Re: Mail Loop at MS?
Sometimes tickets are closed and reopened under a new number due to how metrics are collected on the back-end. As long as the issue continues to be worked on that process is irrelevant to the customer. It's an end-run on the backside playing the metrics game. - Original Message - From: Ali Wilkes (IT) [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, March 12, 2002 9:18 AM Subject: RE: Mail Loop at MS? Actually, I will say that if you call in with a difficult issue, there are times when they get pissy with you because the ticket is open too long (regardless of resolution). I had a ticket open from 10/18 - the issue was absolutely NOT resolved, and by 12/15 the PSS people I was dealing with were wanting to close the ticket at the end of each call. Well, you are still having the problem. but we've done alot (and it might magically go away by tomorrow) so can we close the ticket now? It's been open for two months. We want to close the ticket. When we paid someone from MS to come in and look at it, the PSS manager I had been working with closed the ticket (without actually asking me) and opened a new one because the ticket had been open for so long. (that just added to the mess.) -Original Message- From: Daniel Chenault [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, March 11, 2002 4:26 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Re: Mail Loop at MS? I just retired from MS after eight years in support. I know what I'm talking about. You called in with a specific issue. As long as you're not presenting a laundry list of issues that case is not closed until that specific issue is resolved. That it may need to go to another group is irrelevant. - Original Message - From: Jeremy Pinquist [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, March 11, 2002 2:58 PM Subject: RE: Mail Loop at MS? nope, i've tried to finagle them before - they're pretty specific about what they'll fix on an issue. Generally if they have to transfer you to another group, unless the problem is directly related, they'll not really help you out. ymmv i suppose. jeremy -Original Message- From: Daniel Chenault [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, March 11, 2002 3:44 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Re: Mail Loop at MS? Why another 245 quatloos? The case is open until _you_ say it's fixed. - Original Message - From: Jeremy Pinquist [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, March 11, 2002 2:39 PM Subject: RE: Mail Loop at MS? I had the same thing during a support call earlier today. (getting a 'ghosted' 5.5 server out of my 2000 environment, for all who care) I'm still having the same problem with event id 1706 (see below) which i've found numerous posts in usenet asking about, and no one seems to know anything about it. Missy even replied to one of them with a question, but the original poster never wrote back. MS wouldn't help without another 245 buckeroos, so i'm on my own. any help? (Win2k SP2, E2k SP1) Event Type: Warning Event Source: MSExchangeTransport Event Category: SMTP Protocol Event ID: 1706 Date: 3/11/2002 Time: 2:23:35 PM User: N/A Computer: MAILBOX Description: EXPS is temporarily unable to provide protocol security with MAIL.bergen.cc.nj.us. CSessionContext::OnEXPSInNegotiate called HrServerNegotiateAuth which failed with error code 0x8009030c ( N:\transmt\src\smtpsink\exps\expslib\context.cpp@1414 ). Data: : 0c 03 09 80 ...? Jeremy -Original Message- From: Michel, David [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, March 11, 2002 3:35 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Mail Loop at MS? You've misinterpreted a sarcastic jab at a company that millions enjoy mocking but, in my experience, provides a very reliable and stable product when administered with any amount of intelligence. -Original Message- From: Daniel Chenault [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, March 11, 2002 3:19 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Re: Mail Loop at MS? Since PSS has absolutely no input or administrative control over the microsoft.com domain, including the Exchange servers, your lack of warm fuzzies is ill-placed. - Original Message - From: Michel, David [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, March 11, 2002 2:13 PM Subject: Mail Loop at MS? I was attempting to send an email to a PSS engineer when I received the following NDR info. To receive this NDR while attempting to discuss an Exchange problem this does not make one feel warm and fuzzy??? -- -- - This is an automatically generated Delivery Status Notification. Unable to deliver message to the following recipients, because the message was forwarded more
Re: 550 Error Message for our own domain?
Your server is not set to relay for this IMAP/POP user? - Original Message - From: Blunt, James H (Jim) [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, March 12, 2002 3:48 PM Subject: 550 Error Message for our own domain? Sorry...wrong title earlier... Any idea why I'm getting the error message below? I know what a 550 error is, but why would one of our own users get this when sending from our own domain? Jim Blunt === A mail message was not sent due to a protocol error. 550 Invalid domain bhi-erc.com The message that caused this notification was: To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Puppy--Jessica _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Exchange 2000 in 5.5 Site
It just so happens that MS has a paper or two on exactly this procedure. You might check their website (which should have been your first option instead of this list). - Original Message - From: McCullar, Doug [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, March 11, 2002 2:04 PM Subject: Exchange 2000 in 5.5 Site I have joined a 5.5 site with an Exchange 2000 server. Everything seems to be working fine and I think I am close to removing the 5.5 server. Is there anything I need to do or maybe a white paper I can ready before I proceed? Also, my users are having problem with not being able to see the schedules for attendees when trying to schedule meetings. Any help would be much appreciate and thanks in advance. _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: 550 Error Message for our own domain?
Uh let me try this again. How do your clients connect to the server to send and receive messages? MAPI? Or non-MAPI? - Original Message - From: Blunt, James H (Jim) [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, March 12, 2002 4:15 PM Subject: RE: 550 Error Message for our own domain? We don't use IMAP/POP...all straight SMTP thru Ex5.5, SP4 Jim Blunt Network / E-mail Admin Network / Infrastructure Group Bechtel Hanford, Inc. 509-372-9188 -Original Message- From: Daniel Chenault [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, March 12, 2002 2:13 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Re: 550 Error Message for our own domain? Your server is not set to relay for this IMAP/POP user? - Original Message - From: Blunt, James H (Jim) [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, March 12, 2002 3:48 PM Subject: 550 Error Message for our own domain? Sorry...wrong title earlier... Any idea why I'm getting the error message below? I know what a 550 error is, but why would one of our own users get this when sending from our own domain? Jim Blunt === A mail message was not sent due to a protocol error. 550 Invalid domain bhi-erc.com The message that caused this notification was: To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Puppy--Jessica _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Outlook hangs when creating a certain rule
Nice try, but outlook does not do verification of source routing while creating a rule. Elmer, how are you creating the rule? From scratch or do you have an example message open and using that as a template? - Original Message - From: Blunt, James H (Jim) [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, March 12, 2002 4:27 PM Subject: RE: Outlook hangs when creating a certain rule Elmer, From the point of view of someone who knows nothing about E2K, could this be the problem? Does your Systemadministrator mailbox also have an SMTP addy of [EMAIL PROTECTED]? If so, is the word postmaster a reserved word in E2K? If it isn't, is it possible that trying to send to postmaster is actually trying to send to the SMTP addy, thereby putting Outlook in a loop? Jim Blunt -Original Message- From: Elmer Stöwer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Saturday, March 09, 2002 11:32 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Outlook hangs when creating a certain rule btw, just tried it from a different machine. Same efect. :( elm -Original Message- From: Elmer Stöwer Sent: Friday, March 08, 2002 4:31 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Outlook hangs when creating a certain rule Hi List, anybody had this before? E2K, W2K, O2K. Creating a rule to move messages from 'Systemadministrator' to a folder 'postmaster' Outlook hangs up. (outlook has caused an error. restart outlook. [badly translated from german, sorry]). I can create all kind of rules exept this one. regards elm -- Elmer Stöwer CyberConsult - Beratungsgesellschaft für Neue Medien mbH Tel: (030) 39 99 05 -42, Fax: (030) 39 99 05 -67 mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: 550 Error Message for our own domain?
First thing to keep in mind: error codes (like 550) come from the receiving server, not the sending client (in SMTP the host to open the connection is called the client). Your troubleshooting begins on that server. What it is saying is that receiving server does not possess any information about the named domain. Since the named domain is your own domain, this is a problem, obviously. Something is misconfigured on the other end. - Original Message - From: Blunt, James H (Jim) [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, March 12, 2002 4:38 PM Subject: RE: 550 Error Message for our own domain? Sorry Daniel... MAPI. Jim Blunt -Original Message- From: Daniel Chenault [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, March 12, 2002 2:36 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Re: 550 Error Message for our own domain? Uh let me try this again. How do your clients connect to the server to send and receive messages? MAPI? Or non-MAPI? - Original Message - From: Blunt, James H (Jim) [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, March 12, 2002 4:15 PM Subject: RE: 550 Error Message for our own domain? We don't use IMAP/POP...all straight SMTP thru Ex5.5, SP4 Jim Blunt Network / E-mail Admin Network / Infrastructure Group Bechtel Hanford, Inc. 509-372-9188 -Original Message- From: Daniel Chenault [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, March 12, 2002 2:13 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Re: 550 Error Message for our own domain? Your server is not set to relay for this IMAP/POP user? - Original Message - From: Blunt, James H (Jim) [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, March 12, 2002 3:48 PM Subject: 550 Error Message for our own domain? Sorry...wrong title earlier... Any idea why I'm getting the error message below? I know what a 550 error is, but why would one of our own users get this when sending from our own domain? Jim Blunt === A mail message was not sent due to a protocol error. 550 Invalid domain bhi-erc.com The message that caused this notification was: To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Puppy--Jessica _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: 958 Routing Error
Did you check your DS settings? - Original Message - From: Bloom, Tom [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, March 12, 2002 9:07 PM Subject: 958 Routing Error Our Exchange 2000 application logs show the following warning every hour. Native mode W2K and mixed mode Exchange. I've looked in ADSI Edit and haven't seen anything that relates to this object. I'm not sure where else I should start looking for the fix. Can anybody help? Source: MSExchangeTransport Category: Routing Engine/Service Event ID: 958 Following master server DN appears to be pointing to a deleted object. This may prevent Exchange Routing Service from functioning properly. Please check your DS setting. CN=DSA-MAIL\ DEL:21ec935e-2b47-4aac-890b-aa309daffb1e,CN=Servers,CN=VPSA,CN=Administrativ e Groups,CN=TAMU-Exchange,CN=Microsoft Exchange,CN=Services,CN=Configuration,DC=ad,DC=tamu,DC=edu _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Exchange 2000 in 5.5 Site
Yes, this list is a resource. Trust me on this; you'll get better responses if you outline what you've already done; without saying that no one is going to be interested in doing what looks like your work for you. You raised two issues 1. Removing the last 5.5 server. This server hosts some essential services; follow the KB on removing the first server in the site 2. All attendees, some attendees, specific ones all the time, random? - Original Message - From: McCullar, Doug [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, March 12, 2002 8:55 PM Subject: RE: Exchange 2000 in 5.5 Site I did check that out but must be my mistake. I thought that was what this list was for too. -Original Message- From: Daniel Chenault [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, March 12, 2002 4:14 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Re: Exchange 2000 in 5.5 Site It just so happens that MS has a paper or two on exactly this procedure. You might check their website (which should have been your first option instead of this list). - Original Message - From: McCullar, Doug [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, March 11, 2002 2:04 PM Subject: Exchange 2000 in 5.5 Site I have joined a 5.5 site with an Exchange 2000 server. Everything seems to be working fine and I think I am close to removing the 5.5 server. Is there anything I need to do or maybe a white paper I can ready before I proceed? Also, my users are having problem with not being able to see the schedules for attendees when trying to schedule meetings. Any help would be much appreciate and thanks in advance. _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.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: Recalculate Routing for MTA doesn't work
Routes do not auto-delete merely because another one exists. One wouldn't want that to happen since multiple routes provides redundancy (a good thing). The unwanted route has to be manually removed. - Original Message - From: Mahesh Bharatsingh [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, March 13, 2002 7:17 AM Subject: RE: Recalculate Routing for MTA doesn't work (KCC) This offers no solution. The previous route still exists in the routing table. I connected two sites through a different server and expected the old route to disapear from the routing table. Instead the route got updated with the new server, so i have a route that goes from the new connector server to the old one and then back to the new one. From there it goes to the next mailserver. I want to delete this route somehow from the routing table. -Original Message- From: Woodruff, Michael [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, March 13, 2002 1:50 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Recalculate Routing for MTA doesn't work Knowledge Consistency Check. It's under Directory Service, Server Level. -Original Message- From: Mahesh Bharatsingh [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, March 13, 2002 7:48 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Recalculate Routing for MTA doesn't work Hello Daniel What is KCC? -Original Message- From: Daniel Chenault [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, March 11, 2002 6:31 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Re: Recalculate Routing for MTA doesn't work Recalcuate Routing is the exact same function as the one called automatically. Do a KCC, then recalc routing. - Original Message - From: Mahesh Bharatsingh [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, March 11, 2002 11:08 AM Subject: RE: Recalculate Routing for MTA doesn't work Is there a way to rebuild the mta routing table, without using recalculate route? I have some wrong information in there. -Original Message- From: Daniel Chenault [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, March 11, 2002 4:40 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Re: Recalculate Routing for MTA doesn't work The GWART files (there are two) exist solely for human consumption. Modify them they'll be overwritten. Delete them they'll be recreated. If something is wrong in the GWART its because the engine is getting incorrect information. - Original Message - From: Mahesh Bharatsingh [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, March 11, 2002 9:00 AM Subject: RE: Recalculate Routing for MTA doesn't work As i understand it, the GWART is modified according to the routing table. I deleted the gwart-file and after using recalculating route, the same gwart was generated, according to the info from the routing table. So, modifying the gwart will not work. The modifications will dissapear or is there a way to import the gwart? What i need is some way to change the routing table itself. Is there any way? -Original Message- From: Jonathan Beeler [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, March 08, 2002 10:25 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Re: Recalculate Routing for MTA doesn't work Did you try modifying the GWART, manually? _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED
Re: Exchange 2000 in 5.5 Site
Follow that article and you'll be fine. What is meant by users can't see others' schedules? Is there an error message or do you mean they open the schedule but it is blank when you know there should be info there? - Original Message - From: McCullar, Doug [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, March 13, 2002 8:32 AM Subject: RE: Exchange 2000 in 5.5 Site I have the article Q284148 on removing the last 5.5 server. All attendees, all of the time. -Original Message- From: Daniel Chenault [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, March 12, 2002 9:38 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Re: Exchange 2000 in 5.5 Site Yes, this list is a resource. Trust me on this; you'll get better responses if you outline what you've already done; without saying that no one is going to be interested in doing what looks like your work for you. You raised two issues 1. Removing the last 5.5 server. This server hosts some essential services; follow the KB on removing the first server in the site 2. All attendees, some attendees, specific ones all the time, random? - Original Message - From: McCullar, Doug [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, March 12, 2002 8:55 PM Subject: RE: Exchange 2000 in 5.5 Site I did check that out but must be my mistake. I thought that was what this list was for too. -Original Message- From: Daniel Chenault [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, March 12, 2002 4:14 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Re: Exchange 2000 in 5.5 Site It just so happens that MS has a paper or two on exactly this procedure. You might check their website (which should have been your first option instead of this list). - Original Message - From: McCullar, Doug [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, March 11, 2002 2:04 PM Subject: Exchange 2000 in 5.5 Site I have joined a 5.5 site with an Exchange 2000 server. Everything seems to be working fine and I think I am close to removing the 5.5 server. Is there anything I need to do or maybe a white paper I can ready before I proceed? Also, my users are having problem with not being able to see the schedules for attendees when trying to schedule meetings. Any help would be much appreciate and thanks in advance. _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Exchange 5.5 - 2000 Upgrade grief
I just ran into something like this very recently. On the 5.5 box open the Services and get properties on each Exchange service. Manually enter 'domain\username' and restart the services. Yes, I know, sounds weird. But it works. - Original Message - From: Alister [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, March 13, 2002 9:22 AM Subject: RE: Exchange 5.5 - 2000 Upgrade grief We Only have a W2K domain. 5.5 was installed at the time because 2000 wasn't available. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Grant, Fred Sent: 13 March 2002 15:19 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Exchange 5.5 - 2000 Upgrade grief Have you created trusts between the W2K domain you are installing E2K in and the NT domain that 5.5 is in? If you verify the trust, is it successful? -Original Message- From: Alister [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, March 13, 2002 9:11 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Exchange 5.5 - 2000 Upgrade grief Yes this rings a nasty bell. First time I tried and install 2000 it seemed OK, however I could not access the 5.5 information store. At that time I was not 100% sure the ADC was correct. I removed Windows 2000 and Exchange 2000 and started again. Running ADC on the 5.5 box. Now I the greyed out section for the user name and domain. The password for the Service Account Information is not being excepted Have I got the wrong info in the Schema for Service Account??? I thought the Schema was only a template??? Thanks Alister -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Grant, Fred Sent: 12 March 2002 21:13 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Exchange 5.5 - 2000 Upgrade grief During an earlier step you would have been asked for the name of a server in 5.5. Based on that info the setup program can determine the site the server is in and hence the SA account for that site. That is what is presented in the greyed out section. You now need to provide the PW associated with that account. -Original Message- From: Alister [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, March 12, 2002 11:45 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Exchange 5.5 - 2000 Upgrade grief Hi Guys. I'm new to this forum, so if you've covered this sorry to drag it up again. When trying to install a second exchange server, with Exchange 2000 on it. Our Existing server has 5.5. I've run the ADC (I think correctly). There is Exchange stuff in the Schema, but when I run Exchange 2000 setup (on a different server), and come to the part about entering Service Account Information both the User Name and Domain and greyed out Only the password field is available for entry Anybody any thoughts??? Thanks Ali Network Engineer bango.net _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Exchange 2000 in 5.5 Site
That would mean the F/B folder is not populated. At the moment that F/B server is hosted on the 5.5 box. To simplify troubleshooting follow the gameplan of removing the 5.5 box and we'll go from there. - Original Message - From: McCullar, Doug [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, March 13, 2002 9:23 AM Subject: RE: Exchange 2000 in 5.5 Site It is just blank where before you could see there busy times in blue. -Original Message- From: Daniel Chenault [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, March 13, 2002 9:21 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Re: Exchange 2000 in 5.5 Site Follow that article and you'll be fine. What is meant by users can't see others' schedules? Is there an error message or do you mean they open the schedule but it is blank when you know there should be info there? - Original Message - From: McCullar, Doug [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, March 13, 2002 8:32 AM Subject: RE: Exchange 2000 in 5.5 Site I have the article Q284148 on removing the last 5.5 server. All attendees, all of the time. -Original Message- From: Daniel Chenault [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, March 12, 2002 9:38 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Re: Exchange 2000 in 5.5 Site Yes, this list is a resource. Trust me on this; you'll get better responses if you outline what you've already done; without saying that no one is going to be interested in doing what looks like your work for you. You raised two issues 1. Removing the last 5.5 server. This server hosts some essential services; follow the KB on removing the first server in the site 2. All attendees, some attendees, specific ones all the time, random? - Original Message - From: McCullar, Doug [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, March 12, 2002 8:55 PM Subject: RE: Exchange 2000 in 5.5 Site I did check that out but must be my mistake. I thought that was what this list was for too. -Original Message- From: Daniel Chenault [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, March 12, 2002 4:14 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Re: Exchange 2000 in 5.5 Site It just so happens that MS has a paper or two on exactly this procedure. You might check their website (which should have been your first option instead of this list). - Original Message - From: McCullar, Doug [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, March 11, 2002 2:04 PM Subject: Exchange 2000 in 5.5 Site I have joined a 5.5 site with an Exchange 2000 server. Everything seems to be working fine and I think I am close to removing the 5.5 server. Is there anything I need to do or maybe a white paper I can ready before I proceed? Also, my users are having problem with not being able to see the schedules for attendees when trying to schedule meetings. Any help would be much appreciate and thanks in advance. _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.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: Concurrent Users
