RE: IMC Errors
You'll need mdbvue.exe to view the messages in the BAD folder. There's a TechNet article on this. Neil Hobson Silversands http://www.silversands.co.uk Microsoft Gold Certified Partner For Enterprise Systems For Collaborative Solutions -Original Message- From: Dan Yarrow [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Posted At: 21 February 2002 00:28 Posted To: Sunbelt Exchange List Conversation: IMC Errors Subject: IMC Errors Hi Folks I seem to getting these errors from time to time, and I'm not too sure if I should be worried about them: App: E 'Thu Feb 21 10:15:51 2002': MSExchangeIMC - An error was returned from the messaging software the Internet Mail Service uses to process messages on the Microsoft Exchange Server. It is possible that the piece of mail being processed at the time will be returned to the sender as a failed delivery instead of being delivered. The message will be moved to the BAD folder, if possible, and the error is not a temporary error. Otherwise it will be retried when the service is restarted. Use the appropriate utilities found in the SUPPORT directory of your Exchange CD to view and manipulate messages that have been moved to the BAD folder. App: E 'Thu Feb 21 10:15:51 2002': MSExchangeIS - Error 80070057-8000 occurred while processing message [EMAIL PROTECTED] with subject 'SUBJECT' from 'John Smith'. The archive filename is '1QP5Q8P2'. Any clues??? Cheers Dan Yarrow NT/2000 Systems Administrator Central Queensland University Information Technology Division Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Ph: +61 7 4923 2151 Fax +61 7 4930 9254 List Charter and FAQ at: http://www.sunbelt-software.com/exchange_list_charter.htm ** This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual to whom it is addressed. Any view or opinions presented are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of Silversands, or any of its subsidiary companies. If you have received this email in error, please contact our Support Desk immediately by telephone on 01202-36 or via email at [EMAIL PROTECTED] ** List Charter and FAQ at: http://www.sunbelt-software.com/exchange_list_charter.htm
RE: service pack install level
How true. Perhaps the reason the service pack isn't being displayed is because it's RTM? :-) The other option is to be flash and produce some simple VBScript code like: set objServer = CreateObject(CDOEXM.ExchangeServer) objServer.DataSource.Open your server name here in quotes wscript.echo objServer.ExchangeVersion Neil Hobson Silversands http://www.silversands.co.uk Microsoft Gold Certified Partner For Enterprise Systems For Collaborative Solutions -Original Message- From: William Lefkovics [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Posted At: 21 February 2002 02:12 Posted To: Sunbelt Exchange List Conversation: service pack install level Subject: RE: service pack install level I think the General Tab of the Server Properties page in Exchange System Manager will advise Build and Service Pack number. William -Original Message- From: John Weber [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, February 20, 2002 5:54 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: service pack install level Is there a chart that shows the service pack level in exchange 2000? In the MMC, going to the server in question and looking at the version level displayed there doesn't tell either of my brain cells what service pack the exchange is at. Did I miss something? List Charter and FAQ at: http://www.sunbelt-software.com/exchange_list_charter.htm ** This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual to whom it is addressed. Any view or opinions presented are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of Silversands, or any of its subsidiary companies. If you have received this email in error, please contact our Support Desk immediately by telephone on 01202-36 or via email at [EMAIL PROTECTED] ** List Charter and FAQ at: http://www.sunbelt-software.com/exchange_list_charter.htm
RE: IMC Errors
You'll need mdbvue.exe to view the messages in the BAD folder. There's a TechNet article on this. Neil Hobson Silversands http://www.silversands.co.uk Microsoft Gold Certified Partner For Enterprise Systems For Collaborative Solutions -Original Message- From: Dan Yarrow [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Posted At: 21 February 2002 00:28 Posted To: Sunbelt Exchange List Conversation: IMC Errors Subject: IMC Errors Hi Folks I seem to getting these errors from time to time, and I'm not too sure if I should be worried about them: App: E 'Thu Feb 21 10:15:51 2002': MSExchangeIMC - An error was returned from the messaging software the Internet Mail Service uses to process messages on the Microsoft Exchange Server. It is possible that the piece of mail being processed at the time will be returned to the sender as a failed delivery instead of being delivered. The message will be moved to the BAD folder, if possible, and the error is not a temporary error. Otherwise it will be retried when the service is restarted. Use the appropriate utilities found in the SUPPORT directory of your Exchange CD to view and manipulate messages that have been moved to the BAD folder. App: E 'Thu Feb 21 10:15:51 2002': MSExchangeIS - Error 80070057-8000 occurred while processing message [EMAIL PROTECTED] with subject 'SUBJECT' from 'John Smith'. The archive filename is '1QP5Q8P2'. Any clues??? Cheers Dan Yarrow NT/2000 Systems Administrator Central Queensland University Information Technology Division Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Ph: +61 7 4923 2151 Fax +61 7 4930 9254 List Charter and FAQ at: http://www.sunbelt-software.com/exchange_list_charter.htm ** This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual to whom it is addressed. Any view or opinions presented are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of Silversands, or any of its subsidiary companies. If you have received this email in error, please contact our Support Desk immediately by telephone on 01202-36 or via email at [EMAIL PROTECTED] ** List Charter and FAQ at: http://www.sunbelt-software.com/exchange_list_charter.htm
RE: Exchange system manager on Windows XP
Install the 2000 Admin tools (i know they wont work) install system manager then install the .net tools, worked fine for me :-) Stu -Original Message- From: Patrick Rouse [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 21 February 2002 02:52 To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: Re: Exchange system manager on Windows XP I just use Terminal Services in Remote Administration mode to my Exchange Server. This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --=_NextPart_000_0012_01C1BA2E.B2CCC230 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Does anyone know a way to install system manager on Windows XP? I am aware of (Q312139) I just was curious if anyone knew a work around. I do have the .net beta admin tools installed. Thanks, Bob --=_NextPart_000_0012_01C1BA2E.B2CCC230 Content-Type: text/html; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable html head META HTTP-EQUIV=3DContent-Type CONTENT=3Dtext/html; = charset=3Dus-ascii meta name=3DGenerator content=3DMicrosoft Word 10 (filtered) style !-- /* Font Definitions */ @font-face {font-family:Tempus Sans ITC; panose-1:4 2 4 4 3 13 7 2 2 2;} /* Style Definitions */ p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal {margin:0in; margin-bottom:.0001pt; font-size:12.0pt; font-family:Times New Roman;} a:link, span.MsoHyperlink {color:blue; text-decoration:underline;} a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed {color:purple; text-decoration:underline;} p {margin-right:0in; margin-left:0in; font-size:12.0pt; font-family:Times New Roman;} span.EmailStyle17 {font-family:Arial; color:windowtext;} @page Section1 {size:8.5in 11.0in; margin:1.0in 1.25in 1.0in 1.25in;} div.Section1 {page:Section1;} -- /style /head body lang=3DEN-US link=3Dblue vlink=3Dpurple div class=3DSection1 p class=3DMsoNormalfont size=3D2 face=3DArialspan = style=3D'font-size:10.0pt; font-family:Arial'Does anyone know a way to install system manager on = Windows XP?nbsp; /span/font/p p class=3DMsoNormalfont size=3D2 face=3DArialspan = style=3D'font-size:10.0pt; font-family:Arial'nbsp;/span/font/p p class=3DMsoNormalfont size=3D2 face=3DArialspan = style=3D'font-size:10.0pt; font-family:Arial'I am aware of /span/font(Q312139) I just was = curious if anyone knew a work around.nbsp; /p p class=3DMsoNormalfont size=3D3 face=3DTimes New Romanspan = style=3D'font-size: 12.0pt'nbsp;/span/font/p p class=3DMsoNormalfont size=3D3 face=3DTimes New Romanspan = style=3D'font-size: 12.0pt'I do have the .net beta admin tools installed./span/font/p p class=3DMsoNormalfont size=3D3 face=3DTimes New Romanspan = style=3D'font-size: 12.0pt'nbsp;/span/font/p p class=3DMsoNormalfont size=3D3 face=3DTimes New Romanspan = style=3D'font-size: 12.0pt'Thanks,/span/font/p p class=3DMsoNormalfont size=3D2 face=3DArialspan = style=3D'font-size:10.0pt; font-family:Arial'nbsp;/span/font/p pfont size=3D3 face=3DTempus Sans ITCspan = style=3D'font-size:12.0pt; font-family:Tempus Sans ITC'Bob /span/font/p p class=3DMsoNormalfont size=3D3 face=3DTimes New Romanspan = style=3D'font-size: 12.0pt'nbsp;/span/font/p /div List Charter and FAQ at:BR http://www.sunbelt-software.com/exchange_list_charter.htmBR List Charter and FAQ at:BR http://www.sunbelt-software.com/exchange_list_charter.htmBR /BODY /html --=_NextPart_000_0012_01C1BA2E.B2CCC230--
RE: Trend vs. Antigen
Best idea of all that is the different virus engines. ~ -K.Borndale IT Manager Sybari Software 631.630.8569 -direct dial 631.439.0689 -fax http://www.sybari.com One man's ceiling is another man's floor Martin Blackstone MBlackstone@superiorTo: MS-Exchange Admin Issues [EMAIL PROTECTED] access.com cc: Subject: RE: Trend vs. Antigen 02/20/2002 10:23 PM Please respond to MS-Exchange Admin Issues I'm thinking the same thing. I have Trend and some NAI crap laying around. I was thinking Webshield (SMTP), Anigen (Exchange), Trend (Desktops and Servers). -Original Message- From: Kevin Kennedy [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, February 20, 2002 6:12 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Trend vs. Antigen We have a blend of both. Why argue which is better when two antivirus is better than one. Interscan for NT runs between our firewall and Exchange server. Content management is also done on this server. Once mail has made it through it then gets scanned by Antigen. This setup works very well and has saved us from many virus. A good third tier solution is to have Norton Corporate on the desktops (employees still use Hotmail, Yahoo mail to get personal email). Kevin Kennedy (K2) Network Administrator Mahi Networks, Inc. 707-283-1336 -Original Message- From: John J. Riley [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, February 20, 2002 06:05 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: Re: Trend vs. Antigen I purchased Antigen for our Exchange server and have not, repeat have not had any problems. The support has been super. JRiley - Original Message - From: Karen Palmer [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, February 20, 2002 2:48 PM Subject: Trend vs. Antigen If you are weighing two products and they seem equal to you, compare support. I can't say enough good things about Antigen from a product point of view, but their technical support is just as good. They are absolutely awesome in every way. Karen Palmer 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
Unable to remove additional mailbox
After researching Swinc, Slipstick and MS KB's without much luck, I am hoping someone has an answer to my problem. I had a number off additional mailboxes set up to open when I start Outlook 2K. I went and removed a number of these yesterday from my profile the Exch services - Advanced Tab and applied the change. All but one of the mailboxes closed. The additional mailbox that is still showing up is now no longer listed in the advanced tab - additional mailbox area. I went an added the mailbox back in and when I apply the change, Outlook now shows this mailbox 2x. Removing the additional mailbox again will only remove one of them from Outlook. Any ideas? Dave Vantine List Charter and FAQ at: http://www.sunbelt-software.com/exchange_list_charter.htm
RE: Blocking Email Addresses
Mmm can't find a message filtering button remember this is 5.0 not 5.5 or 2K. If I'm being an ass and there is a button, pray tell me where it is. Thanks Adam. -Original Message- From: Clark, Steve [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 21 February 2002 12:41 To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Blocking Email Addresses In the IMC, check the message filtering button. It allows you to block domain or single address within the domain. 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: Admin [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2002 4:54 AM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: Blocking Email Addresses NT4 sp6a Exchange 5.0 SP2 Antigen Is there a way I can easily block incoming Emails from an address or domain. One of our staff is receiving Emails from a very dubious source and whilst we could create a rule for her in Outlook I want them zapped before they hit the desktop. I've checked delivery restrictions and this appears to only apply to outgoing mail. Yup I know it's an old version of exchange, but we're a very small installation (25 users) and I'm just starting to plan a migration to SBS 2000 as I need to leave the system easy to maintain for the next person to look after and what I inherited was a loads worse than it is now! Any help (constructive!) welcome... Adam Buckland. 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: e2k logs filling up
Title: Message Backup Exec huh... You wouldn't happen to be doing incremental's would you? BE released a bug report about their product fsckin up when performing incrementals and fubaring the logs therefore not flushing them. Don Ely Network Engineer Tripath Imaging, Inc. (336) 290-8293 - Direct (336) 516-4519 - Mobile [EMAIL PROTECTED] - email http://www.tripathimaging.com -Original Message-From: Benjamin Zachary [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, February 06, 2002 11:48 AMTo: MS-Exchange Admin IssuesSubject: e2k logs filling up Hey all, I seem to be having this problem in a couple of clients sites where over the weekend or overnight there is like 3-4 gigs of logfiles in the mdbdata dir. We run backup exec 8.5 and have it clear logs when done. I fixed one by turning up circular logging, but would really like to try and find a solution. Any ideas where to look? both are e2k/sp2 with all default settings, my initial concern was we are being relayed through thus causing high logs.. but i dont think thats the case.. 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: Unable to remove additional mailbox
Dunno.. had it too ..I fixed it by deleting the entire mail profile and recreating it.. B -Original Message- From: Dave Vantine [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 21 February 2002 05:12 To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: Unable to remove additional mailbox After researching Swinc, Slipstick and MS KB's without much luck, I am hoping someone has an answer to my problem. I had a number off additional mailboxes set up to open when I start Outlook 2K. I went and removed a number of these yesterday from my profile the Exch services - Advanced Tab and applied the change. All but one of the mailboxes closed. The additional mailbox that is still showing up is now no longer listed in the advanced tab - additional mailbox area. I went an added the mailbox back in and when I apply the change, Outlook now shows this mailbox 2x. Removing the additional mailbox again will only remove one of them from Outlook. Any ideas? Dave Vantine 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: Unable to remove additional mailbox
Have you rebuilt the profile??? Don Ely Network Engineer Tripath Imaging, Inc. (336) 290-8293 - Direct (336) 516-4519 - Mobile [EMAIL PROTECTED] - email http://www.tripathimaging.com -Original Message- From: Dave Vantine [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2002 10:12 AM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: Unable to remove additional mailbox After researching Swinc, Slipstick and MS KB's without much luck, I am hoping someone has an answer to my problem. I had a number off additional mailboxes set up to open when I start Outlook 2K. I went and removed a number of these yesterday from my profile the Exch services - Advanced Tab and applied the change. All but one of the mailboxes closed. The additional mailbox that is still showing up is now no longer listed in the advanced tab - additional mailbox area. I went an added the mailbox back in and when I apply the change, Outlook now shows this mailbox 2x. Removing the additional mailbox again will only remove one of them from Outlook. Any ideas? Dave Vantine 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
Mail Relaying
We have a stand alone exchange 5.5 sp4 which we need to run pop3 on and have applied the fixes mentioned in the article. http://www.exchangeadmin.com/Articles/Index.cfm?ArticleID=7696 but for some reason we can still relay... I ran the test on telnet relay-test.mail-abuse.org And we pass all of the tests except for this one :Relay test: #Test 17 mail from: spamtest@[10.10.10.10] 250 OK - mail from spamtest@[10.10.10.10] rcpt to: mail-abuse.org!nobody 250 OK - Recipient mail-abuse.org!nobody QUIT 221 closing connection Does anyone have an idea why this is occurring or how we can prevent these type of addresses from being sent out from our boxes. Any suggestions would be appreciated. List Charter and FAQ at: http://www.sunbelt-software.com/exchange_list_charter.htm
Only send internally
Hello, I have an Ex 5.5 server sp4 running on windows 2k server sp1. Is there a way to modify a single mailbox so that it can only send internally and cannot send any emails to external clients? Thanks, List Charter and FAQ at: http://www.sunbelt-software.com/exchange_list_charter.htm
RE: Only send internally
Title: RE: Only send internally Remove the smtp address if I remember correctly. Thanks, Blake Fowkes Waid and Associates Do not follow where the path may lead. Go instead where there is no path and leave a trail. - Muriel Strode -Original Message- From: Sethi, Ali [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2002 10:10 AM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: Only send internally Hello, I have an Ex 5.5 server sp4 running on windows 2k server sp1. Is there a way to modify a single mailbox so that it can only send internally and cannot send any emails to external clients? Thanks, 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: Only send internally
Title: RE: Only send internally Removing SMTP will only prevent it from receiving email from the outside. Go to your Internet Mail Service and choose Delivery Restrictions...Reject Messages From...and put the mailbox in there. -Jim Jim Holmgren MCSE, CCNA [EMAIL PROTECTED] Network Engineer Advertising.com We bring innovation to interactive communication. Advertising.com -- Superior Technology. Superior Performance. -Original Message-From: Blake R. Fowkes [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2002 11:15 AMTo: MS-Exchange Admin IssuesSubject: RE: Only send internally Remove the smtp address if I remember correctly. Thanks, Blake Fowkes Waid and Associates Do not follow where the path may lead. Go instead where there is no path and leave a trail. - Muriel Strode -Original Message- From: Sethi, Ali [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2002 10:10 AM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: Only send internally Hello, I have an Ex 5.5 server sp4 running on windows 2k server sp1. Is there a way to modify a single mailbox so that it can only send internally and cannot send any emails to external clients? Thanks, 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 ***The information transmitted in this email is intended only forthe person(s) or entity to which it is addressed and maycontain confidential and/or privileged material. Any review, retransmission, dissemination or other use of, or taking ofany action in reliance upon, this information by persons orentities other than the intended recipient is prohibited.If you received this email in error, please contact thesender and permanently delete the email from any computer.
