RE: Is Exchange Doomed?

[William Lefkovics]

With 120k users, potentially, you could just be trading one cloud for
another.

 

Microsoft has been coming up with business POS for decades.  Exchange, of
course, is no POS. J

 

 

From: KevinM [mailto:kev...@wlkmmas.org] 
Sent: Tuesday, June 23, 2009 5:54 PM
To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Is Exchange Doomed?

 

Microsoft is pretty buying the seats when they do this. I've bid against
Microsoft on some of these large customers. Microsoft comes to the table
saying " no exchange licenses, and we'll sell it to you for nearly nothing a
month" It is very hard to complete.

 

120k users you care looking at 2-20 million dollars in CALs alone plus
hardware (5-20m), plus administration(1-2m a year).. etc..  Compare that
with 50-500k a month and the dollars and upper management start making up
your mind for you.

 

~Kevinm WLKMMAS- This message is Certified Swine Flu Free

My life http://www.hedonists.ca  

 

From: Tim Vander Kooi [mailto:tvanderk...@expl.com] 
Sent: Tuesday, June 23, 2009 2:36 PM
To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Is Exchange Doomed?

 

Leave it to Microsoft marketing to come up with Business POS.

J

 

From: Michael B. Smith [mailto:mich...@owa.smithcons.com] 
Sent: Tuesday, June 23, 2009 3:23 PM
To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Is Exchange Doomed?

 

Not true.

 

Glaxo-Smith-Kline  (GSK, one of the largest drug companies in the world) is
in the process of moving 120,000 (yes, 120K) seats to Microsoft's BPOS
solution. They aren't the first, and they won't be the last.

 

I know too much about this particular move that isn't public - but the fact
that it is happening is known and public information.

 

  _  

From: Maglinger, Paul [pmaglin...@scvl.com]
Sent: Wednesday, June 10, 2009 2:14 PM
To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Is Exchange Doomed?

I believe there is too much corporate paranoia for a 3rd party email
solution on large companies.  Small and medium businesses however...

 

  _  

From: Louis, Joe [mailto:jlo...@guardianalarm.com] 
Sent: Wednesday, June 10, 2009 12:06 PM
To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Is Exchange Doomed?

I just find it hard to believe that Google will be replacing Exchange at the
corporate end. While that may be their goal, they've been saying that for
many years. The same holds true for the MS Office "cloud" model.  

 

Where they are making inroads are at a number of public schools, colleges,
etc that are using Google email brand (but still buying Office). They are
replacing *Nix mail platforms and Netware. Of the ones I can think of, none
of them had Exchange. And I'm sure the schools are getting a huge break on
it (if not for free).  

 

Gmail is great. Not only has it been convenient, but it's been free. I also
don't think that Gmail would be nearly as popular as it is if there was a
cost to the end user. 

 

From: Carl Houseman [mailto:c.house...@gmail.com] 
Sent: Wednesday, June 10, 2009 12:24 PM
To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Is Exchange Doomed?

 

"Around 1.75 million businesses are using Google Apps"?  1.75 million USERS
I would believe, not businesses.

 

Exchange in your local shop may be doomed, MS wants you to buy it as a cloud
service too.

 

It was only a matter of time before somebody came up with reasonable
competition.

 

Carl

 

From: Roger Wright [mailto:rwri...@evatone.com] 
Sent: Wednesday, June 10, 2009 12:01 PM
To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues
Subject: Is Exchange Doomed?

 

http://news.cnet.com/8301-17939_109-10260879-2.html

 

   

 

Roger Wright

Network Administrator

Evatone, Inc.

727.572.7076  x388

_  

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


~ Ninja Email Security with Cloudmark Spam Engine Gets Image Spam ~
~ http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Ninja~

RE: Is Exchange Doomed?

[KevinM]

Microsoft is pretty buying the seats when they do this. I've bid against 
Microsoft on some of these large customers. Microsoft comes to the table saying 
" no exchange licenses, and we'll sell it to you for nearly nothing a month" It 
is very hard to complete...

120k users you care looking at 2-20 million dollars in CALs alone plus hardware 
(5-20m), plus administration(1-2m a year).. etc..  Compare that with 50-500k a 
month and the dollars and upper management start making up your mind for you.

~Kevinm WLKMMAS- This message is Certified Swine Flu Free
My life http://www.hedonists.ca

From: Tim Vander Kooi [mailto:tvanderk...@expl.com]
Sent: Tuesday, June 23, 2009 2:36 PM
To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Is Exchange Doomed?

Leave it to Microsoft marketing to come up with Business POS...
:)

From: Michael B. Smith [mailto:mich...@owa.smithcons.com]
Sent: Tuesday, June 23, 2009 3:23 PM
To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Is Exchange Doomed?

Not true.

Glaxo-Smith-Kline  (GSK, one of the largest drug companies in the world) is in 
the process of moving 120,000 (yes, 120K) seats to Microsoft's BPOS solution. 
They aren't the first, and they won't be the last.

I know too much about this particular move that isn't public - but the fact 
that it is happening is known and public information.


From: Maglinger, Paul [pmaglin...@scvl.com]
Sent: Wednesday, June 10, 2009 2:14 PM
To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Is Exchange Doomed?
I believe there is too much corporate paranoia for a 3rd party email solution 
on large companies.  Small and medium businesses however...


From: Louis, Joe [mailto:jlo...@guardianalarm.com]
Sent: Wednesday, June 10, 2009 12:06 PM
To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Is Exchange Doomed?
I just find it hard to believe that Google will be replacing Exchange at the 
corporate end. While that may be their goal, they've been saying that for many 
years. The same holds true for the MS Office "cloud" model.

Where they are making inroads are at a number of public schools, colleges, etc 
that are using Google email brand (but still buying Office). They are replacing 
*Nix mail platforms and Netware. Of the ones I can think of, none of them had 
Exchange. And I'm sure the schools are getting a huge break on it (if not for 
free).

Gmail is great. Not only has it been convenient, but it's been free. I also 
don't think that Gmail would be nearly as popular as it is if there was a cost 
to the end user.

From: Carl Houseman [mailto:c.house...@gmail.com]
Sent: Wednesday, June 10, 2009 12:24 PM
To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Is Exchange Doomed?

"Around 1.75 million businesses are using Google Apps"?  1.75 million USERS I 
would believe, not businesses.

Exchange in your local shop may be doomed, MS wants you to buy it as a cloud 
service too.

It was only a matter of time before somebody came up with reasonable 
competition.

Carl

From: Roger Wright [mailto:rwri...@evatone.com]
Sent: Wednesday, June 10, 2009 12:01 PM
To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues
Subject: Is Exchange Doomed?

http://news.cnet.com/8301-17939_109-10260879-2.html



Roger Wright
Network Administrator
Evatone, Inc.
727.572.7076  x388
_















~ Ninja Email Security with Cloudmark Spam Engine Gets Image Spam ~
~ http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Ninja~

RE: Is Exchange Doomed?

[Barsodi.John]

Not when he is running the company that is providing the hosting service.  He 
encourages it. ;)

Thanks,
- JB

From: Campbell, Rob [mailto:rob_campb...@centraltechnology.net]
Sent: Tuesday, June 23, 2009 2:53 PM
To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Is Exchange Doomed?

Do you advise them against doing that?


From: Michael B. Smith [mailto:mich...@owa.smithcons.com]
Sent: Tuesday, June 23, 2009 3:31 PM
To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Is Exchange Doomed?

Shockingly, it's happening.

A number of my hosted Exchange clients handle confidential customer information.


From: Campbell, Rob [rob_campb...@centraltechnology.net]
Sent: Wednesday, June 10, 2009 12:47 PM
To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Is Exchange Doomed?
I can't see any company that handles any kind of confidential customer 
information letting their corporate email outside the firewall.


From: Carl Houseman [mailto:c.house...@gmail.com]
Sent: Wednesday, June 10, 2009 11:24 AM
To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Is Exchange Doomed?

"Around 1.75 million businesses are using Google Apps"?  1.75 million USERS I 
would believe, not businesses.

Exchange in your local shop may be doomed, MS wants you to buy it as a cloud 
service too.

It was only a matter of time before somebody came up with reasonable 
competition.

Carl

From: Roger Wright [mailto:rwri...@evatone.com]
Sent: Wednesday, June 10, 2009 12:01 PM
To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues
Subject: Is Exchange Doomed?

http://news.cnet.com/8301-17939_109-10260879-2.html



Roger Wright
Network Administrator
Evatone, Inc.
727.572.7076  x388
_







**

Note:

The information contained in this message may be privileged and confidential and

protected from disclosure.  If the reader of this message is not the intended

recipient, or an employee or agent responsible for delivering this message to

the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination,

distribution or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you

have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately by

replying to the message and deleting it from your computer.