con·cur·rent Pronunciation Key (kn-kûrnt, -kr-) adj. 1.. Happening at the same time as something else. See Synonyms at contemporary. 2.. Operating or acting in conjunction with another. 3.. Meeting or tending to meet at the same point; convergent. 4.. Being in accordance; harmonious. So concurrent users would be multiple users happening at the same time as other users - Original Message - From: Sabo, Eric [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, March 13, 2002 10:21 AM Subject: Concurrent Users What does the term concurrent users mean? Does this mean a HTTP/POP3/IMAP4 user is consider the same as an MAPI user - Load wise? Can someone please explain what Microsoft means by concurrent users? Thanks, Eric Sabo NT Administrator Computing Services Center California University of Pennsylvania _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] schwa.gif Description: GIF image prime.gif Description: GIF image ubreve.gif Description: GIF image _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Exchange 2000 in 5.5 Site
Gameplan as in removing the 5.5 box. F/B is free/busy, the folder repository that holds all the free/busy information for your users. At the moment it is empty thus explaining why your users see nothing. I thought you already had Ex2K in place running in parallel. On 5.5, admin:folders:system folders: properties on the Free-Busy folder. Set a replica of it to one of the Ex2K boxes with users on it. - Original Message - From: Alister [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, March 13, 2002 10:06 AM Subject: RE: Exchange 2000 in 5.5 Site Gameplan as in populate AD??? I'm not sure what you mean by F/B. I can't remove the 5.5 box at the mo, as it is our main mail server. I need to get a Ex2000 box running in parallel first, hence my prob's. Thanks Ali -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Daniel Chenault Sent: 13 March 2002 15:54 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Re: Exchange 2000 in 5.5 Site That would mean the F/B folder is not populated. At the moment that F/B server is hosted on the 5.5 box. To simplify troubleshooting follow the gameplan of removing the 5.5 box and we'll go from there. - Original Message - From: McCullar, Doug [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, March 13, 2002 9:23 AM Subject: RE: Exchange 2000 in 5.5 Site It is just blank where before you could see there busy times in blue. -Original Message- From: Daniel Chenault [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, March 13, 2002 9:21 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Re: Exchange 2000 in 5.5 Site Follow that article and you'll be fine. What is meant by users can't see others' schedules? Is there an error message or do you mean they open the schedule but it is blank when you know there should be info there? - Original Message - From: McCullar, Doug [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, March 13, 2002 8:32 AM Subject: RE: Exchange 2000 in 5.5 Site I have the article Q284148 on removing the last 5.5 server. All attendees, all of the time. -Original Message- From: Daniel Chenault [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, March 12, 2002 9:38 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Re: Exchange 2000 in 5.5 Site Yes, this list is a resource. Trust me on this; you'll get better responses if you outline what you've already done; without saying that no one is going to be interested in doing what looks like your work for you. You raised two issues 1. Removing the last 5.5 server. This server hosts some essential services; follow the KB on removing the first server in the site 2. All attendees, some attendees, specific ones all the time, random? - Original Message - From: McCullar, Doug [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, March 12, 2002 8:55 PM Subject: RE: Exchange 2000 in 5.5 Site I did check that out but must be my mistake. I thought that was what this list was for too. -Original Message- From: Daniel Chenault [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, March 12, 2002 4:14 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Re: Exchange 2000 in 5.5 Site It just so happens that MS has a paper or two on exactly this procedure. You might check their website (which should have been your first option instead of this list). - Original Message - From: McCullar, Doug [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, March 11, 2002 2:04 PM Subject: Exchange 2000 in 5.5 Site I have joined a 5.5 site with an Exchange 2000 server. Everything seems to be working fine and I think I am close to removing the 5.5 server. Is there anything I need to do or maybe a white paper I can ready before I proceed? Also, my users are having problem with not being able to see the schedules for attendees when trying to schedule meetings. Any help would be much appreciate and thanks in advance. _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List
Re: Outlook hangs when creating a certain rule
Open a message in your inbox from that mailbox. Tools:Create Rule - you are now using the information in that message as a template to create a rule. Handy shortcut. - Original Message - From: Elmer Stöwer [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, March 13, 2002 6:20 AM Subject: RE: Outlook hangs when creating a certain rule Good idea. We are getting closer... Inspirated by your mail I tried it from scratch this time. Systemadminisitrator is the standard Exchange user which sends warning messages. If you want to create a rule for a certain sender, you need adress book entry for this sender. It is impossible to create an adress book entry for the name Systemadministrator. It is possible to add an contact, but it won't show up in the adress book. So this might be the cause. Hmmm. Almost all mails have the word unzustellbar or undeliverable in the subject line. So probably this is a better approach. I will try. Thank you for the help. regards Elmer -Original Message- From: Daniel Chenault [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, March 12, 2002 11:37 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Re: Outlook hangs when creating a certain rule Nice try, but outlook does not do verification of source routing while creating a rule. Elmer, how are you creating the rule? From scratch or do you have an example message open and using that as a template? - Original Message - From: Blunt, James H (Jim) [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, March 12, 2002 4:27 PM Subject: RE: Outlook hangs when creating a certain rule Elmer, From the point of view of someone who knows nothing about E2K, could this be the problem? Does your Systemadministrator mailbox also have an SMTP addy of [EMAIL PROTECTED]? If so, is the word postmaster a reserved word in E2K? If it isn't, is it possible that trying to send to postmaster is actually trying to send to the SMTP addy, thereby putting Outlook in a loop? Jim Blunt -Original Message- From: Elmer Stöwer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Saturday, March 09, 2002 11:32 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Outlook hangs when creating a certain rule btw, just tried it from a different machine. Same efect. :( elm -Original Message- From: Elmer Stöwer Sent: Friday, March 08, 2002 4:31 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Outlook hangs when creating a certain rule Hi List, anybody had this before? E2K, W2K, O2K. Creating a rule to move messages from 'Systemadministrator' to a folder 'postmaster' Outlook hangs up. (outlook has caused an error. restart outlook. [badly translated from german, sorry]). I can create all kind of rules exept this one. regards elm -- Elmer Stöwer CyberConsult - Beratungsgesellschaft für Neue Medien mbH Tel: (030) 39 99 05 -42, Fax: (030) 39 99 05 -67 mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: www.swinc.com faq's back online
Heck, if I'd known I would have bought them out of hock; good investment (but a little eagle-eye on business practices might be in order). - Original Message - From: Kenneth Walden [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, March 13, 2002 4:43 PM Subject: RE: www.swinc.com faq's back online Was it you who bought the Chili Parlor out of hock for $40K? ;-) --Kenneth -Original Message- From: Webb, Andy [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, March 13, 2002 4:26 PM To: Exchange Discussions Cc: Exchange Discussions Subject: www.swinc.com faq's back online Sorry for the outage, folks. One of our wonderful DSL providers is out of service. Moved everything over to another link, and it's back online. cheers. === Andy Webb[EMAIL PROTECTED] www.swinc.com Simpler-Webb, Inc. Austin, TX512-322-0071 -- Contributing to the tax-evading delinquency of the Texas Chili Parlor since 1989 -- === _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Exchange 5.5 - 2000 Upgrade grief
Give a man a fish, feed him for a day. Teach a man to fish, feed him for his lifetime Book of Hard Facts of Life To be is to do: Plato To do is to be: Voltaire Do be do be do: Sinatra ;) - Original Message - From: Sander Van Butzelaar [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, March 14, 2002 12:34 AM Subject: RE: Exchange 5.5 - 2000 Upgrade grief Ah Barry, but a little bit further it says: Do not withhold good from those to whom it is due, when it is in your power to do so. Proverbs 3:27 So let the man have his messages, I think they are good:-) Sander -Original Message- From: Barry Patterson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, March 13, 2002 11:36 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Exchange 5.5 - 2000 Upgrade grief From your website: Luke 19:10 For the Son of Man has come to seek and to save that which was lost. :) Follow the SWYNK link at the bottom... Barry -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, March 13, 2002 5:25 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Re: Exchange 5.5 - 2000 Upgrade grief i keep getting these messeges please remove me from your mailing. Original message Date: Tue, 12 Mar 2002 16:45:02 - From: Alister [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Exchange 5.5 - 2000 Upgrade grief To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Hi Guys. I'm new to this forum, so if you've covered this sorry to drag it up again. When trying to install a second exchange server, with Exchange 2000 on it. Our Existing server has 5.5. I've run the ADC (I think correctly). There is Exchange stuff in the Schema, but when I run Exchange 2000 setup (on a different server), and come to the part about entering Service Account Information both the User Name and Domain and greyed out Only the password field is available for entry Anybody any thoughts??? Thanks Ali Network Engineer bango.net _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Relay more in detail
Uh... relaying is turned off on the machine hosting domain2.com? - Original Message - From: XCNG Daily [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, March 14, 2002 2:14 AM Subject: Relay more in detail Hi, due to no response to my mail some days ago, I should specify a little more my situation. Topology looks like this: Internet gateway (relay secure - non - Exchange) delievers to a Exchange machine 5.5 Sp4 NT4Sp6a hotfixed receiving mails for *.domain.com and domain2.com (its own domain is domain.com) It's the only machine with internet access. connected to this are 3 other machines, 2 with sub1.domain.com and sub2.domain.com, the third with domain2.com The 3 machines are connected via IMC, all is in one organisation with 4 sites. Now when i have setup routing restrictions on the main machine to secure it from the internal side, I see that relaying to sub1.domain.com and sub2.domain.com works fine - these machines can send and receive mails. The third machine with domain2.com can send well but when receiving a mail from external, I see a 550 relaying denied and the mail is blackholed somewhere. Any idea from the relaying and routing freax? Thx in advance Steffen _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Exchange getting bounced
That's because you can't have two servers with the same name on the same network. A restore server should be on it's own network with a copy of the production domain's DC. - Original Message - From: Seitz, Peter [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, March 14, 2002 10:43 AM Subject: RE: Exchange getting bounced Let me clarify, when I do a restore on the test server, the original backed up server goes offline. -Original Message- From: Seitz, Peter Sent: Thursday, March 14, 2002 8:34 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Exchange getting bounced This is an Exchange 5.5, sp4, one of two in our domain. When I take a backup from this system using ntbackup, and try to restore it to our test server, it goes down with the Information store offline. When I do the restore, it'll ask me what server to restore to, and I give it the test servers name. Now, I have done this in the past with no problems, just the last couple of times on this server has been giving me problems. This test server was created with the same site and org name, but I didn't joing the group. I hope this helps. Peter Seitz Operating Systems Analyst Cubic Corporation San Diego, Ca. 92021 (858) 505-2724 _ List posting FAQ: http://www.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: OWA and non standard port
OWA uses four ports total: 80 for inbound from the client three dynamically-chosen (by the Exchange server) ports for communication on the back-end. Not sure if this helps since I don't know your configuration. - Original Message - From: Mike Carlson [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, March 14, 2002 8:32 AM Subject: OWA and non standard port Due to firewall configuration I had to configure OWA to use a port other than 80 and it returns the error: Error Unknown -2147467259 I found this article in th KB: http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;en-us;Q313932 Does anyone have the fix that article talks about or know of a work around? Everything works fine except I can see the public folders. Thanks, Mike .+--xm ,)捩r(溷 \b�!轶 0 㧑zǚ䀱r,:.˛ m隊[hy\z[,牣)r䉄ZZvh宧+-i٢2쯞G( _ List posting FAQ: http://www.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: Client hanging....
Assuming the client is using an OST, start up offline and delete the message sitting in the outbox. - Original Message - From: Ronny Pedersen [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, March 14, 2002 4:05 AM Subject: Client hanging HI ! One of my clients is having problems. When opening the client, it starts transmitting an very large (88MB) mail through the server, and it can't be stopped. The client sits on a slow link. How can I delete this transmission ? Ronny _ List posting FAQ: http://www.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: Evil OST files.
Technet is your friend. I encourage you to do a search and find the relevant article so you can learn the mechanism. Basically, though, an OST can only be opened by the profile that created it. - Original Message - From: McCready, Robert [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, March 14, 2002 8:22 AM Subject: Evil OST files. I have an user who lost some calendar information. He was using an OST file. I've tried recovering that OST file from the Friday backup tape, to see if I could find his data. However, I can't open the darn thing. When I try to open the file off-line, I either get the message Unable to open your default e-mail folders. The Exchange Server has detected that you are using an old copy of your OST file. Please delete your OST file and create a new one from the server. OR Unable to open your default e-mail folders. The information store could not be opened. I have tried deleting the old OST and putting this one in it's place, and granted the user full control over the file, no luck. Is there any way to read what is in this evil old OST file? Thanks in advance for any help. Exchange 5.5 SP4, Outlook 98. NT 4.0 SP6a. Robert _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Auto Responder
Yes. I'd be happy to craft a solution for you. For a price... - Original Message - From: Irfan Malik [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, March 14, 2002 5:18 AM Subject: Auto Responder Dear List, Our Publicity department wants that when ever someone mail to their department email address an auto respond should be generated and that auto respond should attach a file( some rates sheet file) and send it to the recipient. Is there a way to do that. Thanks and Regards. _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Relay more in detail
Seems like one of the two is not working. First thing I'd do is remove both of the security restrictions and see if it works in base configuration. If so add them back one at a time to see which one isn't working. I'm betting it's the autenticated connections. - Original Message - From: XCNG Daily [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, March 14, 2002 6:31 AM Subject: Re: Relay more in detail On machine hosting domain2.com relaying is configured to accept only successful authenticated connections and those of the machine hosting domain.com. That is exact the same as the set up on the 2 machines for sub[1-2].domain.com, where everything works. Regards Steffen _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Exchange getting bounced
One cannot have two servers with the same name on the same network. - Original Message - From: Seitz, Peter [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, March 14, 2002 11:10 AM Subject: RE: Exchange getting bounced Same site, same org, different name. This can't be done this way? -Original Message- From: Daniel Chenault [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, March 14, 2002 9:06 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Re: Exchange getting bounced That's because you can't have two servers with the same name on the same network. A restore server should be on it's own network with a copy of the production domain's DC. - Original Message - From: Seitz, Peter [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, March 14, 2002 10:43 AM Subject: RE: Exchange getting bounced Let me clarify, when I do a restore on the test server, the original backed up server goes offline. -Original Message- From: Seitz, Peter Sent: Thursday, March 14, 2002 8:34 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Exchange getting bounced This is an Exchange 5.5, sp4, one of two in our domain. When I take a backup from this system using ntbackup, and try to restore it to our test server, it goes down with the Information store offline. When I do the restore, it'll ask me what server to restore to, and I give it the test servers name. Now, I have done this in the past with no problems, just the last couple of times on this server has been giving me problems. This test server was created with the same site and org name, but I didn't joing the group. I hope this helps. Peter Seitz Operating Systems Analyst Cubic Corporation San Diego, Ca. 92021 (858) 505-2724 _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Exchange getting bounced
One step at a time; I got ahead of myself and mistyped (brain cloud): If the server name is NOT the same, one has to go through extra steps to get Exchange to start. If the server name IS the same, Exchange can start but the server itself probably won't. Test servers don't belong on a production network. Neither do restore servers. Hubs are cheap. - Original Message - From: Andrew Chan [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, March 14, 2002 11:28 AM Subject: RE: Exchange getting bounced He said same site, same org, DIFFERENT name... Andrew, MCSE (NT W2K) + CCNA -Original Message- From: Daniel Chenault [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Posted At: Thursday, March 14, 2002 9:25 AM Posted To: DiscussionGroup Conversation: Exchange getting bounced Subject: Re: Exchange getting bounced One cannot have two servers with the same name on the same network. - Original Message - From: Seitz, Peter [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, March 14, 2002 11:10 AM Subject: RE: Exchange getting bounced Same site, same org, different name. This can't be done this way? -Original Message- From: Daniel Chenault [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, March 14, 2002 9:06 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Re: Exchange getting bounced That's because you can't have two servers with the same name on the same network. A restore server should be on it's own network with a copy of the production domain's DC. - Original Message - From: Seitz, Peter [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, March 14, 2002 10:43 AM Subject: RE: Exchange getting bounced Let me clarify, when I do a restore on the test server, the original backed up server goes offline. -Original Message- From: Seitz, Peter Sent: Thursday, March 14, 2002 8:34 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Exchange getting bounced This is an Exchange 5.5, sp4, one of two in our domain. When I take a backup from this system using ntbackup, and try to restore it to our test server, it goes down with the Information store offline. When I do the restore, it'll ask me what server to restore to, and I give it the test servers name. Now, I have done this in the past with no problems, just the last couple of times on this server has been giving me problems. This test server was created with the same site and org name, but I didn't joing the group. I hope this helps. Peter Seitz Operating Systems Analyst Cubic Corporation San Diego, Ca. 92021 (858) 505-2724 _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MSX5.5 hacked
As others have pointed out your IIS server got hacked; Exchange itself is probably fine but I would bet your passwords have been compromised. Back up Exchange and any data you want to keep. Flatten this box, reinstall and put the ding-dang security hotfixes on it before putting it back on the network. Then restore Exchange (the disaster recovery whitepaper will come in handy here). Change ALL your passwords. All of them. I'm not kidding at all: you don't know to what extent your enterprise has been compromised. - Original Message - From: Bravo, Liliana [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, March 14, 2002 11:34 AM Subject: MSX5.5 hacked HI all MSX5.5/SP4 We have found ftp1.exe, nc.exe and cmd1.exe in c:\inetpub also nc.exe and ftp1.exe are running in memory. After reading our logfiles those files are there since Feb 24. Does anybody know what kind of hack is that and how to get red of those whitout causing any post-hack attack. Tia -er _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Conversion to Internet format failed
Are the clients using Word as the e-mail editor? - Original Message - From: Woodruff, Michael [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, March 15, 2002 9:58 AM Subject: RE: Conversion to Internet format failed Mainly .docs. They are being attached both ways. Inserting them as attachments and copying and pasting. -Original Message- From: Louis Joyce [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, March 15, 2002 9:55 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Conversion to Internet format failed How are the attachments being attached? What sort of attachments are they? Regards Mr Louis Joyce Data Support Analyst BT Ignite eSolutions -Original Message- From: Woodruff, Michael [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 15 March 2002 14:48 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Conversion to Internet format failed Exch 5.5 SP4, Win2k SP2. When some of my users try to send to internet mail with attachments, they get this bounce. I have checked everything on the IMC and everywhere else. Any thoughts? They are sending in Rich Text, but that shouldn't be a problem. MSEXCH:IMS:GSW:Columbus:EXCHANGECMH 0x80070057 (00050311) Conversion to Internet format failed _ List posting FAQ: http://www.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: Disabling 'Hard Deletion'
