, we disagree on this point. I am not sure why you feel that I am being closed-minded. I am close-minded because you cannot convince me to believe in your point of view? No, I have my point of view and I am quite open-minded enough to understand your point of view. I do not have any bile towards vendors although I do believe that they CAN have a corrupting influence. That's why the AMA is concerned over vendors (drug companies) paying for clinical studies, etc. The AMA does not want doctors being paid to recommend particular prescriptions because it is a conflict of interest. The doctor is supposed to be looking out for the patient's best interests, not their own or the interests of a drug company that is paying them. This is all
RE: Day 2 Lessons Learned: GW6.5 to Exchange 2000
Well, some day I'd like to be a dentist. - Hermey - Matt -Original Message- From: Christopher Hummert [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, December 15, 2003 1:10 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Day 2 Lessons Learned: GW6.5 to Exchange 2000 When I grow up I want to be a principalor a caterpillar. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Eric Fretz Sent: Monday, December 15, 2003 12:01 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Day 2 Lessons Learned: GW6.5 to Exchange 2000 You forget that you're comparing me to the guy that tickles his brain when he picks his nose. Frankly, I seem a bit tame. =) Eric Fretz L-3 Communications ComCept Division 2800 Discovery Blvd. Rockwall, TX 75032 tel: 972.772.7501 fax: 972.772.7510 -Original Message- From: Ben Winzenz [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, December 15, 2003 1:49 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Day 2 Lessons Learned: GW6.5 to Exchange 2000 Oh. My. I think that was TMI, Eric. Ben Winzenz Network Engineer Gardner White (317) 581-1580 ext 418 -Original Message- From: Eric Fretz [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Posted At: Monday, December 15, 2003 11:26 AM Posted To: Exchange (Swynk) Conversation: Day 2 Lessons Learned: GW6.5 to Exchange 2000 Subject: RE: Day 2 Lessons Learned: GW6.5 to Exchange 2000 Sometimes I feel funny when I climb the rope in Gym class. Eric Fretz L-3 Communications ComCept Division 2800 Discovery Blvd. Rockwall, TX 75032 tel: 972.772.7501 fax: 972.772.7510 -Original Message- From: Christopher Hummert [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, December 15, 2003 10:24 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Day 2 Lessons Learned: GW6.5 to Exchange 2000 My brain tickles when I pick my nose -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Erik Sojka Sent: Monday, December 15, 2003 8:23 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Day 2 Lessons Learned: GW6.5 to Exchange 2000 My cat's breath smells like cat food. -Original Message- From: Christopher Hummert [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, December 15, 2003 11:18 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Day 2 Lessons Learned: GW6.5 to Exchange 2000 Tl;dr. Will everyone just drop this discussion? We don't need another 75 e-mails on this today. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Greg Deckler Sent: Monday, December 15, 2003 8:17 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Day 2 Lessons Learned: GW6.5 to Exchange 2000 You do not know the specifics of their situation so I am not sure why you are so certain that the project was severly underscoped and underbid. Rushed, yes. Underscoped and underbid, no. The scope is to get them from GroupWise 6.5 to Exchange 2000 and that is what is being delivered. Underbid, again no. I can get a client of this size and much larger migrated with only spending 5 days or less on sight. I bring all my own software and tools, set them up, configure them and train them on their use. I can actually install all the software and have all the processes up and running in about a day. Once you've done as many email migrations as I have, you tend to get your process worked out pretty thoroughly. So no, I would not characterize this project as underscoped or underbid. It's a public school system and so yes, they are concerned about costs, but I can deliver everything they need, cover my costs with an acceptable profit and they get everything they asked for, so it has been scoped and bid correctly. As for the rest. Yes, everything that I say is my opinion. And no, I do not say that everyone that is an MVP is unethical. What I say is that the act of being an MVP is accepting compensation from a vendor and hence not something that professional IT people should engage in. MCSE? First, I am not an MCSE and would not advertise that fact if I were one. Yes, I do hold certain vendor certifications. The difference is that I PAY for these certifications. I PAY Microsoft to take the test and then I PAY Microsoft to get their software. It is at a discount, but I still have to pay for it. With the MVP, you are not doing any PAYING. Microsoft is PAYING you with a title and gifts, not the other way around. I fail to see how you can miss this obvious distinction, but hey, whatever man. Yes, we disagree on this point. I am not sure why you feel that I am being closed-minded. I am close-minded because you cannot convince me to believe in your point of view? No, I have my point of view and I am quite open-minded enough to understand your point of view. I do not have any bile towards vendors although I do believe that they CAN have a corrupting influence. That's why the AMA is concerned over vendors (drug companies) paying for clinical studies, etc. The AMA does
RE: Day 2 Lessons Learned: GW6.5 to Exchange 2000
I want to be a fig farmer John Parker, MCSE IS Admin. Senior Technical Specialist Alpha Display Systems. Alpha Video 7711 Computer Ave. Edina, MN. 55435 952-896-9898 Local 800-388-0008 Watts 952-896-9899 Fax 612-804-8769 Cell 952-841-3327 Direct [EMAIL PROTECTED] Be excellent to each other ---End of Line--- -Original Message- From: Bailey, Matthew [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, December 15, 2003 2:21 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Day 2 Lessons Learned: GW6.5 to Exchange 2000 Well, some day I'd like to be a dentist. - Hermey - Matt -Original Message- From: Christopher Hummert [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, December 15, 2003 1:10 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Day 2 Lessons Learned: GW6.5 to Exchange 2000 When I grow up I want to be a principalor a caterpillar. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Eric Fretz Sent: Monday, December 15, 2003 12:01 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Day 2 Lessons Learned: GW6.5 to Exchange 2000 You forget that you're comparing me to the guy that tickles his brain when he picks his nose. Frankly, I seem a bit tame. =) Eric Fretz L-3 Communications ComCept Division 2800 Discovery Blvd. Rockwall, TX 75032 tel: 972.772.7501 fax: 972.772.7510 -Original Message- From: Ben Winzenz [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, December 15, 2003 1:49 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Day 2 Lessons Learned: GW6.5 to Exchange 2000 Oh. My. I think that was TMI, Eric. Ben Winzenz Network Engineer Gardner White (317) 581-1580 ext 418 -Original Message- From: Eric Fretz [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Posted At: Monday, December 15, 2003 11:26 AM Posted To: Exchange (Swynk) Conversation: Day 2 Lessons Learned: GW6.5 to Exchange 2000 Subject: RE: Day 2 Lessons Learned: GW6.5 to Exchange 2000 Sometimes I feel funny when I climb the rope in Gym class. Eric Fretz L-3 Communications ComCept Division 2800 Discovery Blvd. Rockwall, TX 75032 tel: 972.772.7501 fax: 972.772.7510 -Original Message- From: Christopher Hummert [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, December 15, 2003 10:24 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Day 2 Lessons Learned: GW6.5 to Exchange 2000 My brain tickles when I pick my nose -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Erik Sojka Sent: Monday, December 15, 2003 8:23 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Day 2 Lessons Learned: GW6.5 to Exchange 2000 My cat's breath smells like cat food. -Original Message- From: Christopher Hummert [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, December 15, 2003 11:18 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Day 2 Lessons Learned: GW6.5 to Exchange 2000 Tl;dr. Will everyone just drop this discussion? We don't need another 75 e-mails on this today. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Greg Deckler Sent: Monday, December 15, 2003 8:17 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Day 2 Lessons Learned: GW6.5 to Exchange 2000 You do not know the specifics of their situation so I am not sure why you are so certain that the project was severly underscoped and underbid. Rushed, yes. Underscoped and underbid, no. The scope is to get them from GroupWise 6.5 to Exchange 2000 and that is what is being delivered. Underbid, again no. I can get a client of this size and much larger migrated with only spending 5 days or less on sight. I bring all my own software and tools, set them up, configure them and train them on their use. I can actually install all the software and have all the processes up and running in about a day. Once you've done as many email migrations as I have, you tend to get your process worked out pretty thoroughly. So no, I would not characterize this project as underscoped or underbid. It's a public school system and so yes, they are concerned about costs, but I can deliver everything they need, cover my costs with an acceptable profit and they get everything they asked for, so it has been scoped and bid correctly. As for the rest. Yes, everything that I say is my opinion. And no, I do not say that everyone that is an MVP is unethical. What I say is that the act of being an MVP is accepting compensation from a vendor and hence not something that professional IT people should engage in. MCSE? First, I am not an MCSE and would not advertise that fact if I were one. Yes, I do hold certain vendor certifications. The difference is that I PAY for these certifications. I PAY Microsoft to take the test and then I PAY Microsoft to get their software. It is at a discount, but I still have to pay for it. With the MVP, you are not doing any PAYING. Microsoft is PAYING you with a title and gifts, not the other way around. I fail to see how you can miss this obvious distinction
RE: Day 3: Lessons Learned GW6.5 to Exchange 2000
We should change the name of this list to Deckler's Blog. Ed Crowley MCSE+Internet MVP Freelance E-Mail Philosopher Protecting the world from PSTs and Bricked Backups!T -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Greg Deckler Sent: Monday, December 15, 2003 10:24 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Day 3: Lessons Learned GW6.5 to Exchange 2000 Day 3 was pretty much finishing up some details with nothing much new and exciting to report. Was able to bring up the GW 6.5 client connected to both GW and Exchange and this allows one to drag and drop contacts but not PDL's. Also tried with the GW 5.2.6 client with similar results. Created a manual process for PDL migration, which is manually intensive but works and does not cost any money. Other than that, reconfigured Rocket to migrate using each user's account and password versus a single, Migration account. Tested this out thoroughly and this seems to work great. I finally got a message back from the creator of GBMT. He has never tested it with any client 6.x client since Microsoft's tools do not officially support migrating from anything other than 5.x. Did recommend using the GW5.5 client, which I have used in the past and does seem to work better with GBMT, although I have found that the Migration Wizard works worse with this version of the client. If anyone has any questions or comments or additional insights, please forward them along. _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang =english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Day 2 Lessons Learned: GW6.5 to Exchange 2000
