Enormous amount of log files
Hello all, I've ran into a database problem this morning. As you can see in the image there are a huge amount of log files generated this weekend. Since the volume is only 30GB it ran full with the associated problem of the database being dismounted. Is there any way to detect what/who generated all this traffic? To solve the issue, I've moved some log files so the database was mountable again. Now I'm running a backup and turned circular logging on to free up some logs. Thnx! [cid:image001.png@01CBD72D.051F5230] Met vriendelijke groeten, KHLim Katholieke Hogeschool Limburg Associatie KULeuven http://www.khlim.behttp://www.khlim.be/ Tim Vandael ICT Systeembeheerder Campus Diepenbeek, Agoralaan gebouw B, bus 1, 3590 Diepenbeek T +32 11 23 08 94 - F +32 11 23 07 89 - G +32 476 22 45 22 tim.vand...@khlim.bemailto:tim.vand...@khlim.be [http://www.khlim.be/AD/COMMUNICATIE/mail_footer_khlim.gif] http://www.khlim.be --- To manage subscriptions click here: http://lyris.sunbelt-software.com/read/my_forums/ or send an email to listmana...@lyris.sunbeltsoftware.com with the body: unsubscribe exchangelistinline: image001.pnginline: image002.gif
RE: Enormous amount of log files
I've had some success in the past using this method. http://blogs.msdn.com/b/scottos/archive/2007/07/12/rough-and-tough-guide-to-identifying-patterns-in-ese-transaction-log-files.aspx There may be better tools out there now, but it's certainly pinpointed potential culprits about 50% of the time. Nick From: Vandael Tim [mailto:tim.vand...@khlim.be] Sent: 28 February 2011 08:53 To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: Enormous amount of log files Hello all, I've ran into a database problem this morning. As you can see in the image there are a huge amount of log files generated this weekend. Since the volume is only 30GB it ran full with the associated problem of the database being dismounted. Is there any way to detect what/who generated all this traffic? To solve the issue, I've moved some log files so the database was mountable again. Now I'm running a backup and turned circular logging on to free up some logs. This electronic message contains information from CACI International Inc or subsidiary companies, which may be confidential, proprietary, privileged or otherwise protected from disclosure. The information is intended to be used solely by the recipient(s) named above. If you are not an intended recipient, be aware that any review, disclosure, copying, distribution or use of this transmission or its contents is prohibited. If you have received this transmission in error, please notify us immediately at postmas...@caci.co.uk Viruses: Although we have taken steps to ensure that this e-mail and attachments are free from any virus, we advise that in keeping with good computing practice the recipient should ensure they are actually virus free. CACI Limited. Registered in England Wales. Registration No. 1649776. CACI House, Avonmore Road, London, W14 8TS. --- To manage subscriptions click here: http://lyris.sunbelt-software.com/read/my_forums/ or send an email to listmana...@lyris.sunbeltsoftware.com with the body: unsubscribe exchangelist
RE: Exchange 2010 books, revisited
2003
From: Eldridge, Dave [mailto:d...@parkviewmc.com]
Sent: Sunday, February 27, 2011 7:54 AM
To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Exchange 2010 books, revisited
Hey Paul question on that 2010 class you took. Are you migrating from 2003 or
2007?
Thanks
dave
From: Maglinger, Paul [mailto:pmaglin...@scvl.com]
Sent: Friday, February 25, 2011 2:23 PM
To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Exchange 2010 books, revisited
Correction!!! It wasn’t the Best Practice book he didn’t like, it was Exchange
2010 Unleashed that he said was riddled with inaccuracies.
-Paul
From: Maglinger, Paul [mailto:pmaglin...@scvl.com]
Sent: Friday, February 25, 2011 2:36 PM
To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Exchange 2010 books, revisited
I just attended an Exchange 2010 class and the instructor told me that the Best
Practices book was riddled with inaccuracies. Earlier I recommended the
Practical Approach book as a fast track to get familiar with the concepts and
implementation, kind of like a Cliff’s Notes version. Michael stated that the
Practical Approach book I had was pre-SP1 and that there was a revised version
coming out sometime.
From: Richard Stovall [mailto:rich...@gmail.com]
Sent: Friday, February 25, 2011 2:29 PM
To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues
Subject: Re: Exchange 2010 books, revisited
I haven't read it yet, but that book was recommended here not too long ago.