Here in the States the SEC (Securities Exchange Commission, the folks who regulate stock-related activities) required the retention of mail a couple years ago. That's when MS came out with the journaling feature; that is to say, the purpose of the journaling feature is exactly what you're looking for. I'd recommend a server with one mailbox on it, said mailbox being the repository for the journaling. Full backup every week with mailbox manager running against it to delete mail older than full backup time period + 1. If you're using Win2K's NTBackup send the backup to a file and burn that file to CD (CD's have a longer shelf-life than magnetic media) and keep the media off-site. - Original Message - From: Louis Joyce [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, March 15, 2002 9:59 AM Subject: RE: Disabling 'Hard Deletion' How about asking your HR department to speak to the some 'not many' users who insist on using this method. Perhaps saying that if they persist they can fu$k off out the door. Regards Mr Louis Joyce Data Support Analyst BT Ignite eSolutions -Original Message- From: Taylor, Mal [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 15 March 2002 15:44 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Disabling 'Hard Deletion' Done that, but if you use 'tools recover deleted items' and then delete they are gone for good - been scouring technet other resources for a good while. -Original Message- From: Louis Joyce [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 15 March 2002 15:39 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Disabling 'Hard Deletion' Yes. the dumpsteralwayson registry value allows items that have been hard deleted to be recovered. Search TechNet for dumpsteralwayson Regards Mr Louis Joyce Data Support Analyst BT Ignite eSolutions -Original Message- From: Taylor, Mal [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 15 March 2002 15:33 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Disabling 'Hard Deletion' Mutterings in the media seem to indicate that the UK or EU powers that be, may enable laws requiring companies to retain ALL emails for a specific period. In our case we have deleted item retention set to 7 days and not finally deleted until a backup is performed. + backups retained for a specific period. Some (not many) users have latched on to the fact that items can be deleted from the 'Recover from deleted items' screen and therefore permanently deleted and not recoverable (this is usually done where an email is regarded as highly confidential). Does anyone know of a method to prevent users from using hard deletes whilst still retaining the recover deleted items feature. Mal Taylor *** This e-mail and its attachments are intended for the above named recipient(s) only and are confidential and may be privileged. If they have come to you in error you must take no action based on them, nor must you copy or disclose them or any part of their contents to any person or organisation; please notify the sender immediately and delete this e-mail and its attachments from your computer system. Please note that Internet communications are not necessarily secure and may be changed, intercepted or corrupted. We advise that you understand and observe this lack of security when e-mailing us and we will not accept any liability for any such changes, interceptions or corruptions. Although we have taken steps to ensure that this e-mail and its attachments are free from any virus, we advise that in keeping with good computing practice the recipient should ensure they are actually virus free. Copyright in this e-mail and attachments created by us belongs to Littlewoods. Littlewoods takes steps to prohibit the transmission of offensive, obscene or discriminatory material. If this message contains inappropriate material please forward the e-mail intact to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and it will be investigated. Statements and opinions contained in this e-mail may not necessarily represent those of Littlewoods. Please note that e-mail communication may be monitored. Registered office: Littlewoods Retail Limited, Sir John Moores Building, 100 Old Hall Street, Liverpool, L70 1AB Registered no: 421258 http://www.littlewoods.com *** _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List
Re: eseutil /d
One cannot prove a negative. Have them give their reasoning for this and then you can address their concerns. - Original Message - From: paragon400 [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, March 15, 2002 11:32 AM Subject: eseutil /d I have some team members here that believe that regular defragmentation (offline) should be done as routine maintenance. I don't share this opinion, but I am having a hard time finding evidence to support my belief. Does anyone know of any links that support the theory that eseutil should not be used for regular maintenance or am I wrong and should it be part of regular maintenance? Exchange 5.5 environment. Thanks for any help anyone can provide. _ List posting FAQ: http://www.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: eseutil /d
It won't hurt Exchange performance but will needlessly break any uptime metrics. There is one, count 'em, one difference between an offline and an online defrag. The former moves the EOF, the latter does not. - Original Message - From: Ray Zorz [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, March 15, 2002 12:06 PM Subject: RE: eseutil /d I remember an excellent explanation of how this will actually hurt Exchange performance by one of the Ed's. I saved it, then lost it somehow. Maybe someone still has it. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Couch, Nate Sent: Friday, March 15, 2002 10:54 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: eseutil /d Try reading Jim McBee's book - Exchange 247. It talks about this very issue. Basically, it comes down to the view, from my reading, that if it ain't broke - leave it alone. If you aren't seeing any errors in the Event logs that clue you into a problem with the databases don't go begging for trouble - you are likely to find it. All the best in your battle with your coworkers. Nate Couch EDS Messaging -- From: paragon400 Reply To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, March 15, 2002 11:32 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: eseutil /d I have some team members here that believe that regular defragmentation (offline) should be done as routine maintenance. I don't share this opinion, but I am having a hard time finding evidence to support my belief. Does anyone know of any links that support the theory that eseutil should not be used for regular maintenance or am I wrong and should it be part of regular maintenance? Exchange 5.5 environment. Thanks for any help anyone can provide. _ List posting FAQ: http://www.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] --- Incoming mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.338 / Virus Database: 189 - Release Date: 3/14/2002 _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Conversion to Internet format failed
Word e-mail editor is evil. Trust me on this. - Original Message - From: Woodruff, Michael [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, March 15, 2002 1:39 PM Subject: RE: Conversion to Internet format failed Not really sure. Would that matter? Rich text using word or rich text using outlook. Both the same right? -Original Message- From: Daniel Chenault [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, March 15, 2002 11:46 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Re: Conversion to Internet format failed Are the clients using Word as the e-mail editor? - Original Message - From: Woodruff, Michael [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, March 15, 2002 9:58 AM Subject: RE: Conversion to Internet format failed Mainly .docs. They are being attached both ways. Inserting them as attachments and copying and pasting. -Original Message- From: Louis Joyce [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, March 15, 2002 9:55 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Conversion to Internet format failed How are the attachments being attached? What sort of attachments are they? Regards Mr Louis Joyce Data Support Analyst BT Ignite eSolutions -Original Message- From: Woodruff, Michael [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 15 March 2002 14:48 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Conversion to Internet format failed Exch 5.5 SP4, Win2k SP2. When some of my users try to send to internet mail with attachments, they get this bounce. I have checked everything on the IMC and everywhere else. Any thoughts? They are sending in Rich Text, but that shouldn't be a problem. MSEXCH:IMS:GSW:Columbus:EXCHANGECMH 0x80070057 (00050311) Conversion to Internet format failed _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: eseutil /d
In that case they need to formulate an SLA on the permissable amount of white space in the databases and use offline defrag to attain that SLA, not just shotgun it. - Original Message - From: paragon400 [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, March 15, 2002 12:41 PM Subject: RE: eseutil /d Their reasoning is to save disk space (there really is not a disk space issue...9 GB store on a 40 GB drive for example)...and to speed up backups. -Original Message- From: Daniel Chenault [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, March 15, 2002 10:05 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Re: eseutil /d One cannot prove a negative. Have them give their reasoning for this and then you can address their concerns. - Original Message - From: paragon400 [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, March 15, 2002 11:32 AM Subject: eseutil /d I have some team members here that believe that regular defragmentation (offline) should be done as routine maintenance. I don't share this opinion, but I am having a hard time finding evidence to support my belief. Does anyone know of any links that support the theory that eseutil should not be used for regular maintenance or am I wrong and should it be part of regular maintenance? Exchange 5.5 environment. Thanks for any help anyone can provide. _ List posting FAQ: http://www.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: eseutil /d
;) I seem to recall having to field this question when I was on the stage at the Boston MEC. My responses now will be the same as they were then. IOW: no real need unless you really WANT to. - Original Message - From: William Lefkovics [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, March 15, 2002 2:23 PM Subject: RE: eseutil /d I am SO going to enjoy this thread. :o) -Original Message- From: paragon400 [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, March 15, 2002 9:33 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: eseutil /d I have some team members here that believe that regular defragmentation (offline) should be done as routine maintenance. I don't share this opinion, but I am having a hard time finding evidence to support my belief. Does anyone know of any links that support the theory that eseutil should not be used for regular maintenance or am I wrong and should it be part of regular maintenance? Exchange 5.5 environment. Thanks for any help anyone can provide. ___ _ List posting FAQ: http://www.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: If I delete an email is it really gone?
The allocated space within the EDB file is marked available for overwrite, just as when you delete a file off a hard drive. So yes, the data is still there but all pointers to it have been removed. Given the dynamic nature of Exchange's database technology it'll probably be overwritten fairly quickly. To answer your next question, no, there is no delete it and wipe the space clean option. Only way to do that is to a) wait for nightly maintenance (which does online defrag) or b) do an offline defrag - Original Message - From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, March 15, 2002 2:57 PM Subject: If I delete an email is it really gone? Exchange 5.5 SP4, 10 Exchange servers, 1 site Outlook 2000 clients I was tasked with the following and need some help finding the answers. I need to be assured that when an item is deleted from a mailbox, it is really gone. We currently have the dumpster feature enabled which I plan to disable. My question is, if a mail item is deleted and the dumpster is turned off, is the item really unrecoverable? If it is recoverable, how can I change our configuration so that it is unrecoverable? Is that even possible? Could someone reconstruct that data in any way even though it has been deleted? On a side note, I know that backups play into this and that will be addressed later. Thanks everyone Jeff _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Default Sys Admin on SMTP
And you've done the reg modification? I know this works as I've done it several times (actually I think I may have written that article, cant' remember for sure). - Original Message - From: Finch Brett [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, March 16, 2002 6:37 PM Subject: Default Sys Admin on SMTP We are a Exchange 5.5 SPK4 ORG, my server is on it's own site and runs it's own SMTP connector, it holds several MX records that all work. In reference to the following article, I have a problem where I want all the postmaster error messages to be generated from the server I administer. http://support.microsoft.com/directory/article.asp?ID=KB;EN-US;Q182010 I also stopped and restarted all services to ensure changes took effect. The problem is that the default reply to address is coming (and being sent) from the postmaster account of the main server in the ORG, not from my server in this SITE. If you were to reply to me [EMAIL PROTECTED] (note the missing t), then you should get the Unknown Recipient message from the [EMAIL PROTECTED] but you don't, it comes from the postmaster@. the ORG's first (main) server. If we both run our own SMTP connections, our MX records are correct, then why is this and how can I stop it from happening. I thought from the article up top I could fix it but apparently not. What am I missing here? Thanks in advance, probably a simple fix, once I actually find it... _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Who needs permission to access Exchange Shares?
The Everyone Full Control is the NTFS permission level, not the sharing permission level which should be Everyone Read. The Everyone group can be removed from both. Leave the others accounts there alone. - Original Message - From: Walbert, Bryan (Bryan) % [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, March 18, 2002 8:12 AM Subject: Who needs permission to access Exchange Shares? When you install Exchange 5.5 it creates the following shares: C:\exchsrvr\ADD-INS C:\exchsrvr\ADDRESS C:\exchsrvr\CONNECT C:\exchsrvr\RES C:\exchsrvr\Tracking.log These shares are created with wide open permissions (Everyone:Full Control) Who really needs access to these shares? How tightly can they be restricted? _ List posting FAQ: http://www.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: Where is global text set for outgoing messages?
FAQ - Original Message - From: Arch Willingham [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, March 18, 2002 9:24 AM Subject: Where is global text set for outgoing messages? We need to append text to the bottom of every e-mail message leaving our Exchange 5.5 site. I saw how to do it a long time ago but do not remember where you set it in Exchange. Can anyone help? Thanks, Arch Willingham _ List posting FAQ: http://www.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: Can exchange 5.5 be set up as a list server?
The secret to how you can use saucer separation in your enterprise. - Original Message - From: Jennifer Baker [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, March 15, 2002 1:23 AM Subject: RE: Can exchange 5.5 be set up as a list server? I know.. I KNOW!! http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq_appxj.htm What did I win? -Original Message- From: William Lefkovics [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, March 14, 2002 8:00 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Can exchange 5.5 be set up as a list server? Any idea where I can find a comprehensive list of attachments I could block from entering my exchange server, assuming I have an application that will do such? -Original Message- From: Martin Blackstone [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, March 14, 2002 7:56 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Can exchange 5.5 be set up as a list server? You are my hero. -Original Message- From: William Lefkovics [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, March 14, 2002 6:10 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Can exchange 5.5 be set up as a list server? It doesn't really make a good list server, but there are applications that will help. Such as: http://www.ikakura.com/ Others include: www.lyris.com www.lsoft.com William Lefkovics, MCSE, A+ -Original Message- From: Baer, Matt [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, March 14, 2002 8:52 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Can exchange 5.5 be set up as a list server? Can exchange 5.5 be set up as a list server? I was told it is possible with some plug-ins. If so were can the plug-ins be found? _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: only 6 Mb after online defrag
It will increase on it's own; you misread the event text. - Original Message - From: Mario Fernandez [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, March 18, 2002 6:08 PM Subject: RE: only 6 Mb after online defrag Yes, plenty of disk space on the hard drive. I was just wondering if this meant I should increase the store size. Mario Fernandez Network Administrator DataSynapse 632 Broadway 5th Floor New York, NY 10012 tel. (212) 842-8849 fax. (212) 842-8843 [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] View the DataSynapse email disclaimer here: e-mail disclaimer http://www.datasynapse.com/legal/emailprivacy.jsp -Original Message- From: Chris Scharff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, March 18, 2002 19:00 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: only 6 Mb after online defrag That's how much free space is in the database, not how much room the database has left to grow. The size limits of Exchange databases are discussed in the FAQ I believe. Chris Scharff - MCSE, Exchange MVP 512.652.4500 x244 Senior Sales Engineer MessageOne -Original Message- From: Mario Fernandez [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, March 18, 2002 5:58 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: only 6 Mb after online defrag After the OL defrag it says I only have 6Mb of free space. How do I increase the store size? Mario Fernandez Network Administrator DataSynapse 632 Broadway 5th Floor New York, NY 10012 tel. (212) 842-8849 fax. (212) 842-8843 [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] View the DataSynapse email disclaimer here: e-mail disclaimer http://www.datasynapse.com/legal/emailprivacy .jsp _ List posting FAQ: http://www.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: Journalling question
I assume the CR is an internet address? It's just another SMTP message to the IMS; the message will queue up and timeout normally. - Original Message - From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, March 18, 2002 5:27 PM Subject: Journalling question We are asked to set up message journalling to a custom recipient. If the custom recipient is unavailable does the email queue up on our Exchange server until it can be delivered to the recipient. I don't recall reading anything that says journalling to a custom recipient will do that. I know that to a public folder, it will simply go to the folder but this is the what the vendor is asking that we implement to use his product for capturing all emails. Anybody have any thoughts on this? Dot _ List posting FAQ: http://www.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: only 6 Mb after online defrag
The only regular maintenance I recommend is watching the logs. Exchange will tell you when it's hurting. If it ain't broke, don't fix it. Whitespace is purely your own decision. Event ID 1221 (from memory; someone correct me if I misremembered) will tell you how much whitespace is in the db. How much is too much and whether it is worth the downtime to reclaim it to the file system is your call. - Original Message - From: Mario Fernandez [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, March 18, 2002 6:14 PM Subject: RE: only 6 Mb after online defrag I've been trying to find out if there's some regular maintenace that should ne performed on the Exchange server, ie. eseutil, isinteg etc. Everything I've read so far is specific, and always warn against using any of these utilities unless ther's a problem. Anyone recommend otherwise. Thanks for clearing the up the white space Mario Fernandez Network Administrator DataSynapse 632 Broadway 5th Floor New York, NY 10012 tel. (212) 842-8849 fax. (212) 842-8843 [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] View the DataSynapse email disclaimer here: e-mail disclaimer http://www.datasynapse.com/legal/emailprivacy.jsp -Original Message- From: Blunt, James H (Jim) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, March 18, 2002 19:08 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: only 6 Mb after online defrag White space = amount of unused space in your store, after defragmentation Free space = amount of unused space on your hard drive Exchange will go out and grab more free space when it needs to, up to the limit of your hard drive, as the volume of messages stored on the server grows in number. As you delete user mailboxes however, and Exchange defrags your Store, you will notice additional white space. Don't worry about it. Exchange will reuse it as more mail is stored on your server. Jim Blunt -Original Message- From: Mario Fernandez [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, March 18, 2002 3:58 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: only 6 Mb after online defrag After the OL defrag it says I only have 6Mb of free space. How do I increase the store size? Mario Fernandez Network Administrator DataSynapse 632 Broadway 5th Floor New York, NY 10012 tel. (212) 842-8849 fax. (212) 842-8843 [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] View the DataSynapse email disclaimer here: e-mail disclaimer http://www.datasynapse.com/legal/emailprivacy.jsp _ List posting FAQ: http://www.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: 554 Invalid data in message
You'll need to turn on protocol logging to see the actual conversation and data being passed to understand why your server (rather, your firewall) is returning the error. Speaking of which, what are you running as a firewall (myfirewall.mydomain.com)? Speaking further of which: it's hard to do troubleshooting when names have been obscured. - Original Message - From: Whitlock, Teresa [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, March 19, 2002 11:12 AM Subject: RE: 554 Invalid data in message Sorry I wasn't clear. It's not users in my domain, it's the Hotmail or AOL accounts that are getting bounces. Here is one of the bounces I had forwarded to my Hotmail account. Please note that when I attempt to send from my Hotmail, it's fine. So this does not seem to affect every account. MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: from mow-m25 (mow-m25.webmail.aol.com [64.12.137.2]) by air-id09.mx.aol.com (v83.45) with ESMTP id MAILINID94-0315173006; Fri, 15 Mar 2002 17:30:06 -0500 Return-Path: [EMAIL PROTECTED] X-Mailer: Unknown (No Version) Message-ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED] The original message was received at Fri, 15 Mar 2002 16:36:49 -0500 (EST) from root@localhost - The following addresses had permanent fatal errors - [EMAIL PROTECTED] - Transcript of session follows - .. while talking to myfirewall.mydomain.com.: DATA 554 Invalid data in message 554 [EMAIL PROTECTED]... Service unavailable -Original Message- From: Louis Joyce [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, March 19, 2002 9:12 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: 554 Invalid data in message So you have users in your domain who are sending to hotmail and AOL accounts and getting NDR's? Can you post the full NDR's please? Regards Mr Louis Joyce Data Support Analyst BT Ignite eSolutions -Original Message- From: Whitlock, Teresa [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 19 March 2002 16:57 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: 554 Invalid data in message I'm starting to get some complaints from certain AOL and Hotmail accounts that email is bouncing. I can send fine with my email, but I was forwarded some of the bounced emails with the following message in the header: 554 Invalid data in message Can anyone help point me in a good direction to try to figure out what the heck is happening? Teresa Whitlock _ List posting FAQ: http://www.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: 554 Invalid data in message