RE: Counting mailboxes
Title: Counting mailboxes export the mailbox list to Excel, see how many rows are taken up. -- DrewVisit http://www.drewncapris.net! Go! Go there now!"Strange things are afoot at the Circle-K..." Ted "Theodore" Logan -Original Message-From: Leone, Michael [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2002 10:25 AMTo: MS-Exchange Admin IssuesSubject: Counting mailboxes I'm reviewing my Exchange license counts. Is there an easy way to get a count of the number of mailboxes I have to get a license for? Some quick utility, rather than laboriously counting by hand? -- Michael Leone, Systems Administrator Philadelphia Contributionship 210 S. 4th Street, Philadelphia, PA 19106 mailto: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] V: 215-627-1752 x1282 F: 215-627-5354 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: Only send internally
Isn't it something on the IMC? -- Drew Visit http://www.drewncapris.net! Go! Go there now! It is far more impressive when others discover your good qualities without your help. -Original Message- From: Clark, Steve [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2002 10:26 AM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Only send internally That won't work - you can still send outside, the recip will still get the email just no valid reply address. I don't remember the answer but I believe it was answered recently - have you checked the archives? 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: Blake R. Fowkes [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2002 11:15 AM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Only send internally Remove the smtp address if I remember correctly. Thanks, Blake Fowkes Waid and Associates Do not follow where the path may lead. Go instead where there is no path and leave a trail. - Muriel Strode -Original Message- From: Sethi, Ali [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] ] Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2002 10:10 AM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: Only send internally Hello, I have an Ex 5.5 server sp4 running on windows 2k server sp1. Is there a way to modify a single mailbox so that it can only send internally and cannot send any emails to external clients? 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: 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: Only send internally
Yeah - Jim nailed it on the head. Disable their capability to send on the IMC. 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: Drewski [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2002 11:34 AM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Only send internally Isn't it something on the IMC? -- Drew Visit http://www.drewncapris.net! Go! Go there now! It is far more impressive when others discover your good qualities without your help. -Original Message- From: Clark, Steve [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2002 10:26 AM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Only send internally That won't work - you can still send outside, the recip will still get the email just no valid reply address. I don't remember the answer but I believe it was answered recently - have you checked the archives? 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: Blake R. Fowkes [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2002 11:15 AM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Only send internally Remove the smtp address if I remember correctly. Thanks, Blake Fowkes Waid and Associates Do not follow where the path may lead. Go instead where there is no path and leave a trail. - Muriel Strode -Original Message- From: Sethi, Ali [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] ] Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2002 10:10 AM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: Only send internally Hello, I have an Ex 5.5 server sp4 running on windows 2k server sp1. Is there a way to modify a single mailbox so that it can only send internally and cannot send any emails to external clients? 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: 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: Counting mailboxes
Title: Counting mailboxes Will that actually give me a valid figure, I wonder. For instance, I see mailboxes for "System Attendant", Free/Busy Connector", IMS, etc. Do I need licenses for those accounts? I know I'll need one for Administrator, and for NAV (our anti-virus). What about those system-created accounts? -- Michael Leone, Systems Administrator Philadelphia Contributionship 210 S. 4th Street, Philadelphia, PA 19106 mailto: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] V: 215-627-1752 x1282 F: 215-627-5354 -Original Message-From: Drewski [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2002 11:33 AMTo: MS-Exchange Admin IssuesSubject: RE: Counting mailboxes export the mailbox list to Excel, see how many rows are taken up. -- DrewVisit http://www.drewncapris.net! Go! Go there now!"Strange things are afoot at the Circle-K..." Ted "Theodore" Logan -Original Message-From: Leone, Michael [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2002 10:25 AMTo: MS-Exchange Admin IssuesSubject: Counting mailboxes I'm reviewing my Exchange license counts. Is there an easy way to get a count of the number of mailboxes I have to get a license for? Some quick utility, rather than laboriously counting by hand? -- Michael Leone, Systems Administrator Philadelphia Contributionship 210 S. 4th Street, Philadelphia, PA 19106 mailto: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] V: 215-627-1752 x1282 F: 215-627-5354 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: Counting mailboxes
Title: Counting mailboxes -Original Message-From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2002 11:27 AMTo: MS-Exchange Admin IssuesSubject: RE: Counting mailboxes Exchange is not licensed by mailbox. It is licenesed by the number of users that will connect to the Exchange server. Yes, but - usually - you have 1 user, with 1 mailbox. And a number of other accounts - NAV, etc. So it's a good ballpark figure. So, since there's no user for "System Attendent" (as an example), I don't need a license for it? List Charter and FAQ at: http://www.sunbelt-software.com/exchange_list_charter.htm
RE: Counting mailboxes
Title: Counting mailboxes One user to One mailbox... must be nice... 250 users, 1000 mailboxes... :) -Original Message-From: Leone, Michael [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2002 08:45To: MS-Exchange Admin IssuesSubject: RE: Counting mailboxes -Original Message-From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2002 11:27 AMTo: MS-Exchange Admin IssuesSubject: RE: Counting mailboxes Exchange is not licensed by mailbox. It is licenesed by the number of users that will connect to the Exchange server. Yes, but - usually - you have 1 user, with 1 mailbox. And a number of other accounts - NAV, etc. So it's a good ballpark figure. So, since there's no user for "System Attendent" (as an example), I don't need a license for it? 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: Counting mailboxes
Title: Counting mailboxes It's easier to delete the few than count the many. However, I believe that Bill's right -- it's by users, not by mailboxes. Now, if you only have 1 user per mailbox... -- DrewVisit http://www.drewncapris.net! Go! Go there now!"To announce that there must be no criticism of the President or that we are to stand by the President right or wrong is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is mortally treasonable to the American Public." Theodore Roosevelt -Original Message-From: Leone, Michael [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2002 10:42 AMTo: MS-Exchange Admin IssuesSubject: RE: Counting mailboxes Will that actually give me a valid figure, I wonder. For instance, I see mailboxes for "System Attendant", Free/Busy Connector", IMS, etc. Do I need licenses for those accounts? I know I'll need one for Administrator, and for NAV (our anti-virus). What about those system-created accounts? -- Michael Leone, Systems Administrator Philadelphia Contributionship 210 S. 4th Street, Philadelphia, PA 19106 mailto: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] V: 215-627-1752 x1282 F: 215-627-5354 -Original Message-From: Drewski [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2002 11:33 AMTo: MS-Exchange Admin IssuesSubject: RE: Counting mailboxes export the mailbox list to Excel, see how many rows are taken up. -- DrewVisit http://www.drewncapris.net! Go! Go there now!"Strange things are afoot at the Circle-K..." Ted "Theodore" Logan -Original Message-From: Leone, Michael [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2002 10:25 AMTo: MS-Exchange Admin IssuesSubject: Counting mailboxes I'm reviewing my Exchange license counts. Is there an easy way to get a count of the number of mailboxes I have to get a license for? Some quick utility, rather than laboriously counting by hand? -- Michael Leone, Systems Administrator Philadelphia Contributionship 210 S. 4th Street, Philadelphia, PA 19106 mailto: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] V: 215-627-1752 x1282 F: 215-627-5354 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.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: Counting mailboxes
Title: Message I know we've been through this before, but I thought Exch 2K was 1 CAL-1 Mailbox, Exch 5.5 was 1 CAL - 1 Connected computer or other device? -Original Message-From: Drewski [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2002 11:48 AMTo: MS-Exchange Admin IssuesSubject: RE: Counting mailboxes It's easier to delete the few than count the many. However, I believe that Bill's right -- it's by users, not by mailboxes. Now, if you only have 1 user per mailbox... -- DrewVisit http://www.drewncapris.net! Go! Go there now!"To announce that there must be no criticism of the President or that we are to stand by the President right or wrong is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is mortally treasonable to the American Public." Theodore Roosevelt -Original Message-From: Leone, Michael [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2002 10:42 AMTo: MS-Exchange Admin IssuesSubject: RE: Counting mailboxes Will that actually give me a valid figure, I wonder. For instance, I see mailboxes for "System Attendant", Free/Busy Connector", IMS, etc. Do I need licenses for those accounts? I know I'll need one for Administrator, and for NAV (our anti-virus). What about those system-created accounts? -- Michael Leone, Systems Administrator Philadelphia Contributionship 210 S. 4th Street, Philadelphia, PA 19106 mailto: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] V: 215-627-1752 x1282 F: 215-627-5354 -Original Message-From: Drewski [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2002 11:33 AMTo: MS-Exchange Admin IssuesSubject: RE: Counting mailboxes export the mailbox list to Excel, see how many rows are taken up. -- DrewVisit http://www.drewncapris.net! Go! Go there now!"Strange things are afoot at the Circle-K..." Ted "Theodore" Logan -Original Message-From: Leone, Michael [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2002 10:25 AMTo: MS-Exchange Admin IssuesSubject: Counting mailboxes I'm reviewing my Exchange license counts. Is there an easy way to get a count of the number of mailboxes I have to get a license for? Some quick utility, rather than laboriously counting by hand? -- Michael Leone, Systems Administrator Philadelphia Contributionship 210 S. 4th Street, Philadelphia, PA 19106 mailto: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] V: 215-627-1752 x1282 F: 215-627-5354 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.htmList 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: Counting mailboxes
I just have to ask why? -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2002 11:46 AM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Counting mailboxes One user to One mailbox... must be nice... 250 users, 1000 mailboxes... :) -Original Message- From: Leone, Michael [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2002 08:45 To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Counting mailboxes -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2002 11:27 AM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Counting mailboxes Exchange is not licensed by mailbox. It is licenesed by the number of users that will connect to the Exchange server. Yes, but - usually - you have 1 user, with 1 mailbox. And a number of other accounts - NAV, etc. So it's a good ballpark figure. So, since there's no user for System Attendent (as an example), I don't need a license for it? 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: Only send internally
Title: RE: Only send internally Thanks for your help! -Original Message- From: Jim Holmgren [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2002 11:30 AM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Only send internally Removing SMTP will only prevent it from receiving email from the outside. Go to your Internet Mail Service and choose Delivery Restrictions...Reject Messages From...and put the mailbox in there. -Jim Jim Holmgren MCSE, CCNA [EMAIL PROTECTED] Network Engineer Advertising.com We bring innovation to interactive communication. Advertising.com -- Superior Technology. Superior Performance. -Original Message- From: Blake R. Fowkes [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2002 11:15 AM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Only send internally Remove the smtp address if I remember correctly. Thanks, Blake Fowkes Waid and Associates Do not follow where the path may lead. Go instead where there is no path and leave a trail. - Muriel Strode -Original Message- From: Sethi, Ali [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2002 10:10 AM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: Only send internally Hello, I have an Ex 5.5 server sp4 running on windows 2k server sp1. Is there a way to modify a single mailbox so that it can only send internally and cannot send any emails to external clients? Thanks, 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 ***The information transmitted in this email is intended only forthe person(s) or entity to which it is addressed and maycontain confidential and/or privileged material. Any review, retransmission, dissemination or other use of, or taking ofany action in reliance upon, this information by persons orentities other than the intended recipient is prohibited.If you received this email in error, please contact thesender and permanently delete the email from any computer. List Charter and FAQ at: http://www.sunbelt-software.com/exchange_list_charter.htm
RE: Trend vs. Antigen
Exactly! -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2002 6:55 AM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Trend vs. Antigen Best idea of all that is the different virus engines. ~ -K.Borndale IT Manager Sybari Software 631.630.8569 -direct dial 631.439.0689 -fax http://www.sybari.com One man's ceiling is another man's floor Martin Blackstone MBlackstone@superiorTo: MS-Exchange Admin Issues [EMAIL PROTECTED] access.com cc: Subject: RE: Trend vs. Antigen 02/20/2002 10:23 PM Please respond to MS-Exchange Admin Issues I'm thinking the same thing. I have Trend and some NAI crap laying around. I was thinking Webshield (SMTP), Anigen (Exchange), Trend (Desktops and Servers). -Original Message- From: Kevin Kennedy [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, February 20, 2002 6:12 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Trend vs. Antigen We have a blend of both. Why argue which is better when two antivirus is better than one. Interscan for NT runs between our firewall and Exchange server. Content management is also done on this server. Once mail has made it through it then gets scanned by Antigen. This setup works very well and has saved us from many virus. A good third tier solution is to have Norton Corporate on the desktops (employees still use Hotmail, Yahoo mail to get personal email). Kevin Kennedy (K2) Network Administrator Mahi Networks, Inc. 707-283-1336 -Original Message- From: John J. Riley [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, February 20, 2002 06:05 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: Re: Trend vs. Antigen I purchased Antigen for our Exchange server and have not, repeat have not had any problems. The support has been super. JRiley - Original Message - From: Karen Palmer [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, February 20, 2002 2:48 PM Subject: Trend vs. Antigen If you are weighing two products and they seem equal to you, compare support. I can't say enough good things about Antigen from a product point of view, but their technical support is just as good. They are absolutely awesome in every way. Karen Palmer 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
Counting mailboxes
Title: Counting mailboxes I'm reviewing my Exchange license counts. Is there an easy way to get a count of the number of mailboxes I have to get a license for? Some quick utility, rather than laboriously counting by hand? -- Michael Leone, Systems Administrator Philadelphia Contributionship 210 S. 4th Street, Philadelphia, PA 19106 mailto: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] V: 215-627-1752 x1282 F: 215-627-5354 List Charter and FAQ at: http://www.sunbelt-software.com/exchange_list_charter.htm
RE: Only send internally
That won't work - you can still send outside, the recip will still get the email just no valid reply address. I don't remember the answer but I believe it was answered recently - have you checked the archives? 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: Blake R. Fowkes [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2002 11:15 AM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Only send internally Remove the smtp address if I remember correctly. Thanks, Blake Fowkes Waid and Associates Do not follow where the path may lead. Go instead where there is no path and leave a trail. - Muriel Strode -Original Message- From: Sethi, Ali [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] ] Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2002 10:10 AM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: Only send internally Hello, I have an Ex 5.5 server sp4 running on windows 2k server sp1. Is there a way to modify a single mailbox so that it can only send internally and cannot send any emails to external clients? 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: http://www.sunbelt-software.com/exchange_list_charter.htm List Charter and FAQ at: http://www.sunbelt-software.com/exchange_list_charter.htm
RE: Counting mailboxes
Title: Message Not always. Many people may have multiple mailboxes. I have run an exchange server for 80 users with over 500 mailboxes. -Original Message-From: Leone, Michael [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2002 8:45 AMTo: MS-Exchange Admin IssuesSubject: RE: Counting mailboxes -Original Message-From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2002 11:27 AMTo: MS-Exchange Admin IssuesSubject: RE: Counting mailboxes Exchange is not licensed by mailbox. It is licenesed by the number of users that will connect to the Exchange server. Yes, but - usually - you have 1 user, with 1 mailbox. And a number of other accounts - NAV, etc. So it's a good ballpark figure. So, since there's no user for "System Attendent" (as an example), I don't need a license for it? 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: Counting mailboxes