**





**

Note:

The information contained in this message may be privileged and confidential and

protected from disclosure.  If the reader of this message is not the intended

recipient, or an employee or agent responsible for delivering this message to

the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination,

distribution or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you

have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately by

replying to the message and deleting it from your computer.

**



~ Ninja Email Security with Cloudmark Spam Engine Gets Image Spam ~
~ http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Ninja~

RE: Is Exchange Doomed?

[Campbell, Rob]

Do you advise them against doing that?


From: Michael B. Smith [mailto:mich...@owa.smithcons.com]
Sent: Tuesday, June 23, 2009 3:31 PM
To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Is Exchange Doomed?

Shockingly, it's happening.

A number of my hosted Exchange clients handle confidential customer information.


From: Campbell, Rob [rob_campb...@centraltechnology.net]
Sent: Wednesday, June 10, 2009 12:47 PM
To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Is Exchange Doomed?
I can't see any company that handles any kind of confidential customer 
information letting their corporate email outside the firewall.


From: Carl Houseman [mailto:c.house...@gmail.com]
Sent: Wednesday, June 10, 2009 11:24 AM
To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Is Exchange Doomed?

"Around 1.75 million businesses are using Google Apps"?  1.75 million USERS I 
would believe, not businesses.

Exchange in your local shop may be doomed, MS wants you to buy it as a cloud 
service too.

It was only a matter of time before somebody came up with reasonable 
competition.

Carl

From: Roger Wright [mailto:rwri...@evatone.com]
Sent: Wednesday, June 10, 2009 12:01 PM
To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues
Subject: Is Exchange Doomed?

http://news.cnet.com/8301-17939_109-10260879-2.html



Roger Wright
Network Administrator
Evatone, Inc.
727.572.7076  x388
_







**

Note:

The information contained in this message may be privileged and confidential and

protected from disclosure.  If the reader of this message is not the intended

recipient, or an employee or agent responsible for delivering this message to

the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination,

distribution or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you

have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately by

replying to the message and deleting it from your computer.

**




**
Note: 
The information contained in this message may be privileged and confidential 
and 
protected from disclosure.  If the reader of this message is not the intended  
recipient, or an employee or agent responsible for delivering this message to  
the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination,   
distribution or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you  
have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately by  
replying to the message and deleting it from your computer. 
**

~ Ninja Email Security with Cloudmark Spam Engine Gets Image Spam ~
~ http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Ninja~

Auto delete rule

[Steve Ens]

I've been tasked to create a rule that deletes messages from a certain
sender after three or four days.  Can Outlook do that, or can I use a tool
in ESM that will do that?
Any suggestions appreciated.
Steve

~ Ninja Email Security with Cloudmark Spam Engine Gets Image Spam ~
~ http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Ninja~

RE: Is Exchange Doomed?

[Tim Vander Kooi]

Leave it to Microsoft marketing to come up with Business POS...
:)

From: Michael B. Smith [mailto:mich...@owa.smithcons.com]
Sent: Tuesday, June 23, 2009 3:23 PM
To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Is Exchange Doomed?

Not true.

Glaxo-Smith-Kline  (GSK, one of the largest drug companies in the world) is in 
the process of moving 120,000 (yes, 120K) seats to Microsoft's BPOS solution. 
They aren't the first, and they won't be the last.

I know too much about this particular move that isn't public - but the fact 
that it is happening is known and public information.


From: Maglinger, Paul [pmaglin...@scvl.com]
Sent: Wednesday, June 10, 2009 2:14 PM
To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Is Exchange Doomed?
I believe there is too much corporate paranoia for a 3rd party email solution 
on large companies.  Small and medium businesses however...


From: Louis, Joe [mailto:jlo...@guardianalarm.com]
Sent: Wednesday, June 10, 2009 12:06 PM
To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Is Exchange Doomed?
I just find it hard to believe that Google will be replacing Exchange at the 
corporate end. While that may be their goal, they've been saying that for many 
years. The same holds true for the MS Office "cloud" model.

Where they are making inroads are at a number of public schools, colleges, etc 
that are using Google email brand (but still buying Office). They are replacing 
*Nix mail platforms and Netware. Of the ones I can think of, none of them had 
Exchange. And I'm sure the schools are getting a huge break on it (if not for 
free).

Gmail is great. Not only has it been convenient, but it's been free. I also 
don't think that Gmail would be nearly as popular as it is if there was a cost 
to the end user.

From: Carl Houseman [mailto:c.house...@gmail.com]
Sent: Wednesday, June 10, 2009 12:24 PM
To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Is Exchange Doomed?

"Around 1.75 million businesses are using Google Apps"?  1.75 million USERS I 
would believe, not businesses.

Exchange in your local shop may be doomed, MS wants you to buy it as a cloud 
service too.

It was only a matter of time before somebody came up with reasonable 
competition.

Carl

From: Roger Wright [mailto:rwri...@evatone.com]
Sent: Wednesday, June 10, 2009 12:01 PM
To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues
Subject: Is Exchange Doomed?

http://news.cnet.com/8301-17939_109-10260879-2.html



Roger Wright
Network Administrator
Evatone, Inc.
727.572.7076  x388
_













~ Ninja Email Security with Cloudmark Spam Engine Gets Image Spam ~
~ http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Ninja~

RE: OOF for Outlook Anywhere user

[Michael B. Smith]

all i can simply tell you is that there are situations - especially when 
outlook 2003 is being used in cached mode - where setting oof doesn't work.

it always works for me in outlook 2007 cached mode, but some of my users report 
that it doesn't work for them in outlook 2007 cached mode.

so, as solution of last resort - use OWA.


From: Steve Hart [sh...@wrightbg.com]
Sent: Tuesday, June 23, 2009 5:05 PM
To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues
Subject: RE: OOF for Outlook Anywhere user

We have that same problem.

We also have an issue where Outlook 2003 users can't turn on OOF even tough 
they're on the local LAN. Worked around the same way.

Steve




-Original Message-
From: Tim Evans [mailto:tev...@sparling.com]
Sent: Tuesday, June 23, 2009 1:54 PM
To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues
Subject: RE: OOF for Outlook Anywhere user

We just ran across that here (outlook 2007 SP2/Exchange 2007 SP1) too, and that 
is what I told the user to do.

Is setting OOF not supported with Outlook Anywhere or do I have something 
misconfigured?


...Tim

> -Original Message-
> From: Michael B. Smith [mailto:mich...@owa.smithcons.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, June 23, 2009 1:46 PM
> To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues
> Subject: RE: OOF for Outlook Anywhere user
>
> use OWA for setting OOF.
>
> 
> From: Steve Hart [sh...@wrightbg.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, June 09, 2009 12:24 PM
> To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues
> Subject: OOF for Outlook Anywhere user
>
> I have a single user that uses Outlook remotely using Outlook Anywhere.
> Everything seems to be OK, except for Out of Office. When he attempts
> to use it, he gets a message saying that the server is unavailable.
> We're on Exchange07 SP1. I'm not sure which version of Office he has.
>
> Ideas?
>
>
> ~ Ninja Email Security with Cloudmark Spam Engine Gets Image Spam ~
> ~ http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Ninja~
>
> ~ Ninja Email Security with Cloudmark Spam Engine Gets Image Spam ~
> ~ http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Ninja~


~ Ninja Email Security with Cloudmark Spam Engine Gets Image Spam ~
~ http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Ninja~


~ Ninja Email Security with Cloudmark Spam Engine Gets Image Spam ~
~ http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Ninja~

~ Ninja Email Security with Cloudmark Spam Engine Gets Image Spam ~
~ http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Ninja~

RE: Is Exchange Doomed?

[William Lefkovics]

Like most other hosted messaging solutions.

 

 

From: Michael B. Smith [mailto:mich...@owa.smithcons.com] 
Sent: Tuesday, June 23, 2009 1:31 PM
To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Is Exchange Doomed?

 

Shockingly, it's happening.

 

A number of my hosted Exchange clients handle confidential customer
information.

 

  _  

From: Campbell, Rob [rob_campb...@centraltechnology.net]
Sent: Wednesday, June 10, 2009 12:47 PM
To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Is Exchange Doomed?

I can't see any company that handles any kind of confidential customer
information letting their corporate email outside the firewall.

 

  _  

From: Carl Houseman [mailto:c.house...@gmail.com] 
Sent: Wednesday, June 10, 2009 11:24 AM
To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Is Exchange Doomed?