telnet 207.212.40.254 25 220 wormhole.dionex.com Generic SMTP handler That ain't Exchange. - Original Message - From: Roger Seielstad [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, March 19, 2002 11:28 AM Subject: RE: 554 Invalid data in message Ahhh - Service Unavailable is the clue, not the invalid data. Sounds like the firewall doesn't like one of the commands (probably an ESMTP command). Alternately, the firewall might be configured (possibly incorrectly) to not allow relaying. -- Roger D. Seielstad - MCSE Sr. Systems Administrator Peregrine Systems Atlanta, GA -Original Message- From: Whitlock, Teresa [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, March 19, 2002 12:13 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: 554 Invalid data in message Sorry I wasn't clear. It's not users in my domain, it's the Hotmail or AOL accounts that are getting bounces. Here is one of the bounces I had forwarded to my Hotmail account. Please note that when I attempt to send from my Hotmail, it's fine. So this does not seem to affect every account. MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: from mow-m25 (mow-m25.webmail.aol.com [64.12.137.2]) by air-id09.mx.aol.com (v83.45) with ESMTP id MAILINID94-0315173006; Fri, 15 Mar 2002 17:30:06 -0500 Return-Path: [EMAIL PROTECTED] X-Mailer: Unknown (No Version) Message-ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED] The original message was received at Fri, 15 Mar 2002 16:36:49 -0500 (EST) from root@localhost - The following addresses had permanent fatal errors - [EMAIL PROTECTED] - Transcript of session follows - .. while talking to myfirewall.mydomain.com.: DATA 554 Invalid data in message 554 [EMAIL PROTECTED]... Service unavailable -Original Message- From: Louis Joyce [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, March 19, 2002 9:12 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: 554 Invalid data in message So you have users in your domain who are sending to hotmail and AOL accounts and getting NDR's? Can you post the full NDR's please? Regards Mr Louis Joyce Data Support Analyst BT Ignite eSolutions -Original Message- From: Whitlock, Teresa [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 19 March 2002 16:57 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: 554 Invalid data in message I'm starting to get some complaints from certain AOL and Hotmail accounts that email is bouncing. I can send fine with my email, but I was forwarded some of the bounced emails with the following message in the header: 554 Invalid data in message Can anyone help point me in a good direction to try to figure out what the heck is happening? Teresa Whitlock _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: 554 Invalid data in message
The only address in the NDR you posted is the domain atom. Had to work backwards from there. Since the info is already public, as I just proved by posting it, why even bother obscuring it? Doctor, I have a pain. Where? Well, I'm not going to tell you except that it's above my waist and below my neck. - Original Message - From: Whitlock, Teresa [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, March 19, 2002 11:29 AM Subject: RE: 554 Invalid data in message Well, I'm not sure why it's difficult if the names have been obscured since the addresses are all valid and I know it's not a problem with them. -Original Message- From: Martin Blackstone [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, March 19, 2002 9:29 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: 554 Invalid data in message I know. I hate this crap. It makes no sense. Believe me, if we want to find out this info, we can. Just cough it up. -Original Message- From: Daniel Chenault [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, March 19, 2002 9:27 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Re: 554 Invalid data in message Speaking further of which: it's hard to do troubleshooting when names have been obscured. - Original Message - From: Whitlock, Teresa [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, March 19, 2002 11:12 AM Subject: RE: 554 Invalid data in message Sorry I wasn't clear. It's not users in my domain, it's the Hotmail or AOL accounts that are getting bounces. Here is one of the bounces I had forwarded to my Hotmail account. Please note that when I attempt to send from my Hotmail, it's fine. So this does not seem to affect every account. MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: from mow-m25 (mow-m25.webmail.aol.com [64.12.137.2]) by air-id09.mx.aol.com (v83.45) with ESMTP id MAILINID94-0315173006; Fri, 15 Mar 2002 17:30:06 -0500 Return-Path: [EMAIL PROTECTED] X-Mailer: Unknown (No Version) Message-ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED] The original message was received at Fri, 15 Mar 2002 16:36:49 -0500 (EST) from root@localhost - The following addresses had permanent fatal errors - [EMAIL PROTECTED] - Transcript of session follows - .. while talking to myfirewall.mydomain.com.: DATA 554 Invalid data in message 554 [EMAIL PROTECTED]... Service unavailable -Original Message- From: Louis Joyce [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, March 19, 2002 9:12 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: 554 Invalid data in message So you have users in your domain who are sending to hotmail and AOL accounts and getting NDR's? Can you post the full NDR's please? Regards Mr Louis Joyce Data Support Analyst BT Ignite eSolutions -Original Message- From: Whitlock, Teresa [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 19 March 2002 16:57 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: 554 Invalid data in message I'm starting to get some complaints from certain AOL and Hotmail accounts that email is bouncing. I can send fine with my email, but I was forwarded some of the bounced emails with the following message in the header: 554 Invalid data in message Can anyone help point me in a good direction to try to figure out what the heck is happening? Teresa Whitlock _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http
Re: Changed NIC - Andy David is GODLIKE!
Oh, ghod. Now Andy will be even more insufferable! - Original Message - From: Alverson, Thomas M. [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, March 19, 2002 2:38 PM Subject: RE: Changed NIC - Andy David is GODLIKE! OK, so maybe Perf Optimizer really wasn't needed. Maybe just another reboot was all that was needed but it is working again. I was just about ready to give our new employee a hotmail address since I could not add him to exchange. One note: When I ran perf optimizer it hung saying that it was stopping the system attendant. I checked services and all the exchange stuff had stopped. I killed perf opt. with taskman and started it again. This time it saw that everything was stopped and went right to the options screen. It did not recommend any changes, yet asked if it was OK to automatically move the files (which I OK'ed). After reboot I could once again open the IMS properties and also add new mailboxes. Thanks Andy! I owe you (something?). Tom -Original Message- From: Andy David [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, March 18, 2002 1:35 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Changed NIC - now can't control IMS via Exch. Admin program ( hang s!) (V5.5) Well, give Perf Optimizer a shot and see what happens. -Original Message- From: Alverson, Thomas M. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, March 18, 2002 1:33 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Changed NIC - now can't control IMS via Exch. Admin program ( hang s!) (V5.5) Long ago we used it but have been fully migrated for a few years. It was set to disabled in services (the msmail connector) and I don't recall having clicked on it lately. I can view and change most of the properties in an existing mailbox EXCEPT for the email address tab. If I try to add an additional address to an existing mailbox I get the same hang (admin program not responding and has hourglass) as when I try to add a new mailbox. Tom -Original Message- From: Andy David [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, March 18, 2002 1:14 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Changed NIC - now can't control IMS via Exch. Admin program ( hang s!) (V5.5) Typically, you should run the Perm Optimizer after changes (Hard drive, RAM etc, though no necessarily NICS...) It may help to run it here as well. Was the MSMAIL conn used at one time? -Original Message- From: Alverson, Thomas M. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, March 18, 2002 12:44 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Changed NIC - now can't control IMS via Exch. Admin program ( hang s!) (V5.5) Opening is OK. The only things that hang the admin program that I have found so far is clicking on the IMS under connections (or also the no longer in use msmail connector) and trying to add a mailbox. I can navigate and open everything else I have tried including modifying an existing mailbox. Tom (starting to sweat...) -Original Message- From: Andy David [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, March 18, 2002 12:40 PM To: Alverson, Thomas M. Subject: RE: Changed NIC - now can't control IMS via Exch. Admin program ( hang s!) (V5.5) So everything seems to work except opening the Admin program? -Original Message- From: Alverson, Thomas M. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, March 18, 2002 12:25 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Changed NIC - now can't control IMS via Exch. Admin program ( hang s!) (V5.5) It was hard-coded. I wrote down the IP, netmask and gateway address and typed them into the new tcp/ip settings. -Original Message- From: Richard Leslie [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, March 18, 2002 12:21 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Re: Changed NIC - now can't control IMS via Exch. Admin program (hang s!) (V5.5) Might not be related, but a changed NIC means a changed MAC. Was the server IP address reserved or static? - Original Message - From: Alverson, Thomas M. [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, March 18, 2002 9:52 AM Subject: Changed NIC - now can't control IMS via Exch. Admin program (hang s!) (V5.5) I have an exchange 5.5 sp4 server that has been working fine for years. On Saturday I shut it down to replace the network card (3c905) with a new one (intel gigabyte desktop T). At the same time I also ran windows update (http://windowsupdate.microsoft.com) and applied the critical updates (that were just for IE6 I believe). After starting it up everything seemed to work fine. This morning I tried to use the Exchange ADMIN program to view the IMS queue and the admin program just hangs when I select connections/ims. It must be killed with task manager. I tried the admin program both on the server and also on a separate client machine which used to work.
Re: Changed NIC - Andy David is GODLIKE!
Thank you Ensign. You may return to your toilet-cleaning duties now. - Original Message - From: Andy David [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, March 19, 2002 3:09 PM Subject: RE: Changed NIC - Andy David is GODLIKE! You're needed on the bridge Number One. -Original Message- From: Daniel Chenault [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, March 19, 2002 3:56 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Re: Changed NIC - Andy David is GODLIKE! Oh, ghod. Now Andy will be even more insufferable! - Original Message - From: Alverson, Thomas M. [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, March 19, 2002 2:38 PM Subject: RE: Changed NIC - Andy David is GODLIKE! OK, so maybe Perf Optimizer really wasn't needed. Maybe just another reboot was all that was needed but it is working again. I was just about ready to give our new employee a hotmail address since I could not add him to exchange. One note: When I ran perf optimizer it hung saying that it was stopping the system attendant. I checked services and all the exchange stuff had stopped. I killed perf opt. with taskman and started it again. This time it saw that everything was stopped and went right to the options screen. It did not recommend any changes, yet asked if it was OK to automatically move the files (which I OK'ed). After reboot I could once again open the IMS properties and also add new mailboxes. Thanks Andy! I owe you (something?). Tom -Original Message- From: Andy David [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, March 18, 2002 1:35 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Changed NIC - now can't control IMS via Exch. Admin program ( hang s!) (V5.5) Well, give Perf Optimizer a shot and see what happens. -Original Message- From: Alverson, Thomas M. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, March 18, 2002 1:33 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Changed NIC - now can't control IMS via Exch. Admin program ( hang s!) (V5.5) Long ago we used it but have been fully migrated for a few years. It was set to disabled in services (the msmail connector) and I don't recall having clicked on it lately. I can view and change most of the properties in an existing mailbox EXCEPT for the email address tab. If I try to add an additional address to an existing mailbox I get the same hang (admin program not responding and has hourglass) as when I try to add a new mailbox. Tom -Original Message- From: Andy David [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, March 18, 2002 1:14 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Changed NIC - now can't control IMS via Exch. Admin program ( hang s!) (V5.5) Typically, you should run the Perm Optimizer after changes (Hard drive, RAM etc, though no necessarily NICS...) It may help to run it here as well. Was the MSMAIL conn used at one time? -Original Message- From: Alverson, Thomas M. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, March 18, 2002 12:44 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Changed NIC - now can't control IMS via Exch. Admin program ( hang s!) (V5.5) Opening is OK. The only things that hang the admin program that I have found so far is clicking on the IMS under connections (or also the no longer in use msmail connector) and trying to add a mailbox. I can navigate and open everything else I have tried including modifying an existing mailbox. Tom (starting to sweat...) -Original Message- From: Andy David [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, March 18, 2002 12:40 PM To: Alverson, Thomas M. Subject: RE: Changed NIC - now can't control IMS via Exch. Admin program ( hang s!) (V5.5) So everything seems to work except opening the Admin program? -Original Message- From: Alverson, Thomas M. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, March 18, 2002 12:25 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Changed NIC - now can't control IMS via Exch. Admin program ( hang s!) (V5.5) It was hard-coded. I wrote down the IP, netmask and gateway address and typed them into the new tcp/ip settings. -Original Message- From: Richard Leslie [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, March 18, 2002 12:21 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Re: Changed NIC - now can't control IMS via Exch. Admin program (hang s!) (V5.5) Might not be related, but a changed NIC means a changed MAC. Was the server IP address reserved or static? - Original Message - From: Alverson, Thomas M. [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, March 18, 2002 9:52 AM Subject: Changed NIC - now can't control IMS via Exch. Admin program (hang s!) (V5.5) I have an exchange 5.5 sp4 server that has been working
Re: Changed NIC - Andy David is GODLIKE!
I am an officer; I pee where I wish and have ensigns like you to take care of the rest. Carry on. - Original Message - From: Andy David [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, March 19, 2002 3:24 PM Subject: RE: Changed NIC - Andy David is GODLIKE! Aye Sir. Remember Sir, we pee in the bowl, not around it. -Original Message- From: Daniel Chenault [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, March 19, 2002 4:17 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Re: Changed NIC - Andy David is GODLIKE! Thank you Ensign. You may return to your toilet-cleaning duties now. - Original Message - From: Andy David [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, March 19, 2002 3:09 PM Subject: RE: Changed NIC - Andy David is GODLIKE! You're needed on the bridge Number One. -Original Message- From: Daniel Chenault [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, March 19, 2002 3:56 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Re: Changed NIC - Andy David is GODLIKE! Oh, ghod. Now Andy will be even more insufferable! - Original Message - From: Alverson, Thomas M. [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, March 19, 2002 2:38 PM Subject: RE: Changed NIC - Andy David is GODLIKE! OK, so maybe Perf Optimizer really wasn't needed. Maybe just another reboot was all that was needed but it is working again. I was just about ready to give our new employee a hotmail address since I could not add him to exchange. One note: When I ran perf optimizer it hung saying that it was stopping the system attendant. I checked services and all the exchange stuff had stopped. I killed perf opt. with taskman and started it again. This time it saw that everything was stopped and went right to the options screen. It did not recommend any changes, yet asked if it was OK to automatically move the files (which I OK'ed). After reboot I could once again open the IMS properties and also add new mailboxes. Thanks Andy! I owe you (something?). Tom -Original Message- From: Andy David [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, March 18, 2002 1:35 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Changed NIC - now can't control IMS via Exch. Admin program ( hang s!) (V5.5) Well, give Perf Optimizer a shot and see what happens. -Original Message- From: Alverson, Thomas M. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, March 18, 2002 1:33 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Changed NIC - now can't control IMS via Exch. Admin program ( hang s!) (V5.5) Long ago we used it but have been fully migrated for a few years. It was set to disabled in services (the msmail connector) and I don't recall having clicked on it lately. I can view and change most of the properties in an existing mailbox EXCEPT for the email address tab. If I try to add an additional address to an existing mailbox I get the same hang (admin program not responding and has hourglass) as when I try to add a new mailbox. Tom -Original Message- From: Andy David [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, March 18, 2002 1:14 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Changed NIC - now can't control IMS via Exch. Admin program ( hang s!) (V5.5) Typically, you should run the Perm Optimizer after changes (Hard drive, RAM etc, though no necessarily NICS...) It may help to run it here as well. Was the MSMAIL conn used at one time? -Original Message- From: Alverson, Thomas M. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, March 18, 2002 12:44 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Changed NIC - now can't control IMS via Exch. Admin program ( hang s!) (V5.5) Opening is OK. The only things that hang the admin program that I have found so far is clicking on the IMS under connections (or also the no longer in use msmail connector) and trying to add a mailbox. I can navigate and open everything else I have tried including modifying an existing mailbox. Tom (starting to sweat...) -Original Message- From: Andy David [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, March 18, 2002 12:40 PM To: Alverson, Thomas M. Subject: RE: Changed NIC - now can't control IMS via Exch. Admin program ( hang s!) (V5.5) So everything seems to work except opening the Admin program? -Original Message- From: Alverson, Thomas M. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, March 18, 2002 12:25 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Changed NIC - now can't control IMS via Exch. Admin program ( hang s!) (V5.5) It was hard-coded. I wrote down the IP, netmask and gateway address and typed them
Re: POP3 Connector Needed
Bad, bad bidness. Guaranteed data loss. Do it right with SMTP and be done with it. - Original Message - From: kedar [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, March 19, 2002 5:55 AM Subject: POP3 Connector Needed Hi All, I know there is a pop3 connector available with Small Business Servers. But i want to use with Windows 2000 Standradedition combination with exchange 2000 standard edition...can anyone tell me if you have any solution other than going for third party connectors _ List posting FAQ: http://www.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: Some Hosts Unreachable - Follow-up
The term, I believe, is black-hole router. - Original Message - From: Ben Schorr [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, March 19, 2002 9:54 PM Subject: RE: Some Hosts Unreachable - Follow-up Well, the problem is resolved but nobody's entirely sure how. It looks like it was an issue with a router somewhere upstream discarding improperly sized packets instead of responding properly (Q136970 is sort of related) but whose router and what they did to fix it we don't know for certain just yet. What a day. -Ben- Ben M. Schorr, MVP-Outlook, CNA, MCPx3 Director of Information Services Damon Key Leong Kupchak Hastert http://www.hawaiilawyer.com -Original Message- From: Ben Schorr [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, March 19, 2002 1:00 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Some Hosts Unreachable This is a new one on me; maybe some of you have seen it before. Exchange 5.5 on NT4SP6a using the IMS to connect through an ISA server. On a handful of hosts the message queues up with a Host Unreachable error. On most hosts (including old favorites like aol.com, hotmail.com, etc.) mail comes and goes just fine and we don't seem to be having any problems RECEIVING mail. But to this small band of hosts (including hawaii.edu and hawaii.rr.com) the mail just queues up. Here's a snippet from an SMTP log that may shed some light: 3/19/02 12:15:06 PM : MAIL FROM:[EMAIL PROTECTED] SIZE=1977 RET=FULL 3/19/02 12:15:06 PM : IO: |250 2.1.0 [EMAIL PROTECTED] OK | 3/19/02 12:15:06 PM : 250 2.1.0 [EMAIL PROTECTED] OK 3/19/02 12:15:06 PM : RCPT TO:[EMAIL PROTECTED] NOTIFY=FAILURE,DELAY 3/19/02 12:15:06 PM : IO: |250 2.1.5 [EMAIL PROTECTED] | 3/19/02 12:15:06 PM : 250 2.1.5 [EMAIL PROTECTED] 3/19/02 12:15:06 PM : DATA 3/19/02 12:15:06 PM : IO: |354 Start mail input; end with CRLF.CRLF | 3/19/02 12:15:06 PM : 354 Start mail input; end with CRLF.CRLF 3/19/02 12:16:22 PM : 499 Host unreachable: cta.net. Message subject: Plain Text Test. Rescheduling delivery for later. Notice that it seems to be going fine until it gets the 354 message, then it sits for a little over a minute and seems to time out. This particular test message was just a couple of lines of plain text; so it shouldn't be a size issue. We've already restarted the IMS several times and the entire Exchange server once. Judging by the oldest message in the queue this problem seems to have started this weekend and no unusual system maintenance or changes occurred over the weekend. As far as I know we were able to send mail to/from those domains just fine on Friday. Baffling. Any thoughts on what might be causing this and how we can resolve it? -Ben- Ben M. Schorr, MVP-Outlook, CNA, MCPx3 Director of Information Services Damon Key Leong Kupchak Hastert http://www.hawaiilawyer.com http://www.hawaiilawyer.com _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Meeting requests do not work if they contain an attachment?