Title: Counting mailboxes Exchange is not licensed by mailbox. It is licenesed by the number of users that will connect to the Exchange server. -Original Message-From: Leone, Michael [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2002 08:25To: MS-Exchange Admin IssuesSubject: Counting mailboxes I'm reviewing my Exchange license counts. Is there an easy way to get a count of the number of mailboxes I have to get a license for? Some quick utility, rather than laboriously counting by hand? -- Michael Leone, Systems Administrator Philadelphia Contributionship 210 S. 4th Street, Philadelphia, PA 19106 mailto: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] V: 215-627-1752 x1282 F: 215-627-5354 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: Counting mailboxes
Title: Counting mailboxes -Original Message-From: Drewski [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2002 11:48 AMTo: MS-Exchange Admin IssuesSubject: RE: Counting mailboxes It's easier to delete the few than count the many. However, I believe that Bill's right -- it's by users, not by mailboxes. Now, if you only have 1 user per mailbox... And if I have a user who connects here at work, AND from home (using OWA)? I thought we had hashed out the fact that the license goes by connected device, so that user would require *2* licenses. Which blows holes in my 1 user, 1 mailbox, 1 CAL" theory. :-) Also, since NAV (and the administrator) both log in (altho NAV is not a human), that counts as a CAL. But what of the other accounts that also access other mailboxes (Free/Busy connector; System Attendent)? Don't they need a CAL, since they are using Exchange-specific resources? List Charter and FAQ at: http://www.sunbelt-software.com/exchange_list_charter.htm
RE: Counting mailboxes
Title: Message Not always. Many people may have multiple mailboxes. I have run an exchange server for 80 users with over 500 mailboxes. Right; that's why I said "usually". :-) So you have only 80 licenses? Or more, to cover any of these 80 accessing via OWA from offsite, as well as locally? -Original Message-From: Leone, Michael [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2002 8:45 AMTo: MS-Exchange Admin IssuesSubject: RE: Counting mailboxes -Original Message-From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2002 11:27 AMTo: MS-Exchange Admin IssuesSubject: RE: Counting mailboxes Exchange is not licensed by mailbox. It is licenesed by the number of users that will connect to the Exchange server. Yes, but - usually - you have 1 user, with 1 mailbox. And a number of other accounts - NAV, etc. So it's a good ballpark figure. So, since there's no user for "System Attendent" (as an example), I don't need a license for it? 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: Counting mailboxes
Title: Message One for work, one for wife, one for girlfriend, etc., etc. Adds up after a while. -Original Message-From: Martin Blackstone [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2002 11:58 AMTo: MS-Exchange Admin IssuesSubject: RE: Counting mailboxes Not always. Many people may have multiple mailboxes. I have run an exchange server for 80 users with over 500 mailboxes. -Original Message-From: Leone, Michael [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2002 8:45 AMTo: MS-Exchange Admin IssuesSubject: RE: Counting mailboxes -Original Message-From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2002 11:27 AMTo: MS-Exchange Admin IssuesSubject: RE: Counting mailboxes Exchange is not licensed by mailbox. It is licenesed by the number of users that will connect to the Exchange server. Yes, but - usually - you have 1 user, with 1 mailbox. And a number of other accounts - NAV, etc. So it's a good ballpark figure. So, since there's no user for "System Attendent" (as an example), I don't need a license for it? 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
Info store to mailbox ratio
Title: Counting mailboxes Just curious what everyones Info store to mailbox ratio is? Ours: 524 mailboxes / 31gb info store Talk to somone's whose was 72 mailbox / 47 gb info store. List Charter and FAQ at: http://www.sunbelt-software.com/exchange_list_charter.htm
RE: Counting mailboxes
Title: Message Huh. I would use a PST on a local drive for non-work related mails, and not take up space in the Exchange server. And if you've got both a wife girlfriend, you've got more important issues to worry about than Exchange licenses! :-) -Original Message-From: Ropiak Steve - NAO Florence Office IT [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2002 12:05 PMTo: MS-Exchange Admin IssuesSubject: RE: Counting mailboxes One for work, one for wife, one for girlfriend, etc., etc. Adds up after a while. List Charter and FAQ at: http://www.sunbelt-software.com/exchange_list_charter.htm
RE: Counting mailboxes
LMAO... 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: Ropiak Steve - NAO Florence Office IT [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2002 12:05 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Counting mailboxes One for work, one for wife, one for girlfriend, etc., etc. Adds up after a while. -Original Message- From: Martin Blackstone [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2002 11:58 AM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Counting mailboxes Not always. Many people may have multiple mailboxes. I have run an exchange server for 80 users with over 500 mailboxes. -Original Message- From: Leone, Michael [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2002 8:45 AM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Counting mailboxes -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2002 11:27 AM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Counting mailboxes Exchange is not licensed by mailbox. It is licenesed by the number of users that will connect to the Exchange server. Yes, but - usually - you have 1 user, with 1 mailbox. And a number of other accounts - NAV, etc. So it's a good ballpark figure. So, since there's no user for System Attendent (as an example), I don't need a license for it? 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: Applying Mailbox Limits....After the Fact
Hi William I assume your observation regarding it not being a good solution (on the grounds of price) is based on the thought that most people just need a simple email system from an ASP? If however they actually want the calendar etc etc features of exchange then 200 is ok? Your thoughts. regards -Original Message- From: William Lefkovics [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 20 February 2002 20:41 To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Applying Mailbox LimitsAfter the Fact I don't think it is a good solution. It is very expensive. But, if that is not at issue, then it can be good. There is a whitepaper at Microsoft on implementing Exchange2000 in a hosting environment. This isn't the one I was thinking of, but... http://www.microsoft.com/exchange/techinfo/hosting/ISPArch.asp William -Original Message- From: Ray Zorz [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, February 19, 2002 7:44 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Applying Mailbox LimitsAfter the Fact Is e2k a good solution for an ASP-type model? Somebody I know wants to try to host an exchange solution for multiple small companies. -Original Message- From: William Lefkovics [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, February 19, 2002 7:57 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Applying Mailbox LimitsAfter the Fact All you can do is report and recommend. Fully communicate the reasons and risks. Management will make the best decision based on your contributions. Exchange2000 Enterprise will allow multiple storage groups so you can have variable send/receive limits administered more simply. Also, you can keep management mailboxes in their own store. Restoration can be per store. Other stores are not affected during the process. Just my unsolicited ramblings. William -Original Message- From: Mike Zatkalik [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, February 14, 2002 3:10 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Applying Mailbox LimitsAfter the Fact I am in a similar position. We had a 250MB warning, 300MB prohibit and a sales person complained to my boss and my boss said to remove the limits on EVERYONE. Now, I have 6 mailboxes in the 1GB+ range and the majority of the other mailboxes are above 400MB+. Of course all of these huge mailboxes are on laptops, so the OST is frickin huge and every other month it gets corrupted and has to be recreated. My company is about 230 user with a priv.edb of 47.5GB. Backups only take a whopping 8 hours for full backup, meaning about the same for a restore. Management is upset that the restore would take so long, but they aren't willing to enforce limits, or delete mail. Oh well, what can I do. Mike Z -Original Message- From: Dillon, Jeff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, February 14, 2002 5:08 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Applying Mailbox LimitsAfter the Fact They tend to save the little metal handles from Chinese carryout containers, also just in case. You gotta fill the living room with something, no? -Original Message- From: William Smith [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, February 14, 2002 17:53 To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Applying Mailbox LimitsAfter the Fact True indeed. We've got exec levels at over a Gig mailboxes. Pretty ridiculous, eh. That's what happens when they build an exchange server w/o limits! W -Original Message- From: Sethi, Ali [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, February 14, 2002 4:26 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Applying Mailbox LimitsAfter the Fact 275 warning, 300 prohibit. Wow that's pretty lenient. You must have ample IS space on your server. Im forced to set mine at 50MB warning 60 mB prohibit. But then again there are over 500 mailboxes. -Original Message- From: John Matteson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, February 14, 2002 3:10 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Applying Mailbox LimitsAfter the Fact Use the HEADERS.EXE file to build a CSV template of the mandatory and optional values you want to extract from the database. Use the directory export tool with the CSV file you generated with HEADERS and then set the limits you wanted on the boxes you wanted, then import. Barring that, and you want to set a GLOBAL value, use the values on the server in the Private Information Store object. This will not overwrite any values set on individual mailboxes. John Matteson; Exchange Manager Geac Corporate Infrastructure Systems and Standards (404) 239 - 2981 Be who you are and say what you feel because those who matter don't mind, and those who mind don't matter. -Original Message- From: William Smith [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, February 14, 2002 2:51 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Applying Mailbox LimitsAfter the Fact Right that's the basic idea I was thinking about, but I'd prefer not to manually set
RE: Counting mailboxes
Title: Message I'm still not sold on this OWA licensing thing -Original Message-From: Leone, Michael [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2002 9:06 AMTo: MS-Exchange Admin IssuesSubject: RE: Counting mailboxes Not always. Many people may have multiple mailboxes. I have run an exchange server for 80 users with over 500 mailboxes. Right; that's why I said "usually". :-) So you have only 80 licenses? Or more, to cover any of these 80 accessing via OWA from offsite, as well as locally? -Original Message-From: Leone, Michael [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2002 8:45 AMTo: MS-Exchange Admin IssuesSubject: RE: Counting mailboxes -Original Message-From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2002 11:27 AMTo: MS-Exchange Admin IssuesSubject: RE: Counting mailboxes Exchange is not licensed by mailbox. It is licenesed by the number of users that will connect to the Exchange server. Yes, but - usually - you have 1 user, with 1 mailbox. And a number of other accounts - NAV, etc. So it's a good ballpark figure. So, since there's no user for "System Attendent" (as an example), I don't need a license for it? 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.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: ScanMail 3.8 for Exchange 5.5 bug
Basically, yes... we have no reason to allow a free flow of EXE files back and forth. If on the rare occasion, we did need one, I'd disable the filter for that time. I can't block all ZIP files, as we do get a lot of wok related things in that are, say, a 15MB non-exe file, but I do want to cut down on the, Hey dude, check out this cool elf bowling game! What? You can't get .exe files? Wait... I'll zip it for you Evan -Original Message- From: Allen Crawford [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2002 9:38 AM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject:RE: ScanMail 3.8 for Exchange 5.5 bug I read that it couldn't do that, but I'm wondering why anyone cares to do that? If you are worried about viruses being transmitted via ZIP files, it seems that you should just block ZIP. I mean, are you just trying to prevent the users from sending ANY EXE files back and forth? Basically the only reason I'm letting ZIPs through are so people CAN actually transmit legitimate files through and a good way to force them to use some form of compression. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, February 20, 2002 5:27 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject:RE: ScanMail 3.8 for Exchange 5.5 bug One thing I still kinda wish 3.8 could do is block an .EXE in a Zip. I tried it, and it lets it through. I know I could block all Zip files, but that's not quite what I was looking for. Evan -Original Message- From: Allen Crawford [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, February 20, 2002 5:21 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject:RE: ScanMail 3.8 for Exchange 5.5 bug By the way, if anyone else uses Martin's list and ScanMail 3.8 and has this same problem, this should save you some time. Don't forget I've added *.REG to the list. File extensions to block: eml;vb;asx;ade;adp;bas;bat;bin;chm;cmd;com;cpl;crt;dll;exe;hiv;hlp;hta;inf;i ns;isp;js;jse;jtd;msc;msi;msp;mst;ocx;oft;ovl;pcd;pif;pl;plx;scr;sct;sh;shb; shs;sys;vbe;vbs;vss;vst;vxd;wsc;wsf;wsh;lnk;reg; File names to block: *.eml;*.vb;*.asx;*.ade;*.adp;*.bas;*.bat;*.bin;*.chm;*.cmd;*.com;*.cpl;*.crt ;*.dll;*.exe;*.hiv;*.hlp;*.hta;*.inf;*.ins;*.isp;*.js;*.jse;*.jtd;*.msc;*.ms i;*.msp;*.mst;*.ocx;*.oft;*.ovl;*.pcd;*.pif;*.pl;*.plx;*.scr;*.sct;*.sh;*.sh b;*.shs;*.sys;*.vbe;*.vbs;*.vss;*.vst;*.vxd;*.wsc;*.wsf;*.wsh;*.lnk;*.reg; -Original Message- From: Allen Crawford Sent: Wednesday, February 20, 2002 5:14 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject:ScanMail 3.8 for Exchange 5.5 bug OK, since everyone has been talking about this and Antigen lately, I'll add this. I just got off the phone with Trend's tech support and apparently there is an issue with blocking file extensions. I noticed that SYS and VBS files were not being blocked, even though they were on my list (or Martin's list I should say, although I don't think he had REG on his list and I do have it). Anyway, the reason is because it is now performing the true file type scanning. I've already tested this and it does work. For example, I'm not blocking ZIP, so renaming a ZIP to EXE, which I am blocking, will let it through just fine because it knows it is a ZIP. So, in turn, it registers VBS, BAT, my SYS (which was really a text file renamed) as TXT files, which aren't being blocked. The fix is to list them in the file name box (the box right below the blocked extension list) as *.vbs;*.bat;*.sys, etc. Seems to work so far. So I guess to be safe, I'm going to add all of Martin's extensions to both boxes. Hope this helps someone else. 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: Info store to mailbox ratio
Title: Counting mailboxes That depends on the limits you set! Ours are 50Mb warning with 60MB stop send and receive so250 mailbox gives us 15GB MAX but in the real world its around 9GB. -Original Message-From: Sethi, Ali [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]Sent: 21 February 2002 17:13To: MS-Exchange Admin IssuesSubject: Info store to mailbox ratio Just curious what everyones Info store to mailbox ratio is? Ours: 524 mailboxes / 31gb info store Talk to somone's whose was 72 mailbox / 47 gb info store.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: Counting mailboxes
Title: Message Out of curiosity...it is my understanding that Exchange 2K is designed for a unique user account for each mailbox...is this correct? If so, how do those of you with multiple mailboxes handle this? We are on Exchange 5.5, and have MANY "resource" mailboxes that are set up with primary accounts belonging to other users. Hope this doesn't qualify as thread hijacking ;-) -Jim Jim Holmgren MCSE, CCNA [EMAIL PROTECTED] Network Engineer Advertising.com We bring innovation to interactive communication. Advertising.com -- Superior Technology. Superior Performance. -Original Message-From: Ropiak Steve - NAO Florence Office IT [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2002 12:05 PMTo: MS-Exchange Admin IssuesSubject: RE: Counting mailboxes One for work, one for wife, one for girlfriend, etc., etc. Adds up after a while. -Original Message-From: Martin Blackstone [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2002 11:58 AMTo: MS-Exchange Admin IssuesSubject: RE: Counting mailboxes Not always. Many people may have multiple mailboxes. I have run an exchange server for 80 users with over 500 mailboxes. -Original Message-From: Leone, Michael [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2002 8:45 AMTo: MS-Exchange Admin IssuesSubject: RE: Counting mailboxes -Original Message-From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2002 11:27 AMTo: MS-Exchange Admin IssuesSubject: RE: Counting mailboxes Exchange is not licensed by mailbox. It is licenesed by the number of users that will connect to the Exchange server. Yes, but - usually - you have 1 user, with 1 mailbox. And a number of other accounts - NAV, etc. So it's a good ballpark figure. So, since there's no user for "System Attendent" (as an example), I don't need a license for it? 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.htmList Charter and FAQ at:http://www.sunbelt-software.com/exchange_list_charter.htm ***The information transmitted in this email is intended only forthe person(s) or entity to which it is addressed and maycontain confidential and/or privileged material. Any review, retransmission, dissemination or other use of, or taking ofany action in reliance upon, this information by persons orentities other than the intended recipient is prohibited.If you received this email in error, please contact thesender and permanently delete the email from any computer.
