RE: Deperate--Still
How did you do that? I can't get it to ignore zipfiles :( -Oorspronkelijk bericht- Van: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Verzonden: donderdag 6 december 2001 17:48 Aan: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Onderwerp: RE: Deperate--Still we use Antigen we can ignore things inside zip files ::confused: -Michèle Immigration site: http://LadySun1969.tripod.com The Miata: http://members.cardomain.com/bpituley Tiggercam: http://www.tiggercam.co.uk - Kaden thought of the old Klingon proverb: Fool me once, shame on you: fool me twice, prepare to die. - -Original Message- From: Bob t. Berge [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, December 06, 2001 6:49 AM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Deperate--Still Then why can Antigen be installed on our testserver and scanmail does not? According to scanmail, the core cannot be installed on that system, even tho win2k + Ex2k are installed and working just fine. One thing i miss in Antigen is the ability to ignore zipfiles that contain filtered extensions, i WANT to be able to send/receive zipfiles with .exe's in em. and so do some of our customers (who weren't all that excited this morning after i installed Antigen on our server last night, one of their clients regularly send zipfiles with .exe's in them hehe) But for the rest i do love Antigen. wonder why Scanmail won't install tho any ideas? Bob All your beer are belong to us! -Oorspronkelijk bericht- Van: Martin Blackstone [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Verzonden: woensdag 5 december 2001 21:38 Aan: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Onderwerp: RE: Deperate--Still Or Scanmail. Either should do the job just fine -Original Message- From: Lefkovics, William [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, December 05, 2001 12:31 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Deperate--Still www.sybari.com has their Antigen product which uninstalls very cleanly (from experience) should you not choose to run with it. William -Original Message- From: John Riley [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, December 05, 2001 12:31 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: Deperate--Still Sorry for the last post. My brain is not working at full capacity--I have been at this all day. the post should have read--I am seeking a trial version of an AV mailserver product. I am running Exchange 5.5/SP4 on an NT server running 4.0/SP6. So, I need to get AV on the server which has none. A full trial verion would be nice to start with. Thanks, JRiley List Charter and FAQ at: http://www.sunbelt-software.com/exchange_list_charter.htm List Charter and FAQ at: http://www.sunbelt-software.com/exchange_list_charter.htm List Charter and FAQ at: http://www.sunbelt-software.com/exchange_list_charter.htm List Charter and FAQ at: http://www.sunbelt-software.com/exchange_list_charter.htm List Charter and FAQ at: http://www.sunbelt-software.com/exchange_list_charter.htm
RE: Outlook Profiles
Can't you use profgen or something to create multiple profiles on each computer and have Outlook prompt for profile? Oh wait... Clients are NT/2000 right? William 'up too late' Lefkovics -Original Message- From: Colin Maynard [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, December 07, 2001 1:04 AM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: Outlook Profiles Hi All, My company want to set up roaming profiles for Outlook only (Using Exchange 5.5 SP4). I believe that the only options we actually have are OWA and full NT roaming profiles but both of these solutions are not really acceptable in this case. Does anyone have any suggestions on how to achieve a roaming profile for Outlook only? BTW, manually setting profiles is also unacceptable as there are 600+ users. Thanks for any suggestions Colin Maynard List Charter and FAQ at: http://www.sunbelt-software.com/exchange_list_charter.htm List Charter and FAQ at: http://www.sunbelt-software.com/exchange_list_charter.htm
Automated Replies
Hi All, Does anyone know how Exchange 5.5 determines whether or not it has already sent an automated response to a user?? We want to add automated response on an address but want the automated response to be sent back every time not just once. Is there a list we can clear down manually or does Exchange determine if it has already responded by checking the transaction log files? Any help appreciated. Thanks Duncan List Charter and FAQ at: http://www.sunbelt-software.com/exchange_list_charter.htm
RE: Outlook Profiles
Not sure how feasible/possible this is (not enought caffeine), but if your users have server based home drives, could OL be configured to store it's profile data on there? -Original Message- From: Colin Maynard [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 07 December 2001 09:04 To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: Outlook Profiles Hi All, My company want to set up roaming profiles for Outlook only (Using Exchange 5.5 SP4). I believe that the only options we actually have are OWA and full NT roaming profiles but both of these solutions are not really acceptable in this case. Does anyone have any suggestions on how to achieve a roaming profile for Outlook only? BTW, manually setting profiles is also unacceptable as there are 600+ users. Thanks for any suggestions Colin Maynard List Charter and FAQ at: http://www.sunbelt-software.com/exchange_list_charter.htm List Charter and FAQ at: http://www.sunbelt-software.com/exchange_list_charter.htm
RE: Automated Replies
Every time a message is replied or forwarded by a rule a new field is added to the item to flag this it as being auto forwarded/replied. Hence Exchange can distinguish between those and standard messages and doesn't create loops. Siegfried / -Original Message- From: Duncan Arnold [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, December 07, 2001 11:03 AM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: Automated Replies Hi All, Does anyone know how Exchange 5.5 determines whether or not it has already sent an automated response to a user?? We want to add automated response on an address but want the automated response to be sent back every time not just once. Is there a list we can clear down manually or does Exchange determine if it has already responded by checking the transaction log files? Any help appreciated. Thanks Duncan List Charter and FAQ at: http://www.sunbelt-software.com/exchange_list_charter.htm List Charter and FAQ at: http://www.sunbelt-software.com/exchange_list_charter.htm
RE: MTA X400
Go ahead and bounce the service. It won't trash the queue. mit freundlichen Grüßen,(Best Regards),Steve RopiakZF Group NAOCERT, Exchange and Bar Code Administrator(207) 989-9115 voice(207) 989-8722 fax(513) 317-0197 cell [EMAIL PROTECTED] -Original Message-From: Gian Sartor [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]Sent: Friday, December 07, 2001 7:00 AMTo: MS-Exchange Admin IssuesSubject: MTA X400 Hi, I have a small problem which I am hoping someone can shed some light on as my knowledge in this area of Exchange is a bit limited at the mo. We have 2 Servers transferring mail over X400 connectors, the link between them went down last night, so mail started backing up in the MTA. The connection between the servers is back up now, but the mail is not being transferred. Can I stop and start the MTA service without losing any mail? I also noticed Event ID:9156 in the Application log of one of the servers, I found this article http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;EN-US;q193894GSSNB=1which relates to the problem but I don't want to change anything unnecessarily. Any help with this would be great, thanks in advance. Gian Sartor MCSEIT Support EngineerList Charter and FAQ at:http://www.sunbelt-software.com/exchange_list_charter.htm List Charter and FAQ at: http://www.sunbelt-software.com/exchange_list_charter.htm
Exchange2000 Service Pack 2 deployment guide
http://www.microsoft.com/exchange/techinfo/deployment/2000/SP2Deployment.aspPossible wrappage. William List Charter and FAQ at: http://www.sunbelt-software.com/exchange_list_charter.htm
RE: Outlook Profiles
I am pretty sure this is not an option. Even if there were enough disk space on the server it would involve reconfiguring all the workstations, which brings us back to roaming profiles. Colin -Original Message- From: Boswell Tim [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 07 December 2001 11:16 To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Outlook Profiles Not sure how feasible/possible this is (not enought caffeine), but if your users have server based home drives, could OL be configured to store it's profile data on there? -Original Message- From: Colin Maynard [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 07 December 2001 09:04 To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: Outlook Profiles Hi All, My company want to set up roaming profiles for Outlook only (Using Exchange 5.5 SP4). I believe that the only options we actually have are OWA and full NT roaming profiles but both of these solutions are not really acceptable in this case. Does anyone have any suggestions on how to achieve a roaming profile for Outlook only? BTW, manually setting profiles is also unacceptable as there are 600+ users. Thanks for any suggestions Colin Maynard List Charter and FAQ at: http://www.sunbelt-software.com/exchange_list_charter.htm List Charter and FAQ at: http://www.sunbelt-software.com/exchange_list_charter.htm List Charter and FAQ at: http://www.sunbelt-software.com/exchange_list_charter.htm
RE: Outlook Profiles
Yes, it should...profgen is in the BORK (I believe!) Ian - [EMAIL PROTECTED] - -Original Message- From: Colin Maynard [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: December 7, 2001 06:40 AM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Outlook Profiles Clients are NT/2000 with the exception of a few ;-). I am not familiar with profgen. Will it prompt for users to log in to Exchange on startup of Outlook and then create their profile on the local machine? If this is the case then how do I get my sticky fingers on it? Colin -Original Message- From: Lefkovics, William [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 07 December 2001 09:29 To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Outlook Profiles Can't you use profgen or something to create multiple profiles on each computer and have Outlook prompt for profile? Oh wait... Clients are NT/2000 right? William 'up too late' Lefkovics -Original Message- From: Colin Maynard [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, December 07, 2001 1:04 AM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: Outlook Profiles Hi All, My company want to set up roaming profiles for Outlook only (Using Exchange 5.5 SP4). I believe that the only options we actually have are OWA and full NT roaming profiles but both of these solutions are not really acceptable in this case. Does anyone have any suggestions on how to achieve a roaming profile for Outlook only? BTW, manually setting profiles is also unacceptable as there are 600+ users. Thanks for any suggestions Colin Maynard List Charter and FAQ at: http://www.sunbelt-software.com/exchange_list_charter.htm List Charter and FAQ at: http://www.sunbelt-software.com/exchange_list_charter.htm List Charter and FAQ at: http://www.sunbelt-software.com/exchange_list_charter.htm List Charter and FAQ at: http://www.sunbelt-software.com/exchange_list_charter.htm
RE: Exchange over a SAN
Title: Message I will second Jamie's request. Tell all...or tell some... We wait with bated breath. -Original Message-From: Arnold, Jamie [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]Sent: Thursday, December 06, 2001 7:22 PMTo: MS-Exchange Admin IssuesSubject: RE: Exchange over a SAN Care to elaborate? You sound like you have much to tell. J -Original Message-From: Violette, Kevin [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, December 06, 2001 6:10 PMTo: MS-Exchange Admin IssuesSubject: RE: Exchange over a SAN We are running Exchange 2000on a SAN. Words of wisdomDo your homework and plan your SAN luns/parts to be used with exchange carefully. Kevin UNCW -Original Message-From: Karen Palmer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]Sent: Thursday, December 06, 2001 4:20 PMTo: MS-Exchange Admin IssuesSubject: Exchange over a SAN William's message woke me right up. Our new Exchange server will be on a SAN. (gulp) Does anyone on the list have an Exchange/SAN setup and, if so, any words of wisdom? Karen Palmer SCJD -Original Message-From: Lefkovics, William [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]Sent: Thursday, December 06, 2001 3:39 PMTo: MS-Exchange Admin IssuesSubject: RE: Error when backing up Exch. 5.5 (using MS backup) Wait. I missed that. Microsoft does not support Exchange over a SAN. I realize that may not be your issue here, but it might be difficult to get good help otherwise. William -Original Message-From: HOLLIDAY, Eric [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]Sent: Thursday, December 06, 2001 12:34 PMTo: MS-Exchange Admin IssuesSubject: RE: Error when backing up Exch. 5.5 (using MS backup) Diane, See my answers incontext below: 1. Is this a new Exchange setup?--Not really. The server's been up for over a year, but we just hooked up a SAN array ran perf optimizer to redirect the store. We have seven servers total, this is the only one with a problem. 2. Has this ever worked?--No, not on this server. We normally use ArcServe, which worked fine until recently. (before you ask, the error was around _before_ the SAN switchover) 3. This is a dumb question, butdoes this exchange server possibly still have circular logging turned on? --No. (I just checked). Good question, tho. (Thereare no "dumb" questions, only dumb answers.) 4. How many log mdbdata log files do you have?--A whole bunch. Since I haven't been able to get a good backup, they're still there. 5. If you can't get it backed up, you probably have many many days worth and a very full partion. --The SAN _greatly_ increased my storage capacity, it's onlyabout 50% full. The problem has been around since it was 25-30% full, however. Diane (picking at straws here.) Eric -Original Message-From: HOLLIDAY, Eric [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]Sent: Thursday, December 06, 2001 6:59 AMTo: MS-Exchange Admin IssuesSubject: RE: Error when backing up Exch. 5.5 (using MS backup) Diane, Yes, I have. It makes _no_ diff when the job runs. At the present time, I am only running the job manually and it still fails. Sorry, should've told you, the OS is Win2Kserver. I run the same job on two other, identical, servers with no problems. Now, I wouldn't even be using NTBackup, except that ArcSmurf choked on the backup. After reading about similar problems from other folks on this list, I thought I'd try using NTBackup to a file then have ArcSmurf back that up to tape. Works like a champ on the other two servers, just not this one! Any other ideas? Should I try running some diags on the store? Eric -Original Message- From: Diane Beckham [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, December 05, 2001 2:39 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Error when backing up Exch. 5.5 (using MS backup)Eric, have you tried changing the time it does the backup to see if it works at a different time? Have you tried backing it up manually? Have you tried backing it up with a NTBackup in a Win2K computer?
RE: Size of Personal Folders
Title: Message 2 gbs is the largerst.. i dont knwo if you have select the option of allowupgrade to large tables will let you over exceed that. but without that option 2 gbs is the biggest. becarefull with that, because i have seen people ( Manager, Vp,etc ) lost everything becuase their .pst file exceeded the 2 gb limit, and outlook will just not open the file anymore. -Mensaje original-De: ONG Liang Bu (CSC) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]Enviado el: Viernes, 07 de Diciembre de 2001 09:41 a.m.Para: MS-Exchange Admin IssuesAsunto: RE: Size of Personal Folders Jack, The server cannot add anymore harddisk. Using2 Compaq Proliant 6500 runs as clustered with one diskdisk array. The disk array has 6 18.2G disks, two are raid 0, for the transaction logs. Four are raid-5 (1 of them is redundant disk). It turn up the firmware on the raid controller card is quite old. If I add one more disk to the disk array I need to redo the raid 5again, which is quite a hassle. Anyway it is the same old story, users do not want to keep old mails. Have double the quota twice, from 10 M to 20 then to 40 M. After 6 months they come back and ask for more. We have installed the Mailbox Manager and will purge anything that is more than 1 yr old. Ong LB -Original Message-From: EALES, Jack / RSAIFS - IOM [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]Sent: Friday, December 07, 2001 8:32 PMTo: MS-Exchange Admin IssuesSubject: RE: Size of Personal Folders Anything bigger than 1.99Gb (i.e 2Gb +) will no longer work. Disk space is so cheap at the moment, why not but some more for the server and continue to take advantage of Single Instance Storage (SIS) in Exchange. That way, overall, you will use less disk space all up and ensure that your backups are complete and simpler then using PST's scattered around the place... HTH Jack -Original Message-From: ONG Liang Bu (CSC) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 07 December 2001 12:19To: MS-Exchange Admin IssuesSubject: Size of Personal FoldersTHIS MESSAGE ORIGINATED ON THE INTERNET - Please read the detailed disclaimer below.-- Hi, I have been a lurker in this list for the past two yrs. Have to say this list has save my ass on many occasions. Recently the file blocking discussions save me from the GONE.SCR, Thanks for the tips. Just a simple question I will not mind if I do not get an answer. Anybody knows how big can a personal folder grow? The reason I asked is my users are growing and I am running out of disk space. We are due to an upgrading from Exchange 5.5 to Exchange 2000 at the mid next yr. At the mean time I am advising the users to temporary pull their mails to the personal folder. I read it somewhere the personal folder cannot be too large. In fact anything above 1 G is not advisable. Definitely Microsoft must have a design spec, say .edb file in Ex 5.5 standard is 16 G; so .pst must have a design limitation. It will not be safe for 1 G, 2 G ... At the moment I am advising them not to have it more than 1G, but to the mid next yr is a long time.. Any points to enlighten on this issue is appreciatd. One more thing I am trying out Antigen, not bad at all. Many thanks (sincerely thanks for the many tips for the past 2 yrs) Ong LB Exchange Adminsitrator National Institute of Education Nanyang Technological University Singapore List Charter and FAQ at:http://www.sunbelt-software.com/exchange_list_charter.htm--The following message has been automatically added by the mail gateway to comply with a Royal Sun Alliance IT Security requirement:As this email arrived via the Internet you should be cautious about its origin and content. Replies which contain sensitive information or legal/contractual obligations are particularly vulnerable. In these cases you should not reply unless you are authorised to do so, and adequate encryption is employed.If you have any questions, please speak to your local desktop support team or IT security contact.--List Charter and FAQ at:http://www.sunbelt-software.com/exchange_list_charter.htmList Charter and FAQ at:http://www.sunbelt-software.com/exchange_list_charter.htm List Charter and FAQ at: http://www.sunbelt-software.com/exchange_list_charter.htm
RE: Antigen (Ejaculate IT)
I have read that pretty much everyone is in agreeance about the uselessness of EjaculateIT. I am currently trying to get my bosses to head over to AntiGen for my Exchange based AV. We will hopefully be moving to NAV for the Server side itself, can you guys give me ammunition to give my boss to shoot down CA's products. -Original Message- From: Kevin Miller [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, December 06, 2001 6:25 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Antigen (Ejaculate IT) I thought it was bad to water a hanging plant every day? -- Kevinm M WLKMMAS, UCC+WCA, CKWSE CKST -Original Message- From: Ray Zorz [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, December 06, 2001 3:14 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Antigen (Ejaculate IT) Right now my favorite place would be in hanging planters over their servers, anxiously waiting to water them daily. -Original Message- From: Kevin Miller [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, December 06, 2001 3:13 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Antigen (Ejaculate IT) We know you like to keep those on your desk : -- Kevinm M WLKMMAS, UCC+WCA, CKWSE CKST -Original Message- From: Ray Zorz [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, December 06, 2001 1:47 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Antigen (Ejaculate IT) Server room? -Original Message- From: Martin Blackstone [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, December 06, 2001 2:09 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Antigen (Ejaculate IT) As long as you keep it away from any bamboo growing in the server room, it should be fine. -Original Message- From: Ray Zorz [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, December 06, 2001 12:14 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Antigen (Ejaculate IT) I ran Panda for files on my exchange server, but excluded the exchange server directories. Worked fine. -Original Message- From: Ropiak Steve - NAO Florence Office Exchange and Bar Code Admn. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, December 06, 2001 9:53 AM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Antigen (Ejaculate IT) I though running a file based scanner on an Exchange server was a mortal sin (like light beer)? mit freundlichen Grüßen,(Best Regards), Steve Ropiak ZF Group NAO CERT, Exchange and Bar Code Administrator (207) 989-9115 voice (207) 989-8722 fax (513) 317-0197 cell [EMAIL PROTECTED] -Original Message- From: BOERO MANSILLA Roberto [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, December 06, 2001 11:35 AM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Antigen (Ejaculate IT) norton 7.5 corporate great combination, on my own opinion -Mensaje original- De: McCready, Robert [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Enviado el: Jueves, 06 de Diciembre de 2001 12:59 p.m. Para: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Asunto: RE: Antigen (Ejaculate IT) Were thinking or purchasing Antigen. I didn't realize it didn't protect your system files also. Is this pretty typical, for instance does ScanMail do the same thing? Are those of you running Antigen running any other virus protection on Exchange? (different) Robert -Original Message- From: Micciche, Robert [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, December 06, 2001 10:46 AM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Antigen (Ejaculate IT) No problem, but that very likely was a miracle. -Original Message- From: Kevin Miller [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, December 06, 2001 10:42 AM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Antigen (Ejaculate IT) I fear for your servers life : -- Kevinm M WLKMMAS, UCC+WCA, CKWSE CKST -Original Message- From: Stephen J. Norton [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, December 06, 2001 7:34 AM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Antigen (Ejaculate IT) Thanks Robert. I assume you've had no conflicting issues running both on one box. And the uninstall of InnoculateIT actually went smoothly? -Original Message- From: Micciche, Robert [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, December 06, 2001 10:24 AM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Antigen (Ejaculate IT) Word of warning about removing Inoculate IT: 1. Antigen is a groupware messaging solution, it protects the IS and IMC. 2. Antigen does NOT protect your file system, c:\winnt\system32 for example. What I did: 1. Remove Inoculate IT for Exchange. 2. Install/config/run Antigen. 3. Re-install Inoculate IT, the normal server version NOT the Exchange version. Result: 1. Antigen (and whatever AV scanners you chose in Antigen) protects your Mail infrastructure. 2. Inoculate IT protects Your Windows NT Server. -Original Message- From: Stephen J. Norton [ mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] ] Sent: Thursday, December 06, 2001 10:05 AM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: Antigen I've gotten approval to install Antigen on my Exchange box. I'm currently running InnoculateIT
RE: Antigen (Ejaculate IT)