Hmmm the meeting room that is the resource has a full mailbox from all the attachments sent to it in the past and it's hit your mailbox limit? Just a WAG... - Original Message - From: Phil [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, March 20, 2002 8:33 AM Subject: Meeting requests do not work if they contain an attachment? Exchange 5.5 SP4, NT4 SP6a For some unknown reasons meeting requests that contain attachments no longer work if they contain an attachament. They worked fine in the past and now if there is an attachment added to the meeting request we get the following error: The operation failed. Unable to directly book a resource for this meeting. If you remove the attachment it works fine. I do not use exchangecode it is a pure Exchange 5.5 installation. Any thoughts on how to troubleshoot this? Thanks _ Do You Yahoo!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Upgrading to Enterprise 5.5
It's a no-brainer to upgrade to Enterprise. Seriously. Just put the CD in and answer the questions appropriately. Other then the requisite downtime it's not even a blip on operations. - Original Message - From: Russell Hopkinson [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, March 20, 2002 2:28 PM Subject: Upgrading to Enterprise 5.5 We are getting ready to hit our head on the 16Gb limit of our Exchange Server (5.5, SP4). How difficult is it to upgrade to the Enterprise version? Also, how strongly should we consider taking this opportunity to upgrade to 2000 Enterprise directly from 5.5 Standard? (We're not currently running any 2000 servers). Thanks, in advance, Russ _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Exchange 5.5 Server
Exchange does indeed use up all the available memory. It's designed to do that. - Original Message - From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, March 20, 2002 3:38 PM Subject: Exchange 5.5 Server I am running Exchage Server 5.5 SP4 on NT 4 SP6a. Everyday, the server will gradually use up all avaliable memory (non-paged) and fail. A reboot will resolve the issue for another 24 hours. I don't know if the OS has a memory leak or if Exchange has a corrupted DLL. Re-applying SPs doesn't solve the problem. I would like to create a new server with a clean Exchange install and migrate this failing Exchange to it. I would then redo the original server and bring everything back. Is this a good strategy? Any and all tips are appreciated. _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Exchange 5.5 Server
Well, he has yet to describe what he means by fail. By default on server the GUI takes backseat to applications, so if the console is slow to respond some might that view as a failure. - Original Message - From: William Lefkovics [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, March 20, 2002 9:40 PM Subject: RE: Exchange 5.5 Server Except the 'fail' part. -Original Message- From: Daniel Chenault [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, March 20, 2002 7:35 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Re: Exchange 5.5 Server Exchange does indeed use up all the available memory. It's designed to do that. - Original Message - From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, March 20, 2002 3:38 PM Subject: Exchange 5.5 Server I am running Exchage Server 5.5 SP4 on NT 4 SP6a. Everyday, the server will gradually use up all avaliable memory (non-paged) and fail. A reboot will resolve the issue for another 24 hours. I don't know if the OS has a memory leak or if Exchange has a corrupted DLL. Re-applying SPs doesn't solve the problem. I would like to create a new server with a clean Exchange install and migrate this failing Exchange to it. I would then redo the original server and bring everything back. Is this a good strategy? Any and all tips are appreciated. _ List posting FAQ: http://www.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: Disaster Recovery Center
I know of a financial company in SF that uses off-site data storage. They told me while I was there that they have tested their DR procedures and can be 80-90% operational within 24 hours of a complete disaster (i.e. their SF offices being completely destroyed). Contact me offlist if you'd like more details about their setup. Sorry, I can't divulge the name of the company due to NDA. - Original Message - From: Shields, Anthony [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, March 21, 2002 9:00 AM Subject: Disaster Recovery Center We're redoing our disaster recovery plan (finally!) and I have some questions. Does anyone use a Disaster Recovery center for their offsite requirements or do you host your own? Do you know of any companies from experience I should stay away from or some that I should look into? Thanks _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: 554 errors from Hot Mail
It's a Cisco PIX firewall command to tell the PIX to stop acting like it knows what it's doing. - Original Message - From: Mitchell Mike [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, March 21, 2002 10:11 AM Subject: RE: 554 errors from Hot Mail what is an SMTP fixup? Regards, Mike Mitchell Systems eMAIL Administrator Alverno Information Services [EMAIL PROTECTED] (317) 532-7800 ext. 6211 -Original Message- From: Tony Hlabse [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, March 20, 2002 12:26 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: 554 errors from Hot Mail Try removing the SMTP fixup. This doesn't allow ESMTP commands to flow. Exchange uses these when talking to foreign email systems. Yes we sit behind a firewall.. Please share any information you can. I would greatly appreciate it. Regards, Mike Mitchell Systems eMAIL Administrator Alverno Information Services [EMAIL PROTECTED] (317) 532-7800 ext. 6211 -Original Message- From: Tony Hlabse [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, March 20, 2002 10:40 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Re: 554 errors from Hot Mail Sounds familiar. Are you behind a firewall. - Original Message - From: Mitchell Mike [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, March 20, 2002 10:31 AM Subject: 554 errors from Hot Mail Good morning, Outlook 98. Exchange 5.5 sp4. I have a user getting the following errors. I do not know where to begin to look. This Sister is using a Hotmail account to send to our exchange server. PLEASE HELP. Reporting-MTA: dns;hotmail.com Received-From-MTA: dns;mail.hotmail.com Arrival-Date: Tue, 19 Mar 2002 18:21:19 -0800 Final-Recipient: rfc822;[EMAIL PROTECTED] Action: failed Status: 5.0.0 Diagnostic-Code: smtp;554 Invalid data in message . character on a line by itself. .241.49]) 250-AUTH 250 SIZE 512 HELP 250-SAML 250-SEND 250-SOML 250-TURN 250-XADR 250-XSTA 250-ETRN 250-XGEN 250-RELAY 250 SIZE 2560 sent from the internet. transmit, or distribute unsolicited bulk 220 e-mail sent from the internet. Regards, Mike Mitchell Systems eMAIL Administrator Alverno Information Services [EMAIL PROTECTED] (317) 532-7800 ext. 6211 _ List posting FAQ: http://www.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] _ Send and receive Hotmail on your mobile device: http://mobile.msn.com _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Ouf Of Office
You've reached the inbox of Mike Jamison. I'm out of the office touring SE Asia for the next two months. Contact Jim Standin at 222-555-1212. That tells a potentially nefarious person that someone's house is empty and unattended for two months. It also tells him the name and phone number of an internal person. With the latter he could maybe concoct a good lie and manipulate the person into giving him something he shouldn't have (like 'would you reset my password?'). - Original Message - From: Andersson Mikael (SIX) [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, March 22, 2002 9:20 AM Subject: RE: Ouf Of Office What kind of security risk from a human engineering standpoint do you mean? -Original Message- From: Chris Scharff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: den 21 mars 2002 20:42 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Ouf Of Office It does, but that doesn't mean it couldn't induce a mail loop. Imagine a help desk ticketing system which uses a unique e-mail address for every e-mail message received and autoreplies to the sender. More importantly is a security risk from a human engineering standpoint. -Original Message- From: Andersson Mikael (SIX) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, March 21, 2002 4:24 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Ouf Of Office Does Out Of Office responses to the internet really loop? I believed that OOF only replied once to every mailaddress!? Anyone who knows for sure? _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: IMC Queues
FAQ - Original Message - From: Chris Haaker [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, March 22, 2002 2:45 PM Subject: IMC Queues Looking in the IMC Queue for Outbound Mail awaiting delivery I see 10-20 enteries to the same address all with as the originator . . . Has the worm struck you think? It is the province of knowledge to speak, and it is the privilege of wisdom to listen. Oliver Wendell Holmes, Sr. (1809-94); U.S. writer, physician. _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: IMC Queues
If the FAQ was not illuminating enough may I suggest RFC-821 or 2821? - Original Message - From: Chris Haaker [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, March 22, 2002 3:55 PM Subject: Re: IMC Queues Perhaps I am dim but I can only find 1 entry with no replies for IMS or IMC queue has in Originator Field. Any other ideas? The weird thing is there is something like 6 entries for each outgoing address co.boing.com co.boing.com co.boing.com co.boing.com yahoo.com yahoo.com yahoo.com yahoo.com etc. all with the same exact timestamp . . . - Original Message - From: Andy David [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, March 22, 2002 3:53 PM Subject: RE: IMC Queues Burrow your way to the FAQ. -Original Message- From: Chris Haaker [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, March 22, 2002 3:45 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: IMC Queues Looking in the IMC Queue for Outbound Mail awaiting delivery I see 10-20 enteries to the same address all with as the originator . . . Has the worm struck you think? It is the province of knowledge to speak, and it is the privilege of wisdom to listen. Oliver Wendell Holmes, Sr. (1809-94); U.S. writer, physician. _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] -- The information contained in this email message is privileged and confidential information intended only for the use of the individual or entity to whom it is addressed. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copy of this message is strictly prohibited. If you have received this email in error, please immediately notify Veronis Suhler Stevenson by telephone (212)935-4990, fax (212)381-8168, or email ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) and delete the message. Thank you. == _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Disabling 'Hard Deletion'
It's documented on Technet. - Original Message - From: LSeltzer [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, March 22, 2002 4:56 PM Subject: RE: Disabling 'Hard Deletion' Just a quick inquiry... Daniel, would this mailbox then collect each and every sent/received message within the site? Just wondering how to enable that to happen. Server-side rule, or is there built-in functionality? Thanks much. Larry Seltzer [EMAIL PROTECTED] -Original Message- From: Daniel Chenault [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, March 15, 2002 11:50 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Re: Disabling 'Hard Deletion' Here in the States the SEC (Securities Exchange Commission, the folks who regulate stock-related activities) required the retention of mail a couple years ago. That's when MS came out with the journaling feature; that is to say, the purpose of the journaling feature is exactly what you're looking for. I'd recommend a server with one mailbox on it, said mailbox being the repository for the journaling. Full backup every week with mailbox manager running against it to delete mail older than full backup time period + 1. If you're using Win2K's NTBackup send the backup to a file and burn that file to CD (CD's have a longer shelf-life than magnetic media) and keep the media off-site. - Original Message - From: Louis Joyce [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, March 15, 2002 9:59 AM Subject: RE: Disabling 'Hard Deletion' How about asking your HR department to speak to the some 'not many' users who insist on using this method. Perhaps saying that if they persist they can fu$k off out the door. Regards Mr Louis Joyce Data Support Analyst BT Ignite eSolutions -Original Message- From: Taylor, Mal [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 15 March 2002 15:44 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Disabling 'Hard Deletion' Done that, but if you use 'tools recover deleted items' and then delete they are gone for good - been scouring technet other resources for a good while. -Original Message- From: Louis Joyce [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 15 March 2002 15:39 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Disabling 'Hard Deletion' Yes. the dumpsteralwayson registry value allows items that have been hard deleted to be recovered. Search TechNet for dumpsteralwayson Regards Mr Louis Joyce Data Support Analyst BT Ignite eSolutions -Original Message- From: Taylor, Mal [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 15 March 2002 15:33 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Disabling 'Hard Deletion' Mutterings in the media seem to indicate that the UK or EU powers that be, may enable laws requiring companies to retain ALL emails for a specific period. In our case we have deleted item retention set to 7 days and not finally deleted until a backup is performed. + backups retained for a specific period. Some (not many) users have latched on to the fact that items can be deleted from the 'Recover from deleted items' screen and therefore permanently deleted and not recoverable (this is usually done where an email is regarded as highly confidential). Does anyone know of a method to prevent users from using hard deletes whilst still retaining the recover deleted items feature. Mal Taylor ** * This e-mail and its attachments are intended for the above named recipient(s) only and are confidential and may be privileged. If they have come to you in error you must take no action based on them, nor must you copy or disclose them or any part of their contents to any person or organisation; please notify the sender immediately and delete this e-mail and its attachments from your computer system. Please note that Internet communications are not necessarily secure and may be changed, intercepted or corrupted. We advise that you understand and observe this lack of security when e-mailing us and we will not accept any liability for any such changes, interceptions or corruptions. Although we have taken steps to ensure that this e-mail and its attachments are free from any virus, we advise that in keeping with good computing practice the recipient should ensure they are actually virus free. Copyright in this e-mail and attachments created by us belongs to Littlewoods. Littlewoods takes steps to prohibit the transmission of offensive, obscene or discriminatory material. If this message contains inappropriate material please forward the e-mail intact to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and it will be investigated. Statements and opinions contained in this e-mail may not necessarily represent those of Littlewoods. Please note that e-mail communication may be monitored. Registered office
Re: IMC Queues
Again, READ RFC-821/2821. - Original Message - From: Chris Haaker [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, March 23, 2002 11:34 AM Subject: Re: IMC Queues After finally finding the answer (I think) at Trend's site . . . Note that this unknown recipient problem does not occur for SMTP servers like Exchange Internet Mail Service. When InterScan tries to deliver to an unknown recipient to Exchange IMicrosoft, Exchange does not reject the message outright, like what Sendmail does. Only when the message has been accepted does Exchange find out the recipient is bogus, and then sends the bounced mail to InterScan as an outbound mail. So, this mail follows the normal outbound path. my next question would be is there anything I can do to stop this? I have been going into the IMS queue every couple of hours and deleting the emails TIA Chris - Original Message - From: Durkee, Peter [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, March 22, 2002 5:10 PM Subject: RE: IMC Queues The answer is that some spammer, pretending to send from a spoofed yahoo address, sent spam to four bad or former addresses in your domain. The messages you see are the resulting NDRs trying to go back to the forged and non-existant yahoo address. Feel free to delete them, they aren't going anywhere anyway. -Peter -Original Message- From: Chris Haaker [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, March 22, 2002 13:55 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Re: IMC Queues Perhaps I am dim but I can only find 1 entry with no replies for IMS or IMC queue has in Originator Field. Any other ideas? The weird thing is there is something like 6 entries for each outgoing address co.boing.com co.boing.com co.boing.com co.boing.com yahoo.com yahoo.com yahoo.com yahoo.com etc. all with the same exact timestamp . . . - Original Message - From: Andy David [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, March 22, 2002 3:53 PM Subject: RE: IMC Queues Burrow your way to the FAQ. -Original Message- From: Chris Haaker [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, March 22, 2002 3:45 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: IMC Queues Looking in the IMC Queue for Outbound Mail awaiting delivery I see 10-20 enteries to the same address all with as the originator . . . Has the worm struck you think? It is the province of knowledge to speak, and it is the privilege of wisdom to listen. Oliver Wendell Holmes, Sr. (1809-94); U.S. writer, physician. _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] -- The information contained in this email message is privileged and confidential information intended only for the use of the individual or entity to whom it is addressed. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copy of this message is strictly prohibited. If you have received this email in error, please immediately notify Veronis Suhler Stevenson by telephone (212)935-4990, fax (212)381-8168, or email ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) and delete the message. Thank you. == _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] __ This message is private or privileged. If you are not the person for whom this message is intended, please delete it and notify me immediately, and please do not copy or send this message to anyone else. _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: IMC Queues
Then you know now from reading Section 3.6 of 821 that the address is normal, expected and required. - Original Message - From: Chris Haaker [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, March 23, 2002 7:49 PM Subject: Re: IMC Queues I did. Thanks. My mom would be proud of you. - Original Message - From: Daniel Chenault [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, March 23, 2002 7:29 PM Subject: Re: IMC Queues Again, READ RFC-821/2821. - Original Message - From: Chris Haaker [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, March 23, 2002 11:34 AM Subject: Re: IMC Queues After finally finding the answer (I think) at Trend's site . . . Note that this unknown recipient problem does not occur for SMTP servers like Exchange Internet Mail Service. When InterScan tries to deliver to an unknown recipient to Exchange IMicrosoft, Exchange does not reject the message outright, like what Sendmail does. Only when the message has been accepted does Exchange find out the recipient is bogus, and then sends the bounced mail to InterScan as an outbound mail. So, this mail follows the normal outbound path. my next question would be is there anything I can do to stop this? I have been going into the IMS queue every couple of hours and deleting the emails TIA Chris - Original Message - From: Durkee, Peter [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, March 22, 2002 5:10 PM Subject: RE: IMC Queues The answer is that some spammer, pretending to send from a spoofed yahoo address, sent spam to four bad or former addresses in your domain. The messages you see are the resulting NDRs trying to go back to the forged and non-existant yahoo address. Feel free to delete them, they aren't going anywhere anyway. -Peter -Original Message- From: Chris Haaker [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, March 22, 2002 13:55 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Re: IMC Queues Perhaps I am dim but I can only find 1 entry with no replies for IMS or IMC queue has in Originator Field. Any other ideas? The weird thing is there is something like 6 entries for each outgoing address co.boing.com co.boing.com co.boing.com co.boing.com yahoo.com yahoo.com yahoo.com yahoo.com etc. all with the same exact timestamp . . . - Original Message - From: Andy David [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, March 22, 2002 3:53 PM Subject: RE: IMC Queues Burrow your way to the FAQ. -Original Message- From: Chris Haaker [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, March 22, 2002 3:45 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: IMC Queues Looking in the IMC Queue for Outbound Mail awaiting delivery I see 10-20 enteries to the same address all with as the originator . . . Has the worm struck you think? It is the province of knowledge to speak, and it is the privilege of wisdom to listen. Oliver Wendell Holmes, Sr. (1809-94); U.S. writer, physician. _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] -- The information contained in this email message is privileged and confidential information intended only for the use of the individual or entity to whom it is addressed. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copy of this message is strictly prohibited. If you have received this email in error, please immediately notify Veronis Suhler Stevenson by telephone (212)935-4990, fax (212)381-8168, or email ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) and delete the message. Thank you. == _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ
Re: Evet ID: 2186