 

"Around 1.75 million businesses are using Google Apps"?  1.75 million USERS
I would believe, not businesses.

 

Exchange in your local shop may be doomed, MS wants you to buy it as a cloud
service too.

 

It was only a matter of time before somebody came up with reasonable
competition.

 

Carl

 

From: Roger Wright [mailto:rwri...@evatone.com] 
Sent: Wednesday, June 10, 2009 12:01 PM
To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues
Subject: Is Exchange Doomed?

 

http://news.cnet.com/8301-17939_109-10260879-2.html

 

   

 

Roger Wright

Network Administrator

Evatone, Inc.

727.572.7076  x388

_  

 

 

 

 


**
Note: 
The information contained in this message may be privileged and confidential
and 
protected from disclosure.  If the reader of this message is not the
intended  
recipient, or an employee or agent responsible for delivering this message
to  
the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination,   
distribution or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you

have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately by  
replying to the message and deleting it from your computer. 

**

 

 


~ Ninja Email Security with Cloudmark Spam Engine Gets Image Spam ~
~ http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Ninja~

RE: OOF for Outlook Anywhere user

[Steve Hart]

We have that same problem.

We also have an issue where Outlook 2003 users can't turn on OOF even tough 
they're on the local LAN. Worked around the same way.

Steve


 

-Original Message-
From: Tim Evans [mailto:tev...@sparling.com] 
Sent: Tuesday, June 23, 2009 1:54 PM
To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues
Subject: RE: OOF for Outlook Anywhere user

We just ran across that here (outlook 2007 SP2/Exchange 2007 SP1) too, and that 
is what I told the user to do.

Is setting OOF not supported with Outlook Anywhere or do I have something 
misconfigured?


...Tim

> -Original Message-
> From: Michael B. Smith [mailto:mich...@owa.smithcons.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, June 23, 2009 1:46 PM
> To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues
> Subject: RE: OOF for Outlook Anywhere user
> 
> use OWA for setting OOF.
> 
> 
> From: Steve Hart [sh...@wrightbg.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, June 09, 2009 12:24 PM
> To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues
> Subject: OOF for Outlook Anywhere user
> 
> I have a single user that uses Outlook remotely using Outlook Anywhere.
> Everything seems to be OK, except for Out of Office. When he attempts 
> to use it, he gets a message saying that the server is unavailable. 
> We're on Exchange07 SP1. I'm not sure which version of Office he has.
> 
> Ideas?
> 
> 
> ~ Ninja Email Security with Cloudmark Spam Engine Gets Image Spam ~
> ~ http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Ninja~
> 
> ~ Ninja Email Security with Cloudmark Spam Engine Gets Image Spam ~
> ~ http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Ninja~


~ Ninja Email Security with Cloudmark Spam Engine Gets Image Spam ~
~ http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Ninja~


~ Ninja Email Security with Cloudmark Spam Engine Gets Image Spam ~
~ http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Ninja~

RE: OOF for Outlook Anywhere user

[Tim Evans]

We just ran across that here (outlook 2007 SP2/Exchange 2007 SP1) too, and that 
is what I told the user to do.

Is setting OOF not supported with Outlook Anywhere or do I have something 
misconfigured?


...Tim

> -Original Message-
> From: Michael B. Smith [mailto:mich...@owa.smithcons.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, June 23, 2009 1:46 PM
> To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues
> Subject: RE: OOF for Outlook Anywhere user
> 
> use OWA for setting OOF.
> 
> 
> From: Steve Hart [sh...@wrightbg.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, June 09, 2009 12:24 PM
> To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues
> Subject: OOF for Outlook Anywhere user
> 
> I have a single user that uses Outlook remotely using Outlook Anywhere.
> Everything seems to be OK, except for Out of Office. When he attempts to
> use it, he gets a message saying that the server is unavailable. We're
> on Exchange07 SP1. I'm not sure which version of Office he has.
> 
> Ideas?
> 
> 
> ~ Ninja Email Security with Cloudmark Spam Engine Gets Image Spam ~
> ~ http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Ninja~
> 
> ~ Ninja Email Security with Cloudmark Spam Engine Gets Image Spam ~
> ~ http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Ninja~


~ Ninja Email Security with Cloudmark Spam Engine Gets Image Spam ~
~ http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Ninja~

RE: TLS Set up on SMTP Exchange 2003

[Michael B. Smith]

Yes, Yes, No.

Exchange 2003 does NOT understand opportunistic TLS. That was a feature added 
in Exchange 2007.

Paul Robichaux wrote a fantastic book on E-mail Security, including setting up 
TLS on Exchange 2003. Hunt amazon.com for his name. It's well worth the price.


From: mqcarp [mqcarpen...@gmail.com]
Sent: Tuesday, June 09, 2009 10:12 AM
To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues
Subject: TLS Set up on SMTP Exchange 2003

This set up looks insanely easy, so I wanted to throw this out for
those who have done it before I make any changes.

* I do not want to touch my default SMTP. so I will create a second one
* It appears that best practice is to set up a separate IP for a
different SMTP connector. Is this necessary?
* I understand setting up domain to domain TLS for required
encryption, but does Exchange autonegotiate this with other domains if
it is available at the other end?

~ Ninja Email Security with Cloudmark Spam Engine Gets Image Spam ~
~ http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Ninja~

~ Ninja Email Security with Cloudmark Spam Engine Gets Image Spam ~
~ http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Ninja~

RE: OOF for Outlook Anywhere user

[Michael B. Smith]

use OWA for setting OOF.


From: Steve Hart [sh...@wrightbg.com]
Sent: Tuesday, June 09, 2009 12:24 PM
To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues
Subject: OOF for Outlook Anywhere user

I have a single user that uses Outlook remotely using Outlook Anywhere. 
Everything seems to be OK, except for Out of Office. When he attempts to use 
it, he gets a message saying that the server is unavailable. We're on 
Exchange07 SP1. I'm not sure which version of Office he has.

Ideas?


~ Ninja Email Security with Cloudmark Spam Engine Gets Image Spam ~
~ http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Ninja~

~ Ninja Email Security with Cloudmark Spam Engine Gets Image Spam ~
~ http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Ninja~

RE: recipient policy help

[Jason Benway]

I'm not sure what I was trying to say either! 
 
I think I was trying to say how to I use the GUI with the checkboxes to
get the same results as the LDAP query. I have around 7 of these to
setup. I would prefer to use the GUI and the checkboxes.
 
jb



From: Michael B. Smith [mailto:mich...@owa.smithcons.com] 
Sent: Tuesday, June 23, 2009 3:58 PM
To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues
Subject: RE: recipient policy help


You can go into advanced view to edit the LDAP query directly.
 
I don't understand "remote the query for any contact and any PF,DL, or
DDL" to be able to answer it.
 


From: Jason Benway [benw...@jsjcorp.com]
Sent: Wednesday, June 17, 2009 10:51 AM
To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues
Subject: RE: recipient policy help


anyone?



From: Jason Benway [mailto:benw...@jsjcorp.com] 
Sent: Thursday, June 11, 2009 4:01 PM
To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues
Subject: RE: recipient policy help


I'm using the GUI in exchange 2003 to create these policies. Not sure
how to edit the ldap directly though the GUI, or which boxes to check to
remote the query for any contact and any PF,DL, or DDL
 
thanks,jb



From: Eric Woodford [mailto:ericwoodf...@gmail.com] 
Sent: Thursday, June 11, 2009 12:59 PM
To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues
Subject: Re: recipient policy help


Your LDAP logic is a wee-bit off.. If I am reading this correctly, it
says 
 

any mailenabled object that's:

*   any mailbox not on any server 
*   any mailbox on IZZYEmail 
*   any contact 
*   any PF, DL or DDL

 
(&
   (&
(& (mailnickname=*) 
(| 
(&
(objectCategory=person)
   (objectClass=user)
   (!(homeMDB=*))
   (!(msExchHomeServerName=*))
)
  (&
  (objectCategory=person)
  (objectClass=user)
 
(msExchHomeServerName=/O=ghsp/OU=Belton/cn=Configuration/cn=Servers/cn=I
ZZYEMAIL)
   )
  (&
  (objectCategory=person)
  (objectClass=contact)
   )
  (objectCategory=group)
  (objectCategory=publicFolder)
 (objectCategory=msExchDynamicDistributionList) 


 
I think you want something more like:
- Any mail enabled object, on IZZYEMAIL that is a mailbox, contact,
group, PF or DDL. 
 