RE: Info store to mailbox ratio
Title: Counting mailboxes 200 mailboxes 28 Gigs of space Dennis Rogov System support specialist Huntleigh Health Care -Original Message- From: Sethi, Ali [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2002 12:13 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: Info store to mailbox ratio Just curious what everyones Info store to mailbox ratio is? Ours: 524 mailboxes / 31gb info store Talk to somone's whose was 72 mailbox / 47 gb info store. 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: Info store to mailbox ratio
Title: Counting mailboxes thats whose than ours at 100 users at 24 gig -Original Message-From: Sethi, Ali [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2002 12:13 PMTo: MS-Exchange Admin IssuesSubject: Info store to mailbox ratio Just curious what everyones Info store to mailbox ratio is? Ours: 524 mailboxes / 31gb info store Talk to somone's whose was 72 mailbox / 47 gb info store.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: Info store to mailbox ratio
Title: Counting mailboxes How long is a piece of string? -Original Message-From: Sethi, Ali [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2002 9:13 AMTo: MS-Exchange Admin IssuesSubject: Info store to mailbox ratio Just curious what everyones Info store to mailbox ratio is? Ours: 524 mailboxes / 31gb info store Talk to somone's whose was 72 mailbox / 47 gb info store. List Charter and FAQ at: http://www.sunbelt-software.com/exchange_list_charter.htm
RE: Counting mailboxes
Title: Message I'm still not sold on this OWA licensing thing I'm calling MS now, and hope they know what they're talking about. I'll post back what they tell me. List Charter and FAQ at: http://www.sunbelt-software.com/exchange_list_charter.htm
Exchange 5.5 SP4 - adn support time
Hi, We are just about to install Exchange, and I am trying to get an idea of how much time Exchange admin duties will require, for budgetary purposes. We are starting out with 50 users, will very quickly grow to 200, then up to 1,000. How much of my life is this going to eat? Thanks. This message should not have any attachments. Jeff Sawatzke Ministry Health Care Senior Network Administrator 11925 W Lake Park Dr Milwaukee, WI 53224 * phone: 414-359-3157 * [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] List Charter and FAQ at: http://www.sunbelt-software.com/exchange_list_charter.htm
RE: Counting mailboxes
Title: Message Then find a vendor that agrees with your model and get it in writing. -Original Message-From: Martin Blackstone [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2002 9:15 AMTo: MS-Exchange Admin IssuesSubject: RE: Counting mailboxes I'm still not sold on this OWA licensing thing -Original Message-From: Leone, Michael [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2002 9:06 AMTo: MS-Exchange Admin IssuesSubject: RE: Counting mailboxes Not always. Many people may have multiple mailboxes. I have run an exchange server for 80 users with over 500 mailboxes. Right; that's why I said "usually". :-) So you have only 80 licenses? Or more, to cover any of these 80 accessing via OWA from offsite, as well as locally? -Original Message-From: Leone, Michael [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2002 8:45 AMTo: MS-Exchange Admin IssuesSubject: RE: Counting mailboxes -Original Message-From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2002 11:27 AMTo: MS-Exchange Admin IssuesSubject: RE: Counting mailboxes Exchange is not licensed by mailbox. It is licenesed by the number of users that will connect to the Exchange server. Yes, but - usually - you have 1 user, with 1 mailbox. And a number of other accounts - NAV, etc. So it's a good ballpark figure. So, since there's no user for "System Attendent" (as an example), I don't need a license for it? 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.htmList 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: Only send internally
I realise your question has been answered, but here is where you can also find the answer: Section 3.6: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq_sec3.htm William -Original Message- From: Sethi, Ali [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2002 8:10 AM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: Only send internally Hello, I have an Ex 5.5 server sp4 running on windows 2k server sp1. Is there a way to modify a single mailbox so that it can only send internally and cannot send any emails to external clients? Thanks, List Charter and FAQ at: http://www.sunbelt-software.com/exchange_list_charter.htm
RE: Info store to mailbox ratio
Title: Counting mailboxes LOL...I love that question...since there truly is an answer!! Its twice the distance from the middle to the end!! I'm glad that my users haven't figured out the answer yet, because thats thequestion that I give them when they say..."how long before its fixed!" Smile Lots! Cameron -Original Message-From: William Lefkovics [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2002 12:34 PMTo: MS-Exchange Admin IssuesSubject: RE: Info store to mailbox ratio How long is a piece of string? -Original Message-From: Sethi, Ali [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2002 9:13 AMTo: MS-Exchange Admin IssuesSubject: Info store to mailbox ratio Just curious what everyones Info store to mailbox ratio is? Ours: 524 mailboxes / 31gb info store Talk to somone's whose was 72 mailbox / 47 gb info store.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: ScanMail 3.8 for Exchange 5.5 bug
You could get some mail monitoring software like mail essentials. The majority of my files blocking, vbs, vbe, mpg, avi etc is done by my antivirus software. Since we have departments that do send out, and receive exes, zips, and jpgs, I set mail essentials to send all incoming and outgoing files to me, and I decide on a case by case basis whether it comes and goes. This won't help for internal mail, but I have found if I can keep the new elf bowling from coming into the system, then I really don't have to worry about it be passed around internally. Just as a mention for those of us anti-elf bowling time and resource wasting file blockers, I have just added .PPS files to those I examine. I noticed a large amount of the same file going in and out, looked at it and it was a fancy Christmas card thing that was about 1.2MB. John -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2002 12:11 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: ScanMail 3.8 for Exchange 5.5 bug Basically, yes... we have no reason to allow a free flow of EXE files back and forth. If on the rare occasion, we did need one, I'd disable the filter for that time. I can't block all ZIP files, as we do get a lot of wok related things in that are, say, a 15MB non-exe file, but I do want to cut down on the, Hey dude, check out this cool elf bowling game! What? You can't get .exe files? Wait... I'll zip it for you Evan -Original Message- From: Allen Crawford [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2002 9:38 AM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject:RE: ScanMail 3.8 for Exchange 5.5 bug I read that it couldn't do that, but I'm wondering why anyone cares to do that? If you are worried about viruses being transmitted via ZIP files, it seems that you should just block ZIP. I mean, are you just trying to prevent the users from sending ANY EXE files back and forth? Basically the only reason I'm letting ZIPs through are so people CAN actually transmit legitimate files through and a good way to force them to use some form of compression. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, February 20, 2002 5:27 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject:RE: ScanMail 3.8 for Exchange 5.5 bug One thing I still kinda wish 3.8 could do is block an .EXE in a Zip. I tried it, and it lets it through. I know I could block all Zip files, but that's not quite what I was looking for. Evan -Original Message- From: Allen Crawford [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, February 20, 2002 5:21 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject:RE: ScanMail 3.8 for Exchange 5.5 bug By the way, if anyone else uses Martin's list and ScanMail 3.8 and has this same problem, this should save you some time. Don't forget I've added *.REG to the list. File extensions to block: eml;vb;asx;ade;adp;bas;bat;bin;chm;cmd;com;cpl;crt;dll;exe;hiv;hlp;hta;inf;i ns;isp;js;jse;jtd;msc;msi;msp;mst;ocx;oft;ovl;pcd;pif;pl;plx;scr;sct;sh;shb; shs;sys;vbe;vbs;vss;vst;vxd;wsc;wsf;wsh;lnk;reg; File names to block: *.eml;*.vb;*.asx;*.ade;*.adp;*.bas;*.bat;*.bin;*.chm;*.cmd;*.com;*.cpl;*.crt ;*.dll;*.exe;*.hiv;*.hlp;*.hta;*.inf;*.ins;*.isp;*.js;*.jse;*.jtd;*.msc;*.ms i;*.msp;*.mst;*.ocx;*.oft;*.ovl;*.pcd;*.pif;*.pl;*.plx;*.scr;*.sct;*.sh;*.sh b;*.shs;*.sys;*.vbe;*.vbs;*.vss;*.vst;*.vxd;*.wsc;*.wsf;*.wsh;*.lnk;*.reg; -Original Message- From: Allen Crawford Sent: Wednesday, February 20, 2002 5:14 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject:ScanMail 3.8 for Exchange 5.5 bug OK, since everyone has been talking about this and Antigen lately, I'll add this. I just got off the phone with Trend's tech support and apparently there is an issue with blocking file extensions. I noticed that SYS and VBS files were not being blocked, even though they were on my list (or Martin's list I should say, although I don't think he had REG on his list and I do have it). Anyway, the reason is because it is now performing the true file type scanning. I've already tested this and it does work. For example, I'm not blocking ZIP, so renaming a ZIP to EXE, which I am blocking, will let it through just fine because it knows it is a ZIP. So, in turn, it registers VBS, BAT, my SYS (which was really a text file renamed) as TXT files, which aren't being blocked. The fix is to list them in the file name box (the box right below the blocked extension list) as *.vbs;*.bat;*.sys, etc. Seems to work so far. So I guess to be safe, I'm going to add all of Martin's extensions to both boxes. Hope this helps someone else. 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:
RE: Counting mailboxes
Title: Message Yes it does. Please leave your Exchange IP and passwords at the door on your way out. -Original Message-From: Jim Holmgren [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2002 9:20 AMTo: MS-Exchange Admin IssuesSubject: RE: Counting mailboxes Out of curiosity...it is my understanding that Exchange 2K is designed for a unique user account for each mailbox...is this correct? If so, how do those of you with multiple mailboxes handle this? We are on Exchange 5.5, and have MANY "resource" mailboxes that are set up with primary accounts belonging to other users. Hope this doesn't qualify as thread hijacking ;-) -Jim Jim Holmgren MCSE, CCNA [EMAIL PROTECTED] Network Engineer Advertising.com We bring innovation to interactive communication. Advertising.com -- Superior Technology. Superior Performance. -Original Message-From: Ropiak Steve - NAO Florence Office IT [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2002 12:05 PMTo: MS-Exchange Admin IssuesSubject: RE: Counting mailboxes One for work, one for wife, one for girlfriend, etc., etc. Adds up after a while. -Original Message-From: Martin Blackstone [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2002 11:58 AMTo: MS-Exchange Admin IssuesSubject: RE: Counting mailboxes Not always. Many people may have multiple mailboxes. I have run an exchange server for 80 users with over 500 mailboxes. -Original Message-From: Leone, Michael [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2002 8:45 AMTo: MS-Exchange Admin IssuesSubject: RE: Counting mailboxes -Original Message-From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2002 11:27 AMTo: MS-Exchange Admin IssuesSubject: RE: Counting mailboxes Exchange is not licensed by mailbox. It is licenesed by the number of users that will connect to the Exchange server. Yes, but - usually - you have 1 user, with 1 mailbox. And a number of other accounts - NAV, etc. So it's a good ballpark figure. So, since there's no user for "System Attendent" (as an example), I don't need a license for it? 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.htmList Charter and FAQ at:http://www.sunbelt-software.com/exchange_list_charter.htm ***The information transmitted in this email is intended only forthe person(s) or entity to which it is addressed and maycontain confidential and/or privileged material. Any review, retransmission, dissemination or other use of, or taking ofany action in reliance upon, this information by persons orentities other than the intended recipient is prohibited.If you received this email in error, please contact thesender and permanently delete the email from any computer. List Charter and FAQ at: http://www.sunbelt-software.com/exchange_list_charter.htm
RE: Applying Mailbox Limits....After the Fact
Well, it comes at a price. I think for most, the price might be prohibitive, or at least justify hosting their own email. Are you going to have MAPI connectivity to your ASP? William -Original Message- From: Steve Wyman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2002 9:12 AM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Applying Mailbox LimitsAfter the Fact Hi William I assume your observation regarding it not being a good solution (on the grounds of price) is based on the thought that most people just need a simple email system from an ASP? If however they actually want the calendar etc etc features of exchange then 200 is ok? Your thoughts. regards -Original Message- From: William Lefkovics [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 20 February 2002 20:41 To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Applying Mailbox LimitsAfter the Fact I don't think it is a good solution. It is very expensive. But, if that is not at issue, then it can be good. There is a whitepaper at Microsoft on implementing Exchange2000 in a hosting environment. This isn't the one I was thinking of, but... http://www.microsoft.com/exchange/techinfo/hosting/ISPArch.asp William -Original Message- From: Ray Zorz [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, February 19, 2002 7:44 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Applying Mailbox LimitsAfter the Fact Is e2k a good solution for an ASP-type model? Somebody I know wants to try to host an exchange solution for multiple small companies. -Original Message- From: William Lefkovics [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, February 19, 2002 7:57 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Applying Mailbox LimitsAfter the Fact All you can do is report and recommend. Fully communicate the reasons and risks. Management will make the best decision based on your contributions. Exchange2000 Enterprise will allow multiple storage groups so you can have variable send/receive limits administered more simply. Also, you can keep management mailboxes in their own store. Restoration can be per store. Other stores are not affected during the process. Just my unsolicited ramblings. William -Original Message- From: Mike Zatkalik [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, February 14, 2002 3:10 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Applying Mailbox LimitsAfter the Fact I am in a similar position. We had a 250MB warning, 300MB prohibit and a sales person complained to my boss and my boss said to remove the limits on EVERYONE. Now, I have 6 mailboxes in the 1GB+ range and the majority of the other mailboxes are above 400MB+. Of course all of these huge mailboxes are on laptops, so the OST is frickin huge and every other month it gets corrupted and has to be recreated. My company is about 230 user with a priv.edb of 47.5GB. Backups only take a whopping 8 hours for full backup, meaning about the same for a restore. Management is upset that the restore would take so long, but they aren't willing to enforce limits, or delete mail. Oh well, what can I do. Mike Z -Original Message- From: Dillon, Jeff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, February 14, 2002 5:08 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Applying Mailbox LimitsAfter the Fact They tend to save the little metal handles from Chinese carryout containers, also just in case. You gotta fill the living room with something, no? -Original Message- From: William Smith [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, February 14, 2002 17:53 To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Applying Mailbox LimitsAfter the Fact True indeed. We've got exec levels at over a Gig mailboxes. Pretty ridiculous, eh. That's what happens when they build an exchange server w/o limits! W -Original Message- From: Sethi, Ali [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, February 14, 2002 4:26 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Applying Mailbox LimitsAfter the Fact 275 warning, 300 prohibit. Wow that's pretty lenient. You must have ample IS space on your server. Im forced to set mine at 50MB warning 60 mB prohibit. But then again there are over 500 mailboxes. -Original Message- From: John Matteson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, February 14, 2002 3:10 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Applying Mailbox LimitsAfter the Fact Use the HEADERS.EXE file to build a CSV template of the mandatory and optional values you want to extract from the database. Use the directory export tool with the CSV file you generated with HEADERS and then set the limits you wanted on the boxes you wanted, then import. Barring that, and you want to set a GLOBAL value, use the values on the server in the Private Information Store object. This will not overwrite any values set on individual mailboxes. John Matteson; Exchange Manager Geac Corporate Infrastructure Systems and Standards (404) 239 - 2981 Be who
RE: Counting mailboxes
Title: Message That will be difficult in migration. You will have to use multimb.exe and/or NTDSNoMatch to isolate the resource boxes. A dummy account will be created for those in migration. The attribute in AD can only have one mailbox object associated with a user object. -Original Message-From: Jim Holmgren [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2002 9:20 AMTo: MS-Exchange Admin IssuesSubject: RE: Counting mailboxes Out of curiosity...it is my understanding that Exchange 2K is designed for a unique user account for each mailbox...is this correct? If so, how do those of you with multiple mailboxes handle this? We are on Exchange 5.5, and have MANY "resource" mailboxes that are set up with primary accounts belonging to other users. Hope this doesn't qualify as thread hijacking ;-) -Jim Jim Holmgren MCSE, CCNA [EMAIL PROTECTED] Network Engineer Advertising.com We bring innovation to interactive communication. Advertising.com -- Superior Technology. Superior Performance. -Original Message-From: Ropiak Steve - NAO Florence Office IT [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2002 12:05 PMTo: MS-Exchange Admin IssuesSubject: RE: Counting mailboxes One for work, one for wife, one for girlfriend, etc., etc. Adds up after a while. -Original Message-From: Martin Blackstone [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2002 11:58 AMTo: MS-Exchange Admin IssuesSubject: RE: Counting mailboxes Not always. Many people may have multiple mailboxes. I have run an exchange server for 80 users with over 500 mailboxes. -Original Message-From: Leone, Michael [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2002 8:45 AMTo: MS-Exchange Admin IssuesSubject: RE: Counting mailboxes -Original Message-From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2002 11:27 AMTo: MS-Exchange Admin IssuesSubject: RE: Counting mailboxes Exchange is not licensed by mailbox. It is licenesed by the number of users that will connect to the Exchange server. Yes, but - usually - you have 1 user, with 1 mailbox. And a number of other accounts - NAV, etc. So it's a good ballpark figure. So, since there's no user for "System Attendent" (as an example), I don't need a license for it? 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.htmList Charter and FAQ at:http://www.sunbelt-software.com/exchange_list_charter.htm ***The information transmitted in this email is intended only forthe person(s) or entity to which it is addressed and maycontain confidential and/or privileged material. Any review, retransmission, dissemination or other use of, or taking ofany action in reliance upon, this information by persons orentities other than the intended recipient is prohibited.If you received this email in error, please contact thesender and permanently delete the email from any computer. List Charter and FAQ at: http://www.sunbelt-software.com/exchange_list_charter.htm
RE: Exchange 5.5 SP4 - adn support time
This is so cool, Jeff! You see, you are in a position to control the answer to your own question. What an opportunity! Setup and deployment is key to your future efforts. Backup and antivirus strategies are also very relevant. Choose wisely now and the future might be filled with joy. Other than adding/changing/removing user information, Exchange takes care of itself when properly deployed. The whitepapers explain the lot. -Original Message- From: Sawatzke, Jeff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2002 9:31 AM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: Exchange 5.5 SP4 - adn support time Hi, We are just about to install Exchange, and I am trying to get an idea of how much time Exchange admin duties will require, for budgetary purposes. We are starting out with 50 users, will very quickly grow to 200, then up to 1,000. How much of my life is this going to eat? Thanks. This message should not have any attachments. Jeff Sawatzke Ministry Health Care Senior Network Administrator 11925 W Lake Park Dr Milwaukee, WI 53224 * phone: 414-359-3157 * [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 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: Counting mailboxes - info from MS
Title: Message So, I just got off the phone with a nice, perky young 'Softie. :-) Here's the odd part ... I asked about the OWA coverage; she went and asked someone else. Result: if the off-site user is using a desktop system to access OWA (or Exchange, via a VPN), then YES, it needs a license. If they are using a laptop, NO, they do not need a license - since the Exchange CAL covers *both* a desktop *and* a laptop of a user. The system mailboxes (Attendant, Free/Busy, etc) are covered under the server license, and so do not require CALs. NAV does *not* require a CAL; the NAV for Exchange is supposed to be sold with a CAl for the user that NAV for Exchange creates. Until somebody at MS contradicts this info, this is what I'll use to base my licensing purchases on. -- Michael Leone, Systems Administrator Philadelphia Contributionship 210 S. 4th Street, Philadelphia, PA 19106 mailto: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] V: 215-627-1752 x1282 F: 215-627-5354 -Original Message-From: Leone, Michael [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2002 12:30 PMTo: MS-Exchange Admin IssuesSubject: RE: Counting mailboxes I'm still not sold on this OWA licensing thing I'm calling MS now, and hope they know what they're talking about. I'll post back what they tell me. 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: Counting mailboxes
Title: Message Homer D'OHyes sir, sorry sir, an older boy made me do it sir. /Homer -Original Message-From: Martin Blackstone [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2002 12:37 PMTo: MS-Exchange Admin IssuesSubject: RE: Counting mailboxes Yes it does. Please leave your Exchange IP and passwords at the door on your way out. -Original Message-From: Jim Holmgren [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2002 9:20 AMTo: MS-Exchange Admin IssuesSubject: RE: Counting mailboxes Out of curiosity...it is my understanding that Exchange 2K is designed for a unique user account for each mailbox...is this correct? If so, how do those of you with multiple mailboxes handle this? We are on Exchange 5.5, and have MANY "resource" mailboxes that are set up with primary accounts belonging to other users. Hope this doesn't qualify as thread hijacking ;-) -Jim Jim Holmgren MCSE, CCNA [EMAIL PROTECTED] Network Engineer Advertising.com We bring innovation to interactive communication. Advertising.com -- Superior Technology. Superior Performance. -Original Message-From: Ropiak Steve - NAO Florence Office IT [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2002 12:05 PMTo: MS-Exchange Admin IssuesSubject: RE: Counting mailboxes One for work, one for wife, one for girlfriend, etc., etc. Adds up after a while. -Original Message-From: Martin Blackstone [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2002 11:58 AMTo: MS-Exchange Admin IssuesSubject: RE: Counting mailboxes Not always. Many people may have multiple mailboxes. I have run an exchange server for 80 users with over 500 mailboxes. -Original Message-From: Leone, Michael [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2002 8:45 AMTo: MS-Exchange Admin IssuesSubject: RE: Counting mailboxes -Original Message-From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2002 11:27 AMTo: MS-Exchange Admin IssuesSubject: RE: Counting mailboxes Exchange is not licensed by mailbox. It is licenesed by the number of users that will connect to the Exchange server. Yes, but - usually - you have 1 user, with 1 mailbox. And a number of other accounts - NAV, etc. So it's a good ballpark figure. So, since there's no user for "System Attendent" (as an example), I don't need a license for it? 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.htmList Charter and FAQ at:http://www.sunbelt-software.com/exchange_list_charter.htm ***The information transmitted in this email is intended only forthe person(s) or entity to which it is addressed and maycontain confidential and/or privileged material. Any review, retransmission, dissemination or other use of, or taking ofany action in reliance upon, this information by persons orentities other than the intended recipient is prohibited.If you received this email in error, please contact thesender and permanently delete the email from any computer.List Charter and FAQ at:http://www.sunbelt-software.com/exchange_list_charter.htm ***The information transmitted in this email is intended only forthe person(s) or entity to which it is addressed and maycontain confidential and/or privileged material. Any review, retransmission, dissemination or other use of, or taking ofany action in reliance upon, this information by persons orentities other than the intended recipient is prohibited.If you received this email in error, please contact thesender and permanently delete the email from any computer.