Reconfigure your file-level AV software to not scan the \exchsrvr directory structure - Original Message - From: How, Say Chuan [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, March 25, 2002 12:41 AM Subject: Evet ID: 2186 Folks, The following event log message (event id: 2186) has been appearing frequently in the Application Log of our Exchange 5.5 bridgehead server(sp4 and post-sp4 hotfix q279798). A high volume of mail is queued up to other Exchange servers within the same site. I need to stopped the MTA/IMS, delete the dat file registered in the event id: 2186 and run mtacheck twice in order to clear the mail queue. Sometimes this does work until I restart the bridgehead server. Does anyone encounter the similar problem before and what is the workaround? Thanks in advanced. Event ID: 2186 Source:MSExchangeMTA Type:Warning Category:Internal Processing Description: An MTA database server error was encountered while locking an object. Called from MTA. Procedure 162. Database error code: ODXOINIU - Object does not exist. Object at fault: 06000453. [DB Server XFER-IN 20 57] (14) How Say Chuan, MCSE Voice: 65-416-4860 Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Tyco Electronics Corp. _ List posting FAQ: http://www.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: Any Explanation? One Way Email
More likely the recipient's mailbox is full; that's why his mailbox is unavailable. - Original Message - From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, March 25, 2002 8:12 AM Subject: RE: Any Explanation? One Way Email Looks to me like the mailbox doesn't exist. The recipient was unavailable to take delivery of the message -Original Message- From: Bill Kuhl [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, March 25, 2002 9:06 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Any Explanation? One Way Email Could the reason that we can not send email to this account possibly be that for some unexplained reason they are blocking our domain? Emails from other domains, even through our ISP go through. And what does it mean The recipient was unavailable to take delivery of the message? I have been researching this on the web, FAQ, and had a consultant look at this with no explanation. Thanks, Bill Kuhl Your message did not reach some or all of the intended recipients. Subject: Test from Winona Sent: 3/21/2002 3:39 PM The following recipient(s) could not be reached: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' on 3/23/2002 3:40 PM The recipient was unavailable to take delivery of the message The MTS-ID of the original message is: c=US;a= ;p=City of Winona;l=EXCHANGE-020321213919Z-2062 MSEXCH:IMS:City of Winona:City Hall:EXCHANGE 3499 (000B09AA) Host unreachable _ List posting FAQ: http://www.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: BCC any sent message
No, journalING, not just journal. And it has nothing to do with the client, it's purely server-side. - Original Message - From: Ed Esgro [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, March 25, 2002 10:50 AM Subject: RE: BCC any sent message Are you referring to Outlook Journal? I can't seem to find anything on email journaling. Most things I find are information about making a journal in email. :0 Exchange SPX files... Are these the service pack readme files? -Original Message- From: Kevin Miller [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, March 25, 2002 11:23 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: BCC any sent message Look up email journaling at http://support.microsoft.com --Kevinm M, WLKMMAS, UCC+WCA, And Beyond http://www.daughtry.ca/ For Graphics and WebDesgin, GO here! -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Ed Esgro Sent: Monday, March 25, 2002 8:20 AM To: Exchange Discussions Cc: Carmine Poliandro Subject: BCC any sent message Hello all, I know that a client side rule will achieve what I am trying to do, but I am wondering if there is another way to accomplish it. Here it is. A specific user sends email messages. I need all of the users sent messages to be blind carbon copied to another person or DL. I am using Outlook 2000 with Exchange 5.5 SP4 I know it sounds like a strange request, but this is their idea of email monitoring. Even 3rd party ideas will work, but I would really like to do it without 3rd party if at all possible. I am thinking it won't be. But I may be wrong. Thanks everyone. Ed _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ Do You Yahoo!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Messages stuck in IMC inbound Queue - EX55 - can't stop IMC (nice ly)
Did you open the messages and see what might be so odd about them? - Original Message - From: Alverson, Thomas M. [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, March 25, 2002 1:02 PM Subject: Messages stuck in IMC inbound Queue - EX55 - can't stop IMC (nice ly) I noticed this morning that a bunch of messages were piling up in my IMC (IMS?) inbound (queued inbound). The number was only increasing. I tried to stop the IMC but it never responded to the control panel/services stop command. I finally forcibly terminated it with taskman. When I restarted it there were no error in the event log (nor were there before stopping) but no improvement. I noticed that a few of the messages were from last week and a couple more from much earlier in the day. I tried killing IMC (it never would stop nicely) and deleting queue.dat but that did not help either. I then started to move the suspect messages out of the IN directory (after killing IMC and deleting queue.dat) and I got things flowing again. But I now have 5 messages that I cannot process. I tried dropping them into PICKUP where they were immediately grabbed but not really processed. The were moved to PICKUP/ARCHIVE and errors logged in the event log that a valid address could not be determined from the message. Has anyone seen such problems and/or have any advice? Tom _ List posting FAQ: http://www.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: Netscape user receives no line wraps?
Hehe... Line-wrapping done at the server or the sending client is an archaic functionality. The client is now expected to understand how to display a message. Looks like Netscape is either misconfigured or brain-dead (or hopelessly outdated). - Original Message - From: Blunt, James H (Jim) [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, March 25, 2002 7:30 PM Subject: RE: Netscape user receives no line wraps? Oh boo! That was REALLY bad! :0) Jim Blunt Network / E-mail Admin Network / Infrastructure Group Bechtel Hanford, Inc. 509-372-9188 Standards are like toothbrushes, everybody agrees you should have one, but no one wants to use yours. - Paul Hurst, Swynk Exchange List Member -Original Message- From: Andy David [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, March 25, 2002 5:30 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Netscape user receives no line wraps? If you like Pina Coladas, and getting caught in the rain If you're not into yoga, if you have half a brain If you'd like making love at midnight in the dunes on the Cape Then I'm the love that you've looked for - write to me and Netscape -Original Message- From: Fred W. Macondray Jr. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, March 25, 2002 8:10 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Netscape user receives no line wraps? Any idea where I can find a good Netscape list? -Original Message- From: Martin Blackstone [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, March 25, 2002 3:42 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Netscape user receives no line wraps? What does the Netscape list say? -Original Message- From: Fred W. Macondray Jr. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, March 25, 2002 3:12 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Netscape user receives no line wraps? Hi All, I've got a user who receives messages from Exchange users here frequently. However when he gets them, they have no line wrap. The text just streams across multiple pages laterally. Any ideas regarding this? Something I can change in Netscape or on the Exchange server? Thanks Fred Fred Macondray Systems Administrator Virtual Purchase Card, Inc. mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.virtualpurchasecard.com - Guaranteed B2B Purchases _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] -- -- -- The information contained in this email message is privileged and confidential information intended only for the use of the individual or entity to whom it is addressed. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copy of this message is strictly prohibited. If you have received this email in error, please immediately notify Veronis Suhler Stevenson by telephone (212)935-4990, fax (212)381-8168, or email ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) and delete the message. Thank you. == _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: ADC - Config Entry
That's not ADC; did you join them to the site during install? It should have prompted for the name of the 5.5 server and the service account/password. - Original Message - From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, March 26, 2002 8:08 AM Subject: RE: ADC - Config Entry I suppose a tell tale problem is that if I go into my 5.5 administrator progs on a 5.5 server, expand the servers tree, the 2 newly added E2K servers are not listed. What went wrong? -Original Message- From: Neil Hobson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 26 March 2002 13:57 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: ADC - Config Entry Sensitivity: Confidential IIRC, only after you've actually installed the Exchange 2000 server into the 5.5 site, e.g. you could install the ADC, perform ForestPrep and join the 5.5 site, then create the ordinary ADC connection agreements, and the Config CA still won't be there at that point. Neil Hobson Silversands http://www.silversands.co.uk Microsoft Gold Certified Partner For Enterprise Systems For Collaborative Solutions -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Posted At: 26 March 2002 13:09 Posted To: Exchange Mailing List Conversation: ADC - Config Entry Subject: ADC - Config Entry Sensitivity: Confidential When installing into a 5.5 site, should the ADC show an automatically generated config connection from the install? Many Thanks _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] ** 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, or any of its subsidiary companies. If you have received this email in error, please contact our Support Desk immediately by telephone on 01202-36 or via email at [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: ADC - Config Entry
That part of installation is no different than 5.5's installation; if it didn't ask you for the name of an existing 5.5 server, then the username/pass, you somehow skipped the screen that asks if you want to join the site. - Original Message - From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, March 26, 2002 8:16 AM Subject: RE: ADC - Config Entry Yes, first time. I ended up having to un-install exchange 2000, then re-install at a later date. It did not ask me a second time when I re-installed, not that I undid the forest prep domain prep, I just un-installed E2K. It only asked me at forest prep time originally. -Original Message- From: Daniel Chenault [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 26 March 2002 14:13 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Re: ADC - Config Entry That's not ADC; did you join them to the site during install? It should have prompted for the name of the 5.5 server and the service account/password. - Original Message - From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, March 26, 2002 8:08 AM Subject: RE: ADC - Config Entry I suppose a tell tale problem is that if I go into my 5.5 administrator progs on a 5.5 server, expand the servers tree, the 2 newly added E2K servers are not listed. What went wrong? -Original Message- From: Neil Hobson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 26 March 2002 13:57 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: ADC - Config Entry Sensitivity: Confidential IIRC, only after you've actually installed the Exchange 2000 server into the 5.5 site, e.g. you could install the ADC, perform ForestPrep and join the 5.5 site, then create the ordinary ADC connection agreements, and the Config CA still won't be there at that point. Neil Hobson Silversands http://www.silversands.co.uk Microsoft Gold Certified Partner For Enterprise Systems For Collaborative Solutions -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Posted At: 26 March 2002 13:09 Posted To: Exchange Mailing List Conversation: ADC - Config Entry Subject: ADC - Config Entry Sensitivity: Confidential When installing into a 5.5 site, should the ADC show an automatically generated config connection from the install? Many Thanks _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] ** 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, or any of its subsidiary companies. If you have received this email in error, please contact our Support Desk immediately by telephone on 01202-36 or via email at [EMAIL PROTECTED] ** _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Messages stuck in IMC inbound Queue - EX55 - can't stop IMC (nice ly)
Well, something is unusual about them. Not having access to the messages that's the best I can offer. - Original Message - From: Tom Alverson [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, March 26, 2002 2:55 PM Subject: Re: Messages stuck in IMC inbound Queue - EX55 - can't stop IMC (nice ly) Yes I did look at the messages and did not see anything unusual. The problem has re-surfaced today twice (after removing some offending messages). _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Prep
My thoughts exactly, but I'll hold back on the plonk. It's always amusing to watch newbies flounder in the waves. - Original Message - From: Thomas Di Nardo [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, March 26, 2002 6:47 PM Subject: RE: Prep If there ever was a fast way to get on a kill list, you just found it. You haven't been here long, and with comments like that (particularly to Andy), you won't be staying long. Plunk. -Original Message- From: Christopher Hummert [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, March 26, 2002 3:13 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Prep Ha ha.why don't you just keep on topic asshole -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Andy David Sent: Tuesday, March 26, 2002 12:05 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Prep Well Sir, you obviously have the writing skills I need to take my show on the road. My agent will be contacting you. -Original Message- From: Christopher Hummert [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, March 26, 2002 2:47 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Prep Ha ha your funny..with your talent why are you in the comedy industry and not the comic circuit? -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Andy David Sent: Tuesday, March 26, 2002 11:39 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Prep No, that would be fdisk. -Original Message- From: Christopher Hummert [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, March 26, 2002 2:31 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Prep So you can run it even after the exchange server has been installed? -Chris -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of William Lefkovics Sent: Tuesday, March 26, 2002 10:41 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Prep You can run them anytime. If you have a large enterprise with remote DC's, it's best to leave some time. William -Original Message- From: Mike Woodruff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, March 26, 2002 10:41 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Prep Can I run Forest and Domain Prep on AD and not install exchange2k until later? _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] -- The information contained in this email message is privileged and confidential information intended only for the use of the individual or entity to whom it is addressed. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copy of this message is strictly prohibited. If you have received this email in error, please immediately notify Veronis Suhler Stevenson by telephone (212)935-4990, fax (212)381-8168, or email ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) and delete the message. Thank you. == _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] -- The information contained in this email message is privileged and confidential information intended only for the use of the individual or entity to whom it is addressed. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copy of this message is strictly prohibited. If you have received this email in error, please immediately notify Veronis Suhler Stevenson by telephone (212)935-4990, fax (212)381-8168, or email ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) and delete the message. Thank you. == _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives:
Re: EX55 sp4: Inbound IMC messages stuck problem update
what kind of AV are you running? - Original Message - From: Alverson, Thomas M. [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, March 27, 2002 4:28 PM Subject: EX55 sp4: Inbound IMC messages stuck problem update A few days ago I reported a problem with inbound emails getting stuck in the IMC inbound queue. Here are some more details: This has happened 3 different times so far. The first time the IMC had stopped processing all inbound traffic. I tried to stop it with control panel/services but it would not stop. I finally forcibly ended the MSEXCIMC.EXE process with task manager and then restarted it. The first time the large backlog of inbound files started to flow and I was left with 4 messages that would not transfer. I tried stopping IMC again (it would never stop via control panel once it had seen one of these bad emails) but it would not process them even after deleting queue.dat (while imc was stopped). I gave up on the 4 emails and let it run for a while but after a few hours two more emails got stuck. Again I had to forcibly terminate the IMC process and delete queue.dat. I also discovered that if I tried to view the queues with exchange admin, that the admin program would freeze when I tried to select the MTS-IN queue on the IMC. I could look at the IMC inbound queue and see the messages that weren't being processed (and they were sitting there in the IMCDATA/IN directory). All I could do is remove them from the IN directory and stop/restart IMC while deleting queue.dat. If I tried to reintroduce one of the 'bad' messages to the IN directory (by stopping IMC, deleting queue.dat, copying the file to IN and restarting IMC) it would fail in the same fashion. The weird part is that after the first restart of IMC, it would still process other inbound emails. This happened a third time (with two similar messages) and again I moved them out of the IN directory. It has been running for a whole day now without getting stuck on a message. I looked at all the 'bad' messages and did not see anything unusual about them. I did not see anything at all in the event log for these messages. I currently have all of the imc log settings at maximum in case it happens again. Tom _ List posting FAQ: http://www.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: EX55 sp4: Inbound IMC messages stuck problem update
What I've found with AV packages is they have to be removed, not just stopped. - Original Message - From: Alverson, Thomas M. [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, March 27, 2002 4:42 PM Subject: RE: EX55 sp4: Inbound IMC messages stuck problem update Norton AV for exchange 2.5 (probably latest build - got an update about a month ago). I suspected that right away but stopping it made no difference at all. Tom -Original Message- From: Daniel Chenault [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, March 27, 2002 5:33 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Re: EX55 sp4: Inbound IMC messages stuck problem update what kind of AV are you running? - Original Message - From: Alverson, Thomas M. [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, March 27, 2002 4:28 PM Subject: EX55 sp4: Inbound IMC messages stuck problem update A few days ago I reported a problem with inbound emails getting stuck in the IMC inbound queue. Here are some more details: This has happened 3 different times so far. The first time the IMC had stopped processing all inbound traffic. I tried to stop it with control panel/services but it would not stop. I finally forcibly ended the MSEXCIMC.EXE process with task manager and then restarted it. The first time the large backlog of inbound files started to flow and I was left with 4 messages that would not transfer. I tried stopping IMC again (it would never stop via control panel once it had seen one of these bad emails) but it would not process them even after deleting queue.dat (while imc was stopped). I gave up on the 4 emails and let it run for a while but after a few hours two more emails got stuck. Again I had to forcibly terminate the IMC process and delete queue.dat. I also discovered that if I tried to view the queues with exchange admin, that the admin program would freeze when I tried to select the MTS-IN queue on the IMC. I could look at the IMC inbound queue and see the messages that weren't being processed (and they were sitting there in the IMCDATA/IN directory). All I could do is remove them from the IN directory and stop/restart IMC while deleting queue.dat. If I tried to reintroduce one of the 'bad' messages to the IN directory (by stopping IMC, deleting queue.dat, copying the file to IN and restarting IMC) it would fail in the same fashion. The weird part is that after the first restart of IMC, it would still process other inbound emails. This happened a third time (with two similar messages) and again I moved them out of the IN directory. It has been running for a whole day now without getting stuck on a message. I looked at all the 'bad' messages and did not see anything unusual about them. I did not see anything at all in the event log for these messages. I currently have all of the imc log settings at maximum in case it happens again. Tom _ List posting FAQ: http://www.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]
BE 8.6
I have to admit I'm kinda stumped here. BackupExec v8.6 running latest driver package using a Seagate/Archive autoloaded (OEMed by Compaq). Works fine doing file-level backups but when I create a job to backup Exchange 5.5 SP4 it gives directory not responding and store not responding yet all Exchange services are up and running, merrily servicing clients. I tried adding the backupexec service account to org, site and config as service account but no change. Both MS' and Veritas websites are no help. Anyone seen this before? _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: protocol error