Looking down, I see that you just pleaded, Will everyone just drop this discussion? Didn't you really mean everyone else? Ed Crowley MCSE+Internet MVP Freelance E-Mail Philosopher Protecting the world from PSTs and Bricked Backups!T -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Christopher Hummert Sent: Monday, December 15, 2003 8:24 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Day 2 Lessons Learned: GW6.5 to Exchange 2000 My brain tickles when I pick my nose -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Erik Sojka Sent: Monday, December 15, 2003 8:23 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Day 2 Lessons Learned: GW6.5 to Exchange 2000 My cat's breath smells like cat food. -Original Message- From: Christopher Hummert [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, December 15, 2003 11:18 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Day 2 Lessons Learned: GW6.5 to Exchange 2000 Tl;dr. Will everyone just drop this discussion? We don't need another 75 e-mails on this today. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Greg Deckler Sent: Monday, December 15, 2003 8:17 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Day 2 Lessons Learned: GW6.5 to Exchange 2000 You do not know the specifics of their situation so I am not sure why you are so certain that the project was severly underscoped and underbid. Rushed, yes. Underscoped and underbid, no. The scope is to get them from GroupWise 6.5 to Exchange 2000 and that is what is being delivered. Underbid, again no. I can get a client of this size and much larger migrated with only spending 5 days or less on sight. I bring all my own software and tools, set them up, configure them and train them on their use. I can actually install all the software and have all the processes up and running in about a day. Once you've done as many email migrations as I have, you tend to get your process worked out pretty thoroughly. So no, I would not characterize this project as underscoped or underbid. It's a public school system and so yes, they are concerned about costs, but I can deliver everything they need, cover my costs with an acceptable profit and they get everything they asked for, so it has been scoped and bid correctly. As for the rest. Yes, everything that I say is my opinion. And no, I do not say that everyone that is an MVP is unethical. What I say is that the act of being an MVP is accepting compensation from a vendor and hence not something that professional IT people should engage in. MCSE? First, I am not an MCSE and would not advertise that fact if I were one. Yes, I do hold certain vendor certifications. The difference is that I PAY for these certifications. I PAY Microsoft to take the test and then I PAY Microsoft to get their software. It is at a discount, but I still have to pay for it. With the MVP, you are not doing any PAYING. Microsoft is PAYING you with a title and gifts, not the other way around. I fail to see how you can miss this obvious distinction, but hey, whatever man. Yes, we disagree on this point. I am not sure why you feel that I am being closed-minded. I am close-minded because you cannot convince me to believe in your point of view? No, I have my point of view and I am quite open-minded enough to understand your point of view. I do not have any bile towards vendors although I do believe that they CAN have a corrupting influence. That's why the AMA is concerned over vendors (drug companies) paying for clinical studies, etc. The AMA does not want doctors being paid to recommend particular prescriptions because it is a conflict of interest. The doctor is supposed to be looking out for the patient's best interests, not their own or the interests of a drug company that is paying them. This is all basic stuff. What I cannot understand is why people keep bringing this up. My position on this subject is well known and not likely to change. I have given this issue a lot of thought and this is my position on it. And we all know the positions involved and all know who thinks what and all of this conversation is simply a rehash of the six or seven other times this subject has come up. So why keep bringing it up? Seems odd to me that a bunch of people would continually bring up the subject and then get mad at ME and blame ME for bringing it up. My position on this is well known and hasn't changed in 8 years. We disagree, great. No big thang. Let it go. If $1200 is 25% of a GW-Ex migration for 700 people then the project was severely underscoped and underbid. It seems like the customer has chosen cost over quality. C'est la vie. As for your positions, they are your opinion. Not fact. Not an opinion that many people agree with either. There are folks on these lists with medical
RE: Day 2 Lessons Learned: GW6.5 to Exchange 2000
Actually I just gave up, and gave in -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Ed Crowley [MVP] Sent: Monday, December 15, 2003 3:45 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Day 2 Lessons Learned: GW6.5 to Exchange 2000 Looking down, I see that you just pleaded, Will everyone just drop this discussion? Didn't you really mean everyone else? Ed Crowley MCSE+Internet MVP Freelance E-Mail Philosopher Protecting the world from PSTs and Bricked Backups!T -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Christopher Hummert Sent: Monday, December 15, 2003 8:24 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Day 2 Lessons Learned: GW6.5 to Exchange 2000 My brain tickles when I pick my nose -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Erik Sojka Sent: Monday, December 15, 2003 8:23 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Day 2 Lessons Learned: GW6.5 to Exchange 2000 My cat's breath smells like cat food. -Original Message- From: Christopher Hummert [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, December 15, 2003 11:18 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Day 2 Lessons Learned: GW6.5 to Exchange 2000 Tl;dr. Will everyone just drop this discussion? We don't need another 75 e-mails on this today. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Greg Deckler Sent: Monday, December 15, 2003 8:17 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Day 2 Lessons Learned: GW6.5 to Exchange 2000 You do not know the specifics of their situation so I am not sure why you are so certain that the project was severly underscoped and underbid. Rushed, yes. Underscoped and underbid, no. The scope is to get them from GroupWise 6.5 to Exchange 2000 and that is what is being delivered. Underbid, again no. I can get a client of this size and much larger migrated with only spending 5 days or less on sight. I bring all my own software and tools, set them up, configure them and train them on their use. I can actually install all the software and have all the processes up and running in about a day. Once you've done as many email migrations as I have, you tend to get your process worked out pretty thoroughly. So no, I would not characterize this project as underscoped or underbid. It's a public school system and so yes, they are concerned about costs, but I can deliver everything they need, cover my costs with an acceptable profit and they get everything they asked for, so it has been scoped and bid correctly. As for the rest. Yes, everything that I say is my opinion. And no, I do not say that everyone that is an MVP is unethical. What I say is that the act of being an MVP is accepting compensation from a vendor and hence not something that professional IT people should engage in. MCSE? First, I am not an MCSE and would not advertise that fact if I were one. Yes, I do hold certain vendor certifications. The difference is that I PAY for these certifications. I PAY Microsoft to take the test and then I PAY Microsoft to get their software. It is at a discount, but I still have to pay for it. With the MVP, you are not doing any PAYING. Microsoft is PAYING you with a title and gifts, not the other way around. I fail to see how you can miss this obvious distinction, but hey, whatever man. Yes, we disagree on this point. I am not sure why you feel that I am being closed-minded. I am close-minded because you cannot convince me to believe in your point of view? No, I have my point of view and I am quite open-minded enough to understand your point of view. I do not have any bile towards vendors although I do believe that they CAN have a corrupting influence. That's why the AMA is concerned over vendors (drug companies) paying for clinical studies, etc. The AMA does not want doctors being paid to recommend particular prescriptions because it is a conflict of interest. The doctor is supposed to be looking out for the patient's best interests, not their own or the interests of a drug company that is paying them. This is all basic stuff. What I cannot understand is why people keep bringing this up. My position on this subject is well known and not likely to change. I have given this issue a lot of thought and this is my position on it. And we all know the positions involved and all know who thinks what and all of this conversation is simply a rehash of the six or seven other times this subject has come up. So why keep bringing it up? Seems odd to me that a bunch of people would continually bring up the subject and then get mad at ME and blame ME for bringing it up. My position on this is well known and hasn't changed in 8 years. We disagree, great. No big thang. Let it go. If $1200 is 25% of a GW-Ex migration for 700 people then the project was severely
RE: Day 2 Lessons Learned: GW6.5 to Exchange 2000
Pretty quickly--six minutes. There's a name for that but this is a family forum. Ed Crowley MCSE+Internet MVP Freelance E-Mail Philosopher Protecting the world from PSTs and Bricked Backups!T -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Christopher Hummert Sent: Monday, December 15, 2003 3:50 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Day 2 Lessons Learned: GW6.5 to Exchange 2000 Actually I just gave up, and gave in -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Ed Crowley [MVP] Sent: Monday, December 15, 2003 3:45 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Day 2 Lessons Learned: GW6.5 to Exchange 2000 Looking down, I see that you just pleaded, Will everyone just drop this discussion? Didn't you really mean everyone else? Ed Crowley MCSE+Internet MVP Freelance E-Mail Philosopher Protecting the world from PSTs and Bricked Backups!T -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Christopher Hummert Sent: Monday, December 15, 2003 8:24 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Day 2 Lessons Learned: GW6.5 to Exchange 2000 My brain tickles when I pick my nose -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Erik Sojka Sent: Monday, December 15, 2003 8:23 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Day 2 Lessons Learned: GW6.5 to Exchange 2000 My cat's breath smells like cat food. -Original Message- From: Christopher Hummert [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, December 15, 2003 11:18 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Day 2 Lessons Learned: GW6.5 to Exchange 2000 Tl;dr. Will everyone just drop this discussion? We don't need another 75 e-mails on this today. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Greg Deckler Sent: Monday, December 15, 2003 8:17 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Day 2 Lessons Learned: GW6.5 to Exchange 2000 You do not know the specifics of their situation so I am not sure why you are so certain that the project was severly underscoped and underbid. Rushed, yes. Underscoped and underbid, no. The scope is to get them from GroupWise 6.5 to Exchange 2000 and that is what is being delivered. Underbid, again no. I can get a client of this size and much larger migrated with only spending 5 days or less on sight. I bring all my own software and tools, set them up, configure them and train them on their use. I can actually install all the software and have all the processes up and running in about a day. Once you've done as many email migrations as I have, you tend to get your process worked out pretty thoroughly. So no, I would not characterize this project as underscoped or underbid. It's a public school system and so yes, they are concerned about costs, but I can deliver everything they need, cover my costs with an acceptable profit and they get everything they asked for, so it has been scoped and bid correctly. As for the rest. Yes, everything that I say is my opinion. And no, I do not say that everyone that is an MVP is unethical. What I say is that the act of being an MVP is accepting compensation from a vendor and hence not something that professional IT people should engage in. MCSE? First, I am not an MCSE and would not advertise that fact if I were one. Yes, I do hold certain vendor certifications. The difference is that I PAY for these certifications. I PAY Microsoft to take the test and then I PAY Microsoft to get their software. It is at a discount, but I still have to pay for it. With the MVP, you are not doing any PAYING. Microsoft is PAYING you with a title and gifts, not the other way around. I fail to see how you can miss this obvious distinction, but hey, whatever man. Yes, we disagree on this point. I am not sure why you feel that I am being closed-minded. I am close-minded because you cannot convince me to believe in your point of view? No, I have my point of view and I am quite open-minded enough to understand your point of view. I do not have any bile towards vendors although I do believe that they CAN have a corrupting influence. That's why the AMA is concerned over vendors (drug companies) paying for clinical studies, etc. The AMA does not want doctors being paid to recommend particular prescriptions because it is a conflict of interest. The doctor is supposed to be looking out for the patient's best interests, not their own or the interests of a drug company that is paying them. This is all basic stuff. What I cannot understand is why people keep bringing this up. My position on this subject is well known and not likely to change. I have given this issue a lot of thought and this is my position on it. And we all know the positions involved and all know who thinks what and all of this conversation is simply a rehash