RE: Counting mailboxes
Title: Message That's exactly why I am not convinced. Because nobody seems to be able to get a straight answer on it. Ask the question 4 times, you get 4 different answers. -Original Message-From: William Lefkovics [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2002 9:29 AMTo: MS-Exchange Admin IssuesSubject: RE: Counting mailboxes Then find a vendor that agrees with your model and get it in writing. -Original Message-From: Martin Blackstone [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2002 9:15 AMTo: MS-Exchange Admin IssuesSubject: RE: Counting mailboxes I'm still not sold on this OWA licensing thing -Original Message-From: Leone, Michael [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2002 9:06 AMTo: MS-Exchange Admin IssuesSubject: RE: Counting mailboxes Not always. Many people may have multiple mailboxes. I have run an exchange server for 80 users with over 500 mailboxes. Right; that's why I said "usually". :-) So you have only 80 licenses? Or more, to cover any of these 80 accessing via OWA from offsite, as well as locally? -Original Message-From: Leone, Michael [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2002 8:45 AMTo: MS-Exchange Admin IssuesSubject: RE: Counting mailboxes -Original Message-From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2002 11:27 AMTo: MS-Exchange Admin IssuesSubject: RE: Counting mailboxes Exchange is not licensed by mailbox. It is licenesed by the number of users that will connect to the Exchange server. Yes, but - usually - you have 1 user, with 1 mailbox. And a number of other accounts - NAV, etc. So it's a good ballpark figure. So, since there's no user for "System Attendent" (as an example), I don't need a license for it? 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.htmList 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.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: Counting mailboxes
Title: Message Please do! But be sure to call 5 times so we can pick from the best answer! :) -Original Message-From: Leone, Michael [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2002 9:30 AMTo: MS-Exchange Admin IssuesSubject: RE: Counting mailboxes I'm still not sold on this OWA licensing thing I'm calling MS now, and hope they know what they're talking about. I'll post back what they tell me. 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: Counting mailboxes
Title: Message Thank you William, that confirms exactly what I had heard. When you say "A dummy account will be created for those in migration", I presume that means that we will be manually creating these dummy accounts, or are the created automagically (probably too much to hope for)? Believe me, I will certainly RTFMs before attempting the migration, but this is just to satisfy my curiosity in the meantime. sigh Its gonna be a longarduous migration. -Jim -Original Message-From: William Lefkovics [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2002 12:46 PMTo: MS-Exchange Admin IssuesSubject: RE: Counting mailboxes That will be difficult in migration. You will have to use multimb.exe and/or NTDSNoMatch to isolate the resource boxes. A dummy account will be created for those in migration. The attribute in AD can only have one mailbox object associated with a user object. -Original Message-From: Jim Holmgren [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2002 9:20 AMTo: MS-Exchange Admin IssuesSubject: RE: Counting mailboxes Out of curiosity...it is my understanding that Exchange 2K is designed for a unique user account for each mailbox...is this correct? If so, how do those of you with multiple mailboxes handle this? We are on Exchange 5.5, and have MANY "resource" mailboxes that are set up with primary accounts belonging to other users. Hope this doesn't qualify as thread hijacking ;-) -Jim Jim Holmgren MCSE, CCNA [EMAIL PROTECTED] Network Engineer Advertising.com We bring innovation to interactive communication. Advertising.com -- Superior Technology. Superior Performance. -Original Message-From: Ropiak Steve - NAO Florence Office IT [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2002 12:05 PMTo: MS-Exchange Admin IssuesSubject: RE: Counting mailboxes One for work, one for wife, one for girlfriend, etc., etc. Adds up after a while. -Original Message-From: Martin Blackstone [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2002 11:58 AMTo: MS-Exchange Admin IssuesSubject: RE: Counting mailboxes Not always. Many people may have multiple mailboxes. I have run an exchange server for 80 users with over 500 mailboxes. -Original Message-From: Leone, Michael [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2002 8:45 AMTo: MS-Exchange Admin IssuesSubject: RE: Counting mailboxes -Original Message-From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2002 11:27 AMTo: MS-Exchange Admin IssuesSubject: RE: Counting mailboxes Exchange is not licensed by mailbox. It is licenesed by the number of users that will connect to the Exchange server. Yes, but - usually - you have 1 user, with 1 mailbox. And a number of other accounts - NAV, etc. So it's a good ballpark figure. So, since there's no user for "System Attendent" (as an example), I don't need a license for it? 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.htmList Charter and FAQ at:http://www.sunbelt-software.com/exchange_list_charter.htm ***The information transmitted in this email is intended only forthe person(s) or entity to which it is addressed and maycontain confidential and/or privileged material. Any review, retransmission, dissemination or other use of, or taking ofany action in reliance upon, this information by persons orentities other than the intended recipient is prohibited.If you received this email in error, please contact thesender and permanently delete the email from any computer.List Charter and FAQ at:http://www.sunbelt-software.com/exchange_list_charter.htm ***The information transmitted in this email is intended only forthe person(s) or entity to which it is addressed and maycontain confidential and/or privileged material. Any review, retransmission, dissemination or other use of, or taking ofany action in reliance upon, this information by persons orentities other than the intended recipient is prohibited.If you received this email in error, please contact thesender and permanently delete the email from any computer.
RE: Counting mailboxes - info from MS
Title: Message Get it in writing from them. As long as you do that, you have nothing to worry about. Ben Winzenz, MCSE Network/Systems Administrator Peregrine Systems -Original Message- From: Leone, Michael [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2002 12:48 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Counting mailboxes - info from MS So, I just got off the phone with a nice, perky young 'Softie. :-) Here's the odd part ... I asked about the OWA coverage; she went and asked someone else. Result: if the off-site user is using a desktop system to access OWA (or Exchange, via a VPN), then YES, it needs a license. If they are using a laptop, NO, they do not need a license - since the Exchange CAL covers *both* a desktop *and* a laptop of a user. The system mailboxes (Attendant, Free/Busy, etc) are covered under the server license, and so do not require CALs. NAV does *not* require a CAL; the NAV for Exchange is supposed to be sold with a CAl for the user that NAV for Exchange creates. Until somebody at MS contradicts this info, this is what I'll use to base my licensing purchases on. -- Michael Leone, Systems Administrator Philadelphia Contributionship 210 S. 4th Street, Philadelphia, PA 19106 mailto: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] V: 215-627-1752 x1282 F: 215-627-5354 -Original Message- From: Leone, Michael [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2002 12:30 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Counting mailboxes I'm still not sold on this OWA licensing thing I'm calling MS now, and hope they know what they're talking about. I'll post back what they tell me. 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
web cast on message flow on right now
Title: Message http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=http://support.microsoft.com/servicedesks/webcasts/wc022102/wcblurb022102.asp Milton R Dogg Of the Dogg Foundation List Charter and FAQ at: http://www.sunbelt-software.com/exchange_list_charter.htm
RE: Counting mailboxes - info from MS
Title: Message Interesting info. I now know what I need to do. -Original Message-From: Leone, Michael [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2002 9:48 AMTo: MS-Exchange Admin IssuesSubject: RE: Counting mailboxes - info from MS So, I just got off the phone with a nice, perky young 'Softie. :-) Here's the odd part ... I asked about the OWA coverage; she went and asked someone else. Result: if the off-site user is using a desktop system to access OWA (or Exchange, via a VPN), then YES, it needs a license. If they are using a laptop, NO, they do not need a license - since the Exchange CAL covers *both* a desktop *and* a laptop of a user. The system mailboxes (Attendant, Free/Busy, etc) are covered under the server license, and so do not require CALs. NAV does *not* require a CAL; the NAV for Exchange is supposed to be sold with a CAl for the user that NAV for Exchange creates. Until somebody at MS contradicts this info, this is what I'll use to base my licensing purchases on. -- Michael Leone, Systems Administrator Philadelphia Contributionship 210 S. 4th Street, Philadelphia, PA 19106 mailto: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] V: 215-627-1752 x1282 F: 215-627-5354 -Original Message-From: Leone, Michael [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2002 12:30 PMTo: MS-Exchange Admin IssuesSubject: RE: Counting mailboxes I'm still not sold on this OWA licensing thing I'm calling MS now, and hope they know what they're talking about. I'll post back what they tell me. 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: ScanMail 3.8 for Exchange 5.5 bug
Gotcha. :) Although Elf bowling was pretty sweet! -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2002 12:11 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject:RE: ScanMail 3.8 for Exchange 5.5 bug Basically, yes... we have no reason to allow a free flow of EXE files back and forth. If on the rare occasion, we did need one, I'd disable the filter for that time. I can't block all ZIP files, as we do get a lot of wok related things in that are, say, a 15MB non-exe file, but I do want to cut down on the, Hey dude, check out this cool elf bowling game! What? You can't get .exe files? Wait... I'll zip it for you Evan -Original Message- From: Allen Crawford [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2002 9:38 AM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject:RE: ScanMail 3.8 for Exchange 5.5 bug I read that it couldn't do that, but I'm wondering why anyone cares to do that? If you are worried about viruses being transmitted via ZIP files, it seems that you should just block ZIP. I mean, are you just trying to prevent the users from sending ANY EXE files back and forth? Basically the only reason I'm letting ZIPs through are so people CAN actually transmit legitimate files through and a good way to force them to use some form of compression. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, February 20, 2002 5:27 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject:RE: ScanMail 3.8 for Exchange 5.5 bug One thing I still kinda wish 3.8 could do is block an .EXE in a Zip. I tried it, and it lets it through. I know I could block all Zip files, but that's not quite what I was looking for. Evan -Original Message- From: Allen Crawford [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, February 20, 2002 5:21 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject:RE: ScanMail 3.8 for Exchange 5.5 bug By the way, if anyone else uses Martin's list and ScanMail 3.8 and has this same problem, this should save you some time. Don't forget I've added *.REG to the list. File extensions to block: eml;vb;asx;ade;adp;bas;bat;bin;chm;cmd;com;cpl;crt;dll;exe;hiv;hlp;hta;inf;i ns;isp;js;jse;jtd;msc;msi;msp;mst;ocx;oft;ovl;pcd;pif;pl;plx;scr;sct;sh;shb; shs;sys;vbe;vbs;vss;vst;vxd;wsc;wsf;wsh;lnk;reg; File names to block: *.eml;*.vb;*.asx;*.ade;*.adp;*.bas;*.bat;*.bin;*.chm;*.cmd;*.com;*.cpl;*.crt ;*.dll;*.exe;*.hiv;*.hlp;*.hta;*.inf;*.ins;*.isp;*.js;*.jse;*.jtd;*.msc;*.ms i;*.msp;*.mst;*.ocx;*.oft;*.ovl;*.pcd;*.pif;*.pl;*.plx;*.scr;*.sct;*.sh;*.sh b;*.shs;*.sys;*.vbe;*.vbs;*.vss;*.vst;*.vxd;*.wsc;*.wsf;*.wsh;*.lnk;*.reg; -Original Message- From: Allen Crawford Sent: Wednesday, February 20, 2002 5:14 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject:ScanMail 3.8 for Exchange 5.5 bug OK, since everyone has been talking about this and Antigen lately, I'll add this. I just got off the phone with Trend's tech support and apparently there is an issue with blocking file extensions. I noticed that SYS and VBS files were not being blocked, even though they were on my list (or Martin's list I should say, although I don't think he had REG on his list and I do have it). Anyway, the reason is because it is now performing the true file type scanning. I've already tested this and it does work. For example, I'm not blocking ZIP, so renaming a ZIP to EXE, which I am blocking, will let it through just fine because it knows it is a ZIP. So, in turn, it registers VBS, BAT, my SYS (which was really a text file renamed) as TXT files, which aren't being blocked. The fix is to list them in the file name box (the box right below the blocked extension list) as *.vbs;*.bat;*.sys, etc. Seems to work so far. So I guess to be safe, I'm going to add all of Martin's extensions to both boxes. Hope this helps someone else. 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
Synchronization and archiving problems
We keep having these problems with ost users, who has large mailboxes during initial sync: it fails with a timeout message. According to MS (in article - http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;EN-US;q264731) it could be fixed on the server site, but even after recommended changes, We still have very same problem. Same with archiving. If we create pst file locally and manually ONE by ONE will move messages, it will work. But if I want to archive it come back with; .Item has been moved or deleted Even everything still in in box. Also number of users receive meeting request it automatically goes into calendar while keeping request in inbox, so when he approves it in inbox outlook creates a duplicate meeting in calendar - and he has two records - one original waiting for approval and another approved from the inbox. We ran outlook with cleanviews switch and it fixed the problem, but if he opens another meeting request and approves it everything is fine he gets only single copy of it in calendar - unfortunately if he closes request without approving it he gets duplicates again - one waiting for approval another sitting in inbox. TIA, Bigll The information transmitted is intended only for the person or entity to which it is addressed and may contain confidential and/or privileged material. Any review, retransmission, dissemination or other use of, or taking of any action in reliance upon, this information by persons or entities other than the intended recipient is prohibited. If you received this in error, please contact the sender and delete the material from any computer. List Charter and FAQ at: http://www.sunbelt-software.com/exchange_list_charter.htm
RE: Apple connection to Exchange
Title: Message Jim, are you still out there? Did this resolve your issue? I am having an eerily similar experience -Original Message-From: Zangara, Jim [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]Sent: Saturday, December 15, 2001 12:08 AMTo: MS-Exchange Admin IssuesSubject: RE: Apple connection to Exchange Possible fix found - According to PSS and some tests we ran, my Exchange server is not listening on canc_ip_tcp which is required for MAC connectivity. He has provided my a hot fix to solve it Q297534 unfortunately he provided me a bum link to download the fix. So till Monday we wait. No big deal, luckily the MAC users are off this weekend. If anyone wants more details let me know. -Original Message-From: Kevin Loney [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]Sent: Friday, December 14, 2001 1:58 PMTo: MS-Exchange Admin IssuesSubject: RE: Apple connection to Exchange My experience was the same as Jons. I have one Mac G4 that gets configured via DHCP, all I added was the Exchange Server name, the mailbox name and the user info. I have had fewer problems with the Mac than my Wintel machines. Kevin Loney -Original Message-From: Bonner, Jon [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]Sent: Friday, December 14, 2001 1:15 PMTo: MS-Exchange Admin IssuesSubject: RE: Apple connection to Exchange I regularly connect to the campus Exchange server from home using my personal iMac. It is running OS X and Outlook 2001 (running in Classic mode). When I set this up for the very first time, I just installed Outlook 2001 and told it my mailbox name. It simply worked like it was supposed to work. I've also used Outlook 2001 on the iMac here in the office that is running Mac OS 9. It too connected just like you'd expect it to - on the first try. Jon Bonner -Original Message-From: David N. Precht [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]Sent: Friday, December 14, 2001 1:17 PMTo: MS-Exchange Admin IssuesSubject: Re: Apple connection to Exchange That was cold... yet on target... But words hurt sometimes ;) - Original Message - From: Doug Eubank To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Sent: Friday, December 14, 2001 12:24 Subject: RE: Apple connection to Exchange MAC = Overpriced Etch-A-Sketch. -Original Message-From: Zangara, Jim [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]Sent: Friday, December 14, 2001 12:08 AMTo: MS-Exchange Admin IssuesSubject: RE: Apple connection to Exchange Keith - Thanks - sorry if I sounded frustrated - two very vocal users and I guess ignorance breeds contempt as far as MACs go for me. Using Outlook 2001 - when I resolve the name I start with IP and Alias and resolve to Computer Name and User name. Static IP address even on the same subnet plugged into the same switch as the exchange server. Not sure about the domain in the Additional Search Domains will check that first thing in the morning. Already have the ticket open with PSS - boss didn't care - we will just get in the queue in the morning if this doesn't resolve it. Thanks for the advice! -Original Message-From: Keith Nelson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]Sent: Thursday, December 13, 2001 10:00 PMTo: MS-Exchange Admin IssuesSubject: RE: Apple connection to Exchange Jim, Did you get your problem resolved? If not are you using Outlook 2001 or Outlook 8.x. If your using the old version try Outlook 2001 from http://www.microsoft.com/mac/ Also are you resolving the names using DNS. If so how are the macs getting their IP address, DHCP or static? On the Mac in the TCP/IP control panel do you have your domain name in the Additional Search domains. If not it might help having it there. I hope this info helps. I started off as a mac person and still consider them real computers. However I don't think they are real network clients just like win9x isn't a real network client. Keith NelsonNetwork AdministratorOrange County High School of the Arts[EMAIL PROTECTED](714) 560-0900
RE: Synchronization and archiving problems