(&(mailnickname=*) 
 
(msExchHomeServerName=/O=ghsp/OU=Belton/cn=Configuration/cn=Servers/cn=I
ZZYEMAIL)
 (|
(&(objectCategory=person)(objectClass=user) )
   (&(objectCategory=person)(objectClass=contact))
   (objectCategory=group)
   (objectCategory=publicFolder)
   (objectCategory=msExchDynamicDistributionList) 
)
)
 
To shorten that a bit more, since you're hitting all mail enabled
objects on the server:
 
(&(mailnickname=*)
(msExchHomeServerName=/O=ghsp/OU=Belton/cn=Configuration/cn=Servers/cn=I
ZZYEMAIL))
 
will do approx. the same thing. 

 
On Thu, Jun 11, 2009 at 6:31 AM, Jason Benway 
wrote:


I created new recipient policies to replace the legacy one's
from our 55 days. During that process I had to add another domain for
our of our business units. So I did an apply to all.
We have 5 different exchange servers and I have 11 recipient
policies.
 
The users are being stamped and created correctly, but the DLs
are only being stamped with the #1 policy. Here's the ldap from that
policy.
 
(&(&(& (mailnickname=*) (|
(&(objectCategory=person)(objectClass=user)(!(homeMDB=*))(!(msExchHomeSe
rverName=*)))(&(objectCategory=person)(objectClass=user)(msExchHomeServe
rName=/O=ghsp/OU=Belton/cn=Configuration/cn=Servers/cn=IZZYEMAIL))(&(obj
ectCategory=person)(objectClass=contact))(objectCategory=group)(objectCa
tegory=publicFolder)(objectCategory=msExchDynamicDistributionList) 
 
I believe this should stamp all objects, but only on the
izzyemail server, correct?
 
but it seems to be stamping DLs on all emails servers!! 
 
thanks,jb
 

Jason Benway
System/Storage Engineer 
616-847-8474 telephone
616-850-1208 fax
www.jsjcorp.com   
 JSJ Corporation
700 Robbins Road
Grand Haven, MI 49417   


This message may contain confidential and/or privileged information. If
you are not the addressee or authorized to receive this for the
addressee, 
you must not use, copy, disclose or take any action based on this
message or any information herein. If you have received this message in
error, 
please advise the sender immediately by reply e-mail and delete this
message. Thank you for your cooperation. 

 

 


 

 

 

 


~ Ninja Email Security with Cloudmark Spam Engine Gets Image Spam ~
~ http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Ninja~<>

RE: Is Exchange Doomed?

[Michael B. Smith]

i think that as a sample MAPI application, the plug-in is fantastic!


From: William Lefkovics [will...@lefkovics.net]
Sent: Wednesday, June 10, 2009 12:40 PM
To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Is Exchange Doomed?

All the major competitors have Outlook plugins.  The many open source 
solutions, like Zimbra Collaboration Suite, used to market that they were 
‘exchange killers’ because they were able to minimize the impact of changing to 
their server product on the user experience.  It never really materialized for 
any of them.

If you don’t want the complete feature set, this may make Google crApps an 
option for you. Otherwise it is a really big yawn.


From: Roger Wright [mailto:rwri...@evatone.com]
Sent: Wednesday, June 10, 2009 9:01 AM
To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues
Subject: Is Exchange Doomed?

http://news.cnet.com/8301-17939_109-10260879-2.html



Roger Wright
Network Administrator
Evatone, Inc.
727.572.7076  x388
_







~ Ninja Email Security with Cloudmark Spam Engine Gets Image Spam ~
~ http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Ninja~

RE: Is Exchange Doomed?

[Michael B. Smith]

Shockingly, it's happening.

A number of my hosted Exchange clients handle confidential customer information.


From: Campbell, Rob [rob_campb...@centraltechnology.net]
Sent: Wednesday, June 10, 2009 12:47 PM
To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Is Exchange Doomed?

I can’t see any company that handles any kind of confidential customer 
information letting their corporate email outside the firewall.


From: Carl Houseman [mailto:c.house...@gmail.com]
Sent: Wednesday, June 10, 2009 11:24 AM
To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Is Exchange Doomed?

"Around 1.75 million businesses are using Google Apps"?  1.75 million USERS I 
would believe, not businesses.

Exchange in your local shop may be doomed, MS wants you to buy it as a cloud 
service too.

It was only a matter of time before somebody came up with reasonable 
competition.

Carl

From: Roger Wright [mailto:rwri...@evatone.com]
Sent: Wednesday, June 10, 2009 12:01 PM
To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues
Subject: Is Exchange Doomed?

http://news.cnet.com/8301-17939_109-10260879-2.html



Roger Wright
Network Administrator
Evatone, Inc.
727.572.7076  x388
_







**
Note:
The information contained in this message may be privileged and confidential and
protected from disclosure.  If the reader of this message is not the intended
recipient, or an employee or agent responsible for delivering this message to
the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination,
distribution or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you
have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately by
replying to the message and deleting it from your computer.
**




~ Ninja Email Security with Cloudmark Spam Engine Gets Image Spam ~
~ http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Ninja~

RE: Is Exchange Doomed?

[Michael B. Smith]

I can't think that anyone is scared that "Exchange will go away". I think that 
a number of vendors are concerned that Microsoft is pushing - really hard - 
SMORGs to the cloud.


From: Louis, Joe [jlo...@guardianalarm.com]
Sent: Wednesday, June 10, 2009 1:50 PM
To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Is Exchange Doomed?

Naw. Different CC.

I’m curious though as to what 3rd party Exchange vendors think about this 
article. None of the ones that I deal with are scaling back on their offerings 
on the fear that Google/Cloud computing will replace Exchange.  Stu?

From: Joe Pochedley [mailto:joe.poched...@fivesgroup.com]
Sent: Wednesday, June 10, 2009 1:45 PM
To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Is Exchange Doomed?

If you mean MCC, then yes.  :)

From: Louis, Joe [mailto:jlo...@guardianalarm.com]
Sent: Wednesday, June 10, 2009 1:37 PM
To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Is Exchange Doomed?

OCC the school?

From: Joe Pochedley [mailto:joe.poched...@fivesgroup.com]
Sent: Wednesday, June 10, 2009 1:35 PM
To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Is Exchange Doomed?

I too find it hard to believe that Gmail would be replacing Exchange in any 
organization that really uses Exchange for more than passing email messages 
back and forth…  Gmail just doesn’t have the same feature set yet…

I use gmail to host my own personal domain and I have a number of friends who 
do too.  The main reason I went with Google is because it was free.  The ads 
aren’t intrusive, so I can deal with them.

I wouldn’t be surprised if my domain and theirs were counted in the 1.75 
million businesses who are using Google apps.. how do they know I’m not a 
business?  So, the number may be accurate as far as Google’s counting on the 
number of group “domains” but it still likely doesn’t provide the whole picture.

I can confirm that Google is offering their service for free to schools.  I 
have a friend who’s an admin at a community college in Michigan that just moved 
all their student’s email accounts over to gmail…  No cost to the college.


From: Louis, Joe [mailto:jlo...@guardianalarm.com]
Sent: Wednesday, June 10, 2009 1:06 PM
To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Is Exchange Doomed?

I just find it hard to believe that Google will be replacing Exchange at the 
corporate end. While that may be their goal, they’ve been saying that for many 
years. The same holds true for the MS Office “cloud” model.

Where they are making inroads are at a number of public schools, colleges, etc 
that are using Google email brand (but still buying Office). They are replacing 
*Nix mail platforms and Netware. Of the ones I can think of, none of them had 
Exchange. And I’m sure the schools are getting a huge break on it (if not for 
free).

Gmail is great. Not only has it been convenient, but it’s been free. I also 
don’t think that Gmail would be nearly as popular as it is if there was a cost 
to the end user.

From: Carl Houseman [mailto:c.house...@gmail.com]
Sent: Wednesday, June 10, 2009 12:24 PM
To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Is Exchange Doomed?

"Around 1.75 million businesses are using Google Apps"?  1.75 million USERS I 
would believe, not businesses.

Exchange in your local shop may be doomed, MS wants you to buy it as a cloud 
service too.

It was only a matter of time before somebody came up with reasonable 
competition.

Carl

From: Roger Wright [mailto:rwri...@evatone.com]
Sent: Wednesday, June 10, 2009 12:01 PM
To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues
Subject: Is Exchange Doomed?

http://news.cnet.com/8301-17939_109-10260879-2.html



Roger Wright
Network Administrator
Evatone, Inc.
727.572.7076  x388
_

















~ Ninja Email Security with Cloudmark Spam Engine Gets Image Spam ~
~ http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Ninja~

RE: Is Exchange Doomed?

