RE: Policy issue
Buhler! -Original Message- From: Schwartz, Jim [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, October 04, 2002 2:32 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Policy issue There is a fairly good white paper on this subject here: http://www.ferris.com/ Look for White Paper: Email Archiving & Records Management in the sponsored research section. It also lists a number of vendors that can accommodate your needs. -Original Message- From: James Liddil [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, October 04, 2002 2:00 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Policy issue I agree. So if I read right you are suggesting this should be a completely automated process. So I should buy into a KVS type solution or does messageone have something. :-). I'd be happy to use the Mailbox Manager in E2K if I was allowed to. And yes I know it's my job, but I sure the heck don't want to spend a week or more manually going through our IS with a lawyer looking over my shoulder. Jim > -Original Message- > From: Chris Scharff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Friday, October 04, 2002 1:44 PM > To: Exchange Discussions > Subject: RE: Policy issue > > > Well, I'd join management in their resistance of an IT guy, > no matter how talented being the one to manually delete mail > on a retention period, even if the policy contains proper > exclusions for items which need to be retained longer (some > of which need to be retained significanly longer than a 5 > year tape rotation). Sorry, I don't think it's an efficient > use of someone that talented and it's too prone to human error. > > > -Original Message- > > From: James Liddil [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > Sent: Friday, October 04, 2002 11:57 AM > > To: Exchange Discussions > > Subject: RE: Policy issue > > > > > > Our lawyer is quite familiar with our business and what we do. Not > > to defend lawyers or anything. They are well versed in the 21CFR11 > > and FDA issues we face along with the legal implications of having > > "no policy" as we do now. So by default our policy for me to follow > > becomes keep everything and make sure backups are archived for 5 > > years. No system is perfect but the fact is that if you have no > > policy it then gives a lawyer who walks in the door for "discovery" > > purposes the right to sit and look over my shoulder while I go > > through all the IS and tapes. > > > > Jim > > > > > -Original Message- > > > From: Chris Scharff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > > Sent: Friday, October 04, 2002 12:33 PM > > > To: Exchange Discussions > > > Subject: RE: Policy issue > > > > > > > > > It's unlikely that you or the system itself has the ability to > > > delete mail in accordance with a well written retention > policy (no > > > offense, I've been researching this subject for a book for quite > > > some time). If your legal counsel has simply given you a > retention > > > policy of something like 'everything older than 120 days > should go' > > > then I'd respectfully suggest you ask your legal counsel > to revisit > > > the policy as it's woefully inadequate.. especially for a company > > > such as yours. > > > > > > -Original Message- > > > From: James Liddil > > > To: Exchange Discussions > > > Sent: 10/4/2002 9:00 AM > > > Subject: Policy issue > > > > > > I seem to be facing resistance from management on > implementation of > > > an e-mail policy. Despite everything our legal counsel > provided and > > > such are not ready to go forward. > > > They have a problem with either the system of myself deleting > > > mail that past the retention period. Some feel that a member > > > of management should be the one deleting the e-mail. I'm > > > sure you can see what's wrong with that picture. I am > > > looking for advice, besides sit on my hands and wait until an > > > event happens that forces them to implement a policy. > > _ > List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm > Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp > To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/
RE: Policy issue
There is a fairly good white paper on this subject here: http://www.ferris.com/ Look for White Paper: Email Archiving & Records Management in the sponsored research section. It also lists a number of vendors that can accommodate your needs. -Original Message- From: James Liddil [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, October 04, 2002 2:00 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Policy issue I agree. So if I read right you are suggesting this should be a completely automated process. So I should buy into a KVS type solution or does messageone have something. :-). I'd be happy to use the Mailbox Manager in E2K if I was allowed to. And yes I know it's my job, but I sure the heck don't want to spend a week or more manually going through our IS with a lawyer looking over my shoulder. Jim > -Original Message- > From: Chris Scharff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Friday, October 04, 2002 1:44 PM > To: Exchange Discussions > Subject: RE: Policy issue > > > Well, I'd join management in their resistance of an IT guy, > no matter how talented being the one to manually delete mail > on a retention period, even if the policy contains proper > exclusions for items which need to be retained longer (some > of which need to be retained significanly longer than a 5 > year tape rotation). Sorry, I don't think it's an efficient > use of someone that talented and it's too prone to human error. > > > -Original Message- > > From: James Liddil [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > Sent: Friday, October 04, 2002 11:57 AM > > To: Exchange Discussions > > Subject: RE: Policy issue > > > > > > Our lawyer is quite familiar with our business and what we do. Not > > to defend lawyers or anything. They are