Is this enough? These were all sent to CA: CA contacted me, concerned about posts I've made regarding their products. In the past it has not been their policy to participate in these forums because vendors aren't always treated very well. They are reconsidering this policy. William Lefkovics, MCSE, A+, ExchangeMVP Here is the list of ACTUAL quotes I assembled for them in response to their sudden concern (I did not include names, but these are from public forums): When someone made a comment like this: -We have bought Arcserve 2000 w/ the backup agent for Exchange to backup our Exchange Server and have been having nothing but problems. - Saul, October 10, 2001 The ACTUAL replies were as follows: -Do you really want us to go for the entire day about how HORRIBLE of a product Jerkserv is/ NTBACK2k [1] is 1000 times better. Return the Jerkserv and install Backup Exec -The best thing to do with CA products, is to place them in the dumpster, where they belong. -We have been using Arcserve 2000 for awhile now and I would have to say that it DOES SUCK. -why do people buy that program? I have never heard anyone say anything nice about it? -Don't get started on that crappy as*s piece of software. Other comments about CA software, by those who actually use it: -Let me clue you in on something. I've got a good friend at CA - he told me that they have a bad time getting their E2K servers backed up using their product -ArcCrap is exactly that... Unreliable, no support, a pain in the arse, breaks more than it fixes... Shall I go on? -Arcserve does an excellent job of backup things up, it's downfall is the ability to restore things -Arcserve and anything is not a good choice. -I agree on Arcserve, which is the lowliest of backup products anyway. -Arcserve and a dumpster are a perfect fit. -There's only so much overtime one man can do, and my quota's fully taken by using AarghServe -Run away! Fast! Seriously. There are very few here who like working with ANY CA products even if they inherit them, much less ask for them. -you can switch to arcserve if your current backup is too fast for you -Running Innoculan was somewhat akin to flogging myself. -I've only purchased a few products from CA and the support was absolutely horrid. I have had other system administrators with the same experience. Most of the products themselves were very good until CA buys the company, then the support seems to go down the tubes. -I can't seem to get ARCServe to back up my (WINNT 4.0 SP6) Exchange server 5.5 SP2 data files. -EjaculateIT has worked well for us as a desktop antivirus solution for our office, but for the Exchange Agent, I'd recommend hiring a tibetan monk to analyse code segments manually for viral patterns than ever recommend this piece of crap clearly written by laid off AOL programmers. -The last time I remember any kind of success with ArcServe was when Computer Associates didn't own it and it was running on Novell. Ever since Computer Associates got involved, it has become unreliable garbage. -Yes, although usually alot of things tend to not work after a CA product is installed. -When it comes time to update CA's stuff, maybe an alternative would be in order here. -in my short time in the IT industry InoculateIT 4.53 is the worst piece of software I have had the displeasure to work with. Closely followed by Arcserve. -I don't feel like playing with ArcServe**It right now. -I just started a new job. they have this SQL server that is all hosed up. I uninstall JarkServ and it all worked better : no more problems go figure. -Don't use arcserve - its horrible. -We cannot get a good IS backup using ArcServe2000... -Given the knowledge (or lack or it) exhibited by various CA techs, I trust them about as far as I can throw them. -You hate ARCServe? Can't understand why. Don't you like being pummeled by a brain-dead licensing and registration process that's just an extra added bit of torture? -when we moved to Exchange instead of Netscape Messaging Server, we discovered that Arcserve wasn't too friendly -If our damn Arcserve was working could have restored the whole box, but it has been failing for a while. -We use InocIT because the tech people aren't making enough of the buying decisions around here. I would choose anything but InocIT. Actually I would stay away from any CA product... -A search on ArcServe's tech support FAQs revealed nothing. -licensing was the worst aspect of CAI products. Make that 2nd worst, after tech support -ArcWreckIT will do exactly that... -Arcserve backups have been failing and I haven't got a backup. -this InoculateIT software sucks! -I gave up using Arcserve 2000 - went back to using NTBackup, and then onto Backup Exec. -I hate ArcServe... I am holding my breath until we get the new servers up and running -- and they won't be using ArcServe. -I am a fully signed up member of the CA bashing bandwagon. -We unfortunately still use
RE: Antigen (Ejaculate IT)
We call those 'opportunities'. -Original Message- From: Callan, Chris [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, December 07, 2001 5:48 AM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Antigen (Ejaculate IT) Yes this is very serious William. My company is ace-backwards, and I am trying to get everything straightened out. If you wanna know how messed up they are, our exchange servers, are not only the exchange servers, but they are also the PDC, and BDC for our domain, and they were built on FAT partitions. -Original Message- From: Lefkovics, William [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, December 07, 2001 8:45 AM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Antigen (Ejaculate IT) Is this a setup? William -Original Message- From: Callan, Chris [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, December 07, 2001 5:38 AM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Antigen (Ejaculate IT) I have read that pretty much everyone is in agreeance about the uselessness of EjaculateIT. I am currently trying to get my bosses to head over to AntiGen for my Exchange based AV. We will hopefully be moving to NAV for the Server side itself, can you guys give me ammunition to give my boss to shoot down CA's products. -Original Message- From: Kevin Miller [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, December 06, 2001 6:25 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Antigen (Ejaculate IT) I thought it was bad to water a hanging plant every day? -- Kevinm M WLKMMAS, UCC+WCA, CKWSE CKST -Original Message- From: Ray Zorz [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, December 06, 2001 3:14 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Antigen (Ejaculate IT) Right now my favorite place would be in hanging planters over their servers, anxiously waiting to water them daily. -Original Message- From: Kevin Miller [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, December 06, 2001 3:13 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Antigen (Ejaculate IT) We know you like to keep those on your desk : -- Kevinm M WLKMMAS, UCC+WCA, CKWSE CKST -Original Message- From: Ray Zorz [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, December 06, 2001 1:47 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Antigen (Ejaculate IT) Server room? -Original Message- From: Martin Blackstone [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, December 06, 2001 2:09 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Antigen (Ejaculate IT) As long as you keep it away from any bamboo growing in the server room, it should be fine. List Charter and FAQ at: http://www.sunbelt-software.com/exchange_list_charter.htm List Charter and FAQ at: http://www.sunbelt-software.com/exchange_list_charter.htm List Charter and FAQ at: http://www.sunbelt-software.com/exchange_list_charter.htm
RE: Error when backing up Exch. 5.5 (using MS backup)
Title: Message Well, actually, SAN _is_ supported; NAS is not. Here is the reference William included on a previous reply[1]: http://www.microsoft.com/technet/treeview/default.asp?url=/TechNet/prodtechnol/exchange/deploy/prodspecs/exchstor.asp On a somewhat-related note, WHO thought up these acronyms?! SANNAS; I wonder if I should read the documentation backwards, to find any hidden messages :) [1] Thanks, William! Eric -Original Message-From: David N. Precht [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]Sent: Thursday, December 06, 2001 11:19 PMTo: MS-Exchange Admin IssuesSubject: RE: Error when backing up Exch. 5.5 (using MS backup) Apologize, William already answered this...SAN is "dude, you are SO NOT SUPPORTED" -Original Message-From: David N. Precht [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, December 06, 2001 23:16To: MS-Exchange Admin IssuesSubject: RE: Error when backing up Exch. 5.5 (using MS backup) Whats Supported with MS -Original Message-From: HOLLIDAY, Eric [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, December 06, 2001 16:24To: MS-Exchange Admin IssuesSubject: RE: Error when backing up Exch. 5.5 (using MS backup) William, AFAIK, Exchange will workwith a SAN (Storage Area Network), but_not_ a NAS (Network Attached Storage). It's been up and running for 3 months, now. Eric -Original Message-From: Lefkovics, William [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]Sent: Thursday, December 06, 2001 3:39 PMTo: MS-Exchange Admin IssuesSubject: RE: Error when backing up Exch. 5.5 (using MS backup) Wait. I missed that. Microsoft does not support Exchange over a SAN. I realize that may not be your issue here, but it might be difficult to get good help otherwise. William -Original Message-From: HOLLIDAY, Eric [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]Sent: Thursday, December 06, 2001 12:34 PMTo: MS-Exchange Admin IssuesSubject: RE: Error when backing up Exch. 5.5 (using MS backup) Diane, See my answers incontext below: 1. Is this a new Exchange setup?--Not really. The server's been up for over a year, but we just hooked up a SAN array ran perf optimizer to redirect the store. We have seven servers total, this is the only one with a problem. 2. Has this ever worked?--No, not on this server. We normally use ArcServe, which worked fine until recently. (before you ask, the error was around _before_ the SAN switchover) 3. This is a dumb question, butdoes this exchange server possibly still have circular logging turned on? --No. (I just checked). Good question, tho. (Thereare no "dumb" questions, only dumb answers.) 4. How many log mdbdata log files do you have?--A whole bunch. Since I haven't been able to get a good backup, they're still there. 5. If you can't get it backed up, you probably have many many days worth and a very full partion. --The SAN _greatly_ increased my storage capacity, it's onlyabout 50% full. The problem has been around since it was 25-30% full, however. Diane (picking at straws here.) Eric -Original Message-From: HOLLIDAY, Eric [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]Sent: Thursday, December 06, 2001 6:59 AMTo: MS-Exchange Admin IssuesSubject: RE: Error when backing up Exch. 5.5 (using MS backup) Diane, Yes, I have. It makes _no_ diff when the job runs. At the present time, I am only running the job manually and it still fails. Sorry, should've told you, the OS is Win2Kserver. I run the same job on two other, identical, servers with no problems. Now, I wouldn't even be using NTBackup, except that ArcSmurf choked on the backup. After reading about similar problems from other folks on this list, I thought I'd try using NTBackup to a file then have ArcSmurf back that up to tape. Works like a champ on the other two servers, just not this one! Any other ideas? Should I try running some diags on the store? Eric -Original Message- From: Diane Beckham [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, December 05, 2001 2:39 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Error when backing up Exch. 5.5 (using MS backup)Eric, have you tried
RE: Antigen (Ejaculate IT)
Title: RE: Antigen (Ejaculate IT) I think we all just love to hear you rant about CA. :) -Original Message- From: Lefkovics, William [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, December 07, 2001 8:45 AM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Antigen (Ejaculate IT) Is this a setup? William -Original Message- From: Callan, Chris [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, December 07, 2001 5:38 AM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Antigen (Ejaculate IT) I have read that pretty much everyone is in agreeance about the uselessness of EjaculateIT. I am currently trying to get my bosses to head over to AntiGen for my Exchange based AV. We will hopefully be moving to NAV for the Server side itself, can you guys give me ammunition to give my boss to shoot down CA's products. -Original Message- From: Kevin Miller [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, December 06, 2001 6:25 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Antigen (Ejaculate IT) I thought it was bad to water a hanging plant every day? -- Kevinm M WLKMMAS, UCC+WCA, CKWSE CKST -Original Message- From: Ray Zorz [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, December 06, 2001 3:14 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Antigen (Ejaculate IT) Right now my favorite place would be in hanging planters over their servers, anxiously waiting to water them daily. -Original Message- From: Kevin Miller [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, December 06, 2001 3:13 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Antigen (Ejaculate IT) We know you like to keep those on your desk : -- Kevinm M WLKMMAS, UCC+WCA, CKWSE CKST -Original Message- From: Ray Zorz [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, December 06, 2001 1:47 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Antigen (Ejaculate IT) Server room? -Original Message- From: Martin Blackstone [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, December 06, 2001 2:09 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Antigen (Ejaculate IT) As long as you keep it away from any bamboo growing in the server room, it should be fine. List Charter and FAQ at: http://www.sunbelt-software.com/exchange_list_charter.htm List Charter and FAQ at: http://www.sunbelt-software.com/exchange_list_charter.htm
RE: Antigen (Ejaculate IT)
Title: RE: Antigen (Ejaculate IT) I asked about this product: http://www3.ca.com/Solutions/ProductOption.asp?ID=2765 And they offered to send a development SWAT team out with the CD so they could get my feedback and opinions 'while I installed and played with it'. That would be great if I didn't do these things at night. I'm thinking about it. William -Original Message-From: Allen Crawford [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]Sent: Friday, December 07, 2001 6:11 AMTo: MS-Exchange Admin IssuesSubject: RE: Antigen (Ejaculate IT) I think we all just love to hear you rant about CA. :) -Original Message- From: Lefkovics, William [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, December 07, 2001 8:45 AM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Antigen (Ejaculate IT) Is this a setup? William -Original Message- From: Callan, Chris [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, December 07, 2001 5:38 AM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Antigen (Ejaculate IT) I have read that pretty much everyone is in agreeance about the uselessness of EjaculateIT. I am currently trying to get my bosses to head over to AntiGen for my Exchange based AV. We will hopefully be moving to NAV for the Server side itself, can you guys give me ammunition to give my boss to shoot down CA's products. -Original Message- From: Kevin Miller [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, December 06, 2001 6:25 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Antigen (Ejaculate IT) I thought it was bad to water a hanging plant every day? -- Kevinm M WLKMMAS, UCC+WCA, CKWSE CKST -Original Message- From: Ray Zorz [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, December 06, 2001 3:14 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Antigen (Ejaculate IT) Right now my favorite place would be in hanging planters over their servers, anxiously waiting to water them daily. -Original Message- From: Kevin Miller [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, December 06, 2001 3:13 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Antigen (Ejaculate IT) We know you like to keep those on your desk : -- Kevinm M WLKMMAS, UCC+WCA, CKWSE CKST -Original Message- From: Ray Zorz [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, December 06, 2001 1:47 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Antigen (Ejaculate IT) Server room? -Original Message- From: Martin Blackstone [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, December 06, 2001 2:09 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Antigen (Ejaculate IT) As long as you keep it away from any bamboo growing in the server room, it should be fine. List Charter and FAQ at: http://www.sunbelt-software.com/exchange_list_charter.htm List Charter and FAQ at:http://www.sunbelt-software.com/exchange_list_charter.htm List Charter and FAQ at: http://www.sunbelt-software.com/exchange_list_charter.htm
RE: Size of Personal Folders
Title: Message The fact is PST's have a problem at 2 gig. End of discussion for your users. Even if you don't use PST's, mailboxes over 2 gigs is a problem, because one DR method might include using EXMERGE, which creates PST's. -Original Message-From: ONG Liang Bu (CSC) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]Sent: Friday, December 07, 2001 5:41 AMTo: MS-Exchange Admin IssuesSubject: RE: Size of Personal Folders Jack, The server cannot add anymore harddisk. Using2 Compaq Proliant 6500 runs as clustered with one diskdisk array. The disk array has 6 18.2G disks, two are raid 0, for the transaction logs. Four are raid-5 (1 of them is redundant disk). It turn up the firmware on the raid controller card is quite old. If I add one more disk to the disk array I need to redo the raid 5again, which is quite a hassle. Anyway it is the same old story, users do not want to keep old mails. Have double the quota twice, from 10 M to 20 then to 40 M. After 6 months they come back and ask for more. We have installed the Mailbox Manager and will purge anything that is more than 1 yr old. Ong LB -Original Message-From: EALES, Jack / RSAIFS - IOM [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]Sent: Friday, December 07, 2001 8:32 PMTo: MS-Exchange Admin IssuesSubject: RE: Size of Personal Folders Anything bigger than 1.99Gb (i.e 2Gb +) will no longer work. Disk space is so cheap at the moment, why not but some more for the server and continue to take advantage of Single Instance Storage (SIS) in Exchange. That way, overall, you will use less disk space all up and ensure that your backups are complete and simpler then using PST's scattered around the place... HTH Jack -Original Message-From: ONG Liang Bu (CSC) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 07 December 2001 12:19To: MS-Exchange Admin IssuesSubject: Size of Personal FoldersTHIS MESSAGE ORIGINATED ON THE INTERNET - Please read the detailed disclaimer below.-- Hi, I have been a lurker in this list for the past two yrs. Have to say this list has save my ass on many occasions. Recently the file blocking discussions save me from the GONE.SCR, Thanks for the tips. Just a simple question I will not mind if I do not get an answer. Anybody knows how big can a personal folder grow? The reason I asked is my users are growing and I am running out of disk space. We are due to an upgrading from Exchange 5.5 to Exchange 2000 at the mid next yr. At the mean time I am advising the users to temporary pull their mails to the personal folder. I read it somewhere the personal folder cannot be too large. In fact anything above 1 G is not advisable. Definitely Microsoft must have a design spec, say .edb file in Ex 5.5 standard is 16 G; so .pst must have a design limitation. It will not be safe for 1 G, 2 G ... At the moment I am advising them not to have it more than 1G, but to the mid next yr is a long time.. Any points to enlighten on this issue is appreciatd. One more thing I am trying out Antigen, not bad at all. Many thanks (sincerely thanks for the many tips for the past 2 yrs) Ong LB Exchange Adminsitrator National Institute of Education Nanyang Technological University Singapore List Charter and FAQ at:http://www.sunbelt-software.com/exchange_list_charter.htm--The following message has been automatically added by the mail gateway to comply with a Royal Sun Alliance IT Security requirement:As this email arrived via the Internet you should be cautious about its origin and content. Replies which contain sensitive information or legal/contractual obligations are particularly vulnerable. In these cases you should not reply unless you are authorised to do so, and adequate encryption is employed.If you have any questions, please speak to your local desktop support team or IT security contact.--List Charter and FAQ at:http://www.sunbelt-software.com/exchange_list_charter.htmList Charter and FAQ at:http://www.sunbelt-software.com/exchange_list_charter.htm List Charter and FAQ at: http://www.sunbelt-software.com/exchange_list_charter.htm
RE: Exchange 2000 question
Title: RE: Error when backing up Exch. 5.5 (using MS backup) Does anyone know if there is way to change my font in an Email, so that it irritates thousands of people? -Original Message-From: Manubay, James Francis L. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]Sent: Thursday, December 06, 2001 6:28 PMTo: MS-Exchange Admin IssuesSubject: Exchange 2000 question Hi all! I got a question with regard to installing Exchange 2000. Through testing, I found out that when I install exchange to a mixed mode, the Distribution list becomes a global group on the other hand when installing it on a native mode it becomes a universal group. What does this mean? Should I shift first into native mode before installing E2k? Please help and thanks so much in advance. - james -List Charter and FAQ at:http://www.sunbelt-software.com/exchange_list_charter.htm List Charter and FAQ at: http://www.sunbelt-software.com/exchange_list_charter.htm
GOOD TIP TO DELETE THE MAIL QUEUE on E2K
Title: Message if anyone wants to see de content of mail on the queue, or may be delete de queue. go to X:\Program Files\Exchsrvr\Mailroot\vsi 1\Queue each file in that folder is an email, if you select your explorer options to do a thumbnails, you also can see the email as in your email cliente. also you can select the files and delete them from your queue. This is just a tip, that i find usefull when my server was been used for spamming. List Charter and FAQ at: http://www.sunbelt-software.com/exchange_list_charter.htm
Create Reports for Exchange 5.5 mailboxes
We have over 10,000 users and I would like to create a report that I can export that shows me all mailboxes with the last date that the mailbox was accessed. My ultimate goal is to clean the servers, especially of accounts that have never been used. Any suggestions- List Charter and FAQ at: http://www.sunbelt-software.com/exchange_list_charter.htm
Re: MTA X400
Thanks. That's done, mail still queuing though. Is there anything else I can try? - Original Message - From: Ropiak Steve - NAO Florence Office Exchange and Bar Code Admn. To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Sent: Friday, December 07, 2001 12:47 PM Subject: RE: MTA X400 Go ahead and bounce the service. It won't trash the queue. mit freundlichen Grüßen,(Best Regards),Steve RopiakZF Group NAOCERT, Exchange and Bar Code Administrator(207) 989-9115 voice(207) 989-8722 fax(513) 317-0197 cell [EMAIL PROTECTED] -Original Message-From: Gian Sartor [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]Sent: Friday, December 07, 2001 7:00 AMTo: MS-Exchange Admin IssuesSubject: MTA X400 Hi, I have a small problem which I am hoping someone can shed some light on as my knowledge in this area of Exchange is a bit limited at the mo. We have 2 Servers transferring mail over X400 connectors, the link between them went down last night, so mail started backing up in the MTA. The connection between the servers is back up now, but the mail is not being transferred. Can I stop and start the MTA service without losing any mail? I also noticed Event ID:9156 in the Application log of one of the servers, I found this article http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;EN-US;q193894GSSNB=1which relates to the problem but I don't want to change anything unnecessarily. Any help with this would be great, thanks in advance. Gian Sartor MCSEIT Support EngineerList Charter and FAQ at:http://www.sunbelt-software.com/exchange_list_charter.htmList Charter and FAQ at:http://www.sunbelt-software.com/exchange_list_charter.htm List Charter and FAQ at: http://www.sunbelt-software.com/exchange_list_charter.htm
RE: Windows 2000 Server List
Title: Message He wanted to know of a "good" one... :P D "Get all over this like a donkey on a waffle." -Original Message-From: Allen Crawford [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, December 07, 2001 9:43 AMTo: MS-Exchange Admin IssuesSubject: RE: Windows 2000 Server List Yeah, Sunbelt's NTSYSADMIN list. http://lyris.sunbelt-software.com/scripts/lyris.pl?join=ntsysadmin -Original Message- From: Leblanc, Shawn [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, December 07, 2001 12:37 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: Windows 2000 Server List Does anyone know of a good Windows 2000 Server List? Regards, Shawn List Charter and FAQ at: http://www.sunbelt-software.com/exchange_list_charter.htm List Charter and FAQ at:http://www.sunbelt-software.com/exchange_list_charter.htm List Charter and FAQ at: http://www.sunbelt-software.com/exchange_list_charter.htm
RE: Defragging the IS
For that little, I wouldn't bother. -Original Message- From: Crosby, Tim (Sarcom) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, December 07, 2001 1:40 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: Defragging the IS Tomorrow we are scheduled to move our single server Exchange 5.5 site over to a new Compaq DL380 server that is part of a SAN. Old server is NT4, SP6. New server will be Windows 2000, SP2 but will still have Exchange 5.5, SP4. My boss wants us do a complete backup of the server tonight, then come in tomorrow and do a defrag of the database, back it up again, and restore it to the new server. It seems to be the general consensus on this list that defrag=bad. But what about in this situation where we are moving to a new server and we are scheduled to have the server down for 24 hours anyway? I checked the event logs and, as of last night it shows that the database has 16 megabytes of free space after online defragmentation. Is this the white space that I've heard about? And is that all the space we will gain by doing a defrag? If that's the case, I will suggest we don't take the time and risk of doing a defrag of the IS. I'm guessing it will take at least 2-3 hours to defrag our 36GB database Or will there be a performance increase by doing a defrag now? Thanks for your input. Tim List Charter and FAQ at: http://www.sunbelt-software.com/exchange_list_charter.htm List Charter and FAQ at: http://www.sunbelt-software.com/exchange_list_charter.htm