Title: RE: Synchronization and archiving problems This is a issue, more than likely, with antivirus software. If you are using NAV for Exchange put this in Mapi ONLY mode and it should work. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2002 12:53 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: Synchronization and archiving problems We keep having these problems with ost users, who has large mailboxes during initial sync: it fails with a timeout message. According to MS (in article - http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;EN-US;q264731) it could be fixed on the server site, but even after recommended changes, We still have very same problem. Same with archiving. If we create pst file locally and manually ONE by ONE will move messages, it will work. But if I want to archive it come back with; .Item has been moved or deleted Even everything still in in box. Also number of users receive meeting request it automatically goes into calendar while keeping request in inbox, so when he approves it in inbox outlook creates a duplicate meeting in calendar - and he has two records - one original waiting for approval and another approved from the inbox. We ran outlook with cleanviews switch and it fixed the problem, but if he opens another meeting request and approves it everything is fine he gets only single copy of it in calendar - unfortunately if he closes request without approving it he gets duplicates again - one waiting for approval another sitting in inbox. TIA, Bigll The information transmitted is intended only for the person or entity to which it is addressed and may contain confidential and/or privileged material. Any review, retransmission, dissemination or other use of, or taking of any action in reliance upon, this information by persons or entities other than the intended recipient is prohibited. If you received this in error, please contact the sender and delete the material from any computer. 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: Apple connection to Exchange
Title: Message yes - the RCP fix along with the hosts file totally solved our problem. My support call with MS was free because it was a known bug. Jim Zangara, MCSE+I IT ManagerSpecial Projects Engineer Premiere Radio Networks A Division of Clear Channel Communications 15260 Ventura Blvd Suite 500 Sherman Oaks, CA 91403 Direct: (818) 461-8620 mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Time is the most valuable thing a man can spend. -- Theophrastus -Original Message-From: Eric Brouwer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2002 10:55 AMTo: MS-Exchange Admin IssuesSubject: RE: Apple connection to Exchange Jim, are you still out there? Did this resolve your issue? I am having an eerily similar experience -Original Message-From: Zangara, Jim [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]Sent: Saturday, December 15, 2001 12:08 AMTo: MS-Exchange Admin IssuesSubject: RE: Apple connection to Exchange Possible fix found - According to PSS and some tests we ran, my Exchange server is not listening on canc_ip_tcp which is required for MAC connectivity. He has provided my a hot fix to solve it Q297534 unfortunately he provided me a bum link to download the fix. So till Monday we wait. No big deal, luckily the MAC users are off this weekend. If anyone wants more details let me know. -Original Message-From: Kevin Loney [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]Sent: Friday, December 14, 2001 1:58 PMTo: MS-Exchange Admin IssuesSubject: RE: Apple connection to Exchange My experience was the same as Jons. I have one Mac G4 that gets configured via DHCP, all I added was the Exchange Server name, the mailbox name and the user info. I have had fewer problems with the Mac than my Wintel machines. Kevin Loney -Original Message-From: Bonner, Jon [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]Sent: Friday, December 14, 2001 1:15 PMTo: MS-Exchange Admin IssuesSubject: RE: Apple connection to Exchange I regularly connect to the campus Exchange server from home using my personal iMac. It is running OS X and Outlook 2001 (running in Classic mode). When I set this up for the very first time, I just installed Outlook 2001 and told it my mailbox name. It simply worked like it was supposed to work. I've also used Outlook 2001 on the iMac here in the office that is running Mac OS 9. It too connected just like you'd expect it to - on the first try. Jon Bonner -Original Message-From: David N. Precht [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]Sent: Friday, December 14, 2001 1:17 PMTo: MS-Exchange Admin IssuesSubject: Re: Apple connection to Exchange That was cold... yet on target... But words hurt sometimes ;) - Original Message - From: Doug Eubank To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Sent: Friday, December 14, 2001 12:24 Subject: RE: Apple connection to Exchange MAC = Overpriced Etch-A-Sketch. -Original Message-From: Zangara, Jim [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]Sent: Friday, December 14, 2001 12:08 AMTo: MS-Exchange Admin IssuesSubject: RE: Apple connection to Exchange Keith - Thanks - sorry if I sounded frustrated - two very vocal users and I guess ignorance breeds contempt as far as MACs go for me. Using Outlook 2001 - when I resolve the name I start with IP and Alias and resolve to Computer Name and User name. Static IP address even on the same subnet plugged into the same switch as the exchange server. Not sure about the domain in the Additional Search Domains will check that first thing in the morning. Already have the ticket open with PSS - boss didn't care - we will just get in the queue in the morning if this doesn't resolve it. Thanks for the advice! -Original Message-From: Keith Nelson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]Sent: Thursday, December 13, 2001 10:00 PMTo: MS-Exchange Admin IssuesSubject: RE: Apple connection to Exchange Jim, Did you get your problem resolved? If not are you using Outlook 2001 or Outlook 8.x.
RE: Counting mailboxes - info from MS
Title: Message Would that be call the "young, perky, softie" ;o) Don Ely Network Engineer Tripath Imaging, Inc. (336) 290-8293 - Direct (336) 516-4519 - Mobile [EMAIL PROTECTED] - email http://www.tripathimaging.com -Original Message-From: Martin Blackstone [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2002 1:19 PMTo: MS-Exchange Admin IssuesSubject: RE: Counting mailboxes - info from MS Interesting info. I now know what I need to do. -Original Message-From: Leone, Michael [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2002 9:48 AMTo: MS-Exchange Admin IssuesSubject: RE: Counting mailboxes - info from MS So, I just got off the phone with a nice, perky young 'Softie. :-) Here's the odd part ... I asked about the OWA coverage; she went and asked someone else. Result: if the off-site user is using a desktop system to access OWA (or Exchange, via a VPN), then YES, it needs a license. If they are using a laptop, NO, they do not need a license - since the Exchange CAL covers *both* a desktop *and* a laptop of a user. The system mailboxes (Attendant, Free/Busy, etc) are covered under the server license, and so do not require CALs. NAV does *not* require a CAL; the NAV for Exchange is supposed to be sold with a CAl for the user that NAV for Exchange creates. Until somebody at MS contradicts this info, this is what I'll use to base my licensing purchases on. -- Michael Leone, Systems Administrator Philadelphia Contributionship 210 S. 4th Street, Philadelphia, PA 19106 mailto: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] V: 215-627-1752 x1282 F: 215-627-5354 -Original Message-From: Leone, Michael [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2002 12:30 PMTo: MS-Exchange Admin IssuesSubject: RE: Counting mailboxes I'm still not sold on this OWA licensing thing I'm calling MS now, and hope they know what they're talking about. I'll post back what they tell me. 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.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
Architecture question
Hello Folks, Currently I have 4 Exchange 5.5 SP4 servers running on NT4.0 here in my server room. 3 user servers and 1 server hosting the IMC and OWA. As part of the disaster recovery plan and because of other reliability issues the head of my group wants us to move a BDC to a remote collocation. At the same time they are asking me what servers if any from the Exchange site we could move to the co-location. They have a DS3 in place for connectivity to the co-location. I don't think I want to move the user servers but can anyone give reasons not to move the IMC/OWA server to the co-location? Bob Falkenberg List Charter and FAQ at: http://www.sunbelt-software.com/exchange_list_charter.htm
RE: Counting mailboxes
Title: Message Read the NTDSNoMatch docs. I think a disabled user account is automatically created when NDTSNoMatch is in custom attribute #10. -Original Message-From: Jim Holmgren [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2002 10:07 AMTo: MS-Exchange Admin IssuesSubject: RE: Counting mailboxes Thank you William, that confirms exactly what I had heard. When you say "A dummy account will be created for those in migration", I presume that means that we will be manually creating these dummy accounts, or are the created automagically (probably too much to hope for)? Believe me, I will certainly RTFMs before attempting the migration, but this is just to satisfy my curiosity in the meantime. sigh Its gonna be a longarduous migration. -Jim -Original Message-From: William Lefkovics [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2002 12:46 PMTo: MS-Exchange Admin IssuesSubject: RE: Counting mailboxes That will be difficult in migration. You will have to use multimb.exe and/or NTDSNoMatch to isolate the resource boxes. A dummy account will be created for those in migration. The attribute in AD can only have one mailbox object associated with a user object. -Original Message-From: Jim Holmgren [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2002 9:20 AMTo: MS-Exchange Admin IssuesSubject: RE: Counting mailboxes Out of curiosity...it is my understanding that Exchange 2K is designed for a unique user account for each mailbox...is this correct? If so, how do those of you with multiple mailboxes handle this? We are on Exchange 5.5, and have MANY "resource" mailboxes that are set up with primary accounts belonging to other users. Hope this doesn't qualify as thread hijacking ;-) -Jim Jim Holmgren MCSE, CCNA [EMAIL PROTECTED] Network Engineer Advertising.com We bring innovation to interactive communication. Advertising.com -- Superior Technology. Superior Performance. -Original Message-From: Ropiak Steve - NAO Florence Office IT [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2002 12:05 PMTo: MS-Exchange Admin IssuesSubject: RE: Counting mailboxes One for work, one for wife, one for girlfriend, etc., etc. Adds up after a while. -Original Message-From: Martin Blackstone [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2002 11:58 AMTo: MS-Exchange Admin IssuesSubject: RE: Counting mailboxes Not always. Many people may have multiple mailboxes. I have run an exchange server for 80 users with over 500 mailboxes. -Original Message-From: Leone, Michael [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2002 8:45 AMTo: MS-Exchange Admin IssuesSubject: RE: Counting mailboxes -Original Message-From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2002 11:27 AMTo: MS-Exchange Admin IssuesSubject: RE: Counting mailboxes Exchange is not licensed by mailbox. It is licenesed by the number of users that will connect to the Exchange server. Yes, but - usually - you have 1 user, with 1 mailbox. And a number of other accounts - NAV, etc. So it's a good ballpark figure. So, since there's no user for "System Attendent" (as an example), I don't need a license for it? 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.htmList Charter and FAQ at:http://www.sunbelt-software.com/exchange_list_charter.htm ***The information transmitted in this email is intended only forthe person(s) or entity to which it is addressed and maycontain confidential and/or privileged material. Any review, retransmission, dissemination or other use of, or taking ofany action in reliance upon, this information by persons orentities other than the intended recipient is prohibited.If you received this email in error, please contact thesender and permanently delete the email from any computer.List Charter and FAQ
RE: Architecture question
it's too heavy?... ;-) -Original Message- From: Bob Falkenberg [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: February 21, 2002 2:25 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: Architecture question Hello Folks, Currently I have 4 Exchange 5.5 SP4 servers running on NT4.0 here in my server room. 3 user servers and 1 server hosting the IMC and OWA. As part of the disaster recovery plan and because of other reliability issues the head of my group wants us to move a BDC to a remote collocation. At the same time they are asking me what servers if any from the Exchange site we could move to the co-location. They have a DS3 in place for connectivity to the co-location. I don't think I want to move the user servers but can anyone give reasons not to move the IMC/OWA server to the co-location? Bob Falkenberg 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: Counting mailboxes
Title: Message Very cool...thanks again William. -Jim -Original Message-From: William Lefkovics [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2002 2:35 PMTo: MS-Exchange Admin IssuesSubject: RE: Counting mailboxes Read the NTDSNoMatch docs. I think a disabled user account is automatically created when NDTSNoMatch is in custom attribute #10. -Original Message-From: Jim Holmgren [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2002 10:07 AMTo: MS-Exchange Admin IssuesSubject: RE: Counting mailboxes Thank you William, that confirms exactly what I had heard. When you say "A dummy account will be created for those in migration", I presume that means that we will be manually creating these dummy accounts, or are the created automagically (probably too much to hope for)? Believe me, I will certainly RTFMs before attempting the migration, but this is just to satisfy my curiosity in the meantime. sigh Its gonna be a longarduous migration. -Jim -Original Message-From: William Lefkovics [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2002 12:46 PMTo: MS-Exchange Admin IssuesSubject: RE: Counting mailboxes That will be difficult in migration. You will have to use multimb.exe and/or NTDSNoMatch to isolate the resource boxes. A dummy account will be created for those in migration. The attribute in AD can only have one mailbox object associated with a user object. -Original Message-From: Jim Holmgren [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2002 9:20 AMTo: MS-Exchange Admin IssuesSubject: RE: Counting mailboxes Out of curiosity...it is my understanding that Exchange 2K is designed for a unique user account for each mailbox...is this correct? If so, how do those of you with multiple mailboxes handle this? We are on Exchange 5.5, and have MANY "resource" mailboxes that are set up with primary accounts belonging to other users. Hope this doesn't qualify as thread hijacking ;-) -Jim Jim Holmgren MCSE, CCNA [EMAIL PROTECTED] Network Engineer Advertising.com We bring innovation to interactive communication. Advertising.com -- Superior Technology. Superior Performance. -Original Message-From: Ropiak Steve - NAO Florence Office IT [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2002 12:05 PMTo: MS-Exchange Admin IssuesSubject: RE: Counting mailboxes One for work, one for wife, one for girlfriend, etc., etc. Adds up after a while. -Original Message-From: Martin Blackstone [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2002 11:58 AMTo: MS-Exchange Admin IssuesSubject: RE: Counting mailboxes Not always. Many people may have multiple mailboxes. I have run an exchange server for 80 users with over 500 mailboxes. -Original Message-From: Leone, Michael [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2002 8:45 AMTo: MS-Exchange Admin IssuesSubject: RE: Counting mailboxes -Original Message-From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2002 11:27 AMTo: MS-Exchange Admin IssuesSubject: RE: Counting mailboxes Exchange is not licensed by mailbox. It is licenesed by the number of users that will connect to the Exchange server. Yes, but - usually - you have 1 user, with 1 mailbox. And a number of other accounts - NAV, etc. So it's a good ballpark figure. So, since there's no user for "System Attendent" (as an example), I don't need a license for it? 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.htmList Charter and FAQ at:http://www.sunbelt-software.com/exchange_list_charter.htm ***The information transmitted in this email is intended only forthe person(s) or entity to which it is addressed
RE: Architecture question
Naw, I been going to the gym :P -Original Message- From: Toni, Randy [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2002 11:37 AM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Architecture question it's too heavy?... ;-) -Original Message- From: Bob Falkenberg [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: February 21, 2002 2:25 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: Architecture question Hello Folks, Currently I have 4 Exchange 5.5 SP4 servers running on NT4.0 here in my server room. 3 user servers and 1 server hosting the IMC and OWA. As part of the disaster recovery plan and because of other reliability issues the head of my group wants us to move a BDC to a remote collocation. At the same time they are asking me what servers if any from the Exchange site we could move to the co-location. They have a DS3 in place for connectivity to the co-location. I don't think I want to move the user servers but can anyone give reasons not to move the IMC/OWA server to the co-location? Bob Falkenberg 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
Securing Exchange Server
Hello, I have tried many times but failed to secure Our Exchange Server. We have a Exchnage server for only Server has NT4,IIS4, DNS. How Do I use TCP IP security tab to configure security so that all the unnecessary ports are closed, we only use exchnage for POP3 and SMTP. The last time I tried I got Max user limit on SMTP Many thanks, List Charter and FAQ at: http://www.sunbelt-software.com/exchange_list_charter.htm
RE: ScanMail 3.8 for Exchange 5.5 bug