RE: Day 2 Lessons Learned: GW6.5 to Exchange 2000
On the subject of migration tool investment by the vendors, migration tools are considered a marketing expense. You build free tools when you're trying to quickly gain market share from your competitors. Once you have the market share, there's less need since the prospective customers will want to move to your product for many other reasons. You also face an increasing competition for the development dollars. On day one, /all/ the customers want migration tools. On day 1000, 2% want migration tools and 98% want some other feature. I'm not apologizing for Microsoft's lack of updated tools - in fact their consistency on this has been quite good for my company. They never did do an HP OpenMail to Exchange or Steltor/Netscape Calendar to Exchange tool, so the ones we did are still viable products. In terms of cost, $1200 for 700 users seems pretty cheap compared to the number of hours spent looking for a solution. Migration tools are rarely cheap from third parties because they're generally expensive to maintain and support and because the third parties don't have the Exchange/Outlook/Windows revenue to shore up the bottom line. Compared to the total cost of the project, $1200 is probably a drop in the bucket. Compared to having to abandon the data, I suspect $1200 is infinitesimal. Creating Outlook personal DLs is a pain in the neck. I know because we had to implement it in our products. You can script it using the Outlook Object Model, but you still have to be careful of the size limitations of an Outlook DL (125-135 entries depending on entry type and address size) and handle adding additional nesting if there are too many for one DL. There are some examples of using the DistListItem object at www.outlookcode.com. Andy Ps - please add appropriate grains of salt to the validity and intellectual honesty of this answer. I have been accused of being an MVP, which may have compromised my ethics and ability to think for myself. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Greg Deckler Sent: Thursday, December 11, 2003 11:41 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Day 2 Lessons Learned: GW6.5 to Exchange 2000 OK, some more specifics from the front. ENVIRONMENT - NetWare 6 Server, SP3 - GroupWise 6.5 PO, SP1 - Exchange 2000 Server, (Version 6.0 Build 6249.4, SP3) Migration Workstation - Exchange 2000 Administrative Tools, no SP's - NetWare 32-bit client - GroupWise 6.5 client, not SP1 - Outlook 2000, no patches - Terminal Services in Application Mode What is migrated: - Cabinet - Cabinet - Calendar - Calendar, after logon and import - Contacts - NO, but can use OrgToOut (DL's, see below) - Trash - NO - Mailbox - Inbox - Sent Items - Sent Items - Drafts - Drafts - Junk E-mail - Junk E-mail - Documents - NO, not surprising as this is a different paradigm - Checklist - NO - Work In Progress - Work In Progress Day 2 was largely beating my head against the wall. Could not get GBMT to work with either the 5.2.6 GW client or the 6.5 GW client. I can export users to a file, but cannot reset passwords or set proxy rights. This is not overly distressing since migrating users using their own accounts is working consistly. No real explanation that I can come up with other than I guess something is different in 6.5 that allows this to work. Also, since this is only about 700 users, manually doing this after resetting passwords from the GW Admin interface is a possibility. Sucks if you're the guy that has to do it, but doable. I emailed the creator of GBMT to see if there is an update that might do the trick, but have not heard back and am not really counting on it. Spent the morning trying to get this to work without success. Spent the afternoon beating my head against the wall with converting personal DL's. This one is important to the client because they got burned on this going from Exchange 5.5 to GW6.5 so it bites that I have not been able to get what I consider to be a good solution for this. Contacts work just fine using OrgToOut, but not PDL's. OrgToOut is my own tool that takes CSV files from things like Lotus Organizer and GW and converts them to a format that can be imported into Outlook. If anyone wants a copy, let me know and I'll fire it your way. Exporting the GW address book (Frequent Contacts in GW6.5) to a .NAB file exports the groups, but there does not appear to be a CSV import for PDL's in Outlook. If anyone knows the format or if it is possible to import PDL's into Outlook from a CSV, I would be most appreciative of any insight. Next, I tried VCF format. Again, GW VCF exporting exports the groups and, in fact, exports all of the Frequent Contacts to a single VCF file. However, Outlook VCF import appears to only recognize the very first entry in the VCF file, which it imports successfully and then ignores everything else. So much for VCF being a standard I guess. sigh So next I ran Outlook against the GW server, the thought being that I
RE: Day 2 Lessons Learned: GW6.5 to Exchange 2000
Well, if you're big enough to look past my views on MVP, I think I can let it slide. Many thanks for your response. And, BTW, $1200 is 25% of the budget for this project, that's a big chunk of change. P.S. And because I have been heckled to death on this issue, I feel the need to clarify because I believe you have mis-characterized my position on this. Regardless of whether or not MVP is the greatest thing since sliced bread and never, ever, in a million years caused anyone to every act unethically or fail to think for themselves, it is still compensation from a vendor and hence something that IT professionals should not engage in. It is a slippery slope and if IT is to ever achieve the status of a profession, something that will eventually have to be addressed. Andy Ps - please add appropriate grains of salt to the validity and intellectual honesty of this answer. I have been accused of being an MVP, which may have compromised my ethics and ability to think for myself. _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Server-based autoresponder for exchange 2000
Hi, We want to send an automatic response to the sender when an email is sent to the support mail ID of our company. I am interested in implementing a server based autoresponder for exchange 2000. So far, I've only seen products that run on Outlook. If you know of any server-based products that do this, or if there is a more ingenious way to do this, please let me know. Thanks in advance for all the help. Thanks and have a great day! Vivek Singh IT Manager Confluent Software, Inc. [EMAIL PROTECTED] (408)530-2122 _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Server-based autoresponder for exchange 2000
Well, a server-based rule will work even when Outlook is not running. However it will present a great danger of starting a mail loop. Another way to do this would be to write some more intelligent code and create an event sink. Sincerely, Andrey Fyodorov, Exchange MVP Systems Engineer Messaging and Collaboration Spherion -Original Message- From: Vivek Singh [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, December 12, 2003 12:55 PM To: Exchange Discussions Cc: Vivek Singh Subject: Server-based autoresponder for exchange 2000 Hi, We want to send an automatic response to the sender when an email is sent to the support mail ID of our company. I am interested in implementing a server based autoresponder for exchange 2000. So far, I've only seen products that run on Outlook. If you know of any server-based products that do this, or if there is a more ingenious way to do this, please let me know. Thanks in advance for all the help. Thanks and have a great day! Vivek Singh IT Manager Confluent Software, Inc. [EMAIL PROTECTED] (408)530-2122 _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=; lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Day 2 Lessons Learned: GW6.5 to Exchange 2000
If $1200 is 25% of a GW-Ex migration for 700 people then the project was severely underscoped and underbid. It seems like the customer has chosen cost over quality. C'est la vie. As for your positions, they are your opinion. Not fact. Not an opinion that many people agree with either. There are folks on these lists with medical and jurisprudence and engineering and MBA degrees who have been through all the professional certification processes and few if any have come to your defense here. The ones I know agree with me. I don't think I've mischaracterized your position at all. You say that we are all unethical solely because of the vendor relationship and without respect to any other facts. You say you got an MCSE to get cheaper software. That's a recognition from the vendor with monetary value. I really don't see the difference. I've given a lot of thought to your arguments over the years and I respectfully disagree. IT is not the same as building roads. Within the areas you call professions there are specializations. Within IT there are specializations too. It just so happens that those areas of /deep/ technical knowledge are sometimes on a particular product in addition to the specializations on generic process. There really is no precedent stating that there is ipso facto unprofessionalism or an issue with ethics. You say you got an MCSE to get cheaper software. That's a recognition from the vendor with monetary value. I really don't see the difference. I wish you could stop being so closed minded about this one particular issue. The venom and bile with which you say the word vendor is also really puzzling. When you go to a chiropractor, everything is a chiropractic problem with a chiropractic solution. When you go to a heart surgeon, everything is a coronary problem with a coronary solution. Different you say? Not really. If they act responsibly, they'll refer you somewhere else if what they have to offer isn't what you need. In the IT space, if what you need is not what I have to offer, I'll refer you somewhere else. Saying that I'm more likely to lie to you and try to mislead you than any random doctor with a specialty is absurd. On the other hand, if you want a specialist, getting one that has /deep/ technical knowledge is not a bad idea and if they've been recognized by other experts and their peers for that, all the better. Now you know my opinion on this subject. It's that you are every bit as wrong on this topic as you think I am. Let's move on. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Greg Deckler Sent: Friday, December 12, 2003 9:02 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Day 2 Lessons Learned: GW6.5 to Exchange 2000 Well, if you're big enough to look past my views on MVP, I think I can let it slide. Many thanks for your response. And, BTW, $1200 is 25% of the budget for this project, that's a big chunk of change. P.S. And because I have been heckled to death on this issue, I feel the need to clarify because I believe you have mis-characterized my position on this. Regardless of whether or not MVP is the greatest thing since sliced bread and never, ever, in a million years caused anyone to every act unethically or fail to think for themselves, it is still compensation from a vendor and hence something that IT professionals should not engage in. It is a slippery slope and if IT is to ever achieve the status of a profession, something that will eventually have to be addressed. Andy Ps - please add appropriate grains of salt to the validity and intellectual honesty of this answer. I have been accused of being an MVP, which may have compromised my ethics and ability to think for myself. _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=; lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Day 2 Lessons Learned: GW6.5 to Exchange 2000
-Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Webb, Andy If $1200 is 25% of a GW-Ex migration for 700 people then the project was severely underscoped and underbid. No kidding. The design and implementation plan alone for a project of that size is worth WAY more than $4800. Jason _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Day 2 Lessons Learned: GW6.5 to Exchange 2000
Perhaps you should bill fewer hours to compensate. On the whole, it'd probably be a huge win for everyone. Except for you, of course. Ed Crowley MCSE+Internet MVP Freelance E-Mail Philosopher Protecting the world from PSTs and Bricked Backups!T -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Greg Deckler Sent: Friday, December 12, 2003 7:02 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Day 2 Lessons Learned: GW6.5 to Exchange 2000 Well, if you're big enough to look past my views on MVP, I think I can let it slide. Many thanks for your response. And, BTW, $1200 is 25% of the budget for this project, that's a big chunk of change. P.S. And because I have been heckled to death on this issue, I feel the need to clarify because I believe you have mis-characterized my position on this. Regardless of whether or not MVP is the greatest thing since sliced bread and never, ever, in a million years caused anyone to every act unethically or fail to think for themselves, it is still compensation from a vendor and hence something that IT professionals should not engage in. It is a slippery slope and if IT is to ever achieve the status of a profession, something that will eventually have to be addressed. Andy Ps - please add appropriate grains of salt to the validity and intellectual honesty of this answer. I have been accused of being an MVP, which may have compromised my ethics and ability to think for myself. _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang =english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Day 2 Lessons Learned: GW6.5 to Exchange 2000
OK, some more specifics from the front. ENVIRONMENT - NetWare 6 Server, SP3 - GroupWise 6.5 PO, SP1 - Exchange 2000 Server, (Version 6.0 Build 6249.4, SP3) Migration Workstation - Exchange 2000 Administrative Tools, no SP's - NetWare 32-bit client - GroupWise 6.5 client, not SP1 - Outlook 2000, no patches - Terminal Services in Application Mode What is migrated: - Cabinet - Cabinet - Calendar - Calendar, after logon and import - Contacts - NO, but can use OrgToOut (DL's, see below) - Trash - NO - Mailbox - Inbox - Sent Items - Sent Items - Drafts - Drafts - Junk E-mail - Junk E-mail - Documents - NO, not surprising as this is a different paradigm - Checklist - NO - Work In Progress - Work In Progress Day 2 was largely beating my head against the wall. Could not get GBMT to work with either the 5.2.6 GW client or the 6.5 GW client. I can export users to a file, but cannot reset passwords or set proxy rights. This is not overly distressing since migrating users using their own accounts is working consistly. No real explanation that I can come up with other than I guess something is different in 6.5 that allows this to work. Also, since this is only about 700 users, manually doing this after resetting passwords from the GW Admin interface is a possibility. Sucks if you're the guy that has to do it, but doable. I emailed the creator of GBMT to see if there is an update that might do the trick, but have not heard back and am not really counting on it. Spent the morning trying to get this to work without success. Spent the afternoon beating my head against the wall with converting personal DL's. This one is important to the client because they got burned on this going from Exchange 5.5 to GW6.5 so it bites that I have not been able to get what I consider to be a good solution for this. Contacts work just fine using OrgToOut, but not PDL's. OrgToOut is my own tool that takes CSV files from things like Lotus Organizer and GW and converts them to a format that can be imported into Outlook. If anyone wants a copy, let me know and I'll fire it your way. Exporting the GW address book (Frequent Contacts in GW6.5) to a .NAB file exports the groups, but there does not appear to be a CSV import for PDL's in Outlook. If anyone knows the format or if it is possible to import PDL's into Outlook from a CSV, I would be most appreciative of any insight. Next, I tried VCF format. Again, GW VCF exporting exports the groups and, in fact, exports all of the Frequent Contacts to a single VCF file. However, Outlook VCF import appears to only recognize the very first entry in the VCF file, which it imports successfully and then ignores everything else. So much for VCF being a standard I guess. sigh So next I ran Outlook against the GW server, the thought being that I could copy the DL's out of the Contacts folder in GW into a PST or something. Unfortunately, Outlook sees the contacts in the Contacts folder, but not the PDL's. deep, deep sigh. So THAT won't work either. Next, tried to run the GW client (5.2.6 and 6.5) against the Exchange server AND the GW server, the thought being that you could copy the PDL's from GW to Exchange via the client, but couldn't get this to really work at all. Checked into available tools to do this and there are some out there that support PDL's but they want an arm and a leg for them. The cheapest would be about $1,200. Ouch. What a rip, there are all kinds of free tools from Novell and others to do the reverse, go from Outlook contacts and PDL's to GroupWise. Microsoft is falling down on their migration support here. Their tools are old and stale and nothing much useful seems to have come out of them lately. So, the current plan; one that I know will work but involves a little bit of effort is to run the following command from the command-line: FIND G *.nab GROUPS.TXT This identifies all of the .NAB files that contain groups so that you can manually go in and recreate them for the user. Not pretty, but it'll work in the event that I cannot come up with something better. If anyone knows of something better, by all means please share the knowledge. I'm thinking of writing some VB tool that could parse the CSV file and recreate the groups, but that will take a bit of work and I may not have time to get it working before the client has to migrate. The nice thing about this approach is that it can all be done prior to the migration if we can get the users to export their Frequent Contacts to a file. That's it for Day 2. Day 3 tasks are: - Grant Migration account mailbox rights to all Exchange mailboxes in preparation for probably having to go into many of the mailboxes and create PDL's and import Calendars, Tasks, etc. - Check into mass changing of GroupWise passwords. Client was already planning this anyway. - Check into mass setting of proxy access from GW Admin. Probably not possibly and apparently not necessary, but would be good to check into anyway. - Update Rocket configuration
Lessons Learned: GW6.5 to Exchange 2000
OK, I've only been onsight at the client for one day and this is my first shot at migrating GroupWise 6.5 to Exchange 2000. I'm having some different experiences with 6.5 than my experiences with other GW 6.x migrations to Exchange and I'm having some different experiences than what Microsoft documentation indicates as well. Here's what I've found out so far, I'll fill in more of the specific details tomorrow or Friday. ENVIRONMENT - Newly installed GW6.5 system running on NetWare servers. System is less than 6 months old. The client recently moved from Exchange 5.5 to GW6.5 and are now migrating to Windows 2000 and Exchange 2000. Not sure about the version or patch levels for the NetWare OS. They are using eDirectory. Also not positive about the SP levels on the Windows 2000 OS or the Exchange 2000 system. The GW6.5 PO was configured to not have a required minimum client and to support both DIRECT and CLIENT/SERVER client connections. LESSONS LEARNED - 5.2.6 client works against the 6.5 PO if you copy the client's ofviews\win files from the 5.2.6 client to the PO. Just copy the .vew and .ini files that do not already exist into the ofviews\win directory on the 6.5 PO. Now, the extraction of messages works in this configuration but it is painfully slow, to the tune of over 2 hours to extract about 450 messages. This is a pretty typical mailbox, these are not overly large messages. So, something is wrong with this configuration and mix of clients, PO, etc. I was able to get this to work in both DIRECT and CLIENT/SERVER (TCP/IP) mode and it was painfully slow with both. - The Exchange Migration Wizard DOES work for extracting messages with the 6.5 client installed. Now, to be specific, I had the GW 5.2.6 client installed on the migration server and then installed the GW6.5 client over top of it. Not sure if this makes a difference. Anecdotal evidence from the client suggest that it does not. Testing was done in CLIENT/SERVER mode and it was so fast, just a few minutes on that same 450 message mailbox, that I probably won't test it in DIRECT mode. Previous experience has shown me that DIRECT mode is roughly 20% faster than CLIENT/SERVER mode for extracting GW mailboxes but I would be amazed if there was any real performance gain from what I have seen. - There is a Checklist folder in the 6.5 client and that folder and its contents are not migrated using the 5.2.6 client for the extraction. I'll have to verify if it is migrated using the 6.5 client. Intuition says no, but, then again, intuition said that the 6.5 client wouldn't work with the migration wizard so who knows. - I successfully extracted messages from a mailbox using the user's NetWare account versus a Migration account that was granted proxy rights using the 6.5 client. Again, to be specific, the user's GW mailbox had the Migration user setup for proxy access but not the user's own account. Now, I have had this work as a fluke before in previous migrations with older versions of GW but it never seemed to be very consistent and was very temperamental. This *appears* to work consistently but I have only had a chance to test with a couple mailboxes thus far. More on this to follow in the next couple days. My test mailboxes were IT folk's mailboxes with certain NetWare administrative rights so I need to do further testing on this. Even if it works, I'm still not sure that I would really trust it. Luckily, Rocket can be easily configured to support either scenario so this is not a pressing issue although it would be nice not to have to reset passwords and set up proxy access for everyone. - GBMT works against 6.5 PO to extract users from the PO to a file. This was with the 5.2.6 GW client installed and working against the 6.5 PO. It was nice and speedy. Tomorrow I'll continue testing this to ensure that the other GBMT functionality works like resetting passwords and setting proxy access rights. That's where I am right now. I'll forward on more details tomorrow night once I go through another day of testing. I'm putting my test plan together now for tomorrow. If anyone can think of something specific to include in that testing, please let me know and if it makes sense for the client to run through that test I'll work it in. I only get three days with the client to get all of their migration systems installed and configured and migration processes created and automated. Today was day one and I was able to get the bulk of the systems installed and configured. That means: 1. A migration control workstation installed with Windows 2000 Professional, Access 2000, VB6, Terminal Services Client, Outlook 2000, GroupWise 5.2.6 client, GBMT and Rocket (my own personal migration toolset that controls and automates the entire migration process). 2. A migration workstation installed with Windows 2000 Server, Terminal Services in Application mode, Outlook 2000, GroupWise 6.5 Client, Exchange 2000 Administrative Tools and Rocket. 3. Installed Exchange's
removal of first exchange 2000 server