[Michael B. Smith]

Google licensed EAS from Microsoft for some very specific applications. They 
did not acquire a "general" license.


From: Sam Cayze [sam.ca...@rollouts.com]
Sent: Wednesday, June 10, 2009 2:08 PM
To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Is Exchange Doomed?

Nobody mentioned the interesting fact that Google licensed EAS from
Microsoft?

Google licensed EAS from Microsoft.

There it is.  I don't think MS is worried.

~ Ninja Email Security with Cloudmark Spam Engine Gets Image Spam ~
~ http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Ninja~

~ Ninja Email Security with Cloudmark Spam Engine Gets Image Spam ~
~ http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Ninja~

RE: Is Exchange Doomed?

[Michael B. Smith]

Not true.

Glaxo-Smith-Kline  (GSK, one of the largest drug companies in the world) is in 
the process of moving 120,000 (yes, 120K) seats to Microsoft's BPOS solution. 
They aren't the first, and they won't be the last.

I know too much about this particular move that isn't public - but the fact 
that it is happening is known and public information.


From: Maglinger, Paul [pmaglin...@scvl.com]
Sent: Wednesday, June 10, 2009 2:14 PM
To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Is Exchange Doomed?

I believe there is too much corporate paranoia for a 3rd party email solution 
on large companies.  Small and medium businesses however...


From: Louis, Joe [mailto:jlo...@guardianalarm.com]
Sent: Wednesday, June 10, 2009 12:06 PM
To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Is Exchange Doomed?

I just find it hard to believe that Google will be replacing Exchange at the 
corporate end. While that may be their goal, they’ve been saying that for many 
years. The same holds true for the MS Office “cloud” model.

Where they are making inroads are at a number of public schools, colleges, etc 
that are using Google email brand (but still buying Office). They are replacing 
*Nix mail platforms and Netware. Of the ones I can think of, none of them had 
Exchange. And I’m sure the schools are getting a huge break on it (if not for 
free).

Gmail is great. Not only has it been convenient, but it’s been free. I also 
don’t think that Gmail would be nearly as popular as it is if there was a cost 
to the end user.

From: Carl Houseman [mailto:c.house...@gmail.com]
Sent: Wednesday, June 10, 2009 12:24 PM
To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Is Exchange Doomed?

"Around 1.75 million businesses are using Google Apps"?  1.75 million USERS I 
would believe, not businesses.

Exchange in your local shop may be doomed, MS wants you to buy it as a cloud 
service too.

It was only a matter of time before somebody came up with reasonable 
competition.

Carl

From: Roger Wright [mailto:rwri...@evatone.com]
Sent: Wednesday, June 10, 2009 12:01 PM
To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues
Subject: Is Exchange Doomed?

http://news.cnet.com/8301-17939_109-10260879-2.html



Roger Wright
Network Administrator
Evatone, Inc.
727.572.7076  x388
_











~ Ninja Email Security with Cloudmark Spam Engine Gets Image Spam ~
~ http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Ninja~

RE: Is Exchange Doomed?

[Michael B. Smith]

Google WHAT?


From: William Lefkovics [will...@lefkovics.net]
Sent: Wednesday, June 10, 2009 2:34 PM
To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Is Exchange Doomed?

Wouldn’t surprise me… darn seafood buffet.

Smelled similar to Google Customer Service.


From: Steve Ens [mailto:stevey...@gmail.com]
Sent: Wednesday, June 10, 2009 10:59 AM
To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues
Subject: Re: Is Exchange Doomed?

Was that what I smelled?
On Wed, Jun 10, 2009 at 12:53 PM, William Lefkovics 
mailto:will...@lefkovics.net>> wrote:

I was with you right up to the ‘Gmail is great’ part and then I tasted some 
throwup in my mouth.





From: Louis, Joe 
[mailto:jlo...@guardianalarm.com]
Sent: Wednesday, June 10, 2009 10:06 AM

To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Is Exchange Doomed?



I just find it hard to believe that Google will be replacing Exchange at the 
corporate end. While that may be their goal, they’ve been saying that for many 
years. The same holds true for the MS Office “cloud” model.



Where they are making inroads are at a number of public schools, colleges, etc 
that are using Google email brand (but still buying Office). They are replacing 
*Nix mail platforms and Netware. Of the ones I can think of, none of them had 
Exchange. And I’m sure the schools are getting a huge break on it (if not for 
free).



Gmail is great. Not only has it been convenient, but it’s been free. I also 
don’t think that Gmail would be nearly as popular as it is if there was a cost 
to the end user.



From: Carl Houseman [mailto:c.house...@gmail.com]
Sent: Wednesday, June 10, 2009 12:24 PM
To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Is Exchange Doomed?



"Around 1.75 million businesses are using Google Apps"?  1.75 million USERS I 
would believe, not businesses.



Exchange in your local shop may be doomed, MS wants you to buy it as a cloud 
service too.



It was only a matter of time before somebody came up with reasonable 
competition.



Carl



From: Roger Wright [mailto:rwri...@evatone.com]
Sent: Wednesday, June 10, 2009 12:01 PM
To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues
Subject: Is Exchange Doomed?



http://news.cnet.com/8301-17939_109-10260879-2.html







Roger Wright

Network Administrator

Evatone, Inc.

727.572.7076  x388

_


















~ Ninja Email Security with Cloudmark Spam Engine Gets Image Spam ~
~ http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Ninja~

RE: Exchange 2007 SCR and certificate requirement.

[Michael B. Smith]

In your Exchange Management Shell "help new-exchangecertificate".


From: Liby Philip Mathew [lmat...@path-solutions.com]
Sent: Monday, June 15, 2009 2:54 AM
To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Exchange 2007 SCR and certificate requirement.

Sorry.  I forgot to mention that I have an internal domain path.local and 
external domain path-solution.com.
The certificate that is expiring is the internal NETBIOS certificate generate 
by the exchange installation.

From: Liby Philip Mathew [mailto:lmat...@path-solutions.com]
Sent: Sunday, June 14, 2009 4:57 PM
To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues
Subject: Exchange 2007 SCR and certificate requirement.

I am in the process of deploying SCR.

I have the below configuration :
2 x DC windows 2008  192.168.0.10&11/24
1 x Exchange 2007 CAS, HUB, MB  192.168.0.12/24
1 x Exchange 2007 Edge.   192.168.200.2/28
1 x ISA 2006
192.168.0.1/24
192.168.200.1/28
1 x Exchange 2007192.168.0.13/24
proposed SCR server

I am generating and issuing certificate for both my Exchange server from my own 
certificate server installed internally.  I have 2 queries.

1.   Do I have any special requirement pertaining to certificate on my SCR 
server?.

2.   My default certificate generated by present mail servers are 
approaching 1 year.  My understanding is that, these certificates expires after 
1 year.  How do I generate the new certificate and with more than 1 year 
validity.
Hope to get some insight.
Regards
Liby









Disclaimer
[The information contained in this e-mail message and any attached files are 
confidential information and intended solely for the use of the individual or 
entity to whom they are addressed. This transmission may contain information 
that is privileged, confidential or exempt from disclosure under applicable 
law. If you have received this e-mail in error, please notify the sender 
immediately and delete all copies. If you are not the intended recipient, any 
disclosure, copying, distribution, or use of the information contained herein 
is STRICTLY PROHIBITED. Path Solutions accepts no responsibility for any 
errors, omissions, computer viruses and other defects.]





~ Ninja Email Security with Cloudmark Spam Engine Gets Image Spam ~
~ http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Ninja~

RE: Moving users to Exch 2007 and Linked mailboxes

[Michael B. Smith]

Did you get this resolved?


From: Senter, John [john.sen...@etrade.com]
Sent: Tuesday, June 16, 2009 9:24 AM
To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues
Subject: Moving users to Exch 2007 and Linked mailboxes

We are about ready to start mass moving our users from Exchange 2003 to the 
2007 servers.  I have moved several test users and some of them appear in 2007 
as linked mailbox.  Looking at this link: 
http://telnetport25.wordpress.com/2008/06/10/linked-mailbox-conversion-after-migration-in-exchange-2007/
 I understand why they are being set that way and the information cleaning up 
the SID’s and resetting the AD attribute works great.  My issue is it will be 
very time consuming to go back and do this for every account that comes over as 
linked.  I am expecting that number to be around 500 accounts since that would 
be the people still around when they did 5.5 to 2000  migration years back 
using ADC.  That is where I think the SID came from that has the “associated 
external account” permission.

So here is the question: how did everyone else deal with this on a mass level?  
Is there a script or utility that will go through the existing 2003 mailboxes 
and remove any SID not associated to a real account?