RE: Defragging the IS
Call me slow, but why not put the NT 4 server in your new AD world and move the IS and such over so as to prevent any loss or downtime? Don't really call me slow - I might have to go to the carebear list that William runs. Steve Clark Clark Systems Support, LLC AVIEN Charter Member Who's watching your network? www.clarksupport.com 301-610-9584 voice 240-465-0323 Efax The data furnished in connection with this document is deemed by Clark Systems Support, LLC., to contain proprietary and privileged information and shall not be disclosed or used for the benefit of others without the prior written permission of Clark Systems Support, LLC. -Original Message- From: Crosby, Tim (Sarcom) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, December 07, 2001 1:50 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Defragging the IS OK, what would be a more realistic estimate then? I'd like to be able to give them some idea. -Original Message- From: Don Ely [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, December 07, 2001 1:49 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Defragging the IS Don't do a defrag for a measly 16MB! 2-3 hours for a 36GB IS!! HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA! Yeah, rggghhh. D Mistakes: It could be that the purpose of your life is only to serve as a warning to others. -Original Message- From: Crosby, Tim (Sarcom) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, December 07, 2001 10:40 AM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: Defragging the IS Tomorrow we are scheduled to move our single server Exchange 5.5 site over to a new Compaq DL380 server that is part of a SAN. Old server is NT4, SP6. New server will be Windows 2000, SP2 but will still have Exchange 5.5, SP4. My boss wants us do a complete backup of the server tonight, then come in tomorrow and do a defrag of the database, back it up again, and restore it to the new server. It seems to be the general consensus on this list that defrag=bad. But what about in this situation where we are moving to a new server and we are scheduled to have the server down for 24 hours anyway? I checked the event logs and, as of last night it shows that the database has 16 megabytes of free space after online defragmentation. Is this the white space that I've heard about? And is that all the space we will gain by doing a defrag? If that's the case, I will suggest we don't take the time and risk of doing a defrag of the IS. I'm guessing it will take at least 2-3 hours to defrag our 36GB database Or will there be a performance increase by doing a defrag now? Thanks for your input. Tim List Charter and FAQ at: http://www.sunbelt-software.com/exchange_list_charter.htm List Charter and FAQ at: http://www.sunbelt-software.com/exchange_list_charter.htm List Charter and FAQ at: http://www.sunbelt-software.com/exchange_list_charter.htm List Charter and FAQ at: http://www.sunbelt-software.com/exchange_list_charter.htm
RE: Defragging the IS
Well, if you've got kick ass hardware, you'd be luck to get 4GB an hour. I would estimate 2GB an hour at best if I were you. D BSD Skunks the Penguin - Roger Seilestad -Original Message- From: Crosby, Tim (Sarcom) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, December 07, 2001 10:50 AM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Defragging the IS OK, what would be a more realistic estimate then? I'd like to be able to give them some idea. -Original Message- From: Don Ely [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, December 07, 2001 1:49 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Defragging the IS Don't do a defrag for a measly 16MB! 2-3 hours for a 36GB IS!! HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA! Yeah, rggghhh. D Mistakes: It could be that the purpose of your life is only to serve as a warning to others. -Original Message- From: Crosby, Tim (Sarcom) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, December 07, 2001 10:40 AM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: Defragging the IS Tomorrow we are scheduled to move our single server Exchange 5.5 site over to a new Compaq DL380 server that is part of a SAN. Old server is NT4, SP6. New server will be Windows 2000, SP2 but will still have Exchange 5.5, SP4. My boss wants us do a complete backup of the server tonight, then come in tomorrow and do a defrag of the database, back it up again, and restore it to the new server. It seems to be the general consensus on this list that defrag=bad. But what about in this situation where we are moving to a new server and we are scheduled to have the server down for 24 hours anyway? I checked the event logs and, as of last night it shows that the database has 16 megabytes of free space after online defragmentation. Is this the white space that I've heard about? And is that all the space we will gain by doing a defrag? If that's the case, I will suggest we don't take the time and risk of doing a defrag of the IS. I'm guessing it will take at least 2-3 hours to defrag our 36GB database Or will there be a performance increase by doing a defrag now? Thanks for your input. Tim List Charter and FAQ at: http://www.sunbelt-software.com/exchange_list_charter.htm List Charter and FAQ at: http://www.sunbelt-software.com/exchange_list_charter.htm List Charter and FAQ at: http://www.sunbelt-software.com/exchange_list_charter.htm List Charter and FAQ at: http://www.sunbelt-software.com/exchange_list_charter.htm
RE: Defragging the IS
He didn't mention anything about AD... D Do all the good you can, by all the means you can, in all the ways you can, in all the places you can, at all the times you can, to all the people you can, as long as ever you can. -John Wesley -Original Message- From: Clark, Steve [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, December 07, 2001 11:04 AM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Defragging the IS Call me slow, but why not put the NT 4 server in your new AD world and move the IS and such over so as to prevent any loss or downtime? Don't really call me slow - I might have to go to the carebear list that William runs. Steve Clark Clark Systems Support, LLC AVIEN Charter Member Who's watching your network? www.clarksupport.com 301-610-9584 voice 240-465-0323 Efax The data furnished in connection with this document is deemed by Clark Systems Support, LLC., to contain proprietary and privileged information and shall not be disclosed or used for the benefit of others without the prior written permission of Clark Systems Support, LLC. -Original Message- From: Crosby, Tim (Sarcom) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, December 07, 2001 1:50 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Defragging the IS OK, what would be a more realistic estimate then? I'd like to be able to give them some idea. -Original Message- From: Don Ely [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, December 07, 2001 1:49 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Defragging the IS Don't do a defrag for a measly 16MB! 2-3 hours for a 36GB IS!! HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA! Yeah, rggghhh. D Mistakes: It could be that the purpose of your life is only to serve as a warning to others. -Original Message- From: Crosby, Tim (Sarcom) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, December 07, 2001 10:40 AM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: Defragging the IS Tomorrow we are scheduled to move our single server Exchange 5.5 site over to a new Compaq DL380 server that is part of a SAN. Old server is NT4, SP6. New server will be Windows 2000, SP2 but will still have Exchange 5.5, SP4. My boss wants us do a complete backup of the server tonight, then come in tomorrow and do a defrag of the database, back it up again, and restore it to the new server. It seems to be the general consensus on this list that defrag=bad. But what about in this situation where we are moving to a new server and we are scheduled to have the server down for 24 hours anyway? I checked the event logs and, as of last night it shows that the database has 16 megabytes of free space after online defragmentation. Is this the white space that I've heard about? And is that all the space we will gain by doing a defrag? If that's the case, I will suggest we don't take the time and risk of doing a defrag of the IS. I'm guessing it will take at least 2-3 hours to defrag our 36GB database Or will there be a performance increase by doing a defrag now? Thanks for your input. Tim List Charter and FAQ at: http://www.sunbelt-software.com/exchange_list_charter.htm List Charter and FAQ at: http://www.sunbelt-software.com/exchange_list_charter.htm List Charter and FAQ at: http://www.sunbelt-software.com/exchange_list_charter.htm List Charter and FAQ at: http://www.sunbelt-software.com/exchange_list_charter.htm List Charter and FAQ at: http://www.sunbelt-software.com/exchange_list_charter.htm
RE: Defragging the IS
True - but still the same point. The Ed Crowley method works beautifully. Have used it several times and didn't have any down time or data issues. Steve Clark Clark Systems Support, LLC AVIEN Charter Member Who's watching your network? www.clarksupport.com 301-610-9584 voice 240-465-0323 Efax The data furnished in connection with this document is deemed by Clark Systems Support, LLC., to contain proprietary and privileged information and shall not be disclosed or used for the benefit of others without the prior written permission of Clark Systems Support, LLC. -Original Message- From: Don Ely [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, December 07, 2001 2:03 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Defragging the IS He didn't mention anything about AD... D Do all the good you can, by all the means you can, in all the ways you can, in all the places you can, at all the times you can, to all the people you can, as long as ever you can. -John Wesley -Original Message- From: Clark, Steve [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, December 07, 2001 11:04 AM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Defragging the IS Call me slow, but why not put the NT 4 server in your new AD world and move the IS and such over so as to prevent any loss or downtime? Don't really call me slow - I might have to go to the carebear list that William runs. Steve Clark Clark Systems Support, LLC AVIEN Charter Member Who's watching your network? www.clarksupport.com 301-610-9584 voice 240-465-0323 Efax The data furnished in connection with this document is deemed by Clark Systems Support, LLC., to contain proprietary and privileged information and shall not be disclosed or used for the benefit of others without the prior written permission of Clark Systems Support, LLC. -Original Message- From: Crosby, Tim (Sarcom) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, December 07, 2001 1:50 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Defragging the IS OK, what would be a more realistic estimate then? I'd like to be able to give them some idea. -Original Message- From: Don Ely [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, December 07, 2001 1:49 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Defragging the IS Don't do a defrag for a measly 16MB! 2-3 hours for a 36GB IS!! HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA! Yeah, rggghhh. D Mistakes: It could be that the purpose of your life is only to serve as a warning to others. -Original Message- From: Crosby, Tim (Sarcom) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, December 07, 2001 10:40 AM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: Defragging the IS Tomorrow we are scheduled to move our single server Exchange 5.5 site over to a new Compaq DL380 server that is part of a SAN. Old server is NT4, SP6. New server will be Windows 2000, SP2 but will still have Exchange 5.5, SP4. My boss wants us do a complete backup of the server tonight, then come in tomorrow and do a defrag of the database, back it up again, and restore it to the new server. It seems to be the general consensus on this list that defrag=bad. But what about in this situation where we are moving to a new server and we are scheduled to have the server down for 24 hours anyway? I checked the event logs and, as of last night it shows that the database has 16 megabytes of free space after online defragmentation. Is this the white space that I've heard about? And is that all the space we will gain by doing a defrag? If that's the case, I will suggest we don't take the time and risk of doing a defrag of the IS. I'm guessing it will take at least 2-3 hours to defrag our 36GB database Or will there be a performance increase by doing a defrag now? Thanks for your input. Tim List Charter and FAQ at: http://www.sunbelt-software.com/exchange_list_charter.htm List Charter and FAQ at: http://www.sunbelt-software.com/exchange_list_charter.htm List Charter and FAQ at: http://www.sunbelt-software.com/exchange_list_charter.htm List Charter and FAQ at: http://www.sunbelt-software.com/exchange_list_charter.htm List Charter and FAQ at: http://www.sunbelt-software.com/exchange_list_charter.htm List Charter and FAQ at: http://www.sunbelt-software.com/exchange_list_charter.htm
RE: Defragging the IS
That was actually my recommendation, but I don't make the final decisions around here. -Original Message- From: Clark, Steve [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, December 07, 2001 2:04 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Defragging the IS Call me slow, but why not put the NT 4 server in your new AD world and move the IS and such over so as to prevent any loss or downtime? Don't really call me slow - I might have to go to the carebear list that William runs. Steve Clark Clark Systems Support, LLC AVIEN Charter Member Who's watching your network? www.clarksupport.com 301-610-9584 voice 240-465-0323 Efax The data furnished in connection with this document is deemed by Clark Systems Support, LLC., to contain proprietary and privileged information and shall not be disclosed or used for the benefit of others without the prior written permission of Clark Systems Support, LLC. -Original Message- From: Crosby, Tim (Sarcom) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, December 07, 2001 1:50 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Defragging the IS OK, what would be a more realistic estimate then? I'd like to be able to give them some idea. -Original Message- From: Don Ely [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, December 07, 2001 1:49 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Defragging the IS Don't do a defrag for a measly 16MB! 2-3 hours for a 36GB IS!! HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA! Yeah, rggghhh. D Mistakes: It could be that the purpose of your life is only to serve as a warning to others. -Original Message- From: Crosby, Tim (Sarcom) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, December 07, 2001 10:40 AM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: Defragging the IS Tomorrow we are scheduled to move our single server Exchange 5.5 site over to a new Compaq DL380 server that is part of a SAN. Old server is NT4, SP6. New server will be Windows 2000, SP2 but will still have Exchange 5.5, SP4. My boss wants us do a complete backup of the server tonight, then come in tomorrow and do a defrag of the database, back it up again, and restore it to the new server. It seems to be the general consensus on this list that defrag=bad. But what about in this situation where we are moving to a new server and we are scheduled to have the server down for 24 hours anyway? I checked the event logs and, as of last night it shows that the database has 16 megabytes of free space after online defragmentation. Is this the white space that I've heard about? And is that all the space we will gain by doing a defrag? If that's the case, I will suggest we don't take the time and risk of doing a defrag of the IS. I'm guessing it will take at least 2-3 hours to defrag our 36GB database Or will there be a performance increase by doing a defrag now? Thanks for your input. Tim List Charter and FAQ at: http://www.sunbelt-software.com/exchange_list_charter.htm List Charter and FAQ at: http://www.sunbelt-software.com/exchange_list_charter.htm List Charter and FAQ at: http://www.sunbelt-software.com/exchange_list_charter.htm List Charter and FAQ at: http://www.sunbelt-software.com/exchange_list_charter.htm List Charter and FAQ at: http://www.sunbelt-software.com/exchange_list_charter.htm
RE: Defragging the IS
He could still do the Ed C. method on his W2K server provided there isn't any AD in the picture. D Mistakes: It could be that the purpose of your life is only to serve as a warning to others. -Original Message- From: Clark, Steve [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, December 07, 2001 11:10 AM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Defragging the IS True - but still the same point. The Ed Crowley method works beautifully. Have used it several times and didn't have any down time or data issues. Steve Clark Clark Systems Support, LLC AVIEN Charter Member Who's watching your network? www.clarksupport.com 301-610-9584 voice 240-465-0323 Efax The data furnished in connection with this document is deemed by Clark Systems Support, LLC., to contain proprietary and privileged information and shall not be disclosed or used for the benefit of others without the prior written permission of Clark Systems Support, LLC. -Original Message- From: Don Ely [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, December 07, 2001 2:03 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Defragging the IS He didn't mention anything about AD... D Do all the good you can, by all the means you can, in all the ways you can, in all the places you can, at all the times you can, to all the people you can, as long as ever you can. -John Wesley -Original Message- From: Clark, Steve [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, December 07, 2001 11:04 AM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Defragging the IS Call me slow, but why not put the NT 4 server in your new AD world and move the IS and such over so as to prevent any loss or downtime? Don't really call me slow - I might have to go to the carebear list that William runs. Steve Clark Clark Systems Support, LLC AVIEN Charter Member Who's watching your network? www.clarksupport.com 301-610-9584 voice 240-465-0323 Efax The data furnished in connection with this document is deemed by Clark Systems Support, LLC., to contain proprietary and privileged information and shall not be disclosed or used for the benefit of others without the prior written permission of Clark Systems Support, LLC. -Original Message- From: Crosby, Tim (Sarcom) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, December 07, 2001 1:50 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Defragging the IS OK, what would be a more realistic estimate then? I'd like to be able to give them some idea. -Original Message- From: Don Ely [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, December 07, 2001 1:49 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Defragging the IS Don't do a defrag for a measly 16MB! 2-3 hours for a 36GB IS!! HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA! Yeah, rggghhh. D Mistakes: It could be that the purpose of your life is only to serve as a warning to others. -Original Message- From: Crosby, Tim (Sarcom) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, December 07, 2001 10:40 AM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: Defragging the IS Tomorrow we are scheduled to move our single server Exchange 5.5 site over to a new Compaq DL380 server that is part of a SAN. Old server is NT4, SP6. New server will be Windows 2000, SP2 but will still have Exchange 5.5, SP4. My boss wants us do a complete backup of the server tonight, then come in tomorrow and do a defrag of the database, back it up again, and restore it to the new server. It seems to be the general consensus on this list that defrag=bad. But what about in this situation where we are moving to a new server and we are scheduled to have the server down for 24 hours anyway? I checked the event logs and, as of last night it shows that the database has 16 megabytes of free space after online defragmentation. Is this the white space that I've heard about? And is that all the space we will gain by doing a defrag? If that's the case, I will suggest we don't take the time and risk of doing a defrag of the IS. I'm guessing it will take at least 2-3 hours to defrag our 36GB database Or will there be a performance increase by doing a defrag now? Thanks for your input. Tim List Charter and FAQ at: http://www.sunbelt-software.com/exchange_list_charter.htm List Charter and FAQ at: http://www.sunbelt-software.com/exchange_list_charter.htm List Charter and FAQ at: http://www.sunbelt-software.com/exchange_list_charter.htm List Charter and FAQ at: http://www.sunbelt-software.com/exchange_list_charter.htm List Charter and FAQ at: http://www.sunbelt-software.com/exchange_list_charter.htm List Charter and FAQ at: http://www.sunbelt-software.com/exchange_list_charter.htm List Charter and FAQ at: http://www.sunbelt-software.com/exchange_list_charter.htm
RE: Defragging the IS
Agreed. Steve Clark Clark Systems Support, LLC AVIEN Charter Member Who's watching your network? www.clarksupport.com 301-610-9584 voice 240-465-0323 Efax The data furnished in connection with this document is deemed by Clark Systems Support, LLC., to contain proprietary and privileged information and shall not be disclosed or used for the benefit of others without the prior written permission of Clark Systems Support, LLC. -Original Message- From: Don Ely [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, December 07, 2001 2:07 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Defragging the IS He could still do the Ed C. method on his W2K server provided there isn't any AD in the picture. D Mistakes: It could be that the purpose of your life is only to serve as a warning to others. -Original Message- From: Clark, Steve [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, December 07, 2001 11:10 AM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Defragging the IS True - but still the same point. The Ed Crowley method works beautifully. Have used it several times and didn't have any down time or data issues. Steve Clark Clark Systems Support, LLC AVIEN Charter Member Who's watching your network? www.clarksupport.com 301-610-9584 voice 240-465-0323 Efax The data furnished in connection with this document is deemed by Clark Systems Support, LLC., to contain proprietary and privileged information and shall not be disclosed or used for the benefit of others without the prior written permission of Clark Systems Support, LLC. -Original Message- From: Don Ely [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, December 07, 2001 2:03 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Defragging the IS He didn't mention anything about AD... D Do all the good you can, by all the means you can, in all the ways you can, in all the places you can, at all the times you can, to all the people you can, as long as ever you can. -John Wesley -Original Message- From: Clark, Steve [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, December 07, 2001 11:04 AM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Defragging the IS Call me slow, but why not put the NT 4 server in your new AD world and move the IS and such over so as to prevent any loss or downtime? Don't really call me slow - I might have to go to the carebear list that William runs. Steve Clark Clark Systems Support, LLC AVIEN Charter Member Who's watching your network? www.clarksupport.com 301-610-9584 voice 240-465-0323 Efax The data furnished in connection with this document is deemed by Clark Systems Support, LLC., to contain proprietary and privileged information and shall not be disclosed or used for the benefit of others without the prior written permission of Clark Systems Support, LLC. -Original Message- From: Crosby, Tim (Sarcom) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, December 07, 2001 1:50 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Defragging the IS OK, what would be a more realistic estimate then? I'd like to be able to give them some idea. -Original Message- From: Don Ely [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, December 07, 2001 1:49 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Defragging the IS Don't do a defrag for a measly 16MB! 2-3 hours for a 36GB IS!! HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA! Yeah, rggghhh. D Mistakes: It could be that the purpose of your life is only to serve as a warning to others. -Original Message- From: Crosby, Tim (Sarcom) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, December 07, 2001 10:40 AM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: Defragging the IS Tomorrow we are scheduled to move our single server Exchange 5.5 site over to a new Compaq DL380 server that is part of a SAN. Old server is NT4, SP6. New server will be Windows 2000, SP2 but will still have Exchange 5.5, SP4. My boss wants us do a complete backup of the server tonight, then come in tomorrow and do a defrag of the database, back it up again, and restore it to the new server. It seems to be the general consensus on this list that defrag=bad. But what about in this situation where we are moving to a new server and we are scheduled to have the server down for 24 hours anyway? I checked the event logs and, as of last night it shows that the database has 16 megabytes of free space after online defragmentation. Is this the white space that I've heard about? And is that all the space we will gain by doing a defrag? If that's the case, I will suggest we don't take the time and risk of doing a defrag of the IS. I'm guessing it will take at least 2-3 hours to defrag our 36GB database Or will there be a performance increase by doing a defrag now? Thanks for your input. Tim List Charter and FAQ at: http://www.sunbelt-software.com/exchange_list_charter.htm List Charter and FAQ at:
RE: Windows 2000 Server List
Title: Message Oh, well then I think hes in trouble. They just talk about beer and stuff over there. Or was that this list? J -Original Message- From: Don Ely [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, December 07, 2001 1:50 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Windows 2000 Server List He wanted to know of a good one... :P D Get all over this like a donkey on a waffle. -Original Message- From: Allen Crawford [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, December 07, 2001 9:43 AM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Windows 2000 Server List Yeah, Sunbelt's NTSYSADMIN list. http://lyris.sunbelt-software.com/scripts/lyris.pl?join=ntsysadmin -Original Message- From: Leblanc, Shawn [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, December 07, 2001 12:37 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: Windows 2000 Server List Does anyone know of a good Windows 2000 Server List? Regards, Shawn List Charter and FAQ at: http://www.sunbelt-software.com/exchange_list_charter.htm List Charter and FAQ at: http://www.sunbelt-software.com/exchange_list_charter.htm List Charter and FAQ at: http://www.sunbelt-software.com/exchange_list_charter.htm List Charter and FAQ at: http://www.sunbelt-software.com/exchange_list_charter.htm
RE: Windows 2000 Server List
Well, there's the NT DL, originated by LANTUG, the Los Angeles NT Users Group, now called LAWNUG, the L.A. Windows Networking Users Group, and hosted on some listserver at UCLA. It's now predominantly Win2K-oriented, and I've gotten a few good suggestions from it. See below. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Windows NT discussion list: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe from this listserver, send an e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Place in the body of the message: UNSUBSCRIBE NT-L - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - There are also other forums, listed below, but I haven't used them as much (doesn't mean they aren't better than the UCLA/LANTUG forum). www.win2000mag.net/Forums www.computingcentral.com/AllMessageBoards www.bhs.com/techforums www.ntfaq.com boards.cramsession.com/boards HTH - Bob Peitzke -Original Message- From: Leblanc, Shawn [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, December 07, 2001 9:37 AM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: Windows 2000 Server List Does anyone know of a good Windows 2000 Server List? Regards, Shawn List Charter and FAQ at: http://www.sunbelt-software.com/exchange_list_charter.htm List Charter and FAQ at: http://www.sunbelt-software.com/exchange_list_charter.htm
RE: Defragging the IS
I feel your pain. You might want to explain the experienced recommendation from others that have done this several times and the proven track record. This along with the words about defragging the IS may help to convince them otherwise. Good luck! Or wait until late, in the dark, and take a baseball bat to them. Then do it your way while their out sick. Your call. Steve Clark Clark Systems Support, LLC AVIEN Charter Member Who's watching your network? www.clarksupport.com 301-610-9584 voice 240-465-0323 Efax The data furnished in connection with this document is deemed by Clark Systems Support, LLC., to contain proprietary and privileged information and shall not be disclosed or used for the benefit of others without the prior written permission of Clark Systems Support, LLC. -Original Message- From: Crosby, Tim (Sarcom) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, December 07, 2001 2:00 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Defragging the IS That was actually my recommendation, but I don't make the final decisions around here. -Original Message- From: Clark, Steve [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, December 07, 2001 2:04 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Defragging the IS Call me slow, but why not put the NT 4 server in your new AD world and move the IS and such over so as to prevent any loss or downtime? Don't really call me slow - I might have to go to the carebear list that William runs. Steve Clark Clark Systems Support, LLC AVIEN Charter Member Who's watching your network? www.clarksupport.com 301-610-9584 voice 240-465-0323 Efax The data furnished in connection with this document is deemed by Clark Systems Support, LLC., to contain proprietary and privileged information and shall not be disclosed or used for the benefit of others without the prior written permission of Clark Systems Support, LLC. -Original Message- From: Crosby, Tim (Sarcom) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, December 07, 2001 1:50 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Defragging the IS OK, what would be a more realistic estimate then? I'd like to be able to give them some idea. -Original Message- From: Don Ely [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, December 07, 2001 1:49 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Defragging the IS Don't do a defrag for a measly 16MB! 2-3 hours for a 36GB IS!! HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA! Yeah, rggghhh. D Mistakes: It could be that the purpose of your life is only to serve as a warning to others. -Original Message- From: Crosby, Tim (Sarcom) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, December 07, 2001 10:40 AM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: Defragging the IS Tomorrow we are scheduled to move our single server Exchange 5.5 site over to a new Compaq DL380 server that is part of a SAN. Old server is NT4, SP6. New server will be Windows 2000, SP2 but will still have Exchange 5.5, SP4. My boss wants us do a complete backup of the server tonight, then come in tomorrow and do a defrag of the database, back it up again, and restore it to the new server. It seems to be the general consensus on this list that defrag=bad. But what about in this situation where we are moving to a new server and we are scheduled to have the server down for 24 hours anyway? I checked the event logs and, as of last night it shows that the database has 16 megabytes of free space after online defragmentation. Is this the white space that I've heard about? And is that all the space we will gain by doing a defrag? If that's the case, I will suggest we don't take the time and risk of doing a defrag of the IS. I'm guessing it will take at least 2-3 hours to defrag our 36GB database Or will there be a performance increase by doing a defrag now? Thanks for your input. Tim List Charter and FAQ at: http://www.sunbelt-software.com/exchange_list_charter.htm List Charter and FAQ at: http://www.sunbelt-software.com/exchange_list_charter.htm List Charter and FAQ at: http://www.sunbelt-software.com/exchange_list_charter.htm List Charter and FAQ at: http://www.sunbelt-software.com/exchange_list_charter.htm List Charter and FAQ at: http://www.sunbelt-software.com/exchange_list_charter.htm List Charter and FAQ at: http://www.sunbelt-software.com/exchange_list_charter.htm
RE: Defragging the IS
Tim for 16MB don't recovery much space in this and Defrag Database 36 GB is very dangerous. Two hours? M for my experience 8GB = 1.50 Horas Depend the Hard of Server -Original Message- From: Crosby, Tim (Sarcom) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, December 07, 2001 3:40 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: Defragging the IS Tomorrow we are scheduled to move our single server Exchange 5.5 site over to a new Compaq DL380 server that is part of a SAN. Old server is NT4, SP6. New server will be Windows 2000, SP2 but will still have Exchange 5.5, SP4. My boss wants us do a complete backup of the server tonight, then come in tomorrow and do a defrag of the database, back it up again, and restore it to the new server. It seems to be the general consensus on this list that defrag=bad. But what about in this situation where we are moving to a new server and we are scheduled to have the server down for 24 hours anyway? I checked the event logs and, as of last night it shows that the database has 16 megabytes of free space after online defragmentation. Is this the white space that I've heard about? And is that all the space we will gain by doing a defrag? If that's the case, I will suggest we don't take the time and risk of doing a defrag of the IS. I'm guessing it will take at least 2-3 hours to defrag our 36GB database Or will there be a performance increase by doing a defrag now? Thanks for your input. Tim List Charter and FAQ at: http://www.sunbelt-software.com/exchange_list_charter.htm List Charter and FAQ at: http://www.sunbelt-software.com/exchange_list_charter.htm
RE: Defragging the IS
Yes, that is the white space and that is ALL the offline defrag is going to do for you other than potentially destroy the IS. Tell your boss to forget about it. -Original Message- From: Crosby, Tim (Sarcom) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, December 07, 2001 10:40 AM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: Defragging the IS Tomorrow we are scheduled to move our single server Exchange 5.5 site over to a new Compaq DL380 server that is part of a SAN. Old server is NT4, SP6. New server will be Windows 2000, SP2 but will still have Exchange 5.5, SP4. My boss wants us do a complete backup of the server tonight, then come in tomorrow and do a defrag of the database, back it up again, and restore it to the new server. It seems to be the general consensus on this list that defrag=bad. But what about in this situation where we are moving to a new server and we are scheduled to have the server down for 24 hours anyway? I checked the event logs and, as of last night it shows that the database has 16 megabytes of free space after online defragmentation. Is this the white space that I've heard about? And is that all the space we will gain by doing a defrag? If that's the case, I will suggest we don't take the time and risk of doing a defrag of the IS. I'm guessing it will take at least 2-3 hours to defrag our 36GB database Or will there be a performance increase by doing a defrag now? Thanks for your input. Tim List Charter and FAQ at: http://www.sunbelt-software.com/exchange_list_charter.htm List Charter and FAQ at: http://www.sunbelt-software.com/exchange_list_charter.htm
Client not receiving email from us but can from any other site
Exchange 5.5... Outlook 2k client We are trying to send email to one of our clients. they can send to us without problem. I can send to them from an external email address (yahoo) with no problem. After we send messages we do not receive a undeliverable reply. Here is my thoughts let me know if you guys have any idea. Since we do not get a undeliverable reply it appears that the email is going someplace. any email I send to their name does not get bounced back. example if I send to [EMAIL PROTECTED] (don't want to use their email address hope you don't mind) I receive no undeliverable message. if I send to any other email address that is wrong I get a bounce back. if I send to a yahoo account that does not exist it bounces it back.We are on a sprint network so I though maybe sprint is not able to resolve their name correctly so I called sprint had them send an email and it go through fine. so I have no idea what the problem could be. Please help. Thanks James List Charter and FAQ at: http://www.sunbelt-software.com/exchange_list_charter.htm
RE: Antigen
Exchange 5.5 SP4 Issue existed prior to applying SP4 3 Gig free on sysvol space for 1.5 Gig page file Perf Optimized according to MS advice I have been working w/MS off on for just under 1 year and they are scratching there heads It started the day after we installed Antigen 5.28 and has continued after we removed installed Antigen 6.20 recently -Original Message- From: Lefkovics, William [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, December 06, 2001 4:36 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Antigen That's an Exchange5.5 box, right? Do you have lots of room for the pagefile? Have you reapplied sp4? Have you run the performance optimizer? William -Original Message- From: Kemppel, Charlean [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, December 06, 2001 12:57 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Antigen Speaking of Antigen, has anyone running Antigen experienced this error: MSExchangeIS 1160 Database resource failure error Out of memory occurred in function JTAB_BASE::EcCreateIndex while accessing the database We have been experiencing 1160's here and there since we installed Antigen last year. TechNet has several 1160 solutions [none indicate that Antigen is relative], but none have done the trick. I'm just curious if anyone else has seen it. -Original Message- From: Ray Zorz [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, December 06, 2001 3:14 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Antigen (Ejaculate IT) I ran Panda for files on my exchange server, but excluded the exchange server directories. Worked fine. -Original Message- From: Ropiak Steve - NAO Florence Office Exchange and Bar Code Admn. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, December 06, 2001 9:53 AM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Antigen (Ejaculate IT) I though running a file based scanner on an Exchange server was a mortal sin (like light beer)? mit freundlichen Grüßen,(Best Regards), Steve Ropiak ZF Group NAO CERT, Exchange and Bar Code Administrator (207) 989-9115 voice (207) 989-8722 fax (513) 317-0197 cell [EMAIL PROTECTED] -Original Message- From: BOERO MANSILLA Roberto [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, December 06, 2001 11:35 AM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Antigen (Ejaculate IT) norton 7.5 corporate great combination, on my own opinion -Mensaje original- De: McCready, Robert [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Enviado el: Jueves, 06 de Diciembre de 2001 12:59 p.m. Para: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Asunto: RE: Antigen (Ejaculate IT) Were thinking or purchasing Antigen. I didn't realize it didn't protect your system files also. Is this pretty typical, for instance does ScanMail do the same thing? Are those of you running Antigen running any other virus protection on Exchange? (different) Robert -Original Message- From: Micciche, Robert [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, December 06, 2001 10:46 AM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Antigen (Ejaculate IT) No problem, but that very likely was a miracle. -Original Message- From: Kevin Miller [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, December 06, 2001 10:42 AM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Antigen (Ejaculate IT) I fear for your servers life : -- Kevinm M WLKMMAS, UCC+WCA, CKWSE CKST -Original Message- From: Stephen J. Norton [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, December 06, 2001 7:34 AM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Antigen (Ejaculate IT) Thanks Robert. I assume you've had no conflicting issues running both on one box. And the uninstall of InnoculateIT actually went smoothly? -Original Message- From: Micciche, Robert [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, December 06, 2001 10:24 AM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Antigen (Ejaculate IT) Word of warning about removing Inoculate IT: 1. Antigen is a groupware messaging solution, it protects the IS and IMC. 2. Antigen does NOT protect your file system, c:\winnt\system32 for example. What I did: 1. Remove Inoculate IT for Exchange. 2. Install/config/run Antigen. 3. Re-install Inoculate IT, the normal server version NOT the Exchange version. Result: 1. Antigen (and whatever AV scanners you chose in Antigen) protects your Mail infrastructure. 2. Inoculate IT protects Your Windows NT Server. -Original Message- From: Stephen J. Norton [ mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] ] Sent: Thursday, December 06, 2001 10:05 AM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: Antigen I've gotten approval to install Antigen on my Exchange box. I'm currently running InnoculateIT 4.5. Has anyone had any experience removing InnoculateIT then installing Antigen? Is there any issues with doing this? Thanks. List Charter and FAQ at: http://www.sunbelt-software.com/exchange_list_charter.htm http://www.sunbelt-software.com/exchange_list_charter.htm List Charter and FAQ at:
RE: Client not receiving email from us but can from any other sit e
Looks like DNS issue to me.. Did you try to do a NSLOOKUP to see if you can resolve their domain name? -Original Message- From: Mathews, James E. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, December 07, 2001 2:51 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: Client not receiving email from us but can from any other site Exchange 5.5... Outlook 2k client We are trying to send email to one of our clients. they can send to us without problem. I can send to them from an external email address (yahoo) with no problem. After we send messages we do not receive a undeliverable reply. Here is my thoughts let me know if you guys have any idea. Since we do not get a undeliverable reply it appears that the email is going someplace. any email I send to their name does not get bounced back. example if I send to [EMAIL PROTECTED] (don't want to use their email address hope you don't mind) I receive no undeliverable message. if I send to any other email address that is wrong I get a bounce back. if I send to a yahoo account that does not exist it bounces it back.We are on a sprint network so I though maybe sprint is not able to resolve their name correctly so I called sprint had them send an email and it go through fine. so I have no idea what the problem could be. Please help. Thanks James List Charter and FAQ at: http://www.sunbelt-software.com/exchange_list_charter.htm List Charter and FAQ at: http://www.sunbelt-software.com/exchange_list_charter.htm
RE: Client not receiving email from us but can from any other sit e
Did you check the IMC queue? -Original Message- From: Mathews, James E. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, December 07, 2001 1:51 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: Client not receiving email from us but can from any other site Exchange 5.5... Outlook 2k client We are trying to send email to one of our clients. they can send to us without problem. I can send to them from an external email address (yahoo) with no problem. After we send messages we do not receive a undeliverable reply. Here is my thoughts let me know if you guys have any idea. Since we do not get a undeliverable reply it appears that the email is going someplace. any email I send to their name does not get bounced back. example if I send to [EMAIL PROTECTED] (don't want to use their email address hope you don't mind) I receive no undeliverable message. if I send to any other email address that is wrong I get a bounce back. if I send to a yahoo account that does not exist it bounces it back.We are on a sprint network so I though maybe sprint is not able to resolve their name correctly so I called sprint had them send an email and it go through fine. so I have no idea what the problem could be. Please help. Thanks James List Charter and FAQ at: http://www.sunbelt-software.com/exchange_list_charter.htm List Charter and FAQ at: http://www.sunbelt-software.com/exchange_list_charter.htm
RE: Client not receiving email from us but can from any other sit e
Very possibly your server is configured as an open relay and spammers have used it to send spam. You then get blacklisted by blackhole site outputs.orbz.org. Go to www.orbz.org, go the section test this IP and you can see if you are blacklisted by any of the major spam cops. Then it takes a day or two to get removed from the blacklist after you have shut down the open relay. -Original Message- From: Mathews, James E. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, December 07, 2001 2:51 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: Client not receiving email from us but can from any other site Exchange 5.5... Outlook 2k client We are trying to send email to one of our clients. they can send to us without problem. I can send to them from an external email address (yahoo) with no problem. After we send messages we do not receive a undeliverable reply. Here is my thoughts let me know if you guys have any idea. Since we do not get a undeliverable reply it appears that the email is going someplace. any email I send to their name does not get bounced back. example if I send to [EMAIL PROTECTED] (don't want to use their email address hope you don't mind) I receive no undeliverable message. if I send to any other email address that is wrong I get a bounce back. if I send to a yahoo account that does not exist it bounces it back.We are on a sprint network so I though maybe sprint is not able to resolve their name correctly so I called sprint had them send an email and it go through fine. so I have no idea what the problem could be. Please help. Thanks James List Charter and FAQ at: http://www.sunbelt-software.com/exchange_list_charter.htm List Charter and FAQ at: http://www.sunbelt-software.com/exchange_list_charter.htm
RE: Defragging the IS
Speakin of CareBear... William doesn't run that list. Consulting: If you're not part of the solution, there's good money to be made in prolonging the problem -Original Message- From: Martin Blackstone [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, December 07, 2001 12:09 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Defragging the IS ROFLWilliam!!! -Original Message- From: Clark, Steve [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, December 07, 2001 11:04 AM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Defragging the IS Don't really call me slow - I might have to go to the carebear list that William runs. Steve Clark Clark Systems Support, LLC AVIEN Charter Member Who's watching your network? www.clarksupport.com 301-610-9584 voice 240-465-0323 Efax The data furnished in connection with this document is deemed by Clark Systems Support, LLC., to contain proprietary and privileged information and shall not be disclosed or used for the benefit of others without the prior written permission of Clark Systems Support, LLC. -Original Message- From: Crosby, Tim (Sarcom) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, December 07, 2001 1:50 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Defragging the IS OK, what would be a more realistic estimate then? I'd like to be able to give them some idea. -Original Message- From: Don Ely [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, December 07, 2001 1:49 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Defragging the IS Don't do a defrag for a measly 16MB! 2-3 hours for a 36GB IS!! HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA! Yeah, rggghhh. D Mistakes: It could be that the purpose of your life is only to serve as a warning to others. -Original Message- From: Crosby, Tim (Sarcom) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, December 07, 2001 10:40 AM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: Defragging the IS Tomorrow we are scheduled to move our single server Exchange 5.5 site over to a new Compaq DL380 server that is part of a SAN. Old server is NT4, SP6. New server will be Windows 2000, SP2 but will still have Exchange 5.5, SP4. My boss wants us do a complete backup of the server tonight, then come in tomorrow and do a defrag of the database, back it up again, and restore it to the new server. It seems to be the general consensus on this list that defrag=bad. But what about in this situation where we are moving to a new server and we are scheduled to have the server down for 24 hours anyway? I checked the event logs and, as of last night it shows that the database has 16 megabytes of free space after online defragmentation. Is this the white space that I've heard about? And is that all the space we will gain by doing a defrag? If that's the case, I will suggest we don't take the time and risk of doing a defrag of the IS. I'm guessing it will take at least 2-3 hours to defrag our 36GB database Or will there be a performance increase by doing a defrag now? Thanks for your input. Tim List Charter and FAQ at: http://www.sunbelt-software.com/exchange_list_charter.htm List Charter and FAQ at: http://www.sunbelt-software.com/exchange_list_charter.htm List Charter and FAQ at: http://www.sunbelt-software.com/exchange_list_charter.htm List Charter and FAQ at: http://www.sunbelt-software.com/exchange_list_charter.htm List Charter and FAQ at: http://www.sunbelt-software.com/exchange_list_charter.htm List Charter and FAQ at: http://www.sunbelt-software.com/exchange_list_charter.htm
FW: NTBUGTRAQ - Potential Problem with Microsoft Security Bulleti n MS01-057
Interesting -Original Message- From: Peter Koso [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, December 07, 2001 11:02 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Potential Problem with Microsoft Security Bulletin MS01-057 Potential issue with this security patch. Running NT 4.0 SP6a and Exchange 5.5 SP4. Issue is with an older version of IE on the exchange server. We were running IE 4.01 SP1. The patch applies fine but upon reboot there is an error message procedure entry point wnsprintfa could not be located in the dynamic link library shlwapi.dll See MS knowledgebase Q284706 The error manifests itself with OWA (outlook Web Access) users not seeing any text of their emails. They can logon fine and see the subject lines - but clicking on the message brings up a white page. Resolved (with help from MS tech support) by backing off the patch, installing IE 5.5 SP2 and re-installing the patch. This takes several reboots. regards, Peter Koso Beansprout Networks Delivery co-sponsored by Trend Micro, Inc. BEST-OF-BREED ANTIVIRUS SOLUTION FOR MICROSOFT EXCHANGE 2000 Earn 5% rebate on licenses purchased for Trend Micro ScanMail for Microsoft Exchange 2000 between October 1 and November 16. ScanMail ensures 100% scanning of inbound and outbound traffic and provides remote software management. For program details or to download your 30-day FREE evaluation copy: http://www.antivirus.com/banners/tracking.asp?si=53bi=245ul=http://www.a ntivirus.com/smex2000_rebate List Charter and FAQ at: http://www.sunbelt-software.com/exchange_list_charter.htm