I have had a mixed exch 2000/2003 site running for about a month. I have followed the Q article regarding removal of first exchange server in a site. Now some of my clients are having issues when accessing their mailbox's. outlook is set for their mailbox to point to the new server and outlook opens but clicking inbox locks outlook. I have tried repairing outlook and upgrading it to 2003 but nothing fix's it. Any info would be appreciated. Exchange 2003 on windows 2003 cluster. Removed server is exchange 2000 on windows 2000 non cluster Client outlook xp/2003 Ronald R. Mazzotta Jr. Director of IT Schonbraun Safris McCann Bekritsky Co. L.L.C. 101 Eisenhower pky Roseland NJ, 07068 _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: removal of first exchange 2000 server
Have you tried creating a new Outlook profile? Removing and re-adding the Outlook Address Book? -Original Message- From: Ronald Mazzotta [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, December 09, 2003 11:01 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: removal of first exchange 2000 server I have had a mixed exch 2000/2003 site running for about a month. I have followed the Q article regarding removal of first exchange server in a site. Now some of my clients are having issues when accessing their mailbox's. outlook is set for their mailbox to point to the new server and outlook opens but clicking inbox locks outlook. I have tried repairing outlook and upgrading it to 2003 but nothing fix's it. Any info would be appreciated. Exchange 2003 on windows 2003 cluster. Removed server is exchange 2000 on windows 2000 non cluster Client outlook xp/2003 Ronald R. Mazzotta Jr. Director of IT Schonbraun Safris McCann Bekritsky Co. L.L.C. 101 Eisenhower pky Roseland NJ, 07068 _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang =english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: removal of first exchange 2000 server
What happens when you generate them a new profile? Joshua Morgan AIMCO [EMAIL PROTECTED] W. 864 239-1015 -Original Message- From: Ronald Mazzotta [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, December 09, 2003 11:01 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: removal of first exchange 2000 server I have had a mixed exch 2000/2003 site running for about a month. I have followed the Q article regarding removal of first exchange server in a site. Now some of my clients are having issues when accessing their mailbox's. outlook is set for their mailbox to point to the new server and outlook opens but clicking inbox locks outlook. I have tried repairing outlook and upgrading it to 2003 but nothing fix's it. Any info would be appreciated. Exchange 2003 on windows 2003 cluster. Removed server is exchange 2000 on windows 2000 non cluster Client outlook xp/2003 Ronald R. Mazzotta Jr. Director of IT Schonbraun Safris McCann Bekritsky Co. L.L.C. 101 Eisenhower pky Roseland NJ, 07068 _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang =english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: removal of first exchange 2000 server
It turns out that the default gal wasn't re-homed. I had to fix that, change the expansion server of my distro lists and uninstall exchange from my old server. Ronald R. Mazzotta Jr. Director of IT Schonbraun Safris McCann Bekritsky Co. L.L.C. 101 Eisenhower pky Roseland NJ, 07068 -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Morgan, Joshua (Greenville) Sent: Tuesday, December 09, 2003 4:04 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: removal of first exchange 2000 server What happens when you generate them a new profile? Joshua Morgan AIMCO [EMAIL PROTECTED] W. 864 239-1015 -Original Message- From: Ronald Mazzotta [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, December 09, 2003 11:01 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: removal of first exchange 2000 server I have had a mixed exch 2000/2003 site running for about a month. I have followed the Q article regarding removal of first exchange server in a site. Now some of my clients are having issues when accessing their mailbox's. outlook is set for their mailbox to point to the new server and outlook opens but clicking inbox locks outlook. I have tried repairing outlook and upgrading it to 2003 but nothing fix's it. Any info would be appreciated. Exchange 2003 on windows 2003 cluster. Removed server is exchange 2000 on windows 2000 non cluster Client outlook xp/2003 Ronald R. Mazzotta Jr. Director of IT Schonbraun Safris McCann Bekritsky Co. L.L.C. 101 Eisenhower pky Roseland NJ, 07068 _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=; lang =english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=; lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Exchange 2000 SMTP Connector
He doesn't have a SMTP Connector. I do on my Org. that is why I am questioning it. Shouldn't he have a SMTP Connector? -Original Message- From: Fyodorov, Andrey [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, December 04, 2003 9:44 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Exchange 2000 SMTP Connector Check to see whether the SMTP Connector has the checkbox selected Allow relay to these domains for the * 1 address space. -Original Message- From: Bridges, Samantha [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, December 04, 2003 9:17 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Exchange 2000 SMTP Connector Is having a SMTP Connector necessary in and Exchange 2000 Organization? I have a friend who has an Exchange server that is somehow relaying spam. My server does not relay spam and has the same settings in the SMTP Virtual server properties. The only difference between his system and mine is that I have a SMTP Connector and he doesn't. Or at least he says he doesn't see a connector in his ESM. I thought it was necessary to have a connector. Samantha _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=; lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=; lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] --- [This E-mail scanned for viruses by Declude Virus] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Exchange 2000 SMTP Connector
I don't think SMTP Connector is that necessary unless you want a tighter control over mail routing and flow. But for relay control the SMTP virtual server has everything that is necessary. -Original Message- From: Bridges, Samantha [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, December 05, 2003 8:59 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Exchange 2000 SMTP Connector He doesn't have a SMTP Connector. I do on my Org. that is why I am questioning it. Shouldn't he have a SMTP Connector? -Original Message- From: Fyodorov, Andrey [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, December 04, 2003 9:44 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Exchange 2000 SMTP Connector Check to see whether the SMTP Connector has the checkbox selected Allow relay to these domains for the * 1 address space. -Original Message- From: Bridges, Samantha [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, December 04, 2003 9:17 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Exchange 2000 SMTP Connector Is having a SMTP Connector necessary in and Exchange 2000 Organization? I have a friend who has an Exchange server that is somehow relaying spam. My server does not relay spam and has the same settings in the SMTP Virtual server properties. The only difference between his system and mine is that I have a SMTP Connector and he doesn't. Or at least he says he doesn't see a connector in his ESM. I thought it was necessary to have a connector. Samantha _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=; lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=; lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] --- [This E-mail scanned for viruses by Declude Virus] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=; lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Exchange 2000 SMTP Connector
Or if you have separate routing groups that route SMTP mail through one another's connectors. Ed Crowley MCSE+Internet MVP Freelance E-Mail Philosopher Protecting the world from PSTs and Bricked Backups!T -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Fyodorov, Andrey Sent: Friday, December 05, 2003 8:27 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Exchange 2000 SMTP Connector I don't think SMTP Connector is that necessary unless you want a tighter control over mail routing and flow. But for relay control the SMTP virtual server has everything that is necessary. -Original Message- From: Bridges, Samantha [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, December 05, 2003 8:59 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Exchange 2000 SMTP Connector He doesn't have a SMTP Connector. I do on my Org. that is why I am questioning it. Shouldn't he have a SMTP Connector? -Original Message- From: Fyodorov, Andrey [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, December 04, 2003 9:44 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Exchange 2000 SMTP Connector Check to see whether the SMTP Connector has the checkbox selected Allow relay to these domains for the * 1 address space. -Original Message- From: Bridges, Samantha [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, December 04, 2003 9:17 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Exchange 2000 SMTP Connector Is having a SMTP Connector necessary in and Exchange 2000 Organization? I have a friend who has an Exchange server that is somehow relaying spam. My server does not relay spam and has the same settings in the SMTP Virtual server properties. The only difference between his system and mine is that I have a SMTP Connector and he doesn't. Or at least he says he doesn't see a connector in his ESM. I thought it was necessary to have a connector. Samantha _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=; lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=; lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] --- [This E-mail scanned for viruses by Declude Virus] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=; lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang =english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Exchange 2000 SMTP Connector
Is having a SMTP Connector necessary in and Exchange 2000 Organization? I have a friend who has an Exchange server that is somehow relaying spam. My server does not relay spam and has the same settings in the SMTP Virtual server properties. The only difference between his system and mine is that I have a SMTP Connector and he doesn't. Or at least he says he doesn't see a connector in his ESM. I thought it was necessary to have a connector. Samantha _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Exchange 2000 SMTP Connector
No, it is not necessary. I do not have a connector (ok, actually I do, but it is ONLY routing mail to for a specific domain). All my normal e-mail flows out through the SMTP VS. What you have to realize is that SMTP connector properties override the Default SMTP VS properties. So, if your SMTP VS relay settings are wrong and allow relaying, if your SMTP Connector is not allowing relaying, it will not be allowed. If you can detail what your Relay settings are on both your SMTP VS and the Connector, or even better, detail what your friend's settings are, we can probably help with where the problem is. Ben Winzenz Network Engineer Gardner White (317) 581-1580 ext 418 -Original Message- From: Bridges, Samantha [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Posted At: Thursday, December 04, 2003 9:17 AM Posted To: Exchange (Swynk) Conversation: Exchange 2000 SMTP Connector Subject: Exchange 2000 SMTP Connector Is having a SMTP Connector necessary in and Exchange 2000 Organization? I have a friend who has an Exchange server that is somehow relaying spam. My server does not relay spam and has the same settings in the SMTP Virtual server properties. The only difference between his system and mine is that I have a SMTP Connector and he doesn't. Or at least he says he doesn't see a connector in his ESM. I thought it was necessary to have a connector. Samantha _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=; lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Exchange 2000 SMTP Connector
Check to see whether the SMTP Connector has the checkbox selected Allow relay to these domains for the * 1 address space. -Original Message- From: Bridges, Samantha [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, December 04, 2003 9:17 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Exchange 2000 SMTP Connector Is having a SMTP Connector necessary in and Exchange 2000 Organization? I have a friend who has an Exchange server that is somehow relaying spam. My server does not relay spam and has the same settings in the SMTP Virtual server properties. The only difference between his system and mine is that I have a SMTP Connector and he doesn't. Or at least he says he doesn't see a connector in his ESM. I thought it was necessary to have a connector. Samantha _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=; lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Exchange 2000 Standard to Enterprise