Thanks




~ Ninja Email Security with Cloudmark Spam Engine Gets Image Spam ~
~ http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Ninja~

RE: recipient policy help

[Michael B. Smith]

You can go into advanced view to edit the LDAP query directly.

I don't understand "remote the query for any contact and any PF,DL, or DDL" to 
be able to answer it.


From: Jason Benway [benw...@jsjcorp.com]
Sent: Wednesday, June 17, 2009 10:51 AM
To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues
Subject: RE: recipient policy help

anyone?


From: Jason Benway [mailto:benw...@jsjcorp.com]
Sent: Thursday, June 11, 2009 4:01 PM
To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues
Subject: RE: recipient policy help

I'm using the GUI in exchange 2003 to create these policies. Not sure how to 
edit the ldap directly though the GUI, or which boxes to check to remote the 
query for any contact and any PF,DL, or DDL

thanks,jb


From: Eric Woodford [mailto:ericwoodf...@gmail.com]
Sent: Thursday, June 11, 2009 12:59 PM
To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues
Subject: Re: recipient policy help

Your LDAP logic is a wee-bit off.. If I am reading this correctly, it says


any mailenabled object that's:

  *   any mailbox not on any server
  *   any mailbox on IZZYEmail
  *   any contact
  *   any PF, DL or DDL


(&
   (&
(& (mailnickname=*)
(|
(&
(objectCategory=person)
   (objectClass=user)
   (!(homeMDB=*))
   (!(msExchHomeServerName=*))
)
  (&
  (objectCategory=person)
  (objectClass=user)
  
(msExchHomeServerName=/O=ghsp/OU=Belton/cn=Configuration/cn=Servers/cn=IZZYEMAIL)
   )
  (&
  (objectCategory=person)
  (objectClass=contact)
   )
  (objectCategory=group)
  (objectCategory=publicFolder)
 (objectCategory=msExchDynamicDistributionList)



I think you want something more like:
- Any mail enabled object, on IZZYEMAIL that is a mailbox, contact, group, PF 
or DDL.

(&(mailnickname=*)

(msExchHomeServerName=/O=ghsp/OU=Belton/cn=Configuration/cn=Servers/cn=IZZYEMAIL)
 (|
(&(objectCategory=person)(objectClass=user) )
   (&(objectCategory=person)(objectClass=contact))
   (objectCategory=group)
   (objectCategory=publicFolder)
   (objectCategory=msExchDynamicDistributionList)
)
)

To shorten that a bit more, since you're hitting all mail enabled objects on 
the server:

(&(mailnickname=*) 
(msExchHomeServerName=/O=ghsp/OU=Belton/cn=Configuration/cn=Servers/cn=IZZYEMAIL))

will do approx. the same thing.


On Thu, Jun 11, 2009 at 6:31 AM, Jason Benway 
mailto:benw...@jsjcorp.com>> wrote:
I created new recipient policies to replace the legacy one's from our 55 days. 
During that process I had to add another domain for our of our business units. 
So I did an apply to all.
We have 5 different exchange servers and I have 11 recipient policies.

The users are being stamped and created correctly, but the DLs are only being 
stamped with the #1 policy. Here's the ldap from that policy.

(&(&(& (mailnickname=*) (| 
(&(objectCategory=person)(objectClass=user)(!(homeMDB=*))(!(msExchHomeServerName=*)))(&(objectCategory=person)(objectClass=user)(msExchHomeServerName=/O=ghsp/OU=Belton/cn=Configuration/cn=Servers/cn=IZZYEMAIL))(&(objectCategory=person)(objectClass=contact))(objectCategory=group)(objectCategory=publicFolder)(objectCategory=msExchDynamicDistributionList)
 

I believe this should stamp all objects, but only on the izzyemail server, 
correct?

but it seems to be stamping DLs on all emails servers!!

thanks,jb


Jason Benway
System/Storage Engineer
616-847-8474 telephone
616-850-1208 fax
www.jsjcorp.com
[cid:376195114@17062009-03CE]   JSJ Corporation
700 Robbins Road
Grand Haven, MI 49417

This message may contain confidential and/or privileged information. If you are 
not the addressee or authorized to receive this for the addressee,
you must not use, copy, disclose or take any action based on this message or 
any information herein. If you have received this message in error,
please advise the sender immediately by reply e-mail and delete this message. 
Thank you for your cooperation.












~ Ninja Email Security with Cloudmark Spam Engine Gets Image Spam ~
~ http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Ninja~<>

Re: BES upgrade to 5.0

[Sherry Abercrombie]

Thanks Jon, I'm going to be contacting my RIM support to get this migration
kit.

On Tue, Jun 23, 2009 at 1:03 PM, Jon D  wrote:

> I just finished my research into this today and started the process.
> Here's my notes.
> I'm upgrade to 5.0 from 4.x onto new hardware. No external SQL.
>
> 1. Upgrade to newest SP on production box
> 2. Get temp SRP and Migration Kit from BES Customer Support
> 3. Install fresh server on new hardware, install BES 5.0 using key from #2
> 4. Use the 'Enterprise Transporter' from the kit to move over users(a
> few at a time).
> 5. After everything is good, shut down old server(or uninstall bes
> software).
> 6. Original SRP will go bad within 90 days.
>
>
> Jon
>
>
>
> .
>
> ~ Ninja Email Security with Cloudmark Spam Engine Gets Image Spam ~
> ~ http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Ninja~
>



-- 
Sherry Abercrombie

"Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic."
Arthur C. Clarke

~ Ninja Email Security with Cloudmark Spam Engine Gets Image Spam ~
~ http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Ninja~

Re: BES upgrade to 5.0

[Jon D]

I just finished my research into this today and started the process.
Here's my notes.
I'm upgrade to 5.0 from 4.x onto new hardware. No external SQL.

1. Upgrade to newest SP on production box
2. Get temp SRP and Migration Kit from BES Customer Support
3. Install fresh server on new hardware, install BES 5.0 using key from #2
4. Use the 'Enterprise Transporter' from the kit to move over users(a
few at a time).
5. After everything is good, shut down old server(or uninstall bes software).
6. Original SRP will go bad within 90 days.


Jon



.

~ Ninja Email Security with Cloudmark Spam Engine Gets Image Spam ~
~ http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Ninja~

Re: BES upgrade to 5.0

[David Baca]

What kind of upgrade are you doing?  I did an in-place upgrade to 5.0 from 
4.1.6I ran into an issue with being able to log into the dashboard
after the upgrade (it could not find the website).  There was an issue with the 
webserver (i believe they are using apache) talking with the database.  We had 
to enable tcp/ip on the database side.  I may be able to get more information 
if needed.  It was a pretty easy fix once we figured out what it was.  If you 
have support you may want to have them walk you through the upgrade.  


Regards,

David




From: Jeff Brown <2jbr...@gmail.com>
To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues 
Sent: Friday, June 19, 2009 1:34:12 PM
Subject: BES upgrade to 5.0

I saw a post a week or so back but didn't see a lot of response.  Am thinking 
about upgrading my BES server to the new 5.0 version for Exchange.  Anyone do 
this and run into trouble so far?

Thanks for any help.  Jeff


  
~ Ninja Email Security with Cloudmark Spam Engine Gets Image Spam ~
~ http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Ninja~

RE: Cisco ASA and inspect esmtp

[Eldridge, Dave]

Don't worry I didn't take it that way.

 

From: Bob Fronk [mailto:b...@btrfronk.com] 
Sent: Tuesday, June 23, 2009 7:10 AM
To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Cisco ASA and inspect esmtp

 

Looking at my reply now, it could be construed a bit short, and
suggesting that you didn't research.  That is not how I meant it to be.

 

 

 

-

Bob Fronk

P Please print only as needed.

 

 

 

 

 

From: Eldridge, Dave [mailto:d...@parkviewmc.com] 
Sent: Tuesday, June 23, 2009 9:06 AM
To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Cisco ASA and inspect esmtp

 

I did and I didn't see a lot of version 8 listed in my search.

I will probably turn it off and watch for issues.

I'm just trying to be cautious. 

thanks

 

From: Bob Fronk [mailto:b...@btrfronk.com] 
Sent: Tuesday, June 23, 2009 7:00 AM
To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Cisco ASA and inspect esmtp

 

Google it.. you will see a few with same issues that have turned off
esmtp inspection.

 

-

Bob Fronk

P Please print only as needed.

 

 

 

 

 

From: Eldridge, Dave [mailto:d...@parkviewmc.com] 
Sent: Tuesday, June 23, 2009 8:49 AM
To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues
Subject: OT: Cisco ASA and inspect esmtp

 

I have a vendor that is having trouble sending emails to me and wants me
to turn off inspect esmtp. I know the older pix had some issues with
this but not the newer (8.03) ASA.