FYI : Outlook Web Access Script Execution Vulnerability
http://www.secadministrator.com/articles/index.cfm?articleid=23433 __ Do You Yahoo!? Send your FREE holiday greetings online! http://greetings.yahoo.com List Charter and FAQ at: http://www.sunbelt-software.com/exchange_list_charter.htm
Page File
For those of you that are running Windows 2000 Server with Exchange Server 5.5 SP4 where are you placing your pagefile(s)? Todd White System Administrator LaserComm Inc. 972-941-0276 Voice 972-941-0223 Fax The contents of this e-mail and any attachments are the property of LaserComm Inc, its subsidiaries or licensors and are intended to be private and confidential. This material is intended solely for the individual to whom it is addressed. The material is protected by various laws, including those related to copyright and trade secret, and may not be used, copied or distributed without the express permission of LaserComm Inc. If you have received this message in error, please notify the sender by return e-mail and delete the correspondence. List Charter and FAQ at: http://www.sunbelt-software.com/exchange_list_charter.htm
FW: Potential Problem with Microsoft Security Bulletin MS01-057
Just a little FYI. Todd -Original Message- From: Windows NTBugtraq Mailing List [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Peter Koso Sent: Friday, December 07, 2001 2:02 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Potential Problem with Microsoft Security Bulletin MS01-057 Potential issue with this security patch. Running NT 4.0 SP6a and Exchange 5.5 SP4. Issue is with an older version of IE on the exchange server. We were running IE 4.01 SP1. The patch applies fine but upon reboot there is an error message procedure entry point wnsprintfa could not be located in the dynamic link library shlwapi.dll See MS knowledgebase Q284706 The error manifests itself with OWA (outlook Web Access) users not seeing any text of their emails. They can logon fine and see the subject lines - but clicking on the message brings up a white page. Resolved (with help from MS tech support) by backing off the patch, installing IE 5.5 SP2 and re-installing the patch. This takes several reboots. regards, Peter Koso Beansprout Networks Delivery co-sponsored by Trend Micro, Inc. BEST-OF-BREED ANTIVIRUS SOLUTION FOR MICROSOFT EXCHANGE 2000 Earn 5% rebate on licenses purchased for Trend Micro ScanMail for Microsoft Exchange 2000 between October 1 and November 16. ScanMail ensures 100% scanning of inbound and outbound traffic and provides remote software management. For program details or to download your 30-day FREE evaluation copy: http://www.antivirus.com/banners/tracking.asp?si=53bi=245ul=http://www.a ntivirus.com/smex2000_rebate _ Do You Yahoo!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com List Charter and FAQ at: http://www.sunbelt-software.com/exchange_list_charter.htm
Re: Page File
with all NT/2000, I place them on all partitions. --- Todd White [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: For those of you that are running Windows 2000 Server with Exchange Server 5.5 SP4 where are you placing your pagefile(s)? Todd White System Administrator LaserComm Inc. 972-941-0276 Voice 972-941-0223 Fax The contents of this e-mail and any attachments are the property of LaserComm Inc, its subsidiaries or licensors and are intended to be private and confidential. This material is intended solely for the individual to whom it is addressed. The material is protected by various laws, including those related to copyright and trade secret, and may not be used, copied or distributed without the express permission of LaserComm Inc. If you have received this message in error, please notify the sender by return e-mail and delete the correspondence. List Charter and FAQ at: http://www.sunbelt-software.com/exchange_list_charter.htm __ Do You Yahoo!? Send your FREE holiday greetings online! http://greetings.yahoo.com List Charter and FAQ at: http://www.sunbelt-software.com/exchange_list_charter.htm
RE: Page File
That's not a good idea... Excessive paging can result from that config. Technically, you should try to keep them on the partition where the system files reside. Especially, if your server ever BSOD's and you want to view the dump file. D True friends stab you in the front. -Oscar Wilde -Original Message- From: David N Precht [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, December 07, 2001 12:42 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: Re: Page File with all NT/2000, I place them on all partitions. --- Todd White [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: For those of you that are running Windows 2000 Server with Exchange Server 5.5 SP4 where are you placing your pagefile(s)? Todd White System Administrator LaserComm Inc. 972-941-0276 Voice 972-941-0223 Fax The contents of this e-mail and any attachments are the property of LaserComm Inc, its subsidiaries or licensors and are intended to be private and confidential. This material is intended solely for the individual to whom it is addressed. The material is protected by various laws, including those related to copyright and trade secret, and may not be used, copied or distributed without the express permission of LaserComm Inc. If you have received this message in error, please notify the sender by return e-mail and delete the correspondence. List Charter and FAQ at: http://www.sunbelt-software.com/exchange_list_charter.htm __ Do You Yahoo!? Send your FREE holiday greetings online! http://greetings.yahoo.com List Charter and FAQ at: http://www.sunbelt-software.com/exchange_list_charter.htm List Charter and FAQ at: http://www.sunbelt-software.com/exchange_list_charter.htm
RE: NTBUGTRAQ - Potential Problem with Microsoft Security Bulleti n MS01-057
nice - like this OWA box here isn't quirky enough to begin with. Maybe the problems I've been having lately are just fallout from applying MS patches religiously... -Original Message- From: Martin Blackstone [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: December 7, 2001 3:14 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: FW: NTBUGTRAQ - Potential Problem with Microsoft Security Bulleti n MS01-057 Interesting -Original Message- From: Peter Koso [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, December 07, 2001 11:02 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Potential Problem with Microsoft Security Bulletin MS01-057 Potential issue with this security patch. Running NT 4.0 SP6a and Exchange 5.5 SP4. Issue is with an older version of IE on the exchange server. We were running IE 4.01 SP1. The patch applies fine but upon reboot there is an error message procedure entry point wnsprintfa could not be located in the dynamic link library shlwapi.dll See MS knowledgebase Q284706 The error manifests itself with OWA (outlook Web Access) users not seeing any text of their emails. They can logon fine and see the subject lines - but clicking on the message brings up a white page. Resolved (with help from MS tech support) by backing off the patch, installing IE 5.5 SP2 and re-installing the patch. This takes several reboots. regards, Peter Koso Beansprout Networks == == Delivery co-sponsored by Trend Micro, Inc. == == BEST-OF-BREED ANTIVIRUS SOLUTION FOR MICROSOFT EXCHANGE 2000 Earn 5% rebate on licenses purchased for Trend Micro ScanMail for Microsoft Exchange 2000 between October 1 and November 16. ScanMail ensures 100% scanning of inbound and outbound traffic and provides remote software management. For program details or to download your 30-day FREE evaluation copy: http://www.antivirus.com/banners/tracking.asp?si=53bi=245ul=http://www.a ntivirus.com/smex2000_rebate List Charter and FAQ at: http://www.sunbelt-software.com/exchange_list_charter.htm List Charter and FAQ at: http://www.sunbelt-software.com/exchange_list_charter.htm
RE: Defragging the IS
About 3 months ago I defragged a 28GB IS (exch 5.5 sp3) down to about 22GB...it took about 12 hours (this was on faster hardware than the production machine -- I was doing testing in our test lab). Why not build the new server on your SAN (different server name, part of the same site) and move the user mail bags to the new server? You'll have to leave the old server up for awhile (we do for about 2 weeks) so that the users email client will automatically update to the new server. -- From: Crosby, Tim (Sarcom)[SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Reply To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Sent: Friday, December 07, 2001 1:49 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Defragging the IS OK, what would be a more realistic estimate then? I'd like to be able to give them some idea. -Original Message- From: Don Ely [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, December 07, 2001 1:49 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Defragging the IS Don't do a defrag for a measly 16MB! 2-3 hours for a 36GB IS!! HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA! Yeah, rggghhh. D Mistakes: It could be that the purpose of your life is only to serve as a warning to others. -Original Message- From: Crosby, Tim (Sarcom) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, December 07, 2001 10:40 AM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: Defragging the IS Tomorrow we are scheduled to move our single server Exchange 5.5 site over to a new Compaq DL380 server that is part of a SAN. Old server is NT4, SP6. New server will be Windows 2000, SP2 but will still have Exchange 5.5, SP4. My boss wants us do a complete backup of the server tonight, then come in tomorrow and do a defrag of the database, back it up again, and restore it to the new server. It seems to be the general consensus on this list that defrag=bad. But what about in this situation where we are moving to a new server and we are scheduled to have the server down for 24 hours anyway? I checked the event logs and, as of last night it shows that the database has 16 megabytes of free space after online defragmentation. Is this the white space that I've heard about? And is that all the space we will gain by doing a defrag? If that's the case, I will suggest we don't take the time and risk of doing a defrag of the IS. I'm guessing it will take at least 2-3 hours to defrag our 36GB database Or will there be a performance increase by doing a defrag now? Thanks for your input. Tim List Charter and FAQ at: http://www.sunbelt-software.com/exchange_list_charter.htm List Charter and FAQ at: http://www.sunbelt-software.com/exchange_list_charter.htm List Charter and FAQ at: http://www.sunbelt-software.com/exchange_list_charter.htm List Charter and FAQ at: http://www.sunbelt-software.com/exchange_list_charter.htm
RE: Defragging the IS
Absolutely. Steve Clark Clark Systems Support, LLC AVIEN Charter Member Who's watching your network? www.clarksupport.com 301-610-9584 voice 240-465-0323 Efax The data furnished in connection with this document is deemed by Clark Systems Support, LLC., to contain proprietary and privileged information and shall not be disclosed or used for the benefit of others without the prior written permission of Clark Systems Support, LLC. -Original Message- From: Don Ely [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, December 07, 2001 3:08 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Defragging the IS Speakin of CareBear... William doesn't run that list. Consulting: If you're not part of the solution, there's good money to be made in prolonging the problem -Original Message- From: Martin Blackstone [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, December 07, 2001 12:09 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Defragging the IS ROFLWilliam!!! -Original Message- From: Clark, Steve [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, December 07, 2001 11:04 AM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Defragging the IS Don't really call me slow - I might have to go to the carebear list that William runs. Steve Clark Clark Systems Support, LLC AVIEN Charter Member Who's watching your network? www.clarksupport.com 301-610-9584 voice 240-465-0323 Efax The data furnished in connection with this document is deemed by Clark Systems Support, LLC., to contain proprietary and privileged information and shall not be disclosed or used for the benefit of others without the prior written permission of Clark Systems Support, LLC. -Original Message- From: Crosby, Tim (Sarcom) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, December 07, 2001 1:50 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Defragging the IS OK, what would be a more realistic estimate then? I'd like to be able to give them some idea. -Original Message- From: Don Ely [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, December 07, 2001 1:49 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Defragging the IS Don't do a defrag for a measly 16MB! 2-3 hours for a 36GB IS!! HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA! Yeah, rggghhh. D Mistakes: It could be that the purpose of your life is only to serve as a warning to others. -Original Message- From: Crosby, Tim (Sarcom) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, December 07, 2001 10:40 AM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: Defragging the IS Tomorrow we are scheduled to move our single server Exchange 5.5 site over to a new Compaq DL380 server that is part of a SAN. Old server is NT4, SP6. New server will be Windows 2000, SP2 but will still have Exchange 5.5, SP4. My boss wants us do a complete backup of the server tonight, then come in tomorrow and do a defrag of the database, back it up again, and restore it to the new server. It seems to be the general consensus on this list that defrag=bad. But what about in this situation where we are moving to a new server and we are scheduled to have the server down for 24 hours anyway? I checked the event logs and, as of last night it shows that the database has 16 megabytes of free space after online defragmentation. Is this the white space that I've heard about? And is that all the space we will gain by doing a defrag? If that's the case, I will suggest we don't take the time and risk of doing a defrag of the IS. I'm guessing it will take at least 2-3 hours to defrag our 36GB database Or will there be a performance increase by doing a defrag now? Thanks for your input. Tim List Charter and FAQ at: http://www.sunbelt-software.com/exchange_list_charter.htm List Charter and FAQ at: http://www.sunbelt-software.com/exchange_list_charter.htm List Charter and FAQ at: http://www.sunbelt-software.com/exchange_list_charter.htm List Charter and FAQ at: http://www.sunbelt-software.com/exchange_list_charter.htm List Charter and FAQ at: http://www.sunbelt-software.com/exchange_list_charter.htm List Charter and FAQ at: http://www.sunbelt-software.com/exchange_list_charter.htm List Charter and FAQ at: http://www.sunbelt-software.com/exchange_list_charter.htm
RE: Defragging the IS
I don't think he's in today. I forwarded a great OOA response from someone telling me to contact $Lotus Support (not sure what $Lotus means) but never heard from him. Oh well.. Steve Clark Clark Systems Support, LLC AVIEN Charter Member Who's watching your network? www.clarksupport.com 301-610-9584 voice 240-465-0323 Efax The data furnished in connection with this document is deemed by Clark Systems Support, LLC., to contain proprietary and privileged information and shall not be disclosed or used for the benefit of others without the prior written permission of Clark Systems Support, LLC. -Original Message- From: Martin Blackstone [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, December 07, 2001 3:09 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Defragging the IS ROFLWilliam!!! -Original Message- From: Clark, Steve [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, December 07, 2001 11:04 AM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Defragging the IS Don't really call me slow - I might have to go to the carebear list that William runs. Steve Clark Clark Systems Support, LLC AVIEN Charter Member Who's watching your network? www.clarksupport.com 301-610-9584 voice 240-465-0323 Efax The data furnished in connection with this document is deemed by Clark Systems Support, LLC., to contain proprietary and privileged information and shall not be disclosed or used for the benefit of others without the prior written permission of Clark Systems Support, LLC. -Original Message- From: Crosby, Tim (Sarcom) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, December 07, 2001 1:50 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Defragging the IS OK, what would be a more realistic estimate then? I'd like to be able to give them some idea. -Original Message- From: Don Ely [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, December 07, 2001 1:49 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Defragging the IS Don't do a defrag for a measly 16MB! 2-3 hours for a 36GB IS!! HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA! Yeah, rggghhh. D Mistakes: It could be that the purpose of your life is only to serve as a warning to others. -Original Message- From: Crosby, Tim (Sarcom) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, December 07, 2001 10:40 AM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: Defragging the IS Tomorrow we are scheduled to move our single server Exchange 5.5 site over to a new Compaq DL380 server that is part of a SAN. Old server is NT4, SP6. New server will be Windows 2000, SP2 but will still have Exchange 5.5, SP4. My boss wants us do a complete backup of the server tonight, then come in tomorrow and do a defrag of the database, back it up again, and restore it to the new server. It seems to be the general consensus on this list that defrag=bad. But what about in this situation where we are moving to a new server and we are scheduled to have the server down for 24 hours anyway? I checked the event logs and, as of last night it shows that the database has 16 megabytes of free space after online defragmentation. Is this the white space that I've heard about? And is that all the space we will gain by doing a defrag? If that's the case, I will suggest we don't take the time and risk of doing a defrag of the IS. I'm guessing it will take at least 2-3 hours to defrag our 36GB database Or will there be a performance increase by doing a defrag now? Thanks for your input. Tim List Charter and FAQ at: http://www.sunbelt-software.com/exchange_list_charter.htm List Charter and FAQ at: http://www.sunbelt-software.com/exchange_list_charter.htm List Charter and FAQ at: http://www.sunbelt-software.com/exchange_list_charter.htm List Charter and FAQ at: http://www.sunbelt-software.com/exchange_list_charter.htm List Charter and FAQ at: http://www.sunbelt-software.com/exchange_list_charter.htm List Charter and FAQ at: http://www.sunbelt-software.com/exchange_list_charter.htm
RE: Error when backing up Exch. 5.5 (using MS backup)
Actually, in a quick check, it only shows you how you COULD do it. Doesn't say it is supported. Also, this doc is based on beta (as stated in the bottom of the doc : This is a preliminary document and may be changed substantially prior to final commercial release. ) Dave --- HOLLIDAY, Eric [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Well, actually, SAN _is_ supported; NAS is not. Here is the reference William included on a previous reply[1]: http://www.microsoft.com/technet/treeview/default.asp?url=/TechNet/prodtechn ol/exchange/deploy/prodspecs/exchstor.asp http://www.microsoft.com/technet/treeview/default.asp?url=/TechNet/prodtech nol/exchange/deploy/prodspecs/exchstor.asp On a somewhat-related note, WHO thought up these acronyms?! SANNAS; I wonder if I should read the documentation backwards, to find any hidden messages :) [1] Thanks, William! Eric -Original Message- From: David N. Precht [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, December 06, 2001 11:19 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Error when backing up Exch. 5.5 (using MS backup) Apologize, William already answered this...SAN is dude, you are SO NOT SUPPORTED -Original Message- From: David N. Precht [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, December 06, 2001 23:16 To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Error when backing up Exch. 5.5 (using MS backup) Whats Supported with MS -Original Message- From: HOLLIDAY, Eric [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, December 06, 2001 16:24 To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Error when backing up Exch. 5.5 (using MS backup) William, AFAIK, Exchange will work with a SAN (Storage Area Network), but _not_ a NAS (Network Attached Storage). It's been up and running for 3 months, now. Eric -Original Message- From: Lefkovics, William [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, December 06, 2001 3:39 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Error when backing up Exch. 5.5 (using MS backup) Wait. I missed that. Microsoft does not support Exchange over a SAN. I realize that may not be your issue here, but it might be difficult to get good help otherwise. William -Original Message- From: HOLLIDAY, Eric [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, December 06, 2001 12:34 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Error when backing up Exch. 5.5 (using MS backup) Diane, See my answers in context below: 1. Is this a new Exchange setup? --Not really. The server's been up for over a year, but we just hooked up a SAN array ran perf optimizer to redirect the store. We have seven servers total, this is the only one with a problem. 2. Has this ever worked? --No, not on this server. We normally use ArcServe, which worked fine until recently. (before you ask, the error was around _before_ the SAN switchover) 3. This is a dumb question, butdoes this exchange server possibly still have circular logging turned on? --No. (I just checked). Good question, tho. (There are no dumb questions, only dumb answers.) 4. How many log mdbdata log files do you have? --A whole bunch. Since I haven't been able to get a good backup, they're still there. 5. If you can't get it backed up, you probably have many many days worth and a very full partion. --The SAN _greatly_ increased my storage capacity, it's only about 50% full. The problem has been around since it was 25-30% full, however. Diane (picking at straws here.) Eric -Original Message- From: HOLLIDAY, Eric [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, December 06, 2001 6:59 AM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Error when backing up Exch. 5.5 (using MS backup) Diane, Yes, I have. It makes _no_ diff when the job runs. At the present time, I am only running the job manually and it still fails. Sorry, should've told you, the OS is Win2Kserver. I run the same job on two other, identical, servers with no problems. Now, I wouldn't even be using NTBackup, except that ArcSmurf choked on the backup. After reading about similar problems from other folks on this list, I thought I'd try using NTBackup to a file then have ArcSmurf back that up to tape. Works like a champ on the other two servers, just not this one! Any other ideas? Should I try running some diags on the store? Eric -Original Message- From: Diane Beckham [ mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] ] Sent: Wednesday, December 05, 2001 2:39 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Error when backing up Exch. 5.5 (using MS backup) Eric, have you tried changing the time it does the backup to see if it works at a different time? Have you tried backing it up manually? Have you tried backing it up with a NTBackup in a Win2K computer? Diane
RE: Error when backing up Exch. 5.5 (using MS backup)