It's an incredibly uneventful procedure. 1. Take a backup. 2. Insert CD - run setup and choose to reinstall. 3. Apply service pack. Pretty boring stuff really. Neil -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Ray Beckwith Posted At: 12 November 2003 22:40 Posted To: Swynk Exchange (30 days) Conversation: Exchange 2000 Standard to Enterprise Subject: Exchange 2000 Standard to Enterprise We are preparing to upgrade from Exchange 2000 Standard Edition to Exchange 2000 Enterprise Edition and I wanted to know if anyone out there has done this procedure before? Can you give me some ideas what to expect? Have you run into any problems? How long does it take and what impact does it have on the server. I appreciate any input you can offer. Thanks... Ray Beckwith Network Administrator California Credit Union League Information Technology [EMAIL PROTECTED] www.ccul.org _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=; lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] __ This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual to whom it is addressed. Any view or opinions presented are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of Silversands. If you have received this email in error, please contact our Support Desk immediately on 01202 360360 or email [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.silversands.co.uk _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Exchange 2000 Standard to Enterprise
No issues with the Std -- Enterprise upgrade. Put in CD Run setup Apply service packs. You'll want to have good OS and Exchange backups as well, but you probably won't need them. -Original Message- From: Ray Beckwith [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, November 12, 2003 5:40 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Exchange 2000 Standard to Enterprise We are preparing to upgrade from Exchange 2000 Standard Edition to Exchange 2000 Enterprise Edition and I wanted to know if anyone out there has done this procedure before? Can you give me some ideas what to expect? Have you run into any problems? How long does it take and what impact does it have on the server. I appreciate any input you can offer. Thanks... Ray Beckwith Network Administrator California Credit Union League Information Technology [EMAIL PROTECTED] www.ccul.org _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchanget ext_mode=lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Exchange 2000 Standard to Enterprise
Did it here. Worked as the doctor prescribed. No side effects. Sincerely, Andrey Fyodorov, MVP Systems Engineer Messaging and Collaboration Spherion -Original Message- From: Ray Beckwith [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, November 12, 2003 5:40 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Exchange 2000 Standard to Enterprise We are preparing to upgrade from Exchange 2000 Standard Edition to Exchange 2000 Enterprise Edition and I wanted to know if anyone out there has done this procedure before? Can you give me some ideas what to expect? Have you run into any problems? How long does it take and what impact does it have on the server. I appreciate any input you can offer. Thanks... Ray Beckwith Network Administrator California Credit Union League Information Technology [EMAIL PROTECTED] www.ccul.org _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=; lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Exchange 2000 Standard to Enterprise
We are preparing to upgrade from Exchange 2000 Standard Edition to Exchange 2000 Enterprise Edition and I wanted to know if anyone out there has done this procedure before? Can you give me some ideas what to expect? Have you run into any problems? How long does it take and what impact does it have on the server. I appreciate any input you can offer. Thanks... Ray Beckwith Network Administrator California Credit Union League Information Technology [EMAIL PROTECTED] www.ccul.org _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Exchange 2000 SMTP queues
You can sort the queues themselves too. -Original Message- From: Miller, Robert [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, November 04, 2003 4:08 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Exchange 2000 SMTP queues So far it has not grown on me... :) I guess I am just accustomed to being able to sort all messages in the queue - regardless of destination domain (originator, sent time). -Original Message- From: Fyodorov, Andrey [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, November 04, 2003 2:39 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Exchange 2000 SMTP queues I never had issues with 2000 queue management. You need to give it time to grow on you. It is much better than 5.5 queue management. If you want to see messages going to a particular remote domain - right click on that queue and Enumerate messages. Then you will be able to sort them as well. Sincerely, Andrey Fyodorov, MVP Systems Engineer Messaging and Collaboration Spherion -Original Message- From: Miller, Robert [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, November 04, 2003 12:12 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Exchange 2000 SMTP queues All, First I would like to thank all who responded to my secure e-mail thread last week. Looks like we will be looking into Tumbleweed for the possible solution... Now for the question. We are to a point now in our upgrade Project from 5.5 to 2000 that we are replacing our current 5.5 outbound IMC servers with 2000 SMTP connectors. We did a pilot test yesterday - and although delivery was fine - the queues seem almost impossible to manage under 2000. It creates a virtual queue for each and every SMTP domain that it delivers too. Within 30 minutes I had 200 queues listed. Refreshes on the queues were taking 3 to 4 minutes (whether from the console or remotely) - and the server was not under a heavy load performance wise. Also, I see no way to sort all queued messages by date, originator, etc - as in 5.5... Are there any 3rd party tools that make queue management any easier? Thanks _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchanget ext_mode= lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=; lang =english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=; lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Exchange 2000 SMTP queues
All, First I would like to thank all who responded to my secure e-mail thread last week. Looks like we will be looking into Tumbleweed for the possible solution... Now for the question. We are to a point now in our upgrade Project from 5.5 to 2000 that we are replacing our current 5.5 outbound IMC servers with 2000 SMTP connectors. We did a pilot test yesterday - and although delivery was fine - the queues seem almost impossible to manage under 2000. It creates a virtual queue for each and every SMTP domain that it delivers too. Within 30 minutes I had 200 queues listed. Refreshes on the queues were taking 3 to 4 minutes (whether from the console or remotely) - and the server was not under a heavy load performance wise. Also, I see no way to sort all queued messages by date, originator, etc - as in 5.5... Are there any 3rd party tools that make queue management any easier? Thanks _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Exchange 2000 SMTP queues
I never had issues with 2000 queue management. You need to give it time to grow on you. It is much better than 5.5 queue management. If you want to see messages going to a particular remote domain - right click on that queue and Enumerate messages. Then you will be able to sort them as well. Sincerely, Andrey Fyodorov, MVP Systems Engineer Messaging and Collaboration Spherion -Original Message- From: Miller, Robert [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, November 04, 2003 12:12 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Exchange 2000 SMTP queues All, First I would like to thank all who responded to my secure e-mail thread last week. Looks like we will be looking into Tumbleweed for the possible solution... Now for the question. We are to a point now in our upgrade Project from 5.5 to 2000 that we are replacing our current 5.5 outbound IMC servers with 2000 SMTP connectors. We did a pilot test yesterday - and although delivery was fine - the queues seem almost impossible to manage under 2000. It creates a virtual queue for each and every SMTP domain that it delivers too. Within 30 minutes I had 200 queues listed. Refreshes on the queues were taking 3 to 4 minutes (whether from the console or remotely) - and the server was not under a heavy load performance wise. Also, I see no way to sort all queued messages by date, originator, etc - as in 5.5... Are there any 3rd party tools that make queue management any easier? Thanks _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=; lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Exchange 2000 SMTP queues
So far it has not grown on me... :) I guess I am just accustomed to being able to sort all messages in the queue - regardless of destination domain (originator, sent time). -Original Message- From: Fyodorov, Andrey [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, November 04, 2003 2:39 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Exchange 2000 SMTP queues I never had issues with 2000 queue management. You need to give it time to grow on you. It is much better than 5.5 queue management. If you want to see messages going to a particular remote domain - right click on that queue and Enumerate messages. Then you will be able to sort them as well. Sincerely, Andrey Fyodorov, MVP Systems Engineer Messaging and Collaboration Spherion -Original Message- From: Miller, Robert [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, November 04, 2003 12:12 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Exchange 2000 SMTP queues All, First I would like to thank all who responded to my secure e-mail thread last week. Looks like we will be looking into Tumbleweed for the possible solution... Now for the question. We are to a point now in our upgrade Project from 5.5 to 2000 that we are replacing our current 5.5 outbound IMC servers with 2000 SMTP connectors. We did a pilot test yesterday - and although delivery was fine - the queues seem almost impossible to manage under 2000. It creates a virtual queue for each and every SMTP domain that it delivers too. Within 30 minutes I had 200 queues listed. Refreshes on the queues were taking 3 to 4 minutes (whether from the console or remotely) - and the server was not under a heavy load performance wise. Also, I see no way to sort all queued messages by date, originator, etc - as in 5.5... Are there any 3rd party tools that make queue management any easier? Thanks _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchanget ext_mode= lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang =english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Exchange 2000 OWA: Setting IE to open maximized
Ask him what kind of budget he has for developers. Ed Crowley MCSE+Internet MVP Freelance E-Mail Philosopher Protecting the world from PSTs and Bricked Backups!T -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Bailey, Matthew Sent: Monday, November 03, 2003 3:25 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Exchange 2000 OWA: Setting IE to open maximized I have an odd request from a user, unfortunately he is our CIO. He would like to see OWA open messages and replies to message in a maximized IE window. I haven't been able to find anything in the KB or via a Google search. Has anybody tried this or know how I might be able to do this? Thanks, - Matt Matthew Bailey LAN Engineer CSK Auto, Inc. Voice: 602.631.7486 Fax: 602.294.7486 _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang =english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Exchange 2000 OWA: Setting IE to open maximized
I have an odd request from a user, unfortunately he is our CIO. He would like to see OWA open messages and replies to message in a maximized IE window. I haven't been able to find anything in the KB or via a Google search. Has anybody tried this or know how I might be able to do this? Thanks, - Matt Matthew Bailey LAN Engineer CSK Auto, Inc. Voice: 602.631.7486 Fax: 602.294.7486 _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Exchange 2000 SP4 - release date?