Those with asa's what have you done with esmtp inspect? On or Off?

I have a ccie colleague that hasn't seen any issues with the ASA and
version 8 so I am hesitant to break something that is working. 

 

Tia

dave

 

 

This e-mail contains the thoughts and opinions of the sender and does
not represent official Parkview Medical Center policy.

This communication is intended only for the recipient(s) named above,
may be confidential and/or legally privileged: and, must be treated as
such in accordance with state and federal laws. If you are not the
intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any use of this
communication, or any of its contents, is prohibited. If you have
received this communication in error, please return to sender and delete
the message from your computer system.

 

 

This e-mail contains the thoughts and opinions of the sender and does
not represent official Parkview Medical Center policy.

This communication is intended only for the recipient(s) named above,
may be confidential and/or legally privileged: and, must be treated as
such in accordance with state and federal laws. If you are not the
intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any use of this
communication, or any of its contents, is prohibited. If you have
received this communication in error, please return to sender and delete
the message from your computer system.

 

 




This message contains confidential information and is intended only for the 
intended recipient(s). If you are not the named recipient you should not read, 
distribute or copy this e-mail. Please notify the sender immediately via e-mail 
if you have received this e-mail by mistake; then, delete this e-mail from your 
system.
~ Ninja Email Security with Cloudmark Spam Engine Gets Image Spam ~
~ http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Ninja~

RE: Cisco ASA and inspect esmtp

[Bob Fronk]

Looking at my reply now, it could be construed a bit short, and suggesting that 
you didn't research.  That is not how I meant it to be.



-
Bob Fronk
P Please print only as needed.





From: Eldridge, Dave [mailto:d...@parkviewmc.com]
Sent: Tuesday, June 23, 2009 9:06 AM
To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Cisco ASA and inspect esmtp

I did and I didn't see a lot of version 8 listed in my search.
I will probably turn it off and watch for issues.
I'm just trying to be cautious.
thanks

From: Bob Fronk [mailto:b...@btrfronk.com]
Sent: Tuesday, June 23, 2009 7:00 AM
To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Cisco ASA and inspect esmtp

Google it.. you will see a few with same issues that have turned off esmtp 
inspection.

-
Bob Fronk
P Please print only as needed.





From: Eldridge, Dave [mailto:d...@parkviewmc.com]
Sent: Tuesday, June 23, 2009 8:49 AM
To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues
Subject: OT: Cisco ASA and inspect esmtp

I have a vendor that is having trouble sending emails to me and wants me to 
turn off inspect esmtp. I know the older pix had some issues with this but not 
the newer (8.03) ASA.
Those with asa's what have you done with esmtp inspect? On or Off?
I have a ccie colleague that hasn't seen any issues with the ASA and version 8 
so I am hesitant to break something that is working.

Tia
dave



This e-mail contains the thoughts and opinions of the sender and does not 
represent official Parkview Medical Center policy.

This communication is intended only for the recipient(s) named above, may be 
confidential and/or legally privileged: and, must be treated as such in 
accordance with state and federal laws. If you are not the intended recipient, 
you are hereby notified that any use of this communication, or any of its 
contents, is prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, 
please return to sender and delete the message from your computer system.





This e-mail contains the thoughts and opinions of the sender and does not 
represent official Parkview Medical Center policy.

This communication is intended only for the recipient(s) named above, may be 
confidential and/or legally privileged: and, must be treated as such in 
accordance with state and federal laws. If you are not the intended recipient, 
you are hereby notified that any use of this communication, or any of its 
contents, is prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, 
please return to sender and delete the message from your computer system.



~ Ninja Email Security with Cloudmark Spam Engine Gets Image Spam ~
~ http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Ninja~

RE: Cisco ASA and inspect esmtp

[Bob Fronk]

Google it.. you will see a few with same issues that have turned off esmtp 
inspection.

-
Bob Fronk
P Please print only as needed.





From: Eldridge, Dave [mailto:d...@parkviewmc.com]
Sent: Tuesday, June 23, 2009 8:49 AM
To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues
Subject: OT: Cisco ASA and inspect esmtp

I have a vendor that is having trouble sending emails to me and wants me to 
turn off inspect esmtp. I know the older pix had some issues with this but not 
the newer (8.03) ASA.
Those with asa's what have you done with esmtp inspect? On or Off?
I have a ccie colleague that hasn't seen any issues with the ASA and version 8 
so I am hesitant to break something that is working.

Tia
dave



This e-mail contains the thoughts and opinions of the sender and does not 
represent official Parkview Medical Center policy.

This communication is intended only for the recipient(s) named above, may be 
confidential and/or legally privileged: and, must be treated as such in 
accordance with state and federal laws. If you are not the intended recipient, 
you are hereby notified that any use of this communication, or any of its 
contents, is prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, 
please return to sender and delete the message from your computer system.



~ Ninja Email Security with Cloudmark Spam Engine Gets Image Spam ~
~ http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Ninja~

RE: Exchange 2007 SP1 Journaling Question

[John Hornbuckle]

I'm under 500 mailboxes, and as a rule of thumb our mailbox server isn't 
overworked. In fact, it runs in a VM on a server with a number of other virtual 
servers, and the physical server's CPU utilization and disk I/O are comfortably 
low.

Of course, I suppose however I set up journaling isn't set in stone. If 
performance becomes an issue, I can always change how it's done.



-Original Message-
From: James Wells [mailto:jam...@gmail.com] 
Sent: Tuesday, June 23, 2009 8:36 AM
To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues
Subject: Re: Exchange 2007 SP1 Journaling Question

FYI - one of the reasons to put the journal mailbox(es) on a different
database (different sotrage group, really) is so the database and logs
can be on a different disk group than the mailboxes being journaled.

You didn't say how many mailboxes are being journaled...if it's a few
hundred, the performance stuff might not be a concern. If it's
thousands of mailboxes, I've often done a small, dedicated server for
journaling mailboxes (usually regulatory requirements made it worth it
for that peace of mind).

--James


On 6/23/09, John Hornbuckle  wrote:
> Do you have an article where MS talks about this for Exchange 2007 (the one
> below is for 2003, and doesn't mention putting the journaling mailbox in a
> separate database unless I'm overlooking it.)
>
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Tom Kern [mailto:tpk...@gmail.com]
> Sent: Monday, June 22, 2009 8:36 PM
> To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues
> Subject: Re: Exchange 2007 SP1 Journaling Question
>
> http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/aa996802(EXCHG.65).aspx
>
> Its smart enough to not journal twice
> I was speaking more to the db overhead of having both recipient AND
> the journal mbx on the same db
>
>
>
> On Mon, Jun 22, 2009 at 7:25 PM, John
> Hornbuckle wrote:
>> But I would assume Exchange would be smart enough to know not to journal
>> the journal mailbox.
>>
>> The other weird thing is that looking online at various journaling
>> tutorials, a number of them don't mention this. So I didn't know if it was
>> an outright requirement, or just a best practice.
>>
>>
>>
>> -Original Message-
>> From: Tom Kern [mailto:tpk...@gmail.com]
>> Sent: Monday, June 22, 2009 4:46 PM
>> To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues
>> Subject: Re: Exchange 2007 SP1 Journaling Question
>>
>> MSFT recommends the same thing
>>
>> Think about it in terms of disk i/o etc-
>> in that config you are journaling the journal mailbox to the journal
>> mailbox
>>
>>
>> On Mon, Jun 22, 2009 at 3:56 PM, John
>> Hornbuckle wrote:
>>> I'm a journaling noob, and am setting up journaling for use with
>>> Google/Postini.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Google says that the journaling mailbox can't be in the same database
>>> that
>>> you're configuring journaling for.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> How come?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> John Hornbuckle
>>>
>>> MIS Department
>>>
>>> Taylor County School District
>>>
>>> 318 North Clark Street
>>>
>>> Perry, FL 32347
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> www.taylor.k12.fl.us
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> NOTICE: Florida has a broad public records law. Most written
>>> communications
>>> to or from this entity are public records that will be disclosed to the
>>> public and the media upon request. E-mail communications may be subject
>>> to
>>> public disclosure.
>>>
>>
>> ~ Ninja Email Security with Cloudmark Spam Engine Gets Image Spam ~
>> ~             http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Ninja                ~
>>
>>
>>
>> NOTICE: Florida has a broad public records law. Most written
>> communications to or from this entity are public records that will be
>> disclosed to the public and the media upon request. E-mail communications
>> may be subject to public disclosure.
>>
>>
>> ~ Ninja Email Security with Cloudmark Spam Engine Gets Image Spam ~
>> ~             http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Ninja                ~
>>
>>
>
> ~ Ninja Email Security with Cloudmark Spam Engine Gets Image Spam ~
> ~ http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Ninja~
>
>
>
> NOTICE: Florida has a broad public records law. Most written communications
> to or from this entity are public records that will be disclosed to the
> public and the media upon request. E-mail communications may be subject to
> public disclosure.
>
>
> ~ Ninja Email Security with Cloudmark Spam Engine Gets Image Spam ~
> ~ http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Ninja~
>
>

-- 
Sent from my mobile device

~ Ninja Email Security with Cloudmark Spam Engine Gets Image Spam ~
~ http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Ninja~



NOTICE: Florida has a broad public records law. Most written communications to 
or from this entity are public records that will be disclosed to the public and 
the media upon request. E-mail communications may be subject to public 
disclosure.