Actually, in a quick check, it only shows you how you COULD do it. Doesn't say it is supported. Also, this doc is based on beta (as stated in the bottom of the doc : This is a preliminary document and may be changed substantially prior to final commercial release. ) Dave --- HOLLIDAY, Eric [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Well, actually, SAN _is_ supported; NAS is not. Here is the reference William included on a previous reply[1]: http://www.microsoft.com/technet/treeview/default.asp?url=/TechNet/prodtechn ol/exchange/deploy/prodspecs/exchstor.asp http://www.microsoft.com/technet/treeview/default.asp?url=/TechNet/prodtech nol/exchange/deploy/prodspecs/exchstor.asp On a somewhat-related note, WHO thought up these acronyms?! SANNAS; I wonder if I should read the documentation backwards, to find any hidden messages :) [1] Thanks, William! Eric -Original Message- From: David N. Precht [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, December 06, 2001 11:19 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Error when backing up Exch. 5.5 (using MS backup) Apologize, William already answered this...SAN is dude, you are SO NOT SUPPORTED -Original Message- From: David N. Precht [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, December 06, 2001 23:16 To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Error when backing up Exch. 5.5 (using MS backup) Whats Supported with MS -Original Message- From: HOLLIDAY, Eric [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, December 06, 2001 16:24 To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Error when backing up Exch. 5.5 (using MS backup) William, AFAIK, Exchange will work with a SAN (Storage Area Network), but _not_ a NAS (Network Attached Storage). It's been up and running for 3 months, now. Eric -Original Message- From: Lefkovics, William [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, December 06, 2001 3:39 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Error when backing up Exch. 5.5 (using MS backup) Wait. I missed that. Microsoft does not support Exchange over a SAN. I realize that may not be your issue here, but it might be difficult to get good help otherwise. William -Original Message- From: HOLLIDAY, Eric [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, December 06, 2001 12:34 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Error when backing up Exch. 5.5 (using MS backup) Diane, See my answers in context below: 1. Is this a new Exchange setup? --Not really. The server's been up for over a year, but we just hooked up a SAN array ran perf optimizer to redirect the store. We have seven servers total, this is the only one with a problem. 2. Has this ever worked? --No, not on this server. We normally use ArcServe, which worked fine until recently. (before you ask, the error was around _before_ the SAN switchover) 3. This is a dumb question, butdoes this exchange server possibly still have circular logging turned on? --No. (I just checked). Good question, tho. (There are no dumb questions, only dumb answers.) 4. How many log mdbdata log files do you have? --A whole bunch. Since I haven't been able to get a good backup, they're still there. 5. If you can't get it backed up, you probably have many many days worth and a very full partion. --The SAN _greatly_ increased my storage capacity, it's only about 50% full. The problem has been around since it was 25-30% full, however. Diane (picking at straws here.) Eric -Original Message- From: HOLLIDAY, Eric [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, December 06, 2001 6:59 AM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Error when backing up Exch. 5.5 (using MS backup) Diane, Yes, I have. It makes _no_ diff when the job runs. At the present time, I am only running the job manually and it still fails. Sorry, should've told you, the OS is Win2Kserver. I run the same job on two other, identical, servers with no problems. Now, I wouldn't even be using NTBackup, except that ArcSmurf choked on the backup. After reading about similar problems from other folks on this list, I thought I'd try using NTBackup to a file then have ArcSmurf back that up to tape. Works like a champ on the other two servers, just not this one! Any other ideas? Should I try running some diags on the store? Eric -Original Message- From: Diane Beckham [ mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] ] Sent: Wednesday, December 05, 2001 2:39 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Error when backing up Exch. 5.5 (using MS backup) Eric, have you tried changing the time it does the backup to see if it works at a different time? Have you tried backing it up manually? Have you tried backing it up with a NTBackup in a Win2K computer? Diane
RE: Exchange 2000 question
My feelings exactly --- Micciche, Robert [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Does anyone know if there is way to change my font in an Email, so that it irritates thousands of people? -Original Message- From: Manubay, James Francis L. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, December 06, 2001 6:28 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: Exchange 2000 question Hi all! I got a question with regard to installing Exchange 2000. Through testing, I found out that when I install exchange to a mixed mode, the Distribution list becomes a global group on the other hand when installing it on a native mode it becomes a universal group. What does this mean? Should I shift first into native mode before installing E2k? Please help and thanks so much in advance. - james - List Charter and FAQ at: http://www.sunbelt-software.com/exchange_list_charter.htm List Charter and FAQ at: http://www.sunbelt-software.com/exchange_list_charter.htm __ Do You Yahoo!? Send your FREE holiday greetings online! http://greetings.yahoo.com List Charter and FAQ at: http://www.sunbelt-software.com/exchange_list_charter.htm
RE: Circular Logging
Good call... Maybe that is why two of them were fired/asked to leave before I came on board Makes you wonder... --- Lefkovics, William [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Yes, that is correct. Run setup, select the admin portion only and NTBackup is replaced with an Exchange-aware version. Heck, in Paul's case, he could download a demo of W2K server, throw it on a P133, install exchange5.5 admin, run NTBackup over the wire to disk in a pinch. Otherwise, whoever is handling this installation should be replaced. Just my thoughts. William -Original Message- From: David N. Precht [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, December 06, 2001 6:56 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Circular Logging Correct me if I am wrong, that when you install ExAdmin, it makes Ntbackup Exchange-aware ? Sorry, William , I have (unfort.) never used Ntbackup for Exchange backups (always inherited environments) -Original Message- From: Lefkovics, William [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, December 06, 2001 19:48 To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Circular Logging No. NTBackup on W2K only will backup to file. Also, you can install Exchange admin on another box other than the exchange server to perform this. William -Original Message- From: Paul Armstrong [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, December 06, 2001 4:41 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Circular Logging Can NTBackup on NT 4.0 back up to a file? The system doesn't have a drive to backup to so NTBackup wont work! -Original Message- From: Sanborn, John [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, December 06, 2001 7:37 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Circular Logging NTBackup (free with the O/S) would work just fine. You could even write up a little bat file to automate it, to a point. John -Original Message- From: Paul Armstrong [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, December 06, 2001 5:34 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: Circular Logging Importance: High Hello All, I have a question about a current situation that a client of mine is in. They have an Exchange 5.5 SP2 server which has run out of space! They originally had a tape drive installed on the server and was using Backup Exec with the Exchange agent. they had circular logging enabled but it wasn't a problem because they were backing up every night a the logs were cleared. Now they recently implemented another server and had ArcServe installed on it. They didn't want to maintain two backup apps so they uninstalled BbackupEXec from the Exchange serve and maintained the ArcServe. The ArcServe doesn't have an Exchange agent installed so there is no current backup of that server except for any files on it. I recommended that they get the ArcServe Exchange Agent. AnyHoo, a couple of months ago they ran out of space and they called me. I found out that it was due to not having a recent backup of Exchange and the logs had taken all available space. At this time, backupexec was still installed so I performed a backup and the space was cleared and the server was able to be started again. Now last week they have come across the same exact issue again and the tape drive has been removed and BackupExec uninstalled. So all I could do was move some of the log files to another server and again recommend that they get the ArcServe Exchange Agent. now, they recently got hit with Goner and there back to the space issue again. They have finally approved the Exchange agent but we are waiting for it to be delivered. So right now, the server is down because Exchange wont start due to lack of drive space. I cannot move the log files anymore because the prior relocation took up the space on another volume. I am thinking of disabling circular logging to let the logs files not take up the space they are currently using. Is this a wise move? What other options do I have. Any immediate answers would be greatly appreciated! TIA!!! List Charter and FAQ at: http://www.sunbelt-software.com/exchange_list_charter.htm List Charter and FAQ at: http://www.sunbelt-software.com/exchange_list_charter.htm List Charter and FAQ at: http://www.sunbelt-software.com/exchange_list_charter.htm List Charter and FAQ at: http://www.sunbelt-software.com/exchange_list_charter.htm _ Do You Yahoo!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com List Charter and FAQ at: http://www.sunbelt-software.com/exchange_list_charter.htm List Charter and FAQ at: http://www.sunbelt-software.com/exchange_list_charter.htm __ Do You Yahoo!? Send your FREE holiday greetings online! http://greetings.yahoo.com List Charter and FAQ at:
RE: Defragging the IS
Maybe there is money in Lotus support ;) --- Clark, Steve [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I don't think he's in today. I forwarded a great OOA response from someone telling me to contact $Lotus Support (not sure what $Lotus means) but never heard from him. Oh well.. Steve Clark Clark Systems Support, LLC AVIEN Charter Member Who's watching your network? www.clarksupport.com 301-610-9584 voice 240-465-0323 Efax The data furnished in connection with this document is deemed by Clark Systems Support, LLC., to contain proprietary and privileged information and shall not be disclosed or used for the benefit of others without the prior written permission of Clark Systems Support, LLC. -Original Message- From: Martin Blackstone [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, December 07, 2001 3:09 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Defragging the IS ROFLWilliam!!! -Original Message- From: Clark, Steve [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, December 07, 2001 11:04 AM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Defragging the IS Don't really call me slow - I might have to go to the carebear list that William runs. Steve Clark Clark Systems Support, LLC AVIEN Charter Member Who's watching your network? www.clarksupport.com 301-610-9584 voice 240-465-0323 Efax The data furnished in connection with this document is deemed by Clark Systems Support, LLC., to contain proprietary and privileged information and shall not be disclosed or used for the benefit of others without the prior written permission of Clark Systems Support, LLC. -Original Message- From: Crosby, Tim (Sarcom) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, December 07, 2001 1:50 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Defragging the IS OK, what would be a more realistic estimate then? I'd like to be able to give them some idea. -Original Message- From: Don Ely [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, December 07, 2001 1:49 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Defragging the IS Don't do a defrag for a measly 16MB! 2-3 hours for a 36GB IS!! HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA! Yeah, rggghhh. D Mistakes: It could be that the purpose of your life is only to serve as a warning to others. -Original Message- From: Crosby, Tim (Sarcom) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, December 07, 2001 10:40 AM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: Defragging the IS Tomorrow we are scheduled to move our single server Exchange 5.5 site over to a new Compaq DL380 server that is part of a SAN. Old server is NT4, SP6. New server will be Windows 2000, SP2 but will still have Exchange 5.5, SP4. My boss wants us do a complete backup of the server tonight, then come in tomorrow and do a defrag of the database, back it up again, and restore it to the new server. It seems to be the general consensus on this list that defrag=bad. But what about in this situation where we are moving to a new server and we are scheduled to have the server down for 24 hours anyway? I checked the event logs and, as of last night it shows that the database has 16 megabytes of free space after online defragmentation. Is this the white space that I've heard about? And is that all the space we will gain by doing a defrag? If that's the case, I will suggest we don't take the time and risk of doing a defrag of the IS. I'm guessing it will take at least 2-3 hours to defrag our 36GB database Or will there be a performance increase by doing a defrag now? Thanks for your input. Tim List Charter and FAQ at: http://www.sunbelt-software.com/exchange_list_charter.htm List Charter and FAQ at: http://www.sunbelt-software.com/exchange_list_charter.htm List Charter and FAQ at: http://www.sunbelt-software.com/exchange_list_charter.htm List Charter and FAQ at: http://www.sunbelt-software.com/exchange_list_charter.htm List Charter and FAQ at: http://www.sunbelt-software.com/exchange_list_charter.htm List Charter and FAQ at: http://www.sunbelt-software.com/exchange_list_charter.htm __ Do You Yahoo!? Send your FREE holiday greetings online! http://greetings.yahoo.com List Charter and FAQ at: http://www.sunbelt-software.com/exchange_list_charter.htm
RE: NTBUGTRAQ - Potential Problem with Microsoft Security Bulleti n MS01-057
Interesting? How about disappointing? And a little frustrating... William -Original Message- From: Martin Blackstone [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, December 07, 2001 12:14 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: FW: NTBUGTRAQ - Potential Problem with Microsoft Security Bulleti n MS01-057 Interesting -Original Message- From: Peter Koso [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, December 07, 2001 11:02 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Potential Problem with Microsoft Security Bulletin MS01-057 Potential issue with this security patch. Running NT 4.0 SP6a and Exchange 5.5 SP4. Issue is with an older version of IE on the exchange server. We were running IE 4.01 SP1. The patch applies fine but upon reboot there is an error message procedure entry point wnsprintfa could not be located in the dynamic link library shlwapi.dll See MS knowledgebase Q284706 The error manifests itself with OWA (outlook Web Access) users not seeing any text of their emails. They can logon fine and see the subject lines - but clicking on the message brings up a white page. Resolved (with help from MS tech support) by backing off the patch, installing IE 5.5 SP2 and re-installing the patch. This takes several reboots. regards, Peter Koso Beansprout Networks List Charter and FAQ at: http://www.sunbelt-software.com/exchange_list_charter.htm
RE: Error when backing up Exch. 5.5 (using MS backup)
That was the response when I was running a help desk from one of my senior people (didn't actually say that to users, just laughing later in staff meetings..) Like people that wanted to have a VILE (a/k/a Vaio) laptop running ME with an Opera browser with a ISDN line, doing VPN remote access (nothing wrong with those, except the VILE part). Like man , that ain't in the SLA or a company machine D --- Lefkovics, William [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I still like the dude, you are SO NOT SUPPORTED line though. I'm going to use that one. -Original Message- From: HOLLIDAY, Eric [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, December 07, 2001 5:56 AM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Error when backing up Exch. 5.5 (using MS backup) Well, actually, SAN _is_ supported; NAS is not. Here is the reference William included on a previous reply[1]: http://www.microsoft.com/technet/treeview/default.asp?url=/TechNet/prodtechn ol/exchange/deploy/prodspecs/exchstor.asp http://www.microsoft.com/technet/treeview/default.asp?url=/TechNet/prodtech nol/exchange/deploy/prodspecs/exchstor.asp On a somewhat-related note, WHO thought up these acronyms?! SANNAS; I wonder if I should read the documentation backwards, to find any hidden messages :) [1] Thanks, William! Eric -Original Message- From: David N. Precht [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, December 06, 2001 11:19 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Error when backing up Exch. 5.5 (using MS backup) Apologize, William already answered this...SAN is dude, you are SO NOT SUPPORTED -Original Message- From: David N. Precht [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, December 06, 2001 23:16 To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Error when backing up Exch. 5.5 (using MS backup) Whats Supported with MS -Original Message- From: HOLLIDAY, Eric [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, December 06, 2001 16:24 To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Error when backing up Exch. 5.5 (using MS backup) William, AFAIK, Exchange will work with a SAN (Storage Area Network), but _not_ a NAS (Network Attached Storage). It's been up and running for 3 months, now. Eric -Original Message- From: Lefkovics, William [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, December 06, 2001 3:39 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Error when backing up Exch. 5.5 (using MS backup) Wait. I missed that. Microsoft does not support Exchange over a SAN. I realize that may not be your issue here, but it might be difficult to get good help otherwise. William -Original Message- From: HOLLIDAY, Eric [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, December 06, 2001 12:34 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Error when backing up Exch. 5.5 (using MS backup) Diane, See my answers in context below: 1. Is this a new Exchange setup? --Not really. The server's been up for over a year, but we just hooked up a SAN array ran perf optimizer to redirect the store. We have seven servers total, this is the only one with a problem. 2. Has this ever worked? --No, not on this server. We normally use ArcServe, which worked fine until recently. (before you ask, the error was around _before_ the SAN switchover) 3. This is a dumb question, butdoes this exchange server possibly still have circular logging turned on? --No. (I just checked). Good question, tho. (There are no dumb questions, only dumb answers.) 4. How many log mdbdata log files do you have? --A whole bunch. Since I haven't been able to get a good backup, they're still there. 5. If you can't get it backed up, you probably have many many days worth and a very full partion. --The SAN _greatly_ increased my storage capacity, it's only about 50% full. The problem has been around since it was 25-30% full, however. Diane (picking at straws here.) Eric -Original Message- From: HOLLIDAY, Eric [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, December 06, 2001 6:59 AM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Error when backing up Exch. 5.5 (using MS backup) Diane, Yes, I have. It makes _no_ diff when the job runs. At the present time, I am only running the job manually and it still fails. Sorry, should've told you, the OS is Win2Kserver. I run the same job on two other, identical, servers with no problems. Now, I wouldn't even be using NTBackup, except that ArcSmurf choked on the backup. After reading about similar problems from other folks on this list, I thought I'd try using NTBackup to a file then have ArcSmurf back that up to tape. Works like a champ on the other two servers, just not this one! Any other ideas? Should I try running some diags on the store? Eric - List Charter and FAQ at:
RE: Exchange over a SAN
Title: Message I believe it's NAS that MS won't support for Exchange. -Mike -Original Message-From: Jamison, Chris [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, December 07, 2001 10:04 AMTo: MS-Exchange Admin IssuesSubject: RE: Exchange over a SAN You are correct!! I too have an Exchange 2K server clustered on a SAN. (Compaq - StorageWorks)It is not a requirement to implement a SAN for your cluster. It give you the ability to work with your storage more effectively. With the Compaq SAN and several tools you do have the option to grow your storage on the fly!! NOTE: Microsoft does support SAN's with Exchange Chris -Original Message-From: Arnold, Jamie [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, December 07, 2001 11:47 AMTo: MS-Exchange Admin IssuesSubject: RE: Exchange over a SAN Why is the SAN a *must* for cluster? You could easily do a cluster with a standard Powervault and SCSI. J -Original Message-From: Violette, Kevin [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, December 07, 2001 11:28 AMTo: MS-Exchange Admin IssuesSubject: RE: Exchange over a SAN Sorry for the delay on the elaboration. Got pulled away. Here is our story: At the University of North Carolina at Wilmington we are moving from VMS based (pop/imap) mail system to Exchange and Outlook. We are running a Dell SAN over Fibre Channel and Dell PV servers. The SAN adds an extra level of complexity but is a must for clustered environment. Depending on the SAN you are implementing and its "ability" to have lun and or partition sizes changed on the fly, the "virtual" disk size planning plays a major role. With our SAN we cannot grow the partition on the fly. Any growth will require: downing of E2K, a GOOD backup,rebuilding of the LUN and partitions used, re-presentation of the luns, getting W2K to ID the proper LUNs, data restore, much prayer, bring E2K up. In short leave yourself plenty of room. I am currently allotting only .25 of available space to the mailboxes. The system default mailbox size is 20MB. There is a separate partition/lun for each of the 2 nodes in the cluster and another for the public store. The HBA's to connect to the SAN had issues with W2K SP2 and fail over would not work, this has been fixed (about mid year). A thorough understanding of the SAN and its fabrics is very necessary, Don't just have and outsourced implementation team come in and set it up, this will kill you if you need to troubleshoot. I can give more info to the list later if needed or offline. The quick synopsis: E2K on active-active cluster Quorum, logsx2,priv.edbx2, pub.edb are on SAN partitions NLB Front-End/OWA 2 node "cluster" Hope this a start for any questions, I can give a more "formal" elaboration after the weekend (taking some time off) --Kevin UNCW -Original Message-From: Arnold, Jamie [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]Sent: Thursday, December 06, 2001 7:22 PMTo: MS-Exchange Admin IssuesSubject: RE: Exchange over a SAN Care to elaborate? You sound like you have much to tell. J -Original Message-From: Violette, Kevin [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, December 06, 2001 6:10 PMTo: MS-Exchange Admin IssuesSubject: RE: Exchange over a SAN We are running Exchange 2000on a SAN. Words of wisdomDo your homework and plan your SAN luns/parts to be used with exchange carefully. Kevin UNCW -Original Message-From: Karen Palmer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]Sent: Thursday, December 06, 2001 4:20 PMTo: MS-Exchange Admin IssuesSubject: Exchange over a SAN William's message woke me right up. Our new Exchange server will be on a SAN. (gulp) Does anyone on the list have an Exchange/SAN setup and, if so, any words of wisdom? Karen Palmer SCJD -Original Message-From: Lefkovics, William [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]Sent: Thursday, December 06, 2001 3:39 PMTo: MS-Exchange Admin IssuesSubject: RE: Error when backing up Exch. 5.5 (using MS backup) Wait. I missed that. Microsoft does not support Exchange over a SAN. I realize that may not be your issue here, but it might be difficult to get good
RE: Exchange over a SAN
Title: Message That's been established. Thanks J -Original Message-From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, December 07, 2001 6:43 PMTo: MS-Exchange Admin IssuesSubject: RE: Exchange over a SAN I believe it's NAS that MS won't support for Exchange. -Mike -Original Message-From: Jamison, Chris [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, December 07, 2001 10:04 AMTo: MS-Exchange Admin IssuesSubject: RE: Exchange over a SAN You are correct!! I too have an Exchange 2K server clustered on a SAN. (Compaq - StorageWorks)It is not a requirement to implement a SAN for your cluster. It give you the ability to work with your storage more effectively. With the Compaq SAN and several tools you do have the option to grow your storage on the fly!! NOTE: Microsoft does support SAN's with Exchange Chris -Original Message-From: Arnold, Jamie [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, December 07, 2001 11:47 AMTo: MS-Exchange Admin IssuesSubject: RE: Exchange over a SAN Why is the SAN a *must* for cluster? You could easily do a cluster with a standard Powervault and SCSI. J -Original Message-From: Violette, Kevin [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, December 07, 2001 11:28 AMTo: MS-Exchange Admin IssuesSubject: RE: Exchange over a SAN Sorry for the delay on the elaboration. Got pulled away. Here is our story: At the University of North Carolina at Wilmington we are moving from VMS based (pop/imap) mail system to Exchange and Outlook. We are running a Dell SAN over Fibre Channel and Dell PV servers. The SAN adds an extra level of complexity but is a must for clustered environment. Depending on the SAN you are implementing and its "ability" to have lun and or partition sizes changed on the fly, the "virtual" disk size planning plays a major role. With our SAN we cannot grow the partition on the fly. Any growth will require: downing of E2K, a GOOD backup,rebuilding of the LUN and partitions used, re-presentation of the luns, getting W2K to ID the proper LUNs, data restore, much prayer, bring E2K up. In short leave yourself plenty of room. I am currently allotting only .25 of available space to the mailboxes. The system default mailbox size is 20MB. There is a separate partition/lun for each of the 2 nodes in the cluster and another for the public store. The HBA's to connect to the SAN had issues with W2K SP2 and fail over would not work, this has been fixed (about mid year). A thorough understanding of the SAN and its fabrics is very necessary, Don't just have and outsourced implementation team come in and set it up, this will kill you if you need to troubleshoot. I can give more info to the list later if needed or offline. The quick synopsis: E2K on active-active cluster Quorum, logsx2,priv.edbx2, pub.edb are on SAN partitions NLB Front-End/OWA 2 node "cluster" Hope this a start for any questions, I can give a more "formal" elaboration after the weekend (taking some time off) --Kevin UNCW -Original Message-From: Arnold, Jamie [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]Sent: Thursday, December 06, 2001 7:22 PMTo: MS-Exchange Admin IssuesSubject: RE: Exchange over a SAN Care to elaborate? You sound like you have much to tell. J -Original Message-From: Violette, Kevin [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, December 06, 2001 6:10 PMTo: MS-Exchange Admin IssuesSubject: RE: Exchange over a SAN We are running Exchange 2000on a SAN. Words of wisdomDo your homework and plan your SAN luns/parts to be used with exchange carefully. Kevin UNCW -Original Message-From: Karen Palmer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]Sent: Thursday, December 06, 2001 4:20 PMTo: MS-Exchange Admin IssuesSubject: Exchange over a SAN William's message woke me right up. Our new Exchange server will be on a SAN. (gulp) Does anyone on the list have an Exchange/SAN setup and, if so, any words of wisdom? Karen Palmer SCJD -Original