Has anyone heard when Exchange 2000 SP4 will be released? Thanks. _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Exchange 2000/3 InterForest Synchronization
I will look into these options and see what the client wishes to do. Thanks for all your help. Damian Scoles Senior Technical Analyst MCSE, CCNP, CNA, A+ -Original Message- From: Ed Crowley [MVP] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, October 27, 2003 8:31 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Exchange 2000/3 InterForest Synchronization Avaliable options I'm aware of: 1. HP LDAP Directory Synchronization Utility (LDSU) 2. Microsoft Identity Integration Server (MIIS) 3. SimpleSync 4. MS Mail Dirsync (unsupported by Microsoft, but is supposed to work) 5. Active Directory Connector (in interorganizational mode) 6. Your own code Ed Crowley MCSE+Internet MVP Freelance E-Mail Philosopher Protecting the world from PSTs and Bricked Backups!T -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Scoles, Damian Sent: Monday, October 27, 2003 8:03 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Exchange 2000/3 InterForest Synchronization I have a client that wants to synch their mailboxes, distribution lists and custom recipients to other Exchange 2000/3 organizations. They want to do this because their company has partnerships with 2 other companies and are tied together in a loose group. I know with Exchange 5.5 there was an InterOrg Synch tool. For Exchange 2000, I think I will have to use the Microsoft Metadirectory Services product (which is now called Microsoft Identity Integration Server 2003). Can any confirm this or point me to another solution? I want something that will be fairly easy to setup and maintain if possible. Thanks in advance. Damian Scoles Senior Technical Analyst MCSE, CCNP, CNA, A+ _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=; lang =english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=; lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Public Folders not replicating to Exchange 2003 from Exchange 2000
Anyone, anyone... Bueller, Bueller? Eric -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of HOLLIDAY, Eric Sent: Sunday, October 26, 2003 9:06 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Public Folders not replicating to Exchange 2003 from Exchange 2000 To all, My company uses Public Folders regularly, with no problems until now. We recently upgraded two of our Exchange servers (the FE 1 BE) to Win 2003/Exch 2003 moved all of the techs' accounts over to the upgraded server test the setup. All is well, EXCEPT: some, but not all of the Public Folder contents have replicated to the Exchange 2003 BE server. This server should have had enough time (?) to replicate all of the contents of the public folders - it was upgraded on 13 Nov. When I go into ESM 2003 to manually send the contents from Exch2k to the PF's on the 2003 server, the only server in the 'source server' column is the one I want to send the content _to_, not from. Am I missing something somewhere? Should I wait a bit longer for replication? My environment: 7 Exchange Ent. Ed. servers in a FE/BE setup: 5 BE servers are Win 2000 SP4 / Exch 2000 SP3 1 FE and 1 BE server are Win 2003 / Exch 2003 Any ideas or suggestions are welcome. Thank you, Eric Holliday Exchange Administrator Corporate Information Systems Logistics Management Institute (703) 917-7117 2000 Corporate Ridge McLean, Virginia 22102 www.lmi.org _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=; lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Exchange 2000/3 InterForest Synchronization
I have a client that wants to synch their mailboxes, distribution lists and custom recipients to other Exchange 2000/3 organizations. They want to do this because their company has partnerships with 2 other companies and are tied together in a loose group. I know with Exchange 5.5 there was an InterOrg Synch tool. For Exchange 2000, I think I will have to use the Microsoft Metadirectory Services product (which is now called Microsoft Identity Integration Server 2003). Can any confirm this or point me to another solution? I want something that will be fairly easy to setup and maintain if possible. Thanks in advance. Damian Scoles Senior Technical Analyst MCSE, CCNP, CNA, A+ _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Exchange 2000/3 InterForest Synchronization
Hi Damian: The DIM Report is a great resources for Identity Management Solutions and alternatives to MIIS. Check out the following link. http://www.dimreport.com/dimreport/Reports/1403.htm#article1 Kevin -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Scoles, Damian Sent: Monday, October 27, 2003 8:03 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Exchange 2000/3 InterForest Synchronization I have a client that wants to synch their mailboxes, distribution lists and custom recipients to other Exchange 2000/3 organizations. They want to do this because their company has partnerships with 2 other companies and are tied together in a loose group. I know with Exchange 5.5 there was an InterOrg Synch tool. For Exchange 2000, I think I will have to use the Microsoft Metadirectory Services product (which is now called Microsoft Identity Integration Server 2003). Can any confirm this or point me to another solution? I want something that will be fairly easy to setup and maintain if possible. Thanks in advance. Damian Scoles Senior Technical Analyst MCSE, CCNP, CNA, A+ _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=; lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Exchange 2000/3 InterForest Synchronization
Is it possible to just use AD Connectors to do this? These companies are on a fairly tight budget and would rather have a free solution if possible. I know I could use the ADC for 5.5 to 2000, why not 2000 to 2000? Thanks. Damian Scoles Senior Technical Analyst MCSE, CCNP, CNA, A+ -Original Message- From: Lalor, Kevin [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, October 27, 2003 10:12 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Exchange 2000/3 InterForest Synchronization Hi Damian: The DIM Report is a great resources for Identity Management Solutions and alternatives to MIIS. Check out the following link. http://www.dimreport.com/dimreport/Reports/1403.htm#article1 Kevin -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Scoles, Damian Sent: Monday, October 27, 2003 8:03 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Exchange 2000/3 InterForest Synchronization I have a client that wants to synch their mailboxes, distribution lists and custom recipients to other Exchange 2000/3 organizations. They want to do this because their company has partnerships with 2 other companies and are tied together in a loose group. I know with Exchange 5.5 there was an InterOrg Synch tool. For Exchange 2000, I think I will have to use the Microsoft Metadirectory Services product (which is now called Microsoft Identity Integration Server 2003). Can any confirm this or point me to another solution? I want something that will be fairly easy to setup and maintain if possible. Thanks in advance. Damian Scoles Senior Technical Analyst MCSE, CCNP, CNA, A+ _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=; lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=; lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Exchange 2000/3 InterForest Synchronization
Avaliable options I'm aware of: 1. HP LDAP Directory Synchronization Utility (LDSU) 2. Microsoft Identity Integration Server (MIIS) 3. SimpleSync 4. MS Mail Dirsync (unsupported by Microsoft, but is supposed to work) 5. Active Directory Connector (in interorganizational mode) 6. Your own code Ed Crowley MCSE+Internet MVP Freelance E-Mail Philosopher Protecting the world from PSTs and Bricked Backups!T -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Scoles, Damian Sent: Monday, October 27, 2003 8:03 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Exchange 2000/3 InterForest Synchronization I have a client that wants to synch their mailboxes, distribution lists and custom recipients to other Exchange 2000/3 organizations. They want to do this because their company has partnerships with 2 other companies and are tied together in a loose group. I know with Exchange 5.5 there was an InterOrg Synch tool. For Exchange 2000, I think I will have to use the Microsoft Metadirectory Services product (which is now called Microsoft Identity Integration Server 2003). Can any confirm this or point me to another solution? I want something that will be fairly easy to setup and maintain if possible. Thanks in advance. Damian Scoles Senior Technical Analyst MCSE, CCNP, CNA, A+ _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang =english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Public Folders not replicating to Exchange 2003 from Exchange 2000
To all, My company uses Public Folders regularly, with no problems until now. We recently upgraded two of our Exchange servers (the FE 1 BE) to Win 2003/Exch 2003 moved all of the techs' accounts over to the upgraded server test the setup. All is well, EXCEPT: some, but not all of the Public Folder contents have replicated to the Exchange 2003 BE server. This server should have had enough time (?) to replicate all of the contents of the public folders - it was upgraded on 13 Nov. When I go into ESM 2003 to manually send the contents from Exch2k to the PF's on the 2003 server, the only server in the 'source server' column is the one I want to send the content _to_, not from. Am I missing something somewhere? Should I wait a bit longer for replication? My environment: 7 Exchange Ent. Ed. servers in a FE/BE setup: 5 BE servers are Win 2000 SP4 / Exch 2000 SP3 1 FE and 1 BE server are Win 2003 / Exch 2003 Any ideas or suggestions are welcome. Thank you, Eric Holliday Exchange Administrator Corporate Information Systems Logistics Management Institute (703) 917-7117 2000 Corporate Ridge McLean, Virginia 22102 www.lmi.org _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Exchange 2000 and DS tolpology query
H... only one DC can be designated as the Configuration DC. If it fails... Sincerely, Andrey Fyodorov Systems Engineer Messaging and Collaboration Spherion -Original Message- From: Ed Crowley [MVP] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, October 18, 2003 2:11 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Exchange 2000 and DS tolpology query The obvious answer is to add another domain controller so your AD doesn't fail. Ed Crowley MCSE+Internet MVP Freelance E-Mail Philosopher Protecting the world from PSTs and Bricked Backups!T -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Timothy Schilbach Sent: Thursday, October 16, 2003 11:25 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Exchange 2000 and DS tolpology query Hi All, How can I speed up the DS topology Query for Exchange 2000? Right now its about every 15 minutes. When my AD fails, it takes 15 minutes for it to fail over. Thans about 14 minutes too long for our executive staff. Any suggestions? Timothy _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=; lang =english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=; lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Exchange 2000 and DS tolpology query