well versed in the 21CFR11 > > and FDA issues we face along with the legal implications of having > > "no policy" as we do now. So by default our policy for me to follow > > becomes keep everything and make sure backups are archived for 5 > > years. No system is perfect but the fact is that if you have no > > policy it then gives a lawyer who walks in the door for "discovery" > > purposes the right to sit and look over my shoulder while I go > > through all the IS and tapes. > > > > Jim > > > > > -Original Message- > > > From: Chris Scharff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > > Sent: Friday, October 04, 2002 12:33 PM > > > To: Exchange Discussions > > > Subject: RE: Policy issue > > > > > > > > > It's unlikely that you or the system itself has the ability to > > > delete mail in accordance with a well written retention > policy (no > > > offense, I've been researching this subject for a book for quite > > > some time). If your legal counsel has simply given you a > retention > > > policy of something like 'everything older than 120 days > should go' > > > then I'd respectfully suggest you ask your legal counsel > to revisit > > > the policy as it's woefully inadequate.. especially for a company > > > such as yours. > > > > > > -Original Message- > > > From: James Liddil > > > To: Exchange Discussions > > > Sent: 10/4/2002 9:00 AM > > > Subject: Policy issue > > > > > > I seem to be facing resistance from management on > implementation of > > > an e-mail policy. Despite everything our legal counsel > provided and > > > such are not ready to go forward. > > > They have a problem with either the system of myself deleting > > > mail that past the retention period. Some feel that a member > > > of management should be the one deleting the e-mail. I'm > > > sure you can see what's wrong with that picture. I am > > > looking for advice, besides sit on my hands and wait until an > > > event happens that forces them to implement a policy. > > _ > List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm > Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp > To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Policy issue
No, MessageOne doesn't have an archival solution... My research was for a customer of ours and a chapter of a book I've been asked to write. I don't normally say much when topics of discussion come around to products we make, but if you want an easy to manage reporting solution for an enterprise Exchange shop or a low cost messaging continuity solution for your Exchange environment then have we go the solution for you! ;) Yes, something like KVS or one of its competitors would be a much more adequate solution. Not inexpensive to implement, but it will pay for itself several times over the first time you have to comply with a discovery request. BTW, in general it's been my experience that the other guy's lawyer won't be the one looking over your should while you do discovery.. But YMMV. > -Original Message- > From: James Liddil [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Friday, October 04, 2002 1:00 PM > To: Exchange Discussions > Subject: RE: Policy issue > > > I agree. So if I read right you are suggesting this should > be a completely automated process. So I should buy into a > KVS type solution or does messageone have something. :-). > I'd be happy to use the Mailbox Manager in E2K if I was > allowed to. And yes I know it's my job, but I sure the heck > don't want to spend a week or more manually going through our > IS with a lawyer looking over my shoulder. > > Jim > > > -Original Message- > > From: Chris Scharff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > Sent: Friday, October 04, 2002 1:44 PM > > To: Exchange Discussions > > Subject: RE: Policy issue > > > > > > Well, I'd join management in their resistance of an IT guy, > > no matter how talented being the one to manually delete mail > > on a retention period, even if the policy contains proper > > exclusions for items which need to be retained longer (some > > of which need to be retained significanly longer than a 5 > > year tape rotation). Sorry, I don't think it's an efficient > > use of someone that talented and it's too prone to human error. > > > > > -Original Message- > > > From: James Liddil [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > > Sent: Friday, October 04, 2002 11:57 AM > > > To: Exchange Discussions > > > Subject: RE: Policy issue > > > > > > > > > Our lawyer is quite familiar with our business and what > we do. Not > > > to defend lawyers or anything. They are well versed in > the 21CFR11 > > > and FDA issues we face along with the legal implications > of having > > > "no policy" as we do now. So by default our policy for me > to follow > > > becomes keep everything and make sure backups are archived for 5 > > > years. No system is perfect but the fact is that if you have no > > > policy it then gives a lawyer who walks in the door for > "discovery" > > > purposes the right to sit and look over my shoulder while I go > > > through all the IS and tapes. > > > > > > Jim > > > > > > > -Original Message- > > > > From: Chris Scharff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > > > Sent: Friday, October 04, 2002 12:33 PM > > > > To: Exchange Discussions > > > > Subject: RE: Policy issue > > > > > > > > > > > > It's unlikely that you or the system itself has the ability to > > > > delete mail in accordance with a well written retention > > policy (no > > > > offense, I've been researching this subject for a book for quite > > > > some time). If your legal counsel has simply given you a > > retention > > > > policy of something like 'everything older than 120 days > > should go' > > > > then I'd respectfully suggest you ask your legal counsel > > to revisit > > > > the policy as it's woefully inadequate.. especially for > a company > > > > such as yours. > > > > > > > > -Original Message- > > > > From: James Liddil > > > > To: Exchange Discussions > > > > Sent: 10/4/2002 9:00 AM > > > > Subject: Policy issue > > > > > > > > I seem to be facing resistance from management on > > implementation of > > > > an e-mail policy. Despite everything our legal counsel > > provided and > > > > such are not ready to go forward. > > > > They have a problem with either the system of myself deleting > > > > mail that pas