RE: Exchange over a SAN
Title: Message I know I'll never forget it. NAS = No Applicable Setup. -Original Message-From: Arnold, Jamie [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]Sent: Friday, December 07, 2001 4:07 PMTo: MS-Exchange Admin IssuesSubject: RE: Exchange over a SAN That's been established. Thanks J -Original Message-From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, December 07, 2001 6:43 PMTo: MS-Exchange Admin IssuesSubject: RE: Exchange over a SAN I believe it's NAS that MS won't support for Exchange. -Mike -Original Message-From: Jamison, Chris [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, December 07, 2001 10:04 AMTo: MS-Exchange Admin IssuesSubject: RE: Exchange over a SAN You are correct!! I too have an Exchange 2K server clustered on a SAN. (Compaq - StorageWorks)It is not a requirement to implement a SAN for your cluster. It give you the ability to work with your storage more effectively. With the Compaq SAN and several tools you do have the option to grow your storage on the fly!! NOTE: Microsoft does support SAN's with Exchange Chris -Original Message-From: Arnold, Jamie [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, December 07, 2001 11:47 AMTo: MS-Exchange Admin IssuesSubject: RE: Exchange over a SAN Why is the SAN a *must* for cluster? You could easily do a cluster with a standard Powervault and SCSI. J -Original Message-From: Violette, Kevin [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, December 07, 2001 11:28 AMTo: MS-Exchange Admin IssuesSubject: RE: Exchange over a SAN Sorry for the delay on the elaboration. Got pulled away. Here is our story: At the University of North Carolina at Wilmington we are moving from VMS based (pop/imap) mail system to Exchange and Outlook. We are running a Dell SAN over Fibre Channel and Dell PV servers. The SAN adds an extra level of complexity but is a must for clustered environment. Depending on the SAN you are implementing and its "ability" to have lun and or partition sizes changed on the fly, the "virtual" disk size planning plays a major role. With our SAN we cannot grow the partition on the fly. Any growth will require: downing of E2K, a GOOD backup,rebuilding of the LUN and partitions used, re-presentation of the luns, getting W2K to ID the proper LUNs, data restore, much prayer, bring E2K up. In short leave yourself plenty of room. I am currently allotting only .25 of available space to the mailboxes. The system default mailbox size is 20MB. There is a separate partition/lun for each of the 2 nodes in the cluster and another for the public store. The HBA's to connect to the SAN had issues with W2K SP2 and fail over would not work, this has been fixed (about mid year). A thorough understanding of the SAN and its fabrics is very necessary, Don't just have and outsourced implementation team come in and set it up, this will kill you if you need to troubleshoot. I can give more info to the list later if needed or offline. The quick synopsis: E2K on active-active cluster Quorum, logsx2,priv.edbx2, pub.edb are on SAN partitions NLB Front-End/OWA 2 node "cluster" Hope this a start for any questions, I can give a more "formal" elaboration after the weekend (taking some time off) --Kevin UNCW -Original Message-From: Arnold, Jamie [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]Sent: Thursday, December 06, 2001 7:22 PMTo: MS-Exchange Admin IssuesSubject: RE: Exchange over a SAN Care to elaborate? You sound like you have much to tell. J -Original Message-From: Violette, Kevin [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, December 06, 2001 6:10 PMTo: MS-Exchange Admin IssuesSubject: RE: Exchange over a SAN We are running Exchange 2000on a SAN. Words of wisdomDo your homework and plan your SAN luns/parts to be used with exchange carefully. Kevin UNCW -Original Message-From: Karen Palmer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]Sent: Thursday, December 06, 2001 4:20 PMTo: MS-Exchange Admin IssuesSubject: Exchange over a SAN William's message woke me right up. Our new Exchange server will be on
RE: Exchange over a SAN
Title: Message NapsterApplicationStorage -Original Message-From: Lefkovics, William [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, December 07, 2001 7:10 PMTo: MS-Exchange Admin IssuesSubject: RE: Exchange over a SAN I know I'll never forget it. NAS = No Applicable Setup. -Original Message-From: Arnold, Jamie [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]Sent: Friday, December 07, 2001 4:07 PMTo: MS-Exchange Admin IssuesSubject: RE: Exchange over a SAN That's been established. Thanks J -Original Message-From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, December 07, 2001 6:43 PMTo: MS-Exchange Admin IssuesSubject: RE: Exchange over a SAN I believe it's NAS that MS won't support for Exchange. -Mike -Original Message-From: Jamison, Chris [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, December 07, 2001 10:04 AMTo: MS-Exchange Admin IssuesSubject: RE: Exchange over a SAN You are correct!! I too have an Exchange 2K server clustered on a SAN. (Compaq - StorageWorks)It is not a requirement to implement a SAN for your cluster. It give you the ability to work with your storage more effectively. With the Compaq SAN and several tools you do have the option to grow your storage on the fly!! NOTE: Microsoft does support SAN's with Exchange Chris -Original Message-From: Arnold, Jamie [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, December 07, 2001 11:47 AMTo: MS-Exchange Admin IssuesSubject: RE: Exchange over a SAN Why is the SAN a *must* for cluster? You could easily do a cluster with a standard Powervault and SCSI. J -Original Message-From: Violette, Kevin [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, December 07, 2001 11:28 AMTo: MS-Exchange Admin IssuesSubject: RE: Exchange over a SAN Sorry for the delay on the elaboration. Got pulled away. Here is our story: At the University of North Carolina at Wilmington we are moving from VMS based (pop/imap) mail system to Exchange and Outlook. We are running a Dell SAN over Fibre Channel and Dell PV servers. The SAN adds an extra level of complexity but is a must for clustered environment. Depending on the SAN you are implementing and its "ability" to have lun and or partition sizes changed on the fly, the "virtual" disk size planning plays a major role. With our SAN we cannot grow the partition on the fly. Any growth will require: downing of E2K, a GOOD backup,rebuilding of the LUN and partitions used, re-presentation of the luns, getting W2K to ID the proper LUNs, data restore, much prayer, bring E2K up. In short leave yourself plenty of room. I am currently allotting only .25 of available space to the mailboxes. The system default mailbox size is 20MB. There is a separate partition/lun for each of the 2 nodes in the cluster and another for the public store. The HBA's to connect to the SAN had issues with W2K SP2 and fail over would not work, this has been fixed (about mid year). A thorough understanding of the SAN and its fabrics is very necessary, Don't just have and outsourced implementation team come in and set it up, this will kill you if you need to troubleshoot. I can give more info to the list later if needed or offline. The quick synopsis: E2K on active-active cluster Quorum, logsx2,priv.edbx2, pub.edb are on SAN partitions NLB Front-End/OWA 2 node "cluster" Hope this a start for any questions, I can give a more "formal" elaboration after the weekend (taking some time off) --Kevin UNCW -Original Message-From: Arnold, Jamie [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]Sent: Thursday, December 06, 2001 7:22 PMTo: MS-Exchange Admin IssuesSubject: RE: Exchange over a SAN Care to elaborate? You sound like you have much to tell. J -Original Message-From: Violette, Kevin [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, December 06, 2001 6:10 PMTo: MS-Exchange Admin IssuesSubject: RE: Exchange over a SAN We are running Exchange 2000on a SAN. Words of
RE: Page File
Depends, but I try to put the entire thing on one partition only and that is the system partition. It shouldn't be on a RAID 5 array, it should be on a mirrored system where the OS resides... D There are seldom good technological solutions to behavioral problems. - Ed Crowley -Original Message- From: David N Precht [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, December 07, 2001 2:56 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Page File Hmm... one or two other admins suggested that setup... Whats your formula for paging ? --- Don Ely [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: That's not a good idea... Excessive paging can result from that config. Technically, you should try to keep them on the partition where the system files reside. Especially, if your server ever BSOD's and you want to view the dump file. D True friends stab you in the front. -Oscar Wilde -Original Message- From: David N Precht [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, December 07, 2001 12:42 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: Re: Page File with all NT/2000, I place them on all partitions. --- Todd White [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: For those of you that are running Windows 2000 Server with Exchange Server 5.5 SP4 where are you placing your pagefile(s)? Todd White System Administrator LaserComm Inc. 972-941-0276 Voice 972-941-0223 Fax The contents of this e-mail and any attachments are the property of LaserComm Inc, its subsidiaries or licensors and are intended to be private and confidential. This material is intended solely for the individual to whom it is addressed. The material is protected by various laws, including those related to copyright and trade secret, and may not be used, copied or distributed without the express permission of LaserComm Inc. If you have received this message in error, please notify the sender by return e-mail and delete the correspondence. List Charter and FAQ at: http://www.sunbelt-software.com/exchange_list_charter.htm __ Do You Yahoo!? Send your FREE holiday greetings online! http://greetings.yahoo.com List Charter and FAQ at: http://www.sunbelt-software.com/exchange_list_charter.htm List Charter and FAQ at: http://www.sunbelt-software.com/exchange_list_charter.htm __ Do You Yahoo!? Send your FREE holiday greetings online! http://greetings.yahoo.com List Charter and FAQ at: http://www.sunbelt-software.com/exchange_list_charter.htm List Charter and FAQ at: http://www.sunbelt-software.com/exchange_list_charter.htm
RE: NTBUGTRAQ - Potential Problem with Microsoft Security Bulleti n MS01-057
I have not tested that. This question is more for Microsoft, but why should I need such a powerful browser installed on a web server? William -Original Message- From: Fred Valdez [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, December 07, 2001 4:43 PM To: 'Lefkovics, William '; Exchange Newsgroup Subject: RE: NTBUGTRAQ - Potential Problem with Microsoft Security Bulleti n MS01-057 Do you think there would be any problems if IE6 is installed first? Fred -Original Message- From: Lefkovics, William To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Sent: 12/7/01 2:59 PM Subject: RE: NTBUGTRAQ - Potential Problem with Microsoft Security Bulleti n MS01-057 Interesting? How about disappointing? And a little frustrating... William -Original Message- From: Martin Blackstone [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, December 07, 2001 12:14 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: FW: NTBUGTRAQ - Potential Problem with Microsoft Security Bulleti n MS01-057 Interesting -Original Message- From: Peter Koso [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, December 07, 2001 11:02 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Potential Problem with Microsoft Security Bulletin MS01-057 Potential issue with this security patch. Running NT 4.0 SP6a and Exchange 5.5 SP4. Issue is with an older version of IE on the exchange server. We were running IE 4.01 SP1. The patch applies fine but upon reboot there is an error message procedure entry point wnsprintfa could not be located in the dynamic link library shlwapi.dll See MS knowledgebase Q284706 The error manifests itself with OWA (outlook Web Access) users not seeing any text of their emails. They can logon fine and see the subject lines - but clicking on the message brings up a white page. Resolved (with help from MS tech support) by backing off the patch, installing IE 5.5 SP2 and re-installing the patch. This takes several reboots. regards, Peter Koso Beansprout Networks List Charter and FAQ at: http://www.sunbelt-software.com/exchange_list_charter.htm List Charter and FAQ at: http://www.sunbelt-software.com/exchange_list_charter.htm
RE: NTBUGTRAQ - Potential Problem with Microsoft Security Bulleti n MS01-057
My Exch server has IE6, but that is because I just built it. I have installed the patcha and OWA functions fine. -Original Message- From: Lefkovics, William [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, December 07, 2001 4:52 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: NTBUGTRAQ - Potential Problem with Microsoft Security Bulleti n MS01-057 I have not tested that. This question is more for Microsoft, but why should I need such a powerful browser installed on a web server? William -Original Message- From: Fred Valdez [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, December 07, 2001 4:43 PM To: 'Lefkovics, William '; Exchange Newsgroup Subject: RE: NTBUGTRAQ - Potential Problem with Microsoft Security Bulleti n MS01-057 Do you think there would be any problems if IE6 is installed first? Fred -Original Message- From: Lefkovics, William To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Sent: 12/7/01 2:59 PM Subject: RE: NTBUGTRAQ - Potential Problem with Microsoft Security Bulleti n MS01-057 Interesting? How about disappointing? And a little frustrating... William -Original Message- From: Martin Blackstone [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, December 07, 2001 12:14 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: FW: NTBUGTRAQ - Potential Problem with Microsoft Security Bulleti n MS01-057 Interesting -Original Message- From: Peter Koso [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, December 07, 2001 11:02 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Potential Problem with Microsoft Security Bulletin MS01-057 Potential issue with this security patch. Running NT 4.0 SP6a and Exchange 5.5 SP4. Issue is with an older version of IE on the exchange server. We were running IE 4.01 SP1. The patch applies fine but upon reboot there is an error message procedure entry point wnsprintfa could not be located in the dynamic link library shlwapi.dll See MS knowledgebase Q284706 The error manifests itself with OWA (outlook Web Access) users not seeing any text of their emails. They can logon fine and see the subject lines - but clicking on the message brings up a white page. Resolved (with help from MS tech support) by backing off the patch, installing IE 5.5 SP2 and re-installing the patch. This takes several reboots. regards, Peter Koso Beansprout Networks List Charter and FAQ at: http://www.sunbelt-software.com/exchange_list_charter.htm List Charter and FAQ at: http://www.sunbelt-software.com/exchange_list_charter.htm List Charter and FAQ at: http://www.sunbelt-software.com/exchange_list_charter.htm
RE: NTBUGTRAQ - Potential Problem with Microsoft Security Bulleti n MS01-057
My OWA server had Netscape4.7 on it until today. -Original Message- From: Martin Blackstone [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, December 07, 2001 5:24 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: NTBUGTRAQ - Potential Problem with Microsoft Security Bulleti n MS01-057 My Exch server has IE6, but that is because I just built it. I have installed the patcha and OWA functions fine. -Original Message- From: Lefkovics, William [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, December 07, 2001 4:52 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: NTBUGTRAQ - Potential Problem with Microsoft Security Bulleti n MS01-057 I have not tested that. This question is more for Microsoft, but why should I need such a powerful browser installed on a web server? William -Original Message- From: Fred Valdez [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, December 07, 2001 4:43 PM To: 'Lefkovics, William '; Exchange Newsgroup Subject: RE: NTBUGTRAQ - Potential Problem with Microsoft Security Bulleti n MS01-057 Do you think there would be any problems if IE6 is installed first? Fred -Original Message- From: Lefkovics, William To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Sent: 12/7/01 2:59 PM Subject: RE: NTBUGTRAQ - Potential Problem with Microsoft Security Bulleti n MS01-057 Interesting? How about disappointing? And a little frustrating... William -Original Message- From: Martin Blackstone [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, December 07, 2001 12:14 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: FW: NTBUGTRAQ - Potential Problem with Microsoft Security Bulleti n MS01-057 Interesting -Original Message- From: Peter Koso [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, December 07, 2001 11:02 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Potential Problem with Microsoft Security Bulletin MS01-057 Potential issue with this security patch. Running NT 4.0 SP6a and Exchange 5.5 SP4. Issue is with an older version of IE on the exchange server. We were running IE 4.01 SP1. The patch applies fine but upon reboot there is an error message procedure entry point wnsprintfa could not be located in the dynamic link library shlwapi.dll See MS knowledgebase Q284706 The error manifests itself with OWA (outlook Web Access) users not seeing any text of their emails. They can logon fine and see the subject lines - but clicking on the message brings up a white page. Resolved (with help from MS tech support) by backing off the patch, installing IE 5.5 SP2 and re-installing the patch. This takes several reboots. regards, Peter Koso Beansprout Networks List Charter and FAQ at: http://www.sunbelt-software.com/exchange_list_charter.htm List Charter and FAQ at: http://www.sunbelt-software.com/exchange_list_charter.htm List Charter and FAQ at: http://www.sunbelt-software.com/exchange_list_charter.htm List Charter and FAQ at: http://www.sunbelt-software.com/exchange_list_charter.htm
RE: NTBUGTRAQ - Potential Problem with Microsoft Security Bulleti n MS01-057
MS will simply say they don't support IE4 any longer so no testing was done. But who upgrades the browser on an OS without a specific need? -Original Message- From: Lefkovics, William [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, December 07, 2001 2:59 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: NTBUGTRAQ - Potential Problem with Microsoft Security Bulleti n MS01-057 Interesting? How about disappointing? And a little frustrating... William -Original Message- From: Martin Blackstone [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, December 07, 2001 12:14 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: FW: NTBUGTRAQ - Potential Problem with Microsoft Security Bulleti n MS01-057 Interesting -Original Message- From: Peter Koso [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, December 07, 2001 11:02 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Potential Problem with Microsoft Security Bulletin MS01-057 Potential issue with this security patch. Running NT 4.0 SP6a and Exchange 5.5 SP4. Issue is with an older version of IE on the exchange server. We were running IE 4.01 SP1. The patch applies fine but upon reboot there is an error message procedure entry point wnsprintfa could not be located in the dynamic link library shlwapi.dll See MS knowledgebase Q284706 The error manifests itself with OWA (outlook Web Access) users not seeing any text of their emails. They can logon fine and see the subject lines - but clicking on the message brings up a white page. Resolved (with help from MS tech support) by backing off the patch, installing IE 5.5 SP2 and re-installing the patch. This takes several reboots. regards, Peter Koso Beansprout Networks List Charter and FAQ at: http://www.sunbelt-software.com/exchange_list_charter.htm List Charter and FAQ at: http://www.sunbelt-software.com/exchange_list_charter.htm
RE: Page File
I put the pagefile on the NAS. -Original Message- From: Don Ely [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, December 07, 2001 4:49 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Page File Depends, but I try to put the entire thing on one partition only and that is the system partition. It shouldn't be on a RAID 5 array, it should be on a mirrored system where the OS resides... D There are seldom good technological solutions to behavioral problems. - Ed Crowley -Original Message- From: David N Precht [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, December 07, 2001 2:56 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Page File Hmm... one or two other admins suggested that setup... Whats your formula for paging ? --- Don Ely [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: That's not a good idea... Excessive paging can result from that config. Technically, you should try to keep them on the partition where the system files reside. Especially, if your server ever BSOD's and you want to view the dump file. D True friends stab you in the front. -Oscar Wilde -Original Message- From: David N Precht [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, December 07, 2001 12:42 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: Re: Page File with all NT/2000, I place them on all partitions. --- Todd White [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: For those of you that are running Windows 2000 Server with Exchange Server 5.5 SP4 where are you placing your pagefile(s)? Todd White System Administrator LaserComm Inc. 972-941-0276 Voice 972-941-0223 Fax The contents of this e-mail and any attachments are the property of LaserComm Inc, its subsidiaries or licensors and are intended to be private and confidential. This material is intended solely for the individual to whom it is addressed. The material is protected by various laws, including those related to copyright and trade secret, and may not be used, copied or distributed without the express permission of LaserComm Inc. If you have received this message in error, please notify the sender by return e-mail and delete the correspondence. List Charter and FAQ at: http://www.sunbelt-software.com/exchange_list_charter.htm __ Do You Yahoo!? Send your FREE holiday greetings online! http://greetings.yahoo.com List Charter and FAQ at: http://www.sunbelt-software.com/exchange_list_charter.htm List Charter and FAQ at: http://www.sunbelt-software.com/exchange_list_charter.htm __ Do You Yahoo!? Send your FREE holiday greetings online! http://greetings.yahoo.com List Charter and FAQ at: http://www.sunbelt-software.com/exchange_list_charter.htm List Charter and FAQ at: http://www.sunbelt-software.com/exchange_list_charter.htm List Charter and FAQ at: http://www.sunbelt-software.com/exchange_list_charter.htm
RE: Defragging the IS