BTW, there is a link to download it for free at red-gate.com.
http://www.red-gate.com/our-company/about/book-store/exchange-2010
On Fri, Feb 25, 2011 at 3:22 PM, Jonathan ncm...@gmail.com wrote:
Ok, so my new job starts in 9 days, and I just found out on a conference call
today that I'm going to hit the ground running with an Exchange 2010 migration
(which wasn't originally part of the plan). I'm more than cool with it, but
I've never touched 2010, and I've barely touched 2007 so, I was delighted
to recall the thread here from about a week ago and found the thread started by
smsadm on Feb 16, 2011 with two specific book recommendations on Exchange 2010.
I looked at the kit of the two books that was recommended - unavailable right
now. so I looked at them separately:
Microsoft Exchange Server 2010 Best Practices
http://www.amazon.com/Microsoft-Exchange-Server-2010-Practices/dp/0735627193/ref=pd_cp_b_1
by Jagott Stidley
And:
Microsoft Exchange Server 2010 Inside Out
http://www.amazon.com/Microsoft-Exchange-Server-2010-Inside/dp/0735640610/ref=pd_sim_b_2
by Tony Redmond
I started reaching for the credit card, however, when I realized that they were
900 and 1200 pages, respectively, I paused (because I have 9 days, 1 wife, and
2 boys - ages 5 4). I'm not averse to reading (a definite requirement in our
field), however trying to dig through something of that magnitude in that
timeframe probably isn't going to happen...
So, I dug, and found this book, which looks like it might be a good starting
point (before I delve into the other two).
Exchange 2010 - A Practical Approach
http://www.amazon.com/Exchange-2010-Practical-Jaap-Wesselius/dp/1906434328/ref=sr_1_9?s=booksie=UTF8qid=1298664858sr=1-9
, by Jaap Wesselius
Before I jump head first into this, any other suggestions? Obviously I know it
won't substitute for more detailed info, but I feel like I need a broad
overview before I start going deep.
Thanks,
--
Jonathan, A+, MCSA, MCSE
---
To manage subscriptions click here:
http://lyris.sunbelt-software.com/read/my_forums/
or send an email to listmana...@lyris.sunbeltsoftware.com
with the body: unsubscribe exchangelist
---
To manage subscriptions click here:
http://lyris.sunbelt-software.com/read/my_forums/
or send an email to listmana...@lyris.sunbeltsoftware.com
with the body: unsubscribe exchangelist
---
To manage subscriptions click here:
http://lyris.sunbelt-software.com/read/my_forums/
or send an email to listmana...@lyris.sunbeltsoftware.com
with the body: unsubscribe exchangelist
---
To manage subscriptions click here:
http://lyris.sunbelt-software.com/read/my_forums/
or send an email to listmana...@lyris.sunbeltsoftware.com
with the body: unsubscribe exchangelist
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.{token}
---
To manage subscriptions click here:
http://lyris.sunbelt-software.com/read/my_forums/
or send an email to listmana...@lyris.sunbeltsoftware.com
with the
Re: Enormous amount of log files
grep @ *.log | wc -l I'm betting that you've got a new iPhone user doing ActiveSync On Mon, Feb 28, 2011 at 00:52, Vandael Tim tim.vand...@khlim.be wrote: Hello all, I’ve ran into a database problem this morning. As you can see in the image there are a huge amount of log files generated this weekend. Since the volume is only 30GB it ran full with the associated problem of the database being dismounted. Is there any way to detect what/who generated all this traffic? To solve the issue, I’ve moved some log files so the database was mountable again. Now I’m running a backup and turned circular logging on to free up some logs. Thnx! Met vriendelijke groeten, *KHLim* Katholieke Hogeschool Limburg Associatie KULeuven http://www.khlim.be *Tim Vandael* ICT Systeembeheerder Campus Diepenbeek, Agoralaan gebouw B, bus 1, 3590 Diepenbeek T +32 11 23 08 94 - F +32 11 23 07 89 - G +32 476 22 45 22 tim.vand...@khlim.be [image: Description: bar] http://www.khlim.be --- To manage subscriptions click here: http://lyris.sunbelt-software.com/read/my_forums/ or send an email to listmana...@lyris.sunbeltsoftware.com with the body: unsubscribe exchangelist --- To manage subscriptions click here: http://lyris.sunbelt-software.com/read/my_forums/ or send an email to listmana...@lyris.sunbeltsoftware.com with the body: unsubscribe exchangelistimage001.pngimage002.gif
Public folders...
We have Exchange 07, and have carried public folders along for seven or eight years. We only have calendars. And only a few, about 10. Where else should I start thinking about moving them before I go to Exchange 10 later in the year? People here use them. --- To manage subscriptions click here: http://lyris.sunbelt-software.com/read/my_forums/ or send an email to listmana...@lyris.sunbeltsoftware.com with the body: unsubscribe exchangelist
RE: Public folders...