RE: Policy issue
I agree. So if I read right you are suggesting this should be a completely automated process. So I should buy into a KVS type solution or does messageone have something. :-). I'd be happy to use the Mailbox Manager in E2K if I was allowed to. And yes I know it's my job, but I sure the heck don't want to spend a week or more manually going through our IS with a lawyer looking over my shoulder. Jim > -Original Message- > From: Chris Scharff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Friday, October 04, 2002 1:44 PM > To: Exchange Discussions > Subject: RE: Policy issue > > > Well, I'd join management in their resistance of an IT guy, > no matter how talented being the one to manually delete mail > on a retention period, even if the policy contains proper > exclusions for items which need to be retained longer (some > of which need to be retained significanly longer than a 5 > year tape rotation). Sorry, I don't think it's an efficient > use of someone that talented and it's too prone to human error. > > > -Original Message- > > From: James Liddil [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > Sent: Friday, October 04, 2002 11:57 AM > > To: Exchange Discussions > > Subject: RE: Policy issue > > > > > > Our lawyer is quite familiar with our business and what we > > do. Not to defend lawyers or anything. They are well versed > > in the 21CFR11 and FDA issues we face along with the legal > > implications of having "no policy" as we do now. So by > > default our policy for me to follow becomes keep everything > > and make sure backups are archived for 5 years. No system is > > perfect but the fact is that if you have no policy it then > > gives a lawyer who walks in the door for "discovery" purposes > > the right to sit and look over my shoulder while I go through > > all the IS and tapes. > > > > Jim > > > > > -Original Message- > > > From: Chris Scharff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > > Sent: Friday, October 04, 2002 12:33 PM > > > To: Exchange Discussions > > > Subject: RE: Policy issue > > > > > > > > > It's unlikely that you or the system itself has the ability to > > > delete mail in accordance with a well written retention > policy (no > > > offense, I've been researching this subject for a book for quite > > > some time). If your legal counsel has simply given you a > retention > > > policy of something like 'everything older than 120 days > should go' > > > then I'd respectfully suggest you ask your legal counsel > to revisit > > > the policy as it's woefully inadequate.. especially for a company > > > such as yours. > > > > > > -Original Message- > > > From: James Liddil > > > To: Exchange Discussions > > > Sent: 10/4/2002 9:00 AM > > > Subject: Policy issue > > > > > > I seem to be facing resistance from management on > implementation of > > > an e-mail policy. Despite everything our legal counsel > provided and > > > such are not ready to go forward. > > > They have a problem with either the system of myself deleting > > > mail that past the retention period. Some feel that a member > > > of management should be the one deleting the e-mail. I'm > > > sure you can see what's wrong with that picture. I am > > > looking for advice, besides sit on my hands and wait until an > > > event happens that forces them to implement a policy. > > _ > List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm > Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp > To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Policy issue
As someone else said, document yourself and your objections (in e-mail and on paper) with copies to appropriate parties. You can bet the legal dept. is doing exactly that and for the same reason. - Original Message - From: "James Liddil" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Exchange Discussions" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Friday, October 04, 2002 11:57 AM Subject: RE: Policy issue Our lawyer is quite familiar with our business and what we do. Not to defend lawyers or anything. They are well versed in the 21CFR11 and FDA issues we face along with the legal implications of having "no policy" as we do now. So by default our policy for me to follow becomes keep everything and make sure backups are archived for 5 years. No system is perfect but the fact is that if you have no policy it then gives a lawyer who walks in the door for "discovery" purposes the right to sit and look over my shoulder while I go through all the IS and tapes. Jim > -Original Message- > From: Chris Scharff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Friday, October 04, 2002 12:33 PM > To: Exchange Discussions > Subject: RE: Policy issue > > > It's unlikely that you or the system itself has the ability > to delete mail in accordance with a well written retention > policy (no offense, I've been researching this subject for a > book for quite some time). If your legal counsel has simply > given you a retention policy of something like 'everything > older than 120 days should go' then I'd respectfully suggest > you ask your legal counsel to revisit the policy as it's > woefully inadequate.. especially for a company such as yours. > > -Original Message- > From: James Liddil > To: Exchange Discussions > Sent: 10/4/2002 9:00 AM > Subject: Policy issue > > I seem to be facing resistance from management on > implementation of an e-mail policy. Despite everything our > legal counsel provided and such are not ready to go forward. > They have a problem with either the system of myself deleting > mail that past the retention period. Some feel that a member > of management should be the one deleting the e-mail. I'm > sure you can see what's wrong with that picture. I am > looking for advice, besides sit on my hands and wait until an > event happens that forces them to implement a policy. > > _ > List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm > Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp > To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Policy issue