LOL! No, I got kicked off. Original Message- From: Don Ely [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, December 07, 2001 12:08 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Defragging the IS Speakin of CareBear... William doesn't run that list. Consulting: If you're not part of the solution, there's good money to be made in prolonging the problem -Original Message- From: Martin Blackstone [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, December 07, 2001 12:09 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Defragging the IS ROFLWilliam!!! -Original Message- From: Clark, Steve [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, December 07, 2001 11:04 AM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Defragging the IS Don't really call me slow - I might have to go to the carebear list that William runs. Steve Clark Clark Systems Support, LLC AVIEN Charter Member Who's watching your network? www.clarksupport.com 301-610-9584 voice 240-465-0323 Efax The data furnished in connection with this document is deemed by Clark Systems Support, LLC., to contain proprietary and privileged information and shall not be disclosed or used for the benefit of others without the prior written permission of Clark Systems Support, LLC. -Original Message- From: Crosby, Tim (Sarcom) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, December 07, 2001 1:50 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Defragging the IS OK, what would be a more realistic estimate then? I'd like to be able to give them some idea. -Original Message- From: Don Ely [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, December 07, 2001 1:49 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Defragging the IS Don't do a defrag for a measly 16MB! 2-3 hours for a 36GB IS!! HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA! Yeah, rggghhh. D Mistakes: It could be that the purpose of your life is only to serve as a warning to others. -Original Message- From: Crosby, Tim (Sarcom) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, December 07, 2001 10:40 AM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: Defragging the IS Tomorrow we are scheduled to move our single server Exchange 5.5 site over to a new Compaq DL380 server that is part of a SAN. Old server is NT4, SP6. New server will be Windows 2000, SP2 but will still have Exchange 5.5, SP4. My boss wants us do a complete backup of the server tonight, then come in tomorrow and do a defrag of the database, back it up again, and restore it to the new server. It seems to be the general consensus on this list that defrag=bad. But what about in this situation where we are moving to a new server and we are scheduled to have the server down for 24 hours anyway? I checked the event logs and, as of last night it shows that the database has 16 megabytes of free space after online defragmentation. Is this the white space that I've heard about? And is that all the space we will gain by doing a defrag? If that's the case, I will suggest we don't take the time and risk of doing a defrag of the IS. I'm guessing it will take at least 2-3 hours to defrag our 36GB database Or will there be a performance increase by doing a defrag now? Thanks for your input. Tim List Charter and FAQ at: http://www.sunbelt-software.com/exchange_list_charter.htm List Charter and FAQ at: http://www.sunbelt-software.com/exchange_list_charter.htm List Charter and FAQ at: http://www.sunbelt-software.com/exchange_list_charter.htm List Charter and FAQ at: http://www.sunbelt-software.com/exchange_list_charter.htm List Charter and FAQ at: http://www.sunbelt-software.com/exchange_list_charter.htm List Charter and FAQ at: http://www.sunbelt-software.com/exchange_list_charter.htm List Charter and FAQ at: http://www.sunbelt-software.com/exchange_list_charter.htm
RE: Defragging the IS
Um, why? lol Steve Clark Clark Systems Support, LLC AVIEN Charter Member Who's watching your network? www.clarksupport.com 301-610-9584 voice 240-465-0323 Efax The data furnished in connection with this document is deemed by Clark Systems Support, LLC., to contain proprietary and privileged information and shall not be disclosed or used for the benefit of others without the prior written permission of Clark Systems Support, LLC. -Original Message- From: Lefkovics, William [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, December 07, 2001 9:45 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Defragging the IS LOL! No, I got kicked off. Original Message- From: Don Ely [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, December 07, 2001 12:08 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Defragging the IS Speakin of CareBear... William doesn't run that list. Consulting: If you're not part of the solution, there's good money to be made in prolonging the problem -Original Message- From: Martin Blackstone [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, December 07, 2001 12:09 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Defragging the IS ROFLWilliam!!! -Original Message- From: Clark, Steve [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, December 07, 2001 11:04 AM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Defragging the IS Don't really call me slow - I might have to go to the carebear list that William runs. Steve Clark Clark Systems Support, LLC AVIEN Charter Member Who's watching your network? www.clarksupport.com 301-610-9584 voice 240-465-0323 Efax The data furnished in connection with this document is deemed by Clark Systems Support, LLC., to contain proprietary and privileged information and shall not be disclosed or used for the benefit of others without the prior written permission of Clark Systems Support, LLC. -Original Message- From: Crosby, Tim (Sarcom) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, December 07, 2001 1:50 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Defragging the IS OK, what would be a more realistic estimate then? I'd like to be able to give them some idea. -Original Message- From: Don Ely [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, December 07, 2001 1:49 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Defragging the IS Don't do a defrag for a measly 16MB! 2-3 hours for a 36GB IS!! HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA! Yeah, rggghhh. D Mistakes: It could be that the purpose of your life is only to serve as a warning to others. -Original Message- From: Crosby, Tim (Sarcom) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, December 07, 2001 10:40 AM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: Defragging the IS Tomorrow we are scheduled to move our single server Exchange 5.5 site over to a new Compaq DL380 server that is part of a SAN. Old server is NT4, SP6. New server will be Windows 2000, SP2 but will still have Exchange 5.5, SP4. My boss wants us do a complete backup of the server tonight, then come in tomorrow and do a defrag of the database, back it up again, and restore it to the new server. It seems to be the general consensus on this list that defrag=bad. But what about in this situation where we are moving to a new server and we are scheduled to have the server down for 24 hours anyway? I checked the event logs and, as of last night it shows that the database has 16 megabytes of free space after online defragmentation. Is this the white space that I've heard about? And is that all the space we will gain by doing a defrag? If that's the case, I will suggest we don't take the time and risk of doing a defrag of the IS. I'm guessing it will take at least 2-3 hours to defrag our 36GB database Or will there be a performance increase by doing a defrag now? Thanks for your input. Tim List Charter and FAQ at: http://www.sunbelt-software.com/exchange_list_charter.htm List Charter and FAQ at: http://www.sunbelt-software.com/exchange_list_charter.htm List Charter and FAQ at: http://www.sunbelt-software.com/exchange_list_charter.htm List Charter and FAQ at: http://www.sunbelt-software.com/exchange_list_charter.htm List Charter and FAQ at: http://www.sunbelt-software.com/exchange_list_charter.htm List Charter and FAQ at: http://www.sunbelt-software.com/exchange_list_charter.htm List Charter and FAQ at: http://www.sunbelt-software.com/exchange_list_charter.htm List Charter and FAQ at: http://www.sunbelt-software.com/exchange_list_charter.htm
RE: Page File
Yeah baby! D Happiness comes only when we push our brains and hearts to the farthest reaches of which we are capable. -Leo C. Rosten -Original Message- From: Lefkovics, William [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, December 07, 2001 6:38 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Page File I put the pagefile on the NAS. -Original Message- From: Don Ely [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, December 07, 2001 4:49 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Page File Depends, but I try to put the entire thing on one partition only and that is the system partition. It shouldn't be on a RAID 5 array, it should be on a mirrored system where the OS resides... D There are seldom good technological solutions to behavioral problems. - Ed Crowley -Original Message- From: David N Precht [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, December 07, 2001 2:56 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Page File Hmm... one or two other admins suggested that setup... Whats your formula for paging ? --- Don Ely [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: That's not a good idea... Excessive paging can result from that config. Technically, you should try to keep them on the partition where the system files reside. Especially, if your server ever BSOD's and you want to view the dump file. D True friends stab you in the front. -Oscar Wilde -Original Message- From: David N Precht [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, December 07, 2001 12:42 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: Re: Page File with all NT/2000, I place them on all partitions. --- Todd White [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: For those of you that are running Windows 2000 Server with Exchange Server 5.5 SP4 where are you placing your pagefile(s)? Todd White System Administrator LaserComm Inc. 972-941-0276 Voice 972-941-0223 Fax The contents of this e-mail and any attachments are the property of LaserComm Inc, its subsidiaries or licensors and are intended to be private and confidential. This material is intended solely for the individual to whom it is addressed. The material is protected by various laws, including those related to copyright and trade secret, and may not be used, copied or distributed without the express permission of LaserComm Inc. If you have received this message in error, please notify the sender by return e-mail and delete the correspondence. List Charter and FAQ at: http://www.sunbelt-software.com/exchange_list_charter.htm __ Do You Yahoo!? Send your FREE holiday greetings online! http://greetings.yahoo.com List Charter and FAQ at: http://www.sunbelt-software.com/exchange_list_charter.htm List Charter and FAQ at: http://www.sunbelt-software.com/exchange_list_charter.htm __ Do You Yahoo!? Send your FREE holiday greetings online! http://greetings.yahoo.com List Charter and FAQ at: http://www.sunbelt-software.com/exchange_list_charter.htm List Charter and FAQ at: http://www.sunbelt-software.com/exchange_list_charter.htm List Charter and FAQ at: http://www.sunbelt-software.com/exchange_list_charter.htm List Charter and FAQ at: http://www.sunbelt-software.com/exchange_list_charter.htm
RE: Defragging the IS
Really? What's the link, I'm subbin... :P D Happiness comes only when we push our brains and hearts to the farthest reaches of which we are capable. -Leo C. Rosten -Original Message- From: Lefkovics, William [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, December 07, 2001 6:45 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Defragging the IS LOL! No, I got kicked off. Original Message- From: Don Ely [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, December 07, 2001 12:08 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Defragging the IS Speakin of CareBear... William doesn't run that list. Consulting: If you're not part of the solution, there's good money to be made in prolonging the problem -Original Message- From: Martin Blackstone [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, December 07, 2001 12:09 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Defragging the IS ROFLWilliam!!! -Original Message- From: Clark, Steve [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, December 07, 2001 11:04 AM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Defragging the IS Don't really call me slow - I might have to go to the carebear list that William runs. Steve Clark Clark Systems Support, LLC AVIEN Charter Member Who's watching your network? www.clarksupport.com 301-610-9584 voice 240-465-0323 Efax The data furnished in connection with this document is deemed by Clark Systems Support, LLC., to contain proprietary and privileged information and shall not be disclosed or used for the benefit of others without the prior written permission of Clark Systems Support, LLC. -Original Message- From: Crosby, Tim (Sarcom) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, December 07, 2001 1:50 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Defragging the IS OK, what would be a more realistic estimate then? I'd like to be able to give them some idea. -Original Message- From: Don Ely [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, December 07, 2001 1:49 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Defragging the IS Don't do a defrag for a measly 16MB! 2-3 hours for a 36GB IS!! HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA! Yeah, rggghhh. D Mistakes: It could be that the purpose of your life is only to serve as a warning to others. -Original Message- From: Crosby, Tim (Sarcom) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, December 07, 2001 10:40 AM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: Defragging the IS Tomorrow we are scheduled to move our single server Exchange 5.5 site over to a new Compaq DL380 server that is part of a SAN. Old server is NT4, SP6. New server will be Windows 2000, SP2 but will still have Exchange 5.5, SP4. My boss wants us do a complete backup of the server tonight, then come in tomorrow and do a defrag of the database, back it up again, and restore it to the new server. It seems to be the general consensus on this list that defrag=bad. But what about in this situation where we are moving to a new server and we are scheduled to have the server down for 24 hours anyway? I checked the event logs and, as of last night it shows that the database has 16 megabytes of free space after online defragmentation. Is this the white space that I've heard about? And is that all the space we will gain by doing a defrag? If that's the case, I will suggest we don't take the time and risk of doing a defrag of the IS. I'm guessing it will take at least 2-3 hours to defrag our 36GB database Or will there be a performance increase by doing a defrag now? Thanks for your input. Tim List Charter and FAQ at: http://www.sunbelt-software.com/exchange_list_charter.htm List Charter and FAQ at: http://www.sunbelt-software.com/exchange_list_charter.htm List Charter and FAQ at: http://www.sunbelt-software.com/exchange_list_charter.htm List Charter and FAQ at: http://www.sunbelt-software.com/exchange_list_charter.htm List Charter and FAQ at: http://www.sunbelt-software.com/exchange_list_charter.htm List Charter and FAQ at: http://www.sunbelt-software.com/exchange_list_charter.htm List Charter and FAQ at: http://www.sunbelt-software.com/exchange_list_charter.htm List Charter and FAQ at: http://www.sunbelt-software.com/exchange_list_charter.htm
FW: Microsoft Security Bulletin MS01-057 (version 2.0)
Here we go again. Steve Clark Clark Systems Support, LLC AVIEN Charter Member Who's watching your network? www.clarksupport.com 301-610-9584 voice 240-465-0323 Efax The data furnished in connection with this document is deemed by Clark Systems Support, LLC., to contain proprietary and privileged information and shall not be disclosed or used for the benefit of others without the prior written permission of Clark Systems Support, LLC. -Original Message- From: Microsoft Product Security [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, December 07, 2001 10:15 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Microsoft Security Bulletin MS01-057 (version 2.0) The following is a Security Bulletin from the Microsoft Product Security Notification Service. Please do not reply to this message, as it was sent from an unattended mailbox. -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- - -- Title: Specially Formed Script in HTML Mail can Execute in Exchange 5.5 OWA Date: 06 December 2001 Revised:07 December 2001 (version 2.0) Software: Microsoft Exchange 5.5 Server Outlook Web Access Impact: Run Code of Attacker's Choice Max Risk: Medium Bulletin: MS01-057 Microsoft encourages customers to review the Security Bulletin at: http://www.microsoft.com/technet/security/bulletin/MS01-057.asp. - - - -- Reason for Revision: On December 6, 2001 Microsoft released the original version of this bulletin. On December 7, 2001 an issue relating to file dependencies for the patch was identified and the bulletin was updated and re-released to include this information. Specifically, for this patch to function properly, the Outlook Web Access (OWA) server on which the patch is installed must have Internet Explorer (IE) 5.0 or greater installed. If the patch is installed on a system with a version of IE older than 5.0, unexpected consequences may result. The Caveats section has been updated to include version requirements for this patch. In addition, it contains version recommendations for dependent components that are applicable at the time of this writing. In addition, the FAQ contains remediation information for customers who have applied this patch on systems with versions of IE older than 5.0. Issue: == Outlook Web Access (OWA) is a service of Exchange 5.5 Server that allows users to access and manipulate messages in their Exchange mailbox by using a web browser. A flaw exists in the way OWA handles inline script in messages in conjunction with Internet Explorer (IE). If an HTML message that contains specially formatted script is opened in OWA, the script executes when the message is opened. Because OWA requires that scripting be enabled in the zone where the OWA server is located, a vulnerability results because this script could take any action against the user's Exchange mailbox that the user himself was capable of, including sending, moving, or deleting messages. An attacker could maliciously exploit this flaw by sending a specially crafted message to the user. If the user opened the message in OWA, the script would then execute. While it is possible for a script to send a message as the user, it is impossible for the script to send a message to addresses in the user's address book. Thus, the flaw cannot be exploited for mass-mailing attacks. Also, mounting a successful attack requires knowledge of the intended victim's choice of mail clients and reading habits. If the maliciously crafted message were read in any mail client other than a browser through OWA, the attack would fail. Mitigating Factors: - A successful attack would require the victim to read the message in a IE using OWA only. The attack would fail if read in any other mail client. - A successful attack would also require knowledge of the version of OWA in use. The attack would fail on other versions of OWA. - A successful attack can only take action on the mailbox on the Exchange Server as the user. It cannot take action on the user's local machine. It cannot take actions on any other users mailbox directly. Nor can it take actions directly on the Exchange Server. Risk Rating: - Internet systems: Moderate - Intranet systems: Moderate - Client systems: None Patch Availability: === - A patch is available to fix this vulnerability. Please read the Security Bulletin at http://www.microsoft.com/technet/security/bulletin/ms01-057.asp for information on obtaining this patch. Acknowledgment: === - Lex Arquette of WhiteHat Security (http://www.whitehatsec.com) - - THE INFORMATION PROVIDED IN THE MICROSOFT KNOWLEDGE BASE IS PROVIDED AS IS
Exchange2000 opinions
Title: Message If you were in a position of influence, what really bad things about Exchange2000 would you change and/or improve? What really irks you? What is the product missing? OWA? Migration issues? AD? Admin? Need for third party apps? I don't have any influence, but a summary will be delievered to those who do. Email me offline if you'd prefer. William Lefkovics, MCSE, A+, ExchangeMVP List Charter and FAQ at: http://www.sunbelt-software.com/exchange_list_charter.htm
Blocking files extentions
Can anyone tell me how to block certain file extentions so Exchange rejects them? Example is the .scr extention. Thanks, Brenda List Charter and FAQ at: http://www.sunbelt-software.com/exchange_list_charter.htm
RE: Blocking files extentions
You need an antivirus software like these... www.antivirus.com www.sybari.com They are the top two favs among most of us... D The road to a friend's house is never long. -Danish proverb -Original Message- From: Brenda Anderson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, December 07, 2001 8:19 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: Blocking files extentions Can anyone tell me how to block certain file extentions so Exchange rejects them? Example is the .scr extention. Thanks, Brenda List Charter and FAQ at: http://www.sunbelt-software.com/exchange_list_charter.htm List Charter and FAQ at: http://www.sunbelt-software.com/exchange_list_charter.htm
FW: Microsoft Security Bulletin MS01-057 (version 2.0)
Version2.0. *sigh* -Original Message- From: Microsoft Product Security [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, December 07, 2001 7:15 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Microsoft Security Bulletin MS01-057 (version 2.0) The following is a Security Bulletin from the Microsoft Product Security Notification Service. Please do not reply to this message, as it was sent from an unattended mailbox. -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- - -- Title: Specially Formed Script in HTML Mail can Execute in Exchange 5.5 OWA Date: 06 December 2001 Revised:07 December 2001 (version 2.0) Software: Microsoft Exchange 5.5 Server Outlook Web Access Impact: Run Code of Attacker's Choice Max Risk: Medium Bulletin: MS01-057 Microsoft encourages customers to review the Security Bulletin at: http://www.microsoft.com/technet/security/bulletin/MS01-057.asp. - - - -- Reason for Revision: On December 6, 2001 Microsoft released the original version of this bulletin. On December 7, 2001 an issue relating to file dependencies for the patch was identified and the bulletin was updated and re-released to include this information. Specifically, for this patch to function properly, the Outlook Web Access (OWA) server on which the patch is installed must have Internet Explorer (IE) 5.0 or greater installed. If the patch is installed on a system with a version of IE older than 5.0, unexpected consequences may result. The Caveats section has been updated to include version requirements for this patch. In addition, it contains version recommendations for dependent components that are applicable at the time of this writing. In addition, the FAQ contains remediation information for customers who have applied this patch on systems with versions of IE older than 5.0. Issue: == Outlook Web Access (OWA) is a service of Exchange 5.5 Server that allows users to access and manipulate messages in their Exchange mailbox by using a web browser. A flaw exists in the way OWA handles inline script in messages in conjunction with Internet Explorer (IE). If an HTML message that contains specially formatted script is opened in OWA, the script executes when the message is opened. Because OWA requires that scripting be enabled in the zone where the OWA server is located, a vulnerability results because this script could take any action against the user's Exchange mailbox that the user himself was capable of, including sending, moving, or deleting messages. An attacker could maliciously exploit this flaw by sending a specially crafted message to the user. If the user opened the message in OWA, the script would then execute. While it is possible for a script to send a message as the user, it is impossible for the script to send a message to addresses in the user's address book. Thus, the flaw cannot be exploited for mass-mailing attacks. Also, mounting a successful attack requires knowledge of the intended victim's choice of mail clients and reading habits. If the maliciously crafted message were read in any mail client other than a browser through OWA, the attack would fail. Mitigating Factors: - A successful attack would require the victim to read the message in a IE using OWA only. The attack would fail if read in any other mail client. - A successful attack would also require knowledge of the version of OWA in use. The attack would fail on other versions of OWA. - A successful attack can only take action on the mailbox on the Exchange Server as the user. It cannot take action on the user's local machine. It cannot take actions on any other users mailbox directly. Nor can it take actions directly on the Exchange Server. Risk Rating: - Internet systems: Moderate - Intranet systems: Moderate - Client systems: None Patch Availability: === - A patch is available to fix this vulnerability. Please read the Security Bulletin at http://www.microsoft.com/technet/security/bulletin/ms01-057.asp for information on obtaining this patch. Acknowledgment: === - Lex Arquette of WhiteHat Security (http://www.whitehatsec.com) - - THE INFORMATION PROVIDED IN THE MICROSOFT KNOWLEDGE BASE IS PROVIDED AS IS WITHOUT WARRANTY OF ANY KIND. MICROSOFT DISCLAIMS ALL WARRANTIES, EITHER EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING THE WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY AND FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. IN NO EVENT SHALL MICROSOFT CORPORATION OR ITS SUPPLIERS BE LIABLE FOR ANY DAMAGES WHATSOEVER INCLUDING DIRECT, INDIRECT, INCIDENTAL, CONSEQUENTIAL, LOSS OF BUSINESS PROFITS OR SPECIAL DAMAGES, EVEN IF MICROSOFT CORPORATION OR ITS SUPPLIERS HAVE BEEN ADVISED OF
RE: Blocking files extentions
Outlook XP on the clients can do it, but its already too late anyway. You can use antigen (lists fav), mail essentials (my fav), or NAV for Exchange/gateways with the filtering options on via regedit. -Original Message- From: Brenda Anderson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, December 07, 2001 11:19 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: Blocking files extentions Can anyone tell me how to block certain file extentions so Exchange rejects them? Example is the .scr extention. Thanks, Brenda List Charter and FAQ at: http://www.sunbelt-software.com/exchange_list_charter.htm List Charter and FAQ at: http://www.sunbelt-software.com/exchange_list_charter.htm
E2K Post-SP2 EDSLock Script Available
See http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;EN-US;q313807 for details. See also http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/release.asp?ReleaseID=34507 for the direct download (although there is a download link in the KB, too). -Scott List Charter and FAQ at: http://www.sunbelt-software.com/exchange_list_charter.htm