Leave them in public folders. Why do you want to move them? Regards, Michael B. Smith Consultant and Exchange MVP http://TheEssentialExchange.com From: Holstrom, Don [mailto:dholst...@nbm.org] Sent: Monday, February 28, 2011 11:20 AM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: Public folders... We have Exchange 07, and have carried public folders along for seven or eight years. We only have calendars. And only a few, about 10. Where else should I start thinking about moving them before I go to Exchange 10 later in the year? People here use them. --- To manage subscriptions click here: http://lyris.sunbelt-software.com/read/my_forums/ or send an email to listmana...@lyris.sunbeltsoftware.commailto:listmana...@lyris.sunbeltsoftware.com with the body: unsubscribe exchangelist --- To manage subscriptions click here: http://lyris.sunbelt-software.com/read/my_forums/ or send an email to listmana...@lyris.sunbeltsoftware.com with the body: unsubscribe exchangelist
RE: Public folders...
Take em with you. E2010 still supports PF’s. From: Holstrom, Don [mailto:dholst...@nbm.org] Sent: Monday, February 28, 2011 8:20 AM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: Public folders... We have Exchange 07, and have carried public folders along for seven or eight years. We only have calendars. And only a few, about 10. Where else should I start thinking about moving them before I go to Exchange 10 later in the year? People here use them. --- To manage subscriptions click here: http://lyris.sunbelt-software.com/read/my_forums/ or send an email to listmana...@lyris.sunbeltsoftware.com with the body: unsubscribe exchangelist --- To manage subscriptions click here: http://lyris.sunbelt-software.com/read/my_forums/ or send an email to listmana...@lyris.sunbeltsoftware.com with the body: unsubscribe exchangelist
RE: Public folders...
Resource mailbox. No brainer. You lucky sod ☺ From: bounce-9289665-8066...@lyris.sunbelt-software.com [mailto:bounce-9289665-8066...@lyris.sunbelt-software.com] On Behalf Of Holstrom, Don Sent: 28 February 2011 16:20 To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: Public folders... We have Exchange 07, and have carried public folders along for seven or eight years. We only have calendars. And only a few, about 10. Where else should I start thinking about moving them before I go to Exchange 10 later in the year? People here use them. --- To manage subscriptions click here: http://lyris.sunbelt-software.com/read/my_forums/ or send an email to listmana...@lyris.sunbeltsoftware.commailto:listmana...@lyris.sunbeltsoftware.com with the body: unsubscribe exchangelist --- To manage subscriptions click here: http://lyris.sunbelt-software.com/read/my_forums/ or send an email to listmana...@lyris.sunbeltsoftware.com with the body: unsubscribe exchangelist
Load Balancing Incoming Email Using DNS MX Records
Hello, It seems there are two ways to load balancing incoming email using DNS MX records. Method 1: Multiple MX records with equal priority. Method 2: One MX record with multiple IP address. What's the pros and cons? Somebody suggested the Method 1, because multiple MX entries with the same priority will cause the mail to be delivered faster to the alternative server if the first one it tries is unavailable. Is that right? Thanks, This email and any files transmitted with it are solely intended for the use of the addressee(s) and may contain information that is confidential and privileged. If you receive this email in error, please advise us by return email immediately. Please also disregard the contents of the email, delete it and destroy any copies immediately. CCS Corporation and its subsidiaries do not accept liability for the views expressed in the email or for the consequences of any malicious code that may be transmitted with this email. This email is also subject to copyright. No part of it should be reproduced, adapted or transmitted without the written consent of the copyright owner. CCS-06-01-2009 --- To manage subscriptions click here: http://lyris.sunbelt-software.com/read/my_forums/ or send an email to listmana...@lyris.sunbeltsoftware.com with the body: unsubscribe exchangelist
Re: Load Balancing Incoming Email Using DNS MX Records
DNS provides basic round robin, when a dns query is made to given DNS server, in reality it is upto sender who to sent it too regardless the query order , so if you want true LB you have got to have HW load balancer in the front with multiple IPs Oz Oz Casey, Dedeal Senior Network Consultant www.Geek5050.com Please Visit Us On Web Providing IT Services for your business. P: (202) 670-3606(Office) P: (202) 656-7519(Office) P: (202) 656-2119(Office) www.Geek5050.com On Feb 28, 2011, at 8:30, Tu, Kevin k...@ccscorporation.ca wrote: Hello, It seems there are two ways to load balancing incoming email using DNS MX records. Method 1: Multiple MX records with equal priority. Method 2: One MX record with multiple IP address. What’s the pros and cons? Somebody suggested the Method 1, because multiple MX entries with the same priority will cause the mail to be delivered faster to the alternative server if the first one it tries is unavailable. Is that right? Thanks, This email and any files transmitted with it are solely intended for the use of the addressee(s) and may contain information that is confidential and privileged. If you receive this email in error, please advise us by return email immediately. Please also disregard the contents of the email, delete it and destroy any copies immediately. CCS Corporation and its subsidiaries do not accept liability for the views expressed in the email or for the consequences of any malicious code that may be transmitted with this email. This email is also subject to copyright. No part of it should be reproduced, adapted or transmitted without the written consent of the copyright owner. CCS-06-01-2009 --- To manage subscriptions click here: http://lyris.sunbelt-software.com/read/my_forums/ or send an email to listmana...