Well, I'd join management in their resistance of an IT guy, no matter how talented being the one to manually delete mail on a retention period, even if the policy contains proper exclusions for items which need to be retained longer (some of which need to be retained significanly longer than a 5 year tape rotation). Sorry, I don't think it's an efficient use of someone that talented and it's too prone to human error. > -Original Message- > From: James Liddil [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Friday, October 04, 2002 11:57 AM > To: Exchange Discussions > Subject: RE: Policy issue > > > Our lawyer is quite familiar with our business and what we > do. Not to defend lawyers or anything. They are well versed > in the 21CFR11 and FDA issues we face along with the legal > implications of having "no policy" as we do now. So by > default our policy for me to follow becomes keep everything > and make sure backups are archived for 5 years. No system is > perfect but the fact is that if you have no policy it then > gives a lawyer who walks in the door for "discovery" purposes > the right to sit and look over my shoulder while I go through > all the IS and tapes. > > Jim > > > -Original Message- > > From: Chris Scharff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > Sent: Friday, October 04, 2002 12:33 PM > > To: Exchange Discussions > > Subject: RE: Policy issue > > > > > > It's unlikely that you or the system itself has the ability > > to delete mail in accordance with a well written retention > > policy (no offense, I've been researching this subject for a > > book for quite some time). If your legal counsel has simply > > given you a retention policy of something like 'everything > > older than 120 days should go' then I'd respectfully suggest > > you ask your legal counsel to revisit the policy as it's > > woefully inadequate.. especially for a company such as yours. > > > > -Original Message- > > From: James Liddil > > To: Exchange Discussions > > Sent: 10/4/2002 9:00 AM > > Subject: Policy issue > > > > I seem to be facing resistance from management on > > implementation of an e-mail policy. Despite everything our > > legal counsel provided and such are not ready to go forward. > > They have a problem with either the system of myself deleting > > mail that past the retention period. Some feel that a member > > of management should be the one deleting the e-mail. I'm > > sure you can see what's wrong with that picture. I am > > looking for advice, besides sit on my hands and wait until an > > event happens that forces them to implement a policy. _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Policy issue
I think you have some lawyers that are not quite up to snuff on this topic. You could do their homework for them, but of course that would be practicing law. You should have a policy. They should be highly motivated to have you delete any and all old digital data (especially mail) that you can, with whatever legal and contractual constraints that you have to the contrary (some folks, like people in public agencies, are often legally prevented from deleting). The major problem is NOT what is in the mail, but rather the potential for huge discovery costs, and establishing context for whatever disjointed things are found in there. The potential cost hit is huge. We did not adopt a policy in this regard through any great wisdom or foresight. We waited until we had been hit by discovery activities about three times in one year (it was over a decade ago). But that bad year was enough to get us off the dime. -Original Message- From: James Liddil [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, October 04, 2002 7:00 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Policy issue I seem to be facing resistance from management on implementation of an e-mail policy. Despite everything our legal counsel provided and such are not ready to go forward. They have a problem with either the system of myself deleting mail that past the retention period. Some feel that a member of management should be the one deleting the e-mail. I'm sure you can see what's wrong with that picture. I am looking for advice, besides sit on my hands and wait until an event happens that forces them to implement a policy. Jim Liddil _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Policy issue
Our lawyer is quite familiar with our business and what we do. Not to defend lawyers or anything. They are well versed in the 21CFR11 and FDA issues we face along with the legal implications of having "no policy" as we do now. So by default our policy for me to follow becomes keep everything and make sure backups are archived for 5 years. No system is perfect but the fact is that if you have no policy it then gives a lawyer who walks in the door for "discovery" purposes the right to sit and look over my shoulder while I go through all the IS and tapes. Jim > -Original Message- > From: Chris Scharff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Friday, October 04, 2002 12:33 PM > To: Exchange Discussions > Subject: RE: Policy issue > > > It's unlikely that you or the system itself has the ability > to delete mail in accordance with a well written retention > policy (no offense, I've been researching this subject for a > book for quite some time). If your legal counsel has