Newbie alert! Fresh meat! - Original Message - From: Irfan Malik [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, March 27, 2002 10:22 PM Subject: RE: protocol error Dear Mr. Doug, Please be advise that if you don't have the answer please don't waste time by posting these kind of statements. Thanks Regards. -Original Message- From: Doug Hampshire [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, March 27, 2002 8:30 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: protocol error It means you started eating your soup before the Prime Minister. Next time wait until he starts. Also don't tuck your napkin in your shirt, place it in your lap. -Original Message- From: Irfan Malik [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, March 26, 2002 9:08 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: protocol error Dear List, What does SMTP protocol error means and how can one solve this. Regards, _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: BE 8.6
Tape drive, BE and Exchange all reside on the same box. - Original Message - From: Akerlund, Scott [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, March 27, 2002 6:24 PM Subject: RE: BE 8.6 Have you installed the Exchange administrator and SP on the system doing the backups? A poorly documented gottcha. -Original Message- From: Daniel Chenault [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, March 27, 2002 3:50 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: BE 8.6 I have to admit I'm kinda stumped here. BackupExec v8.6 running latest driver package using a Seagate/Archive autoloaded (OEMed by Compaq). Works fine doing file-level backups but when I create a job to backup Exchange 5.5 SP4 it gives directory not responding and store not responding yet all Exchange services are up and running, merrily servicing clients. I tried adding the backupexec service account to org, site and config as service account but no change. Both MS' and Veritas websites are no help. Anyone seen this before? _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.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: BE 8.6
I believe your first suggestion only has to do with the configuration for BLB which I am not doing and will not do. I'll try that. It is as far as I can tell. Log is clean. - Original Message - From: test [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, March 27, 2002 6:27 PM Subject: RE: BE 8.6 Have you tried to have Outlook client on Xchg machine mapped to BE service account as a Primary WNT account. Also, in the BE Backup tree, right click on Xchg machine and reenter credentials in the Attach As... Check if BE Xchg agent service is loading ok on Xchg machine. -Original Message- From: Daniel Chenault [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, March 27, 2002 15:50 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: BE 8.6 I have to admit I'm kinda stumped here. BackupExec v8.6 running latest driver package using a Seagate/Archive autoloaded (OEMed by Compaq). Works fine doing file-level backups but when I create a job to backup Exchange 5.5 SP4 it gives directory not responding and store not responding yet all Exchange services are up and running, merrily servicing clients. I tried adding the backupexec service account to org, site and config as service account but no change. Both MS' and Veritas websites are no help. Anyone seen this before? _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.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: Delay Outgoing Mail
Pointy-Haired Boss, from Dilbert. - Original Message - From: Etts, Russell [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, March 28, 2002 12:06 PM Subject: RE: Delay Outgoing Mail Question - What does PHB mean?? (Putting on flame retardant suit - this isn't the care-bears list ;)) Thanks Russell -Original Message- From: Ray Zorz [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, March 28, 2002 9:22 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Delay Outgoing Mail You set it up once, and it stays that way. This PHB happens to have technical skills. He could do it himself in a minute. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Martin Blackstone Sent: Thursday, March 28, 2002 7:12 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Delay Outgoing Mail Yes. But I'm sure the PHB CEO doesn't want to have to do this himself. This would probably be one of those times We have looked into possible options, and the answer is no on the server side. On the client side you could do this (show him Rays and Williams methods), or we could bring in a programming consultant to make OL ask yes or no. What is the budget for this project? -Original Message- From: Ray Zorz [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, March 27, 2002 8:31 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Delay Outgoing Mail Can't you delay the sending via Outlook? Give him a minute, or 5. Tools-Options-Mail Delivery? -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Rasey, Dennis Sent: Wednesday, March 27, 2002 7:25 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Delay Outgoing Mail Get ready to laugh (I sure did) Looks like our CEO sent out an e-mail that either he shouldn't have, or wasn't quite ready to send (hit the Send key by accident, has happened to me also). Regardless, now I have to look into delaying out-going e-mails so that we have a chance to intercept it if we encounter this again. RANT To be quite honest, even if this is possible, I'm not really thrilled about implementing it, and I may go as far as saying it's not possible ;) I think delaying the e-mails would cause other problems that I'm not willing to deal with, plus I'm sure it would be difficult to delay just out-bound stuff (versus internal mails), and there is no way folks would take kindly to me delaying our internal stuff (and it wouldn't matter who 'wanted' it to be done). /RANT At this point, I'm curious if this is do-able, but I'm not that worried about it Another funny thing is this is the most techno-savvy CEO I've dealt with in my career. He's also smart enough to know it was %100 his fault (you should have heard him rag on himself for doing this). Usually we'll get bitched at for not being able to stop it (i.e. we'll get crap because the e-mail system works too fast). I'll shut up now.. Thanks all, Dennis -Original Message- From: Andy David [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, March 27, 2002 5:37 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Delay Outgoing Mail Jinx. Pinch, Poke. You owe me a coke. -Original Message- From: William Lefkovics [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, March 27, 2002 8:31 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Delay Outgoing Mail To attain what goal? Just curious. -Original Message- From: Rasey, Dennis [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, March 27, 2002 5:29 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Delay Outgoing Mail I'm trying to find an option to allow us to delay outgoing e-mails. I'm using Exchange 5.5 (sp4), and I've been asked by one of my superiors to see about adding in a delay for e-mails going out to the Internet. We would like to delay those messages about 3-5 minutes. We also would like to NOT delay internal e-mails (if possible). Is this possible? If this is possible, any potential problems with this setup? Thanks, Dennis Rasey Systems Administrator PDS - Premier Dealer Services 9449 Balboa Ave. Suite 300 San Diego, CA 92123 858-810-1734 [EMAIL PROTECTED] _ _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] -- -- -- The information contained in this email message is privileged and confidential information intended only for the use of the individual or entity to whom it is addressed. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copy of this message is strictly prohibited. If you have received this email in error,
Re: Containers
Yes. Obvious when you think about it. - Original Message - From: Mitchell Mike [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, March 29, 2002 12:54 PM Subject: RE: Containers When exmerge a mailbox to move between containers do you have to rebuild a person's Outlook profile? Regards, Mike Mitchell Systems eMAIL Administrator Alverno Information Services [EMAIL PROTECTED] (317) 532-7800 ext. 6211 -Original Message- From: Martin Blackstone [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, January 07, 2002 2:23 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Containers Here is a favorite... Company makes containers based on departments. Joe works for Executive Management and is put in the appropriate container. Joe gets a demotion to janitorial staff. Lame Exch admin now has to Exmerge his email out, delete the account and then put it in the container for janitors. -Original Message- From: Mitchell Mike [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, January 07, 2002 11:21 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Containers What nightmare do you create by using different containers? Thanks. -Original Message- From: Thomas Di Nardo [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, January 04, 2002 2:58 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Containers Just use the recipients container. You will create a nightmare for your self if you do anything else. -Original Message- From: Sparrow, Teresa (GOT) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, January 04, 2002 2:49 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Containers Wanting to gather information. In a large Exchange 5.5 environment organization would you place everyone in the recipients container or make different containers for organizational levels? _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Comm Check
I can tell you from experience it's no better, but it IS more fun. - Original Message - From: John Matteson [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, March 29, 2002 12:58 PM Subject: RE: Comm Check I'm also experimenting whether being a PITA is any better than being a nice guy. John Matteson; Exchange Manager Geac Corporate Infrastructure Systems and Standards (404) 239 - 2981 Be not afraid of growing slowly, be afraid only of standing still. --Chinese Proverb -Original Message- From: Baker, Jennifer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, March 29, 2002 1:52 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Comm Check He's so picky that way. He wants attention and when he gets it he wants it spelled correctly. Sheesh.. -Original Message- From: Stevens, Dave [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, March 29, 2002 10:45 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Comm Check I knew I'd get busted on that... -Original Message- From: John Matteson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, March 29, 2002 1:40 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Comm Check It's defibrillator. You need to update your spellchecker. John Matteson; Exchange Manager Geac Corporate Infrastructure Systems and Standards (404) 239 - 2981 Be not afraid of growing slowly, be afraid only of standing still. --Chinese Proverb -Original Message- From: Stevens, Dave [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, March 29, 2002 1:30 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Comm Check quick, grab the defibullator! -Original Message- From: John Matteson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, March 29, 2002 1:25 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Comm Check This list seems to have died off this afternoon. John Matteson; Exchange Manager Geac Corporate Infrastructure Systems and Standards (404) 239 - 2981 Be not afraid of growing slowly, be afraid only of standing still. --Chinese Proverb _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: smtp event - strange
Most likely a Netscape user sending you mail. Netscape erroneously attempts to login to servers that offer the AUTH command even if the Netscape client was not configured to login to that server in the first place. - Original Message - From: Shane S. [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, March 27, 2002 11:43 AM Subject: smtp event - strange Hi there, Running Exchange 5.5 w/ Sp4 on a NT 4.0 w/ Sp6a. Just noticed a strange log in even viewer. EventID: 4184 Authentication attempt (Auth ntlm) from xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx failed. HrAccept() call failed with error: Logon failure: unknown user name or bad password. xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx is an IP address somewhere outside my network I couldn't find any KB article on this from MS site. Has anyone seen this? What does this mean? being hacked? Thanks Shane _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Bad Mime decode?
It's malformed. It should be sent with multipart/alternative. Additionally the line: boundry=InterScan_NT_MIME_Boundry should be equivalent to --=_938802==_.ALT and finally the correct word is boundary not boundry. If that's not a result of your munging than that's the problem. - Original Message - From: Martin, Greg (CSC) [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, April 01, 2002 7:38 AM Subject: FW: Bad Mime decode? I have a user receiving a message from an external client and the message is getting to Outlook with the body of the message blank. I was able to retrieve the headers from the message and sure enough the content was in there just not displayed by Outlook. I suspect Intercan is screwing up the mime header but never did learn to read mime) I wonder if you could steer me towards a culprit. Thanks (Had to munge the mime stuff a little (Content replaced with Cntnt boundary with boundry) to get it past the no-attachment police) \\Greg Specs: Exch 5.5 sp3 Outlook 2000 SP1 (same results with Outlook 2002) Sender's mail client Eudora Pro 4.1 All mail passes through Interscan Virus wall Message details (most text deleted for privacy): Received: from mc2.etslan.org (mc.ets.org [144.81.127.16]) by rosnt47.ets.org with SMTP (Microsoft Exchange Internet Mail Service Version 5.5.2650.21) id 108WMXSC; Wed, 20 Mar 2002 20:35:03 -0500 Received: from 144.81.97.12 by mc2.etslan.org (InterScan E-Mail VirusWall NT); Wed, 20 Mar 2002 20:35:03 -0500 Received: from smtp.pa.net ([205.166.61.100]) by ets.org (PMDF V6.1-1 #39460) with SMTP id [EMAIL PROTECTED] for [EMAIL PROTECTED] (ORCPT [EMAIL PROTECTED]); Wed, 20 Mar 2002 20:35:03 -0500 (EST) Received: from fsu.edu.fsu.edu (duppp259.chm9.franklin.pa.net [63.164.59.7]) by smtp.pa.net (Postfix) with SMTP id 2716B4C8D4 for [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Wed, 20 Mar 2002 20:29:49 -0500 (EST) Date: Wed, 20 Mar 2002 20:24:35 -0500 From: User [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: CLEP US Hist Comm. In-reply-to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] X-Sender: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Message-id: [EMAIL PROTECTED] MIME-vrsion: 1.0 X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 4.0.1 Cntnt-type: multipart/mixed; boundry=InterScan_NT_MIME_Boundry --=_938802==_.ALT Cntnt-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Hi Margy - ...SNIP... --==_938802==_.ALT Cntent-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii html font size=3Hi Margy - br I think it would be better for me... ...SNIP... /html --=_938802==_.ALT-- --InterScan_NT_MIME_Boundry-- \\Greg ** This e-mail and any files transmitted with it may contain privileged or confidential information. It is solely for use by the individual for whom it is intended, even if addressed incorrectly. If you received this e-mail in error, please notify the sender; do not disclose, copy, distribute, or take any action in reliance on the contents of this information; and delete it from your system. Any other use of this e-mail is prohibited. Thank you for your compliance. _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Remote Site Question
If it's a failed dot.com what did they do for connectivity previously? - Original Message - From: King, John [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, April 01, 2002 9:20 AM Subject: Remote Site Question Hello all, I am stuck trying to figure out an email solution for a company that we have acquired. I have until the end of today to do this..! This is a temporary fix until the T1 at the new facility can be put in place. This is the deal, There will be 15 users that need to access email hosted on our Exchange 5.5 sp4 server. The new facility has NO internet connection. We have a RAS server here with 2 lines. We cannot allow this facility to be connected to RAS 24/7 as the lines are shared by multiple other users. The idea that I have is this. I would like to bring an Exchange 5.5 sp4 server down there. I will need this server to dial up the RAS connection to sync the email accounts with our primary ExCh server during off hours. That shouldn't be that hard, but I don't want all of the email accounts to sync. I just need the 15 email accounts in question to sync. Is there a way to specify what accounts to sync, or is it an all or nothing type of deal? I am sorry for the lack of info, as this was tossed onto me this morning. I have never setup Exchange IMS to connect via Dial up so I don't know too much about this. Any help would be much appreciated.. Thanks, ~John _ List posting FAQ: http://www.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: Remote Site Question
Pity. Your plan will work fine but the entire GAL is going to synch. There is no real problem with this; the data is small (heck, just a couple of directory entries and associated data). If there is a political reason for limiting the replication, too bad. - Original Message - From: King, John [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, April 01, 2002 9:36 AM Subject: RE: Remote Site Question There is a T1 terminated, but it is not live... yet.. -Original Message- From: Daniel Chenault [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, April 01, 2002 10:31 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Re: Remote Site Question If it's a failed dot.com what did they do for connectivity previously? - Original Message - From: King, John [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, April 01, 2002 9:20 AM Subject: Remote Site Question Hello all, I am stuck trying to figure out an email solution for a company that we have acquired. I have until the end of today to do this..! This is a temporary fix until the T1 at the new facility can be put in place. This is the deal, There will be 15 users that need to access email hosted on our Exchange 5.5 sp4 server. The new facility has NO internet connection. We have a RAS server here with 2 lines. We cannot allow this facility to be connected to RAS 24/7 as the lines are shared by multiple other users. The idea that I have is this. I would like to bring an Exchange 5.5 sp4 server down there. I will need this server to dial up the RAS connection to sync the email accounts with our primary ExCh server during off hours. That shouldn't be that hard, but I don't want all of the email accounts to sync. I just need the 15 email accounts in question to sync. Is there a way to specify what accounts to sync, or is it an all or nothing type of deal? I am sorry for the lack of info, as this was tossed onto me this morning. I have never setup Exchange IMS to connect via Dial up so I don't know too much about this. Any help would be much appreciated.. Thanks, ~John _ List posting FAQ: http://www.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: Patches after SP4 for Exchange 5.5
Hotfixes should only be installed if you are experiencing the problem for which the hotfix was created. Willy-nilly installing new patches just because they exist is the mark of an amatuer. - Original Message - From: McCready, Robert [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, April 02, 2002 9:14 AM Subject: Patches after SP4 for Exchange 5.5 There appear to be about 8 patches that have been released since Exchange 5.5 SP4. Has anybody had any problems with any of these patches? Is it recommended to install them separately, over a several week period, or should I just go for it and install them all now? Thanks. Robert _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Exchange 5.5 question
That would be the PHB add-in. - Original Message - From: Ben Schorr [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, April 02, 2002 4:44 PM Subject: RE: Exchange 5.5 question I once had a receptionist who asked me to send out an e-mail to let everybody know when it was o.k. to go back into the e-mail system. Perhaps such a product would have helped her too? Aloha, -Ben- Ben M. Schorr, MVP-Outlook, CNA, MCPx3 Director of Information Services Damon Key Leong Kupchak Hastert http://www.hawaiilawyer.com -Original Message- From: Martin Blackstone [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, April 02, 2002 12:26 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Exchange 5.5 question I need something to send out an email when the email is down. -Original Message- From: Ben Schorr [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, April 02, 2002 2:26 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Exchange 5.5 question It'll send you network alerts but I don't think it will notify via e-mail natively. Aloha, -Ben- Ben M. Schorr, MVP-Outlook, CNA, MCPx3 Director of Information Services Damon Key Leong Kupchak Hastert http://www.hawaiilawyer.com -Original Message- From: Exchange Discussions [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, April 02, 2002 12:13 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Exchange 5.5 question Performance Monitor will do it for you. Regards, Louise -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, April 02, 2002 3:47 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Exchange 5.5 question I'm looking for a way to alert via email when Disk Space on an exchange server goes below a certain level or percentage of disk. I've researched MS site but am not finding anything. Anyone know of such a tool or way of doing this... _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: hops?
I do believe that's TCP returning the error; Exchange is only reporting it. In proper OSI modeling an application knows nothing about what is happening on the lower levels and hops is a TCP concept. - Original Message - From: Hansen, Eric [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, April 02, 2002 5:57 PM Subject: hops? Hi I'm running down a event id 142, and I do think its ISP related with a border gateway protocol issue. The problem is generating a undeliverable that indicates the emails cant go over 17 hops to their target. Now I'm no networking wiz but it looks like a loop issue outside our system, so I thought I would try to up the number of hops and see if that helped. Is there a place in IMS or Exchange where I can set that? I couldn't find one. e- _ List posting FAQ: http://www.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: hops?