~ Ninja Email Security with Cloudmark Spam Engine Gets Image Spam ~
~ http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Ninja~

OT: Cisco ASA and inspect esmtp

[Eldridge, Dave]

I have a vendor that is having trouble sending emails to me and wants me
to turn off inspect esmtp. I know the older pix had some issues with
this but not the newer (8.03) ASA.

Those with asa's what have you done with esmtp inspect? On or Off?

I have a ccie colleague that hasn't seen any issues with the ASA and
version 8 so I am hesitant to break something that is working. 

 

Tia

dave

 

 




This message contains confidential information and is intended only for the 
intended recipient(s). If you are not the named recipient you should not read, 
distribute or copy this e-mail. Please notify the sender immediately via e-mail 
if you have received this e-mail by mistake; then, delete this e-mail from your 
system.
~ Ninja Email Security with Cloudmark Spam Engine Gets Image Spam ~
~ http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Ninja~

Re: Exchange 2007 SP1 Journaling Question

[James Wells]

FYI - one of the reasons to put the journal mailbox(es) on a different
database (different sotrage group, really) is so the database and logs
can be on a different disk group than the mailboxes being journaled.

You didn't say how many mailboxes are being journaled...if it's a few
hundred, the performance stuff might not be a concern. If it's
thousands of mailboxes, I've often done a small, dedicated server for
journaling mailboxes (usually regulatory requirements made it worth it
for that peace of mind).

--James


On 6/23/09, John Hornbuckle  wrote:
> Do you have an article where MS talks about this for Exchange 2007 (the one
> below is for 2003, and doesn't mention putting the journaling mailbox in a
> separate database unless I'm overlooking it.)
>
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Tom Kern [mailto:tpk...@gmail.com]
> Sent: Monday, June 22, 2009 8:36 PM
> To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues
> Subject: Re: Exchange 2007 SP1 Journaling Question
>
> http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/aa996802(EXCHG.65).aspx
>
> Its smart enough to not journal twice
> I was speaking more to the db overhead of having both recipient AND
> the journal mbx on the same db
>
>
>
> On Mon, Jun 22, 2009 at 7:25 PM, John
> Hornbuckle wrote:
>> But I would assume Exchange would be smart enough to know not to journal
>> the journal mailbox.
>>
>> The other weird thing is that looking online at various journaling
>> tutorials, a number of them don't mention this. So I didn't know if it was
>> an outright requirement, or just a best practice.
>>
>>
>>
>> -Original Message-
>> From: Tom Kern [mailto:tpk...@gmail.com]
>> Sent: Monday, June 22, 2009 4:46 PM
>> To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues
>> Subject: Re: Exchange 2007 SP1 Journaling Question
>>
>> MSFT recommends the same thing
>>
>> Think about it in terms of disk i/o etc-
>> in that config you are journaling the journal mailbox to the journal
>> mailbox
>>
>>
>> On Mon, Jun 22, 2009 at 3:56 PM, John
>> Hornbuckle wrote:
>>> I'm a journaling noob, and am setting up journaling for use with
>>> Google/Postini.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Google says that the journaling mailbox can't be in the same database
>>> that
>>> you're configuring journaling for.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> How come?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> John Hornbuckle
>>>
>>> MIS Department
>>>
>>> Taylor County School District
>>>
>>> 318 North Clark Street
>>>
>>> Perry, FL 32347
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> www.taylor.k12.fl.us
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> NOTICE: Florida has a broad public records law. Most written
>>> communications
>>> to or from this entity are public records that will be disclosed to the
>>> public and the media upon request. E-mail communications may be subject
>>> to
>>> public disclosure.
>>>
>>
>> ~ Ninja Email Security with Cloudmark Spam Engine Gets Image Spam ~
>> ~             http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Ninja                ~
>>
>>
>>
>> NOTICE: Florida has a broad public records law. Most written
>> communications to or from this entity are public records that will be
>> disclosed to the public and the media upon request. E-mail communications
>> may be subject to public disclosure.
>>
>>
>> ~ Ninja Email Security with Cloudmark Spam Engine Gets Image Spam ~
>> ~             http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Ninja                ~
>>
>>
>
> ~ Ninja Email Security with Cloudmark Spam Engine Gets Image Spam ~
> ~ http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Ninja~
>
>
>
> NOTICE: Florida has a broad public records law. Most written communications
> to or from this entity are public records that will be disclosed to the
> public and the media upon request. E-mail communications may be subject to
> public disclosure.
>
>
> ~ Ninja Email Security with Cloudmark Spam Engine Gets Image Spam ~
> ~ http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Ninja~
>
>

-- 
Sent from my mobile device

~ Ninja Email Security with Cloudmark Spam Engine Gets Image Spam ~
~ http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Ninja~

RE: Exchange 2007 SP1 Journaling Question

[John Hornbuckle]

Do you have an article where MS talks about this for Exchange 2007 (the one 
below is for 2003, and doesn't mention putting the journaling mailbox in a 
separate database unless I'm overlooking it.)



-Original Message-
From: Tom Kern [mailto:tpk...@gmail.com] 
Sent: Monday, June 22, 2009 8:36 PM
To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues
Subject: Re: Exchange 2007 SP1 Journaling Question

http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/aa996802(EXCHG.65).aspx

Its smart enough to not journal twice
I was speaking more to the db overhead of having both recipient AND
the journal mbx on the same db



On Mon, Jun 22, 2009 at 7:25 PM, John
Hornbuckle wrote:
> But I would assume Exchange would be smart enough to know not to journal the 
> journal mailbox.
>
> The other weird thing is that looking online at various journaling tutorials, 
> a number of them don't mention this. So I didn't know if it was an outright 
> requirement, or just a best practice.
>
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Tom Kern [mailto:tpk...@gmail.com]
> Sent: Monday, June 22, 2009 4:46 PM
> To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues
> Subject: Re: Exchange 2007 SP1 Journaling Question
>
> MSFT recommends the same thing
>
> Think about it in terms of disk i/o etc-
> in that config you are journaling the journal mailbox to the journal mailbox
>
>
> On Mon, Jun 22, 2009 at 3:56 PM, John
> Hornbuckle wrote:
>> I'm a journaling noob, and am setting up journaling for use with
>> Google/Postini.
>>
>>
>>
>> Google says that the journaling mailbox can't be in the same database that
>> you're configuring journaling for.
>>
>>
>>
>> How come?
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> John Hornbuckle
>>
>> MIS Department
>>
>> Taylor County School District
>>
>> 318 North Clark Street
>>
>> Perry, FL 32347
>>
>>
>>
>> www.taylor.k12.fl.us
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> NOTICE: Florida has a broad public records law. Most written communications
>> to or from this entity are public records that will be disclosed to the
>> public and the media upon request. E-mail communications may be subject to
>> public disclosure.
>>
>
> ~ Ninja Email Security with Cloudmark Spam Engine Gets Image Spam ~
> ~             http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Ninja                ~
>
>
>
> NOTICE: Florida has a broad public records law. Most written communications 
> to or from this entity are public records that will be disclosed to the 
> public and the media upon request. E-mail communications may be subject to 
> public disclosure.
>
>
> ~ Ninja Email Security with Cloudmark Spam Engine Gets Image Spam ~
> ~             http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Ninja                ~
>
>

~ Ninja Email Security with Cloudmark Spam Engine Gets Image Spam ~
~ http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Ninja~



NOTICE: Florida has a broad public records law. Most written communications to 
or from this entity are public records that will be disclosed to the public and 
the media upon request. E-mail communications may be subject to public 
disclosure.


~ Ninja Email Security with Cloudmark Spam Engine Gets Image Spam ~
~ http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Ninja~