We allow zip files through, but fortunatly for us we have a custom winzip style program on the network with won't allow users (Admins are allowed and users with permission) to unzip EXE, DLL files etc... It's true we in IT are evil. Neil -Original Message- From: Allen Crawford [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 21 February 2002 14:38 To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: ScanMail 3.8 for Exchange 5.5 bug I read that it couldn't do that, but I'm wondering why anyone cares to do that? If you are worried about viruses being transmitted via ZIP files, it seems that you should just block ZIP. I mean, are you just trying to prevent the users from sending ANY EXE files back and forth? Basically the only reason I'm letting ZIPs through are so people CAN actually transmit legitimate files through and a good way to force them to use some form of compression. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, February 20, 2002 5:27 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject:RE: ScanMail 3.8 for Exchange 5.5 bug One thing I still kinda wish 3.8 could do is block an .EXE in a Zip. I tried it, and it lets it through. I know I could block all Zip files, but that's not quite what I was looking for. Evan -Original Message- From: Allen Crawford [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, February 20, 2002 5:21 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject:RE: ScanMail 3.8 for Exchange 5.5 bug By the way, if anyone else uses Martin's list and ScanMail 3.8 and has this same problem, this should save you some time. Don't forget I've added *.REG to the list. File extensions to block: eml;vb;asx;ade;adp;bas;bat;bin;chm;cmd;com;cpl;crt;dll;exe;hiv;hlp;hta;inf;i ns;isp;js;jse;jtd;msc;msi;msp;mst;ocx;oft;ovl;pcd;pif;pl;plx;scr;sct;sh;shb; shs;sys;vbe;vbs;vss;vst;vxd;wsc;wsf;wsh;lnk;reg; File names to block: *.eml;*.vb;*.asx;*.ade;*.adp;*.bas;*.bat;*.bin;*.chm;*.cmd;*.com;*.cpl;*.crt ;*.dll;*.exe;*.hiv;*.hlp;*.hta;*.inf;*.ins;*.isp;*.js;*.jse;*.jtd;*.msc;*.ms i;*.msp;*.mst;*.ocx;*.oft;*.ovl;*.pcd;*.pif;*.pl;*.plx;*.scr;*.sct;*.sh;*.sh b;*.shs;*.sys;*.vbe;*.vbs;*.vss;*.vst;*.vxd;*.wsc;*.wsf;*.wsh;*.lnk;*.reg; -Original Message- From: Allen Crawford Sent: Wednesday, February 20, 2002 5:14 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject:ScanMail 3.8 for Exchange 5.5 bug OK, since everyone has been talking about this and Antigen lately, I'll add this. I just got off the phone with Trend's tech support and apparently there is an issue with blocking file extensions. I noticed that SYS and VBS files were not being blocked, even though they were on my list (or Martin's list I should say, although I don't think he had REG on his list and I do have it). Anyway, the reason is because it is now performing the true file type scanning. I've already tested this and it does work. For example, I'm not blocking ZIP, so renaming a ZIP to EXE, which I am blocking, will let it through just fine because it knows it is a ZIP. So, in turn, it registers VBS, BAT, my SYS (which was really a text file renamed) as TXT files, which aren't being blocked. The fix is to list them in the file name box (the box right below the blocked extension list) as *.vbs;*.bat;*.sys, etc. Seems to work so far. So I guess to be safe, I'm going to add all of Martin's extensions to both boxes. Hope this helps someone else. 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: Architecture question
I wouldn't colo an of the Exchange boxes. I would probably put a relay server there just to hold the mail until you got your boxes back up. -Original Message- From: Bob Falkenberg [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2002 11:25 AM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: Architecture question Hello Folks, Currently I have 4 Exchange 5.5 SP4 servers running on NT4.0 here in my server room. 3 user servers and 1 server hosting the IMC and OWA. As part of the disaster recovery plan and because of other reliability issues the head of my group wants us to move a BDC to a remote collocation. At the same time they are asking me what servers if any from the Exchange site we could move to the co-location. They have a DS3 in place for connectivity to the co-location. I don't think I want to move the user servers but can anyone give reasons not to move the IMC/OWA server to the co-location? Bob Falkenberg 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: Info store to mailbox ratio
Title: Counting mailboxes I feel like a right scrouge, looking at our system... 950 mailboxes - 9GB. We have been using limits since we upgraded to 55 and we discourage the use of PST files (Though in total, PST files add up to about another 3GB's). Neil -Original Message-From: Sethi, Ali [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]Sent: 21 February 2002 17:13To: MS-Exchange Admin IssuesSubject: Info store to mailbox ratio Just curious what everyones Info store to mailbox ratio is? Ours: 524 mailboxes / 31gb info store Talk to somone's whose was 72 mailbox / 47 gb info store.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: Architecture question
Unix server acting as relay is at the collocation already but thats a good point. That server is going to hold the mail till we are back up. Part of the DR plan assumes we are going to be out of this building for a week or more. Bob F. -Original Message- From: Martin Blackstone [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2002 11:45 AM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Architecture question I wouldn't colo an of the Exchange boxes. I would probably put a relay server there just to hold the mail until you got your boxes back up. -Original Message- From: Bob Falkenberg [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2002 11:25 AM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: Architecture question Hello Folks, Currently I have 4 Exchange 5.5 SP4 servers running on NT4.0 here in my server room. 3 user servers and 1 server hosting the IMC and OWA. As part of the disaster recovery plan and because of other reliability issues the head of my group wants us to move a BDC to a remote collocation. At the same time they are asking me what servers if any from the Exchange site we could move to the co-location. They have a DS3 in place for connectivity to the co-location. I don't think I want to move the user servers but can anyone give reasons not to move the IMC/OWA server to the co-location? Bob Falkenberg 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: Removing Exchange
If you can't restore your Exchange database to a test server, are you sure you can do it in an disaster recovery scenario on your live system? Neil -Original Message- From: James Gosnold [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 21 February 2002 10:49 To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: Removing Exchange Dear all, Just a quick one I'm sure somebody will be able to point me in the right direction for. I am currently 'messing' around with a development server (NT 4.0) which I am trying to restore our Exchange Server to. I join it to our network as a BDC and then take it off-line, restore the backup thus demonstating my ability to deal with a disaster and then also practice upgrading to 2000 e.t.c I am experiencing problems restoring the database but this is another issue involving the wonderful Arcserve. My problem is that every time I botch up a restore it basically corrupts the Exchange installation and I don't really seem to able to remove it properly. Therefore a new resote won't work, I can't re-run setup so I keep re-installing the server! Basically the state I have at the moment is only 4 Exchange services installed, if I run setup (to hopefully get the uninstall option) it doesn't detect the current installation and attempts a new one which then fails! I think what I am asking is does anyone know where to find the article for manually doing a total removal of Exchange 5.5? 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: Info store to mailbox ratio
Title: Counting mailboxes 3000 accounts/ 200 gig Brian -Original Message-From: Sethi, Ali [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2002 12:13 PMTo: MS-Exchange Admin IssuesSubject: Info store to mailbox ratio Just curious what everyones Info store to mailbox ratio is? Ours: 524 mailboxes / 31gb info store Talk to somone's whose was 72 mailbox / 47 gb info store.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: Architecture question
I will have to ask the Network Eng guys about how stable that connection is. I am not considering moving the user servers. Only the OWA/IMC server. Bob F. -Original Message- From: William Lefkovics [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2002 11:48 AM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Architecture question How stable is your DS3 connection? I understand and appreciate the remote BDC for disaster recovery and remote storage of backup media, but moving a mail server away from the users doesn't make sense to me. William -Original Message- From: Toni, Randy [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2002 11:37 AM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Architecture question it's too heavy?... ;-) -Original Message- From: Bob Falkenberg [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: February 21, 2002 2:25 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: Architecture question Hello Folks, Currently I have 4 Exchange 5.5 SP4 servers running on NT4.0 here in my server room. 3 user servers and 1 server hosting the IMC and OWA. As part of the disaster recovery plan and because of other reliability issues the head of my group wants us to move a BDC to a remote collocation. At the same time they are asking me what servers if any from the Exchange site we could move to the co-location. They have a DS3 in place for connectivity to the co-location. I don't think I want to move the user servers but can anyone give reasons not to move the IMC/OWA server to the co-location? Bob Falkenberg 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: Securing Exchange Server
Title: Message So are you saying someone used you as a relay or hacked your box or what? Are you behind a FW? What ports are open to the Exch server? -Original Message-From: Manish Govindji [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2002 11:41 AMTo: MS-Exchange Admin IssuesSubject: Securing Exchange Server Hello, I have tried many times but failed to secure Our Exchange Server. We have a Exchnage server for only Server has NT4,IIS4, DNS. How Do I use TCP IP security tab to configure security so that all the unnecessary ports are closed, we only use exchnage for POP3 and SMTP. The last time I tried I got Max user limit on SMTP Many thanks,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: Architecture question
ok, but why? -Original Message- From: Bob Falkenberg [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2002 11:58 AM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Architecture question I will have to ask the Network Eng guys about how stable that connection is. I am not considering moving the user servers. Only the OWA/IMC server. Bob F. -Original Message- From: William Lefkovics [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2002 11:48 AM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Architecture question How stable is your DS3 connection? I understand and appreciate the remote BDC for disaster recovery and remote storage of backup media, but moving a mail server away from the users doesn't make sense to me. William -Original Message- From: Toni, Randy [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2002 11:37 AM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Architecture question it's too heavy?... ;-) -Original Message- From: Bob Falkenberg [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: February 21, 2002 2:25 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: Architecture question Hello Folks, Currently I have 4 Exchange 5.5 SP4 servers running on NT4.0 here in my server room. 3 user servers and 1 server hosting the IMC and OWA. As part of the disaster recovery plan and because of other reliability issues the head of my group wants us to move a BDC to a remote collocation. At the same time they are asking me what servers if any from the Exchange site we could move to the co-location. They have a DS3 in place for connectivity to the co-location. I don't think I want to move the user servers but can anyone give reasons not to move the IMC/OWA server to the co-location? Bob Falkenberg 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: Securing Exchange Server
Title: Message Thanks for the reply. Not for relay, but we do not have any firewall as yet, and i would like to close unecessary ports. Its a fresh installtion NT server PDC, Exchange 5.5. So all the ports are open. I just want 25, 110, 80 to be open. I tried that on TCP/IP security and nobody could connect to mail server - Original Message - From: Martin Blackstone To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2002 11:02 PM Subject: RE: Securing Exchange Server So are you saying someone used you as a relay or hacked your box or what? Are you behind a FW? What ports are open to the Exch server? -Original Message-From: Manish Govindji [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2002 11:41 AMTo: MS-Exchange Admin IssuesSubject: Securing Exchange Server Hello, I have tried many times but failed to secure Our Exchange Server. We have a Exchnage server for only Server has NT4,IIS4, DNS. How Do I use TCP IP security tab to configure security so that all the unnecessary ports are closed, we only use exchnage for POP3 and SMTP. The last time I tried I got Max user limit on SMTP Many thanks,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
Export/Import From Exchange 2000
Hello Everyone, How many utilites/ways are there to export/import mailbox information from Exchange 2000. Also how does this affect the Active Director ? I already know about the csvde.exe but any other information would be great. Thanks List Charter and FAQ at: http://www.sunbelt-software.com/exchange_list_charter.htm
Server Side rules quit working for SOME users
Title: Message Hey Folks - Exchange 5.5 SP4 on Win 2K SP2 Yesterday several people started complaining that server side rules no longer work for them. Rebuilt the the rule - no good. No changes have been made to the system and rules work fine for others (me for instance). Searched TechNet but did not find anything that seemed relevant. Any one else seen this? TIA for any ideas. Jim Zangara, MCSE+I IT ManagerSpecial Projects Engineer Premiere Radio Networks A Division of Clear Channel Communications 15260 Ventura Blvd Suite 500 Sherman Oaks, CA 91403 Direct: (818) 461-8620 mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] There's no such thing as a free lunch. -- Milton Friendman List Charter and FAQ at: http://www.sunbelt-software.com/exchange_list_charter.htm
RE: Securing Exchange Server
Title: Message Why no SSL? -Original Message-From: Manish Govindji [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2002 12:11 PMTo: MS-Exchange Admin IssuesSubject: Re: Securing Exchange Server Thanks for the reply. Not for relay, but we do not have any firewall as yet, and i would like to close unecessary ports. Its a fresh installtion NT server PDC, Exchange 5.5. So all the ports are open. I just want 25, 110, 80 to be open. I tried that on TCP/IP security and nobody could connect to mail server - Original Message - From: Martin Blackstone To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2002 11:02 PM Subject: RE: Securing Exchange Server So are you saying someone used you as a relay or hacked your box or what? Are you behind a FW? What ports are open to the Exch server? -Original Message-From: Manish Govindji [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2002 11:41 AMTo: MS-Exchange Admin IssuesSubject: Securing Exchange Server Hello, I have tried many times but failed to secure Our Exchange Server. We have a Exchnage server for only Server has NT4,IIS4, DNS. How Do I use TCP IP security tab to configure security so that all the unnecessary ports are closed, we only use exchnage for POP3 and SMTP. The last time I tried I got Max user limit on SMTP List Charter and FAQ at: http://www.sunbelt-software.com/exchange_list_charter.htm
RE: Only send internally
Thanks for the link -Original Message- From: William Lefkovics [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2002 12:33 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Only send internally I realise your question has been answered, but here is where you can also find the answer: Section 3.6: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq_sec3.htm William -Original Message- From: Sethi, Ali [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2002 8:10 AM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: Only send internally Hello, I have an Ex 5.5 server sp4 running on windows 2k server sp1. Is there a way to modify a single mailbox so that it can only send internally and cannot send any emails to external clients? Thanks, 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: Export/Import From Exchange 2000
Our active Directors value their email. Especially the CIO. Many ways. What are you trying to accomplish? Just look at stuff? ldp ldifde William -Original Message- From: Frank [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2002 12:18 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: Export/Import From Exchange 2000 Hello Everyone, How many utilites/ways are there to export/import mailbox information from Exchange 2000. Also how does this affect the Active Director ? I already know about the csvde.exe but any other information would be great. Thanks 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: Server Side rules quit working for SOME users
Title: Message Rules use RDP. Any changes to connectivity between those users and Exchange? -Original Message-From: Zangara, Jim [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2002 12:11 PMTo: MS-Exchange Admin IssuesSubject: Server Side rules quit working for SOME users Hey Folks - Exchange 5.5 SP4 on Win 2K SP2 Yesterday several people started complaining that server side rules no longer work for them. Rebuilt the the rule - no good. No changes have been made to the system and rules work fine for others (me for instance). Searched TechNet but did not find anything that seemed relevant. Any one else seen this? TIA for any ideas. Jim Zangara, MCSE+I IT ManagerSpecial Projects Engineer Premiere Radio Networks A Division of Clear Channel Communications 15260 Ventura Blvd Suite 500 Sherman Oaks, CA 91403 Direct: (818) 461-8620 mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] There's no such thing as a free lunch. -- Milton Friendman List Charter and FAQ at: http://www.sunbelt-software.com/exchange_list_charter.htm
RE: Only send internally
I'm just an url-whore. -Original Message- From: Sethi, Ali [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2002 12:20 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Only send internally Thanks for the link -Original Message- From: William Lefkovics [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2002 12:33 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Only send internally I realise your question has been answered, but here is where you can also find the answer: Section 3.6: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq_sec3.htm William -Original Message- From: Sethi, Ali [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2002 8:10 AM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: Only send internally Hello, I have an Ex 5.5 server sp4 running on windows 2k server sp1. Is there a way to modify a single mailbox so that it can only send internally and cannot send any emails to external clients? Thanks, 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: Securing Exchange Server
Title: Message no we do not use SSL - Original Message - From: William Lefkovics To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2002 11:14 PM Subject: RE: Securing Exchange Server Why no SSL? -Original Message-From: Manish Govindji [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2002 12:11 PMTo: MS-Exchange Admin IssuesSubject: Re: Securing Exchange Server Thanks for the reply. Not for relay, but we do not have any firewall as yet, and i would like to close unecessary ports. Its a fresh installtion NT server PDC, Exchange 5.5. So all the ports are open. I just want 25, 110, 80 to be open. I tried that on TCP/IP security and nobody could connect to mail server - Original Message - From: Martin Blackstone To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2002 11:02 PM Subject: RE: Securing Exchange Server So are you saying someone used you as a relay or hacked your box or what? Are you behind a FW? What ports are open to the Exch server? -Original Message-From: Manish Govindji [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2002 11:41 AMTo: MS-Exchange Admin IssuesSubject: Securing Exchange Server Hello, I have tried many times but failed to secure Our Exchange Server. We have a Exchnage server for only Server has NT4,IIS4, DNS. How Do I use TCP IP security tab to configure security so that all the unnecessary ports are closed, we only use exchnage for POP3 and SMTP. The last time I tried I got Max user limit on SMTPList 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: Only send internally