Reminds me of what I used to say about MSMail: What's amazing is not how well the bear dances, but that the bear dances at all. - Original Message - From: Louis Joyce [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, April 03, 2002 8:23 AM Subject: RE: hops? I thought this thread was about dancing bears. Regards Mr Louis Joyce Data Support Analyst BT Ignite eSolutions -Original Message- From: Orr, Dale [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, April 03, 2002 5:05 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: hops? I, for one, am deeply disappointed that this thread is not about beer. I was about to jump on this like a donkey on a waffle(1) (1) Hi, CJ! Dale L. Orr Network Administrator DoD Polygraph Institute -Original Message- From: Daniel Chenault [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, April 02, 2002 7:18 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Re: hops? I do believe that's TCP returning the error; Exchange is only reporting it. In proper OSI modeling an application knows nothing about what is happening on the lower levels and hops is a TCP concept. - Original Message - From: Hansen, Eric [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, April 02, 2002 5:57 PM Subject: hops? Hi I'm running down a event id 142, and I do think its ISP related with a border gateway protocol issue. The problem is generating a undeliverable that indicates the emails cant go over 17 hops to their target. Now I'm no networking wiz but it looks like a loop issue outside our system, so I thought I would try to up the number of hops and see if that helped. Is there a place in IMS or Exchange where I can set that? I couldn't find one. e- _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Upgrade problems
Yes. Absolutely. Required AAMOF. - Original Message - From: Woodruff, Michael [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, April 03, 2002 10:27 AM Subject: RE: Upgrade problems I think we originally installed the ADC using Windows 2k CD. Should I renstall with ADC from Exch2k CD? -Original Message- From: Woodruff, Michael [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, April 03, 2002 10:39 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Upgrade problems When I click new it only gives me Connection Agreement -Original Message- From: Chris Scharff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, April 03, 2002 10:31 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Upgrade problems Have you set up a recipient connection agreement yet? -Original Message- From: Woodruff, Michael [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, April 03, 2002 9:25 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Upgrade problems RAAAHH! Does anybody know why I can't create a public folder connection agreement? I have ran domain and forestprep successfully. It doesn't even give me th option to create one. Just a plain connection agreement. Thanks. -Original Message- From: Woodruff, Michael [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, April 03, 2002 9:09 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Upgrade problems I ran forest prep and domain prep. They both said they worked fine. I checked and everything was updated except for the Exchange OU folder had a different icon on it other than the folder icon. This morning I went to set up a PF CA. I don't get the option to create one? I guess the Domain prep didn't run right. I also ran a DCDIAG and got this error? Can't find anything on it? Any idea? Thanks. Starting test: KnowsOfRoleHolders Warning: CN=NTDS Settings DEL:e839ded7-d289-4f78-b8c5-4d210a2aa688,CN=CMHDC-1,CN=Server s,CN=CMH,CN=Si tes, CN=Configuration,DC=gswa,DC=tld is the Infrastructure Update Owner, but is delet ed. _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Exchange not supported by this version of Windows
It's not supported. Ex2K might install on it, but not 5.5 - Original Message - From: Chris H [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, April 03, 2002 11:04 AM Subject: Exchange not supported by this version of Windows I am trying to install Exchange Administrator (5.5) on a .net standard server (Latest post Beta 3 build from MSDN). Anyone tried this? You get the below message. I KNOW this is beta and I am not looking for anyone to bust a nut. Just curious if anyone else has encountered or worked around . . . TIA Chris Exchange Server 5.5 Microsoft Issue Description: Exchange Server 5.5 is not supported by this version of Windows. For more information, refer to http://www.microsoft.com/exchange . Contact Information: Microsoft Web site: http://www.microsoft.com Telephone: (425) 635-7172 (U.S.) or (905) 568-3503 (Canada) _ List posting FAQ: http://www.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: CLI Util for adding mailboxes to existing (or new) users
You have two choices: the UI or command-line import of a CSV. Pick one. Unless, of course, you want to do some custom coding using DAPI. - Original Message - From: Matt Hoffman [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, April 04, 2002 10:31 AM Subject: CLI Util for adding mailboxes to existing (or new) users Anyone know of a CLI util for adding mailboxes to Exchange 5.5 for existing or new NT users? I've tried the net user /add command, which is supposed to not only add an NT user, but create a mailbox for that user on a machine with Exchange admin installed. It's not working for me, unfortunately. Is there another way to do this without importing CSV's? Basically, I'm setting up a script to add new users to the domain and to exchange and set up the various things we do here automatically. Any help would be appreciated. Thanks! Matt _ List posting FAQ: http://www.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: Recall: hello
Okay, Pink, settle down. - Original Message - From: Newsgroups [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, April 04, 2002 6:50 PM Subject: RE: Recall: hello Yes you can! With 1010220 all call up to 20 minutes are just 0.99! -Original Message- From: Christopher Hummert [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Posted At: Thursday, April 04, 2002 4:35 PM Posted To: Exchange Newsgroups Conversation: Recall: hello Subject: RE: Recall: hello Ok it will cost you a dollar though.don't worry cause you can't buy nothing for a dollar anymore -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Carine Lim, Sr.SystEng, SCSM/NSB Sent: Thursday, April 04, 2002 4:23 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Recall: hello Carine Lim, Sr.SystEng, SCSM/NSB would like to recall the message, hello. We attend to your needs by offering superior customer service with our call centre business continuity planning services. Check it out at http://www.onecall.com.my _ List posting FAQ: http://www.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: Requesting Data errors with SAN and Large Mailboxs
I'm betting these users have tons of folders or, just as bad, a small number of folders with lots of messages in them. When a user accesses the root of his mailbox the folders in the root level are enumerated by the server and passed back to the client. As each folder is accessed (either by clicking on it, by a rule or by dragging a message to it) the contents of that folder are enumerated by the server and passed back to the client. This... takes... time... for... lots... of... messages... or... folders. The user sees a definite slowdown and in OutlookXP will get the popup message you described (Outlook's communication with the server is single-threaded). Try this experiment if you can find the chance to do it. Have the user reboot his workstation and start Outlook. Have perfmon running against the Exchange server watching physical memory, store usage of memory, cpu and store use of cpu. Watch them spike up and keep ramping up. There's your answer. Solution: dig through the junk and get rid of the crap (Mike, let's meet for lunch on 4/4/97). Come up with a logical and efficient folder hierarchy that reflects the users' usage of those folders. Anything not accessed in over six months (arbitrary number) goes to a PST (and backed up, just in case). Although Exchange is generally pretty good about maintaining large amounts of objects and data the contents of the mailbox itself are pretty much left up to the user to manage. That is to say that Exchange owns the mailbox, but not the contents of the mailbox (in the sense of managing it). This is usually not a problem, but then again the usual user doesn't have 65,000 objects in his mailbox, let alone 200,000. I understand there are some third-party add-ons for Outlook that help with managing a large amount of information offering indexing, management and archival functions; that's what's needed here. Exchange is doing what it is supposed to do and OL isn't intelligent enough to serve as a front-end to a very large store of objects. Take a look at www.slipstick.com. - Original Message - From: missy koslosky [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, April 04, 2002 6:41 PM Subject: Re: Requesting Data errors with SAN and Large Mailboxs This is more a case of sh!t happens than anything else... - Original Message - From: Jim Brady [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, April 04, 2002 5:32 PM Subject: Requesting Data errors with SAN and Large Mailboxs Running Exch55, Sp4, NT4, Sp5 with IS located on SAN Shark (Compaq Fiber Card). Running TrendServerProtect and TrendScanMail. A certain user is getting a lot of latency/delays (requesting data from Microsoft Exchange dialog box, etc) when accessing his mailbox in Outlook (XP). Not a network issue, as he's tried this from multiple PC's, laptops (wireless), etc . same errors periodically. Plenty of free space on the IS/LOG drives. No errors in the event logs. He wasn't having these problems before we switched to the SAN (Compaq RAID5 before). One caveat . this user has a 240MB mailbox with 150,000 - 200,000 messages in it . so many, it's only reading as 0 messages. One other user (out of 250 on the server) has complained also. This user has a 3.5GB mailbox, but only 65,000 messages in it. Any ideas? Thanks, Jim _ List posting FAQ: http://www.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: Requesting Data errors with SAN and Large Mailboxs
Perfmon should also reveal whether the SAN is somehow slowing things down. I know a SAN is supposed to be faster but that can depend on how it was configured in the first place. I've seen a SAN being demoed that was significantly slower than it should have been. After tuning the block sizes to more closely reflect the expected block sizes being written (the demo used Exchange and this is a known size) the performance problems disappeared. Or rather was alleviated; there were some extraneous factors that prevented the demo from giving a good result (not important at this time). Bottom line is that to achieve high performance with a SAN requires more than plugging it in and turning it on. There is a KB article on selecting block size according to size of disks and number of spindles that as I recall translates nicely to SAN configuration. There are numerous objects under Object:PhysicalDisk that, in aggregate, can give a very good idea of how the disk storage subsystem is performing. If I were to choose one as a starting point it would be Current Disk Queue Length. The Explain button for this says: Current Disk Queue Length is the number of requests outstanding on the disk at the time the performance data is collected. It also includes requests in service at the time of the collection. This is a instantaneous snapshot, not an average over the time interval. Multi-spindle disk devices can have multiple requests that are active at one time, but other concurrent requests are awaiting service. This counter might reflect a transitory high or low queue length, but if there is a sustained load on the disk drive, it is likely that this will be consistently high. Requests experience delays proportional to the length of this queue minus the number of spindles on the disks. For good performance, this difference should average less than two. If this number were to stay high, or be on a ramp-up that never goes back down, this would indicate the disk subsystem is falling behind on servicing read/write requests (the above represents both). From here there are other counters that could be observed in order to narrow down where the slowdown is occuring. As to your other point about all the mail being elsewhere besides in the inbox. When a mailbox opens the root folder is enumerated - a large number of folders in the root would be a slowdown. Then the inbox is enumerated; ditto for a large number of messages. Then rules are fired and here is where other folders could be touched and thus enumerated. This could make for a very slow startup for Outlook. After startup the user might drag a message with the mouse to a folder; that folder gets enumerated if it hasn't already, same if a rule fires. A new message sent would write to the Sent Items folder, enumeration again. A deleted message is sent to the Deleted Items folder and, again, more enumeration. I trust that answers your question on that score. - Original Message - From: Jim Brady [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, April 04, 2002 10:22 PM Subject: RE: Requesting Data errors with SAN and Large Mailboxs Thanks for the insight/understanding. I'll give perfmon a shot, and check slipstick for some possible solutions. One thing ... if this started happening right after we switched to the SAN, then I must conclude that SAN technology may not be able handle large mailbox enumerations, etc ... agreed? But a SAN is supposed to outperform a SCSI Raid, right? Also, if the user has no emails in his inbox folder (they're all in another folder in the mailbox) ... that's not going to make a difference, right? ... didn't think so. Thanks again ... Jim -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Daniel Chenault Sent: Thursday, April 04, 2002 7:54 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Re: Requesting Data errors with SAN and Large Mailboxs I'm betting these users have tons of folders or, just as bad, a small number of folders with lots of messages in them. When a user accesses the root of his mailbox the folders in the root level are enumerated by the server and passed back to the client. As each folder is accessed (either by clicking on it, by a rule or by dragging a message to it) the contents of that folder are enumerated by the server and passed back to the client. This... takes... time... for... lots... of... messages... or... folders. The user sees a definite slowdown and in OutlookXP will get the popup message you described (Outlook's communication with the server is single-threaded). Try this experiment if you can find the chance to do it. Have the user reboot his workstation and start Outlook. Have perfmon running against the Exchange server watching physical memory, store usage of memory, cpu and store use of cpu. Watch them spike up and keep ramping up. There's your answer. Solution: dig through the junk and get rid of the crap
Re: Migrating form an existing Exchange 5.5 server to an upgraded Exchange 5.5 server
The Disaster Recovery document covers this. Found at www.microsoft.com/exchange. - Original Message - From: Patrick [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, April 06, 2002 3:07 PM Subject: Migrating form an existing Exchange 5.5 server to an upgraded Exchange 5.5 server Hey, I am looking for any advice on migrating from our existing exchange 5.5 server to a new Exchange 5.5 server, if there's some good articles or advice anyone could give me that would be great. Thanks P.S. I have been checking Technet, etc. and haven't found too much useful info. _ List posting FAQ: http://www.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: Migrating form an existing Exchange 5.5 server to an upgraded Exchange 5.5 server
Yeah, that too. - Original Message - From: Martin Blackstone [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, April 06, 2002 3:08 PM Subject: RE: Migrating form an existing Exchange 5.5 server to an upgraded Exchange 5.5 server http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq_appxa.htm This is everything you need to know/do. -Original Message- From: Patrick [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Saturday, April 06, 2002 1:07 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Migrating form an existing Exchange 5.5 server to an upgraded Exchange 5.5 server Hey, I am looking for any advice on migrating from our existing exchange 5.5 server to a new Exchange 5.5 server, if there's some good articles or advice anyone could give me that would be great. Thanks P.S. I have been checking Technet, etc. and haven't found too much useful info. _ List posting FAQ: http://www.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: Need help with Exchange 5.5 to 2k with a few twists.
I've always preferred a furshlugginer(1) pneumatic drill. 1) for those who remember Alfred E. Neuman - Original Message - From: Andy David [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, April 07, 2002 4:52 PM Subject: RE: Need help with Exchange 5.5 to 2k with a few twists. How about a freakin' pneumatic drill? -Original Message- From: Slinger, Gary [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Saturday, April 06, 2002 9:11 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Need help with Exchange 5.5 to 2k with a few twists. You can use a pneumatic freakin' drill to drive in nails. Doesn't necessarily make it the best option. -Original Message- From: Irfan Malik [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Saturday, April 06, 2002 01:04 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Need help with Exchange 5.5 to 2k with a few twists. You can you use ExMerge to move mailboxes. Irfan Malik Network Engineer United Bank Limited. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, April 01, 2002 10:54 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Need help with Exchange 5.5 to 2k with a few twists. Here is the situation. Have an old exchange server from the old parent company. Parent company has long since died and this little faction has slit and prospered. So now we want to migrate to E2K, but its to a different server (W2K AS) in a whole new domain that I have been asked to build. And they do not want any traces of the old company's name anymore. (understandable) Now is there a way I can move the mailboxes and not have them hold onto any old info, like old inet addresses or do I have to manually add each box and set up permissions? The old exchange server right now has 2 internet addresses for each user. One for the old domain and they added one for the new domain. These are the issues that I speak of. Do not want to old domain internet addresses moved over. _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] -- The information contained in this email message is privileged and confidential information intended only for the use of the individual or entity to whom it is addressed. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copy of this message is strictly prohibited. If you have received this email in error, please immediately notify Veronis Suhler Stevenson by telephone (212)935-4990, fax (212)381-8168, or email ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) and delete the message. Thank you. == _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Restoring Public Folder
yes - Original Message - From: CHRIS H [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, April 08, 2002 4:28 PM Subject: Restoring Public Folder I was reading in the MS Disaster Recovery paper that you do not need to name the server the same name as the one you are restoring from if you are just restoring the info store and grabbing one mailbox. Does anyone know if the same holds true for one public folder and its contents? Can you restore just pub.edb and then run the DS/IS Consistency checker and retrieve the public folder if the server has a different name than the server the pub.edb was backed up off of? TIA Chris You cannot create experience. You must undergo it. Albert Camus (1913-1960); French writer and philosopher _ List posting FAQ: http://www.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: Requesting Data errors with SAN and Large Mailboxs
the article is not about SAN block size, but RAID block size. The numbers translate over nicely but nowhere in the article is SAN mentioned try block size RAID - Original Message - From: Jim Brady [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, April 08, 2002 11:51 AM Subject: RE: Requesting Data errors with SAN and Large Mailboxs One more thing ... couldn't find that KB article on SAN block size ... remember any key works on how to search for it ... can't seem to find it. Thanks ... Jim -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Daniel Chenault Sent: Thursday, April 04, 2002 10:58 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Re: Requesting Data errors with SAN and Large Mailboxs Perfmon should also reveal whether the SAN is somehow slowing things down. I know a SAN is supposed to be faster but that can depend on how it was configured in the first place. I've seen a SAN being demoed that was significantly slower than it should have been. After tuning the block sizes to more closely reflect the expected block sizes being written (the demo used Exchange and this is a known size) the performance problems disappeared. Or rather was alleviated; there were some extraneous factors that prevented the demo from giving a good result (not important at this time). Bottom line is that to achieve high performance with a SAN requires more than plugging it in and turning it on. There is a KB article on selecting block size according to size of disks and number of spindles that as I recall translates nicely to SAN configuration. There are numerous objects under Object:PhysicalDisk that, in aggregate, can give a very good idea of how the disk storage subsystem is performing. If I were to choose one as a starting point it would be Current Disk Queue Length. The Explain button for this says: Current Disk Queue Length is the number of requests outstanding on the disk at the time the performance data is collected. It also includes requests in service at the time of the collection. This is a instantaneous snapshot, not an average over the time interval. Multi-spindle disk devices can have multiple requests that are active at one time, but other concurrent requests are awaiting service. This counter might reflect a transitory high or low queue length, but if there is a sustained load on the disk drive, it is likely that this will be consistently high. Requests experience delays proportional to the length of this queue minus the number of spindles on the disks. For good performance, this difference should average less than two. If this number were to stay high, or be on a ramp-up that never goes back down, this would indicate the disk subsystem is falling behind on servicing read/write requests (the above represents both). From here there are other counters that could be observed in order to narrow down where the slowdown is occuring. As to your other point about all the mail being elsewhere besides in the inbox. When a mailbox opens the root folder is enumerated - a large number of folders in the root would be a slowdown. Then the inbox is enumerated; ditto for a large number of messages. Then rules are fired and here is where other folders could be touched and thus enumerated. This could make for a very slow startup for Outlook. After startup the user might drag a message with the mouse to a folder; that folder gets enumerated if it hasn't already, same if a rule fires. A new message sent would write to the Sent Items folder, enumeration again. A deleted message is sent to the Deleted Items folder and, again, more enumeration. I trust that answers your question on that score. - Original Message - From: Jim Brady [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, April 04, 2002 10:22 PM Subject: RE: Requesting Data errors with SAN and Large Mailboxs Thanks for the insight/understanding. I'll give perfmon a shot, and check slipstick for some possible solutions. One thing ... if this started happening right after we switched to the SAN, then I must conclude that SAN technology may not be able handle large mailbox enumerations, etc ... agreed? But a SAN is supposed to outperform a SCSI Raid, right? Also, if the user has no emails in his inbox folder (they're all in another folder in the mailbox) ... that's not going to make a difference, right? ... didn't think so. Thanks again ... Jim -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Daniel Chenault Sent: Thursday, April 04, 2002 7:54 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Re: Requesting Data errors with SAN and Large Mailboxs I'm betting these users have tons of folders or, just as bad, a small number of folders with lots of messages in them. When a user accesses the root of his
Re: Administrator Permissions
You can remove inherited objects from child leafs. - Original Message - From: Carlos Dinapoli [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, April 04, 2002 5:04 PM Subject: Administrator Permissions Hi guys I have the follow quetion: I have one Group called ExchaAdmins and users into this Group then I nedded this Group have permissions Admin Role in Site and Configuration Container but Never permissions in Recipient Container. Recipient Container have inheritable permissions of Site container, Exist some configuration by break inheritable permissions of Parent Container in Admin of Exchange 5.5? Cheers Carlos Dinapoli MCSE 2000 MCSE NT 4.0 DATCO S.A. - Consultoria 4103-1300 int. 2313 _ List posting FAQ: http://www.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]