simply > given you a retention policy of something like 'everything > older than 120 days should go' then I'd respectfully suggest > you ask your legal counsel to revisit the policy as it's > woefully inadequate.. especially for a company such as yours. > > -Original Message- > From: James Liddil > To: Exchange Discussions > Sent: 10/4/2002 9:00 AM > Subject: Policy issue > > I seem to be facing resistance from management on > implementation of an e-mail policy. Despite everything our > legal counsel provided and such are not ready to go forward. > They have a problem with either the system of myself deleting > mail that past the retention period. Some feel that a member > of management should be the one deleting the e-mail. I'm > sure you can see what's wrong with that picture. I am > looking for advice, besides sit on my hands and wait until an > event happens that forces them to implement a policy. > > _ > List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm > Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp > To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Policy issue
It's unlikely that you or the system itself has the ability to delete mail in accordance with a well written retention policy (no offense, I've been researching this subject for a book for quite some time). If your legal counsel has simply given you a retention policy of something like 'everything older than 120 days should go' then I'd respectfully suggest you ask your legal counsel to revisit the policy as it's woefully inadequate.. especially for a company such as yours. -Original Message- From: James Liddil To: Exchange Discussions Sent: 10/4/2002 9:00 AM Subject: Policy issue I seem to be facing resistance from management on implementation of an e-mail policy. Despite everything our legal counsel provided and such are not ready to go forward. They have a problem with either the system of myself deleting mail that past the retention period. Some feel that a member of management should be the one deleting the e-mail. I'm sure you can see what's wrong with that picture. I am looking for advice, besides sit on my hands and wait until an event happens that forces them to implement a policy. _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Policy issue
Good luck - trying to do the same thing myself. I had assumed you'd already gotten the OK for a policy. Try making an argument in terms of money - are you using Enterprise version? If not, explain the growth patterns you're seeing, hard limit on the Standard IS, and how much it'd cost to upgrade to Enterprise, buy more disks, or another server vs. just imposing limits (no cost, but inconvenience and user responsibility). It's helped me to try and show the money people the inevitability of having limits, and also to give them the power to choose their own. Unfortunately, if the money folks decide that the business needs a holy freakin' ton of mail, they'll at least know what it'll cost to support it. John J. Steniger Network and Security Manager Familymeds, Inc. Phone: 860-676-1222 X633 Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.familymeds.com > -Original Message- > From: James Liddil [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Friday, October 04, 2002 11:18 AM > To: Exchange Discussions > Subject: RE: Policy issue > > > Because that would require that a policy be put in place to > force mail (or > even just inbox) limits. I can't get the powers that be to > even let the > server do this via implementing a policy. > > Jim > > > -Original Message- > > From: John Steniger [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > Sent: Friday, October 04, 2002 10:37 AM > > To: Exchange Discussions > > Subject: RE: Policy issue > > > > > > Why not set limits on the individual mailboxes and leave the > > management up to the mailbox owners as they get full? > > > > John J. Steniger > > > > > > > > > -Original Message- > > > From: James Liddil [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > > Sent: Friday, October 04, 2002 10:00 AM > > > To: Exchange Discussions > > > Subject: Policy issue > > > > > > > > > I seem to be facing resistance from management on > > > implementation of an e-mail > > > policy. Despite everything our legal counsel provided and > > > such are not ready > > > to go forward. They have a problem with either the system of > > > myself deleting > > > mail that past the retention period. Some feel that a member > > > of management > > > should be the one deleting the e-mail. I'm sure you can see > > > what's wrong > > > with that picture. I am looking for advice, besides sit on > > > my hands and wait > > > until an event happens that forces them to implement a policy. > > > > > > Jim Liddil > > > > > > _ > > > List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm > > > Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp > > > To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > > > _ > > List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm > > Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp > > To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > _ > List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm > Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp > To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Policy issue