Unfortunately, I don't have a massive lab in which I can test this, but the last time I looked at it, losing the configuration DC wasn't serious; it switched over rather painlessly. However, when you lose all DCs in the site, it can indeed take 15 minutes or so before Exchange will query AD and redirect its scope to all DCs in the domain. During that 15 minutes, nothing much happens. Ed Crowley MCSE+Internet MVP Freelance E-Mail Philosopher Protecting the world from PSTs and Bricked Backups!T -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Fyodorov, Andrey Sent: Tuesday, October 21, 2003 6:33 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Exchange 2000 and DS tolpology query H... only one DC can be designated as the Configuration DC. If it fails... Sincerely, Andrey Fyodorov Systems Engineer Messaging and Collaboration Spherion -Original Message- From: Ed Crowley [MVP] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, October 18, 2003 2:11 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Exchange 2000 and DS tolpology query The obvious answer is to add another domain controller so your AD doesn't fail. Ed Crowley MCSE+Internet MVP Freelance E-Mail Philosopher Protecting the world from PSTs and Bricked Backups!T -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Timothy Schilbach Sent: Thursday, October 16, 2003 11:25 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Exchange 2000 and DS tolpology query Hi All, How can I speed up the DS topology Query for Exchange 2000? Right now its about every 15 minutes. When my AD fails, it takes 15 minutes for it to fail over. Thans about 14 minutes too long for our executive staff. Any suggestions? Timothy _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=; lang =english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=; lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang =english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Exchange 2000 and DS tolpology query
Um, We have 4 domain controllers and the system doesnt fail over until the next iteraqtion of the dsquery. This was moved from 5 minutes (SP2) to 15 minutes (in SP3). Thus my problem. I have found the solution for the issue to to hack the ds query time in the registry. This is an issue brought on by design of how dsquery works. -Timothy _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Exchange 2000 and DS tolpology query
Are all those domain controllers in the same site as the Exchange server? Ed Crowley MCSE+Internet MVP Freelance E-Mail Philosopher Protecting the world from PSTs and Bricked Backups!T -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Timothy Schilbach Sent: Monday, October 20, 2003 12:57 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Exchange 2000 and DS tolpology query Um, We have 4 domain controllers and the system doesnt fail over until the next iteraqtion of the dsquery. This was moved from 5 minutes (SP2) to 15 minutes (in SP3). Thus my problem. I have found the solution for the issue to to hack the ds query time in the registry. This is an issue brought on by design of how dsquery works. -Timothy _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang =english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Exchange 2000 and DS tolpology query
The obvious answer is to add another domain controller so your AD doesn't fail. Ed Crowley MCSE+Internet MVP Freelance E-Mail Philosopher Protecting the world from PSTs and Bricked Backups!T -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Timothy Schilbach Sent: Thursday, October 16, 2003 11:25 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Exchange 2000 and DS tolpology query Hi All, How can I speed up the DS topology Query for Exchange 2000? Right now its about every 15 minutes. When my AD fails, it takes 15 minutes for it to fail over. Thans about 14 minutes too long for our executive staff. Any suggestions? Timothy _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang =english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Exchange 2000 Web Public Folder Setup Issue
Hi All, I am experiencing a wierd issue when making a new Web Store in Public folders to develop in. I start by doing the following: 1. Create a new Public Folder Tree 2. Create a New Public store and bind it to new tree 3. Create an HTTP entry in the HTTP protocals for the new tree and add script permissions so I can develop in it. 4. I add Frontpage Extension so I can develop via front page in it. 5. I create a new folder in the ESM called Test1 6. I create a virutual directory to the folder on the 'M' drive and frontpage enable it. Now all that goes fine. I am logging into the frontpage folder as the 'system administrator' and I can create my application without issue! The problem I have is when I go an edit anything. Yes, Edit! I can create and delete without issue. I cannot edit or modify anything as I dont have permissions? So I go to the ESM and look in that store and I look for the permissions and I grant my 'System Administrator' account full access under 'Client Permissions'. Now I go back and again, I can create and delete, but not modify. Where am I going wrong with this one? Timothy H. Schilbach Sr. Messaging Administrator CenturyTel _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Active Directory/Exchange 2000 Failover Question
HI Everyone, We are running Ad in our environment with Exchange 2000. We have 2 AD servers in the same site and only 1 server has all FSMO roles (we havent gotten a chance to move them yet). For some reason when one of our DC's failed (the one with all the FSMO roles), our other DC did not accept incomming authentication request, directory lookups, or outlook clients logging into Exchange. I am trying to understand why this issue occurs when we have 2 dircetory servers and exchange is setup to use either of them. DNS is all setup correctly as well and resolves to both servers. I even checked the _ directories under the main DNS and manually verified that all SRV records are in place. Can anyone render an explanation for this? Is it because one server has all the FSMO roles? If so, which roles should I transfer to the other servers? -Timothy _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Exchange 2000 and DS tolpology query
Hi All, How can I speed up the DS topology Query for Exchange 2000? Right now its about every 15 minutes. When my AD fails, it takes 15 minutes for it to fail over. Thans about 14 minutes too long for our executive staff. Any suggestions? Timothy _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Active Directory/Exchange 2000 Failover Question
Is your other server (the one that didn't fail) also a GC? You'll have all sorts of problems if you don't have a live GC anywhere on your network. JC -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Timothy Schilbach Sent: Thursday, October 16, 2003 1:00 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Active Directory/Exchange 2000 Failover Question HI Everyone, We are running Ad in our environment with Exchange 2000. We have 2 AD servers in the same site and only 1 server has all FSMO roles (we havent gotten a chance to move them yet). For some reason when one of our DC's failed (the one with all the FSMO roles), our other DC did not accept incomming authentication request, directory lookups, or outlook clients logging into Exchange. I am trying to understand why this issue occurs when we have 2 dircetory servers and exchange is setup to use either of them. DNS is all setup correctly as well and resolves to both servers. I even checked the _ directories under the main DNS and manually verified that all SRV records are in place. Can anyone render an explanation for this? Is it because one server has all the FSMO roles? If so, which roles should I transfer to the other servers? -Timothy _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=; lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Active Directory/Exchange 2000 Failover Question
Hi There, Thank for the reply. Yes it is, but I think I found the answer and the solution. Its documented here: http://www.winnetmag.com/MicrosoftExchangeOutlook/Article/ArticleID/25332/MicrosoftExchangeOutlook_25332.html This did the trick nicely by allowing me to increase the DS auery intervals. I am also using NetIQ now to look at hung threads in the Netlogon service. Technically the server wasnt 'down' but in software failure. I am going to set NetIq to have a threshhold of so many dead threads and then restart the Netlogon service. This can also be accomplished with MOM as well. Thanx all for the support and have a wonderful day -Timothy _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Using Exchange 2003 ADC for both Exchange 2000 and 2003
Exchange Svr 2003 Deployment Guide CH4 pg 49 -Original Message- From: Andy David [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, October 12, 2003 11:02 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Using Exchange 2003 ADC for both Exchange 2000 and 2003 Sure you can, just not in-place. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Tony Hlabse Sent: Sunday, October 12, 2003 10:57 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Using Exchange 2003 ADC for both Exchange 2000 and 2003 You can not go directly to E2K3 from Exchange 5.5. IIRC From: Andy David [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: Using Exchange 2003 ADC for both Exchange 2000 and 2003 Date: Sun, 12 Oct 2003 10:54:18 -0400 I don't think you will be able to find a definitive answer to this, but IMO, I wouldn't use the 2003 ADC to migrate 5.5 to E2k. There seems to be a lot going on here: W2003 domain, E2k and E2003 servers, migration from 5.5 etc.. Why not just migrate directly to E2003 when you feel comfortable with it after testing in the lab, and forget the E2k bit entirely? -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Jeffrey Dubyn Sent: Sunday, October 12, 2003 7:49 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Using Exchange 2003 ADC for both Exchange 2000 and 2003 Just upgraded a domain from Windows NT to Windows 2003. Our next phase will migrate Exchange 5.5 to Exchange 2000 with some users going to Exchange 2003 (so it can be proven as a viable endpoint for the migration) using the Move Mailbox method. If I use the ADC for Exchange 2003, does anyone know if there are any gotcha's moving mailboxes from the Exchange 5.5 server to the Exchange 2000 server? _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang =english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang =english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ Use custom emotions -- try MSN Messenger 6.0! http://www.msnmessenger-download.com/tracking/reach_emoticon _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang =english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang =english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Problems with IIS settings for Exchange and Public in Exchange 2000
Having a strange problem here where IIS won't hold on to the folder security settings we want in place for our users. We've changed them to Basic Authentication for the Exchange site, and Anonymous for the Public site. Any time the server is rebooted it loses these settings and goes back to the defaults that came with Exchange. Additionally, it seems to lose track of the paths for these sites, that is, the path is there in the settings correctly, and the path itself does exist (the M: drive), but IIS thinks that the path does NOT exist (red Error icon exists in IIS Manager) until you go in and browse to the path and then it finds it. Has anyone run into this before? Thanks, Matt _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