I agree with the 2nd part. 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: William Lefkovics [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2002 3:19 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Only send internally I'm just an url-whore. -Original Message- From: Sethi, Ali [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2002 12:20 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Only send internally Thanks for the link -Original Message- From: William Lefkovics [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2002 12:33 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Only send internally I realise your question has been answered, but here is where you can also find the answer: Section 3.6: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq_sec3.htm William -Original Message- From: Sethi, Ali [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2002 8:10 AM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: Only send internally Hello, I have an Ex 5.5 server sp4 running on windows 2k server sp1. Is there a way to modify a single mailbox so that it can only send internally and cannot send any emails to external clients? Thanks, 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: Securing Exchange Server
Title: Message You can turn off unused/unwanted protocols under the Site, Configuration, Protocols, properties for each protocol. This should render the ports inactive and unable to accept connections on them. You can also do the same on a per server basis under the Server, Protocols, properties for each protocol. This will cover the Exchange protocols only though. I really think that if you are wanting to filter that many ports, you should look at a firewall. Heck, even if it is a software firewall to start with. It would be better than nothing. Ben Winzenz, MCSE Network/Systems Administrator Peregrine Systems -Original Message- From: William Lefkovics [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2002 3:14 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Securing Exchange Server Why no SSL? -Original Message- From: Manish Govindji [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2002 12:11 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: Re: Securing Exchange Server Thanks for the reply. Not for relay, but we do not have any firewall as yet, and i would like to close unecessary ports. Its a fresh installtion NT server PDC, Exchange 5.5. So all the ports are open. I just want 25, 110, 80 to be open. I tried that on TCP/IP security and nobody could connect to mail server - Original Message - From: Martin Blackstone To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2002 11:02 PM Subject: RE: Securing Exchange Server So are you saying someone used you as a relay or hacked your box or what? Are you behind a FW? What ports are open to the Exch server? -Original Message- From: Manish Govindji [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2002 11:41 AM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: Securing Exchange Server Hello, I have tried many times but failed to secure Our Exchange Server. We have a Exchnage server for only Server has NT4,IIS4, DNS. How Do I use TCP IP security tab to configure security so that all the unnecessary ports are closed, we only use exchnage for POP3 and SMTP. The last time I tried I got Max user limit on SMTP 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: Securing Exchange Server
Title: Message Any particular reason you don't use SSL? Ben Winzenz, MCSE Network/Systems Administrator Peregrine Systems -Original Message- From: Manish Govindji [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2002 3:21 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: Re: Securing Exchange Server no we do not use SSL - Original Message - From: William Lefkovics To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2002 11:14 PM Subject: RE: Securing Exchange Server Why no SSL? -Original Message- From: Manish Govindji [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2002 12:11 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: Re: Securing Exchange Server Thanks for the reply. Not for relay, but we do not have any firewall as yet, and i would like to close unecessary ports. Its a fresh installtion NT server PDC, Exchange 5.5. So all the ports are open. I just want 25, 110, 80 to be open. I tried that on TCP/IP security and nobody could connect to mail server - Original Message - From: Martin Blackstone To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2002 11:02 PM Subject: RE: Securing Exchange Server So are you saying someone used you as a relay or hacked your box or what? Are you behind a FW? What ports are open to the Exch server? -Original Message- From: Manish Govindji [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2002 11:41 AM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: Securing Exchange Server Hello, I have tried many times but failed to secure Our Exchange Server. We have a Exchnage server for only Server has NT4,IIS4, DNS. How Do I use TCP IP security tab to configure security so that all the unnecessary ports are closed, we only use exchnage for POP3 and SMTP. The last time I tried I got Max user limit on SMTP 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: Server Side rules quit working for SOME users
Title: Message No changes to the network at all in this time frame. Strange - these guys are all physically located within about 30 feet of each other. Not reporting any other connectivity issues. Jim Zangara, MCSE+I IT ManagerSpecial Projects Engineer Premiere Radio Networks A Division of Clear Channel Communications 15260 Ventura Blvd Suite 500 Sherman Oaks, CA 91403 Direct: (818) 461-8620 mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Waste not, get your budget cut next year. -Original Message-From: William Lefkovics [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2002 12:18 PMTo: MS-Exchange Admin IssuesSubject: RE: Server Side rules quit working for SOME users Rules use RDP. Any changes to connectivity between those users and Exchange? -Original Message-From: Zangara, Jim [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2002 12:11 PMTo: MS-Exchange Admin IssuesSubject: Server Side rules quit working for SOME users Hey Folks - Exchange 5.5 SP4 on Win 2K SP2 Yesterday several people started complaining that server side rules no longer work for them. Rebuilt the the rule - no good. No changes have been made to the system and rules work fine for others (me for instance). Searched TechNet but did not find anything that seemed relevant. Any one else seen this? TIA for any ideas. Jim Zangara, MCSE+I IT ManagerSpecial Projects Engineer Premiere Radio Networks A Division of Clear Channel Communications 15260 Ventura Blvd Suite 500 Sherman Oaks, CA 91403 Direct: (818) 461-8620 mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] There's no such thing as a free lunch. -- Milton Friendman 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: Securing Exchange Server
Title: Message Or to make things easy, you might want to buy a Linksys Cable/DSL router (or similar device). That would be much better than nothing. -Original Message- From: Ben Winzenz [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2002 3:23 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Securing Exchange Server You can turn off unused/unwanted protocols under the Site, Configuration, Protocols, properties for each protocol. This should render the ports inactive and unable to accept connections on them. You can also do the same on a per server basis under the Server, Protocols, properties for each protocol. This will cover the Exchange protocols only though. I really think that if you are wanting to filter that many ports, you should look at a firewall. Heck, even if it is a software firewall to start with. It would be better than nothing. Ben Winzenz, MCSE Network/Systems Administrator Peregrine Systems -Original Message- From: William Lefkovics [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2002 3:14 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Securing Exchange Server Why no SSL? -Original Message- From: Manish Govindji [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2002 12:11 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: Re: Securing Exchange Server Thanks for the reply. Not for relay, but we do not have any firewall as yet, and i would like to close unecessary ports. Its a fresh installtion NT server PDC, Exchange 5.5. So all the ports are open. I just want 25, 110, 80 to be open. I tried that on TCP/IP security and nobody could connect to mail server - Original Message - From: Martin Blackstone To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2002 11:02 PM Subject: RE: Securing Exchange Server So are you saying someone used you as a relay or hacked your box or what? Are you behind a FW? What ports are open to the Exch server? -Original Message- From: Manish Govindji [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2002 11:41 AM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: Securing Exchange Server Hello, I have tried many times but failed to secure Our Exchange Server. We have a Exchnage server for only Server has NT4,IIS4, DNS. How Do I use TCP IP security tab to configure security so that all the unnecessary ports are closed, we only use exchnage for POP3 and SMTP. The last time I tried I got Max user limit on SMTP 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: Securing Exchange Server
Title: Message I was thinking the same thing. Heck, even Zonealarm or something just to hold you over. -Original Message-From: Ben Winzenz [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2002 12:23 PMTo: MS-Exchange Admin IssuesSubject: RE: Securing Exchange Server You can turn off unused/unwanted protocols under the Site, Configuration, Protocols, properties for each protocol. This should render the ports inactive and unable to accept connections on them. You can also do the same on a per server basis under the Server, Protocols, properties for each protocol. This will cover the Exchange protocols only though. I really think that if you are wanting to filter that many ports, you should look at a firewall. Heck, even if it is a software firewall to start with. It would be better than nothing. Ben Winzenz, MCSE Network/Systems Administrator Peregrine Systems -Original Message-From: William Lefkovics [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2002 3:14 PMTo: MS-Exchange Admin IssuesSubject: RE: Securing Exchange Server Why no SSL? -Original Message-From: Manish Govindji [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2002 12:11 PMTo: MS-Exchange Admin IssuesSubject: Re: Securing Exchange Server Thanks for the reply. Not for relay, but we do not have any firewall as yet, and i would like to close unecessary ports. Its a fresh installtion NT server PDC, Exchange 5.5. So all the ports are open. I just want 25, 110, 80 to be open. I tried that on TCP/IP security and nobody could connect to mail server - Original Message - From: Martin Blackstone To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2002 11:02 PM Subject: RE: Securing Exchange Server So are you saying someone used you as a relay or hacked your box or what? Are you behind a FW? What ports are open to the Exch server? -Original Message-From: Manish Govindji [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2002 11:41 AMTo: MS-Exchange Admin IssuesSubject: Securing Exchange Server Hello, I have tried many times but failed to secure Our Exchange Server. We have a Exchnage server for only Server has NT4,IIS4, DNS. How Do I use TCP IP security tab to configure security so that all the unnecessary ports are closed, we only use exchnage for POP3 and SMTP. The last time I tried I got Max user limit on SMTP 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: Securing Exchange Server
Title: Message Can you tell us how you tried to set up the port filtering on this server? Did you configure it by TCP, UDP or IP Protocol? Also, remember that internally, if your clients are connecting via Outlook, they will be using different ports. Do you have 2 NIC's in this server? More info on your exact setup please. Ports 25, 80 and 110 sound like the ports you want open to the outside world. Inside, I wouldn't restrict ports. It would get really messy. Ben Winzenz, MCSE Network/Systems Administrator Peregrine Systems -Original Message- From: Manish Govindji [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2002 3:11 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: Re: Securing Exchange Server Thanks for the reply. Not for relay, but we do not have any firewall as yet, and i would like to close unecessary ports. Its a fresh installtion NT server PDC, Exchange 5.5. So all the ports are open. I just want 25, 110, 80 to be open. I tried that on TCP/IP security and nobody could connect to mail server - Original Message - From: Martin Blackstone To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2002 11:02 PM Subject: RE: Securing Exchange Server So are you saying someone used you as a relay or hacked your box or what? Are you behind a FW? What ports are open to the Exch server? -Original Message- From: Manish Govindji [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2002 11:41 AM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: Securing Exchange Server Hello, I have tried many times but failed to secure Our Exchange Server. We have a Exchnage server for only Server has NT4,IIS4, DNS. How Do I use TCP IP security tab to configure security so that all the unnecessary ports are closed, we only use exchnage for POP3 and SMTP. The last time I tried I got Max user limit on SMTP Many thanks, 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: Securing Exchange Server
Title: Message Wouldn't that block out FTP ports? I assumed those only allowed the HTTP ports through.. Chris Simmons -Original Message- From: Allen Crawford [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2002 2:29 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Securing Exchange Server Or to make things easy, you might want to buy a Linksys Cable/DSL router (or similar device). That would be much better than nothing. -Original Message- From: Ben Winzenz [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2002 3:23 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Securing Exchange Server You can turn off unused/unwanted protocols under the Site, Configuration, Protocols, properties for each protocol. This should render the ports inactive and unable to accept connections on them. You can also do the same on a per server basis under the Server, Protocols, properties for each protocol. This will cover the Exchange protocols only though. I really think that if you are wanting to filter that many ports, you should look at a firewall. Heck, even if it is a software firewall to start with. It would be better than nothing. Ben Winzenz, MCSE Network/Systems Administrator Peregrine Systems -Original Message- From: William Lefkovics [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2002 3:14 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Securing Exchange Server Why no SSL? -Original Message- From: Manish Govindji [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2002 12:11 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: Re: Securing Exchange Server Thanks for the reply. Not for relay, but we do not have any firewall as yet, and i would like to close unecessary ports. Its a fresh installtion NT server PDC, Exchange 5.5. So all the ports are open. I just want 25, 110, 80 to be open. I tried that on TCP/IP security and nobody could connect to mail server - Original Message - From: Martin Blackstone To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2002 11:02 PM Subject: RE: Securing Exchange Server So are you saying someone used you as a relay or hacked your box or what? Are you behind a FW? What ports are open to the Exch server? -Original Message- From: Manish Govindji [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2002 11:41 AM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: Securing Exchange Server Hello, I have tried many times but failed to secure Our Exchange Server. We have a Exchnage server for only Server has NT4,IIS4, DNS. How Do I use TCP IP security tab to configure security so that all the unnecessary ports are closed, we only use exchnage for POP3 and SMTP. The last time I tried I got Max user limit on SMTP 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: Securing Exchange Server
Title: Message is there no way to close ports not needed on the server, protocols, properties. Just allow port 25, 110 for the exchange to breath. So that all the 135, 137, 139, and the rest are closed. - Original Message - From: Allen Crawford To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2002 11:28 PM Subject: RE: Securing Exchange Server Or to make things easy, you might want to buy a Linksys Cable/DSL router (or similar device). That would be much better than nothing. -Original Message-From: Ben Winzenz [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2002 3:23 PMTo: MS-Exchange Admin IssuesSubject: RE: Securing Exchange Server You can turn off unused/unwanted protocols under the Site, Configuration, Protocols, properties for each protocol. This should render the ports inactive and unable to accept connections on them. You can also do the same on a per server basis under the Server, Protocols, properties for each protocol. This will cover the Exchange protocols only though. I really think that if you are wanting to filter that many ports, you should look at a firewall. Heck, even if it is a software firewall to start with. It would be better than nothing. Ben Winzenz, MCSE Network/Systems Administrator Peregrine Systems -Original Message-From: William Lefkovics [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2002 3:14 PMTo: MS-Exchange Admin IssuesSubject: RE: Securing Exchange Server Why no SSL? -Original Message-From: Manish Govindji [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2002 12:11 PMTo: MS-Exchange Admin IssuesSubject: Re: Securing Exchange Server Thanks for the reply. Not for relay, but we do not have any firewall as yet, and i would like to close unecessary ports. Its a fresh installtion NT server PDC, Exchange 5.5. So all the ports are open. I just want 25, 110, 80 to be open. I tried that on TCP/IP security and nobody could connect to mail server - Original Message - From: Martin Blackstone To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2002 11:02 PM Subject: RE: Securing Exchange Server So are you saying someone used you as a relay or hacked your box or what? Are you behind a FW? What ports are open to the Exch server? -Original Message-From: Manish Govindji [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2002 11:41 AMTo: MS-Exchange Admin IssuesSubject: Securing Exchange Server Hello, I have tried many times but failed to secure Our Exchange Server. We have a Exchnage server for only Server has NT4,IIS4, DNS. How Do I use TCP IP security tab to configure security so that all the unnecessary ports are closed, we only use exchnage for POP3 and SMTP. The last time I tried I got Max user limit on SMTP 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.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