If your policy is written down somewhere in the Standards and Practices for your infrastructure, then you have nothing to worry about. Legally anyhow. The people who break the standards are the one who wrote them or have lunch with the ones who did. I wouldn't do a thing until specifically told so and stated earlier document as much as possible to cover your as$ and support your argument. - Original Message - From: "James Liddil" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Exchange Discussions" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Friday, October 04, 2002 10:18 AM Subject: RE: Policy issue Because that would require that a policy be put in place to force mail (or even just inbox) limits. I can't get the powers that be to even let the server do this via implementing a policy. Jim > -Original Message- > From: John Steniger [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Friday, October 04, 2002 10:37 AM > To: Exchange Discussions > Subject: RE: Policy issue > > > Why not set limits on the individual mailboxes and leave the > management up to the mailbox owners as they get full? > > John J. Steniger > > > > > -Original Message- > > From: James Liddil [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > Sent: Friday, October 04, 2002 10:00 AM > > To: Exchange Discussions > > Subject: Policy issue > > > > > > I seem to be facing resistance from management on > > implementation of an e-mail > > policy. Despite everything our legal counsel provided and > > such are not ready > > to go forward. They have a problem with either the system of > > myself deleting > > mail that past the retention period. Some feel that a member > > of management > > should be the one deleting the e-mail. I'm sure you can see > > what's wrong > > with that picture. I am looking for advice, besides sit on > > my hands and wait > > until an event happens that forces them to implement a policy. > > > > Jim Liddil > > > > _ > > List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm > > Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp > > To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > _ > List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm > Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp > To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Policy issue
Because that would require that a policy be put in place to force mail (or even just inbox) limits. I can't get the powers that be to even let the server do this via implementing a policy. Jim > -Original Message- > From: John Steniger [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Friday, October 04, 2002 10:37 AM > To: Exchange Discussions > Subject: RE: Policy issue > > > Why not set limits on the individual mailboxes and leave the > management up to the mailbox owners as they get full? > > John J. Steniger > > > > > -Original Message- > > From: James Liddil [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > Sent: Friday, October 04, 2002 10:00 AM > > To: Exchange Discussions > > Subject: Policy issue > > > > > > I seem to be facing resistance from management on > > implementation of an e-mail > > policy. Despite everything our legal counsel provided and > > such are not ready > > to go forward. They have a problem with either the system of > > myself deleting > > mail that past the retention period. Some feel that a member > > of management > > should be the one deleting the e-mail. I'm sure you can see > > what's wrong > > with that picture. I am looking for advice, besides sit on > > my hands and wait > > until an event happens that forces them to implement a policy. > > > > Jim Liddil > > > > _ > > List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm > > Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp > > To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > _ > List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm > Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp > To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Policy issue
Why not set limits on the individual mailboxes and leave the management up to the mailbox owners as they get full? John J. Steniger > -Original Message- > From: James Liddil [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Friday, October 04, 2002 10:00 AM > To: Exchange Discussions > Subject: Policy issue > > > I seem to be facing resistance from management on > implementation of an e-mail > policy. Despite everything our legal counsel provided and > such are not ready > to go forward. They have a problem with either the system of > myself deleting > mail that past the retention period. Some feel that a member > of management > should be the one deleting the e-mail. I'm sure you can see > what's wrong > with that picture. I am looking for advice, besides sit on > my hands and wait > until an event happens that forces them to implement a policy. > > Jim Liddil > > _ > List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm > Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp > To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Policy issue
CYA. Document everything so when the ducks come quacking you can pick them off one by one. -Original Message- From: James Liddil [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, October 04, 2002 10:00 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Policy issue I seem to be facing resistance from management on implementation of an e-mail policy. Despite everything our legal counsel provided and such are not ready to go forward. They have a problem with either the system of myself deleting mail that past the retention period. Some feel that a member of management should be the one deleting the e-mail. I'm sure you can see what's wrong with that picture. I am looking for advice, besides sit on my hands and wait until an event happens that forces them to implement a policy. Jim Liddil _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] -- The information contained in this email message is privileged and confidential information intended only for the use of the individual or entity to whom it is addressed. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copy of this message is strictly prohibited. If you have received this email in error, please immediately notify Veronis Suhler Stevenson by telephone (212)935-4990, fax (212)381-8168, or email ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) and delete the message. Thank you. == _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