@lyris.sunbeltsoftware.com with the body: unsubscribe exchangelist --- To manage subscriptions click here: http://lyris.sunbelt-software.com/read/my_forums/ or send an email to listmana...@lyris.sunbeltsoftware.com with the body: unsubscribe exchangelist
RE: Load Balancing Incoming Email Using DNS MX Records
We use method 1 and have been for 15+ years. The *vast* majority of software out there follow MX's decently. Every once in a while when one of those edge systems is down we'll get reports that something inbound failed, but it's very few and far between. We have 3 inbound receivers on the MX records and it's almost perfect on load balancing across them. Oh, we receive about 27 million inbound connections per month on the perimeter. From: Tu, Kevin [mailto:k...@ccscorporation.ca] Sent: Monday, February 28, 2011 10:30 AM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: Load Balancing Incoming Email Using DNS MX Records Hello, It seems there are two ways to load balancing incoming email using DNS MX records. Method 1: Multiple MX records with equal priority. Method 2: One MX record with multiple IP address. What's the pros and cons? Somebody suggested the Method 1, because multiple MX entries with the same priority will cause the mail to be delivered faster to the alternative server if the first one it tries is unavailable. Is that right? Thanks, This email and any files transmitted with it are solely intended for the use of the addressee(s) and may contain information that is confidential and privileged. If you receive this email in error, please advise us by return email immediately. Please also disregard the contents of the email, delete it and destroy any copies immediately. CCS Corporation and its subsidiaries do not accept liability for the views expressed in the email or for the consequences of any malicious code that may be transmitted with this email. This email is also subject to copyright. No part of it should be reproduced, adapted or transmitted without the written consent of the copyright owner. CCS-06-01-2009 --- To manage subscriptions click here: http://lyris.sunbelt-software.com/read/my_forums/ or send an email to listmana...@lyris.sunbeltsoftware.commailto:listmana...@lyris.sunbeltsoftware.com with the body: unsubscribe exchangelist --- To manage subscriptions click here: http://lyris.sunbelt-software.com/read/my_forums/ or send an email to listmana...@lyris.sunbeltsoftware.com with the body: unsubscribe exchangelist
RE: Load Balancing Incoming Email Using DNS MX Records
I can't think of any reason why having multiple MX records with the same precedence would cause failover to happen any faster if one is down. You may get less delay in getting incoming email processed with multiple MX records with the same precedence because it will be more of a load balancing arrangement than a failover arrangement. IMHO, the biggest downside is going to be when it comes to message tracking. If you're load balancing across multiple mail servers then you're always going to have to check the logs on all the servers. If it's in a failover arrangement, then as long as the primary is up and responding you usually only have to check the logs on the primary server to find the information you're looking for. From: Tu, Kevin [mailto:k...@ccscorporation.ca] Sent: Monday, February 28, 2011 10:30 AM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: Load Balancing Incoming Email Using DNS MX Records Hello, It seems there are two ways to load balancing incoming email using DNS MX records. Method 1: Multiple MX records with equal priority. Method 2: One MX record with multiple IP address. What's the pros and cons? Somebody suggested the Method 1, because multiple MX entries with the same priority will cause the mail to be delivered faster to the alternative server if the first one it tries is unavailable. Is that right? Thanks, This email and any files transmitted with it are solely intended for the use of the addressee(s) and may contain information that is confidential and privileged. If you receive this email in error, please advise us by return email immediately. Please also disregard the contents of the email, delete it and destroy any copies immediately. CCS Corporation and its subsidiaries do not accept liability for the views expressed in the email or for the consequences of any malicious code that may be transmitted with this email. This email is also subject to copyright. No part of it should be reproduced, adapted or transmitted without the written consent of the copyright owner. CCS-06-01-2009 --- To manage subscriptions click here: http://lyris.sunbelt-software.com/read/my_forums/ or send an email to listmana...@lyris.sunbeltsoftware.commailto:listmana...@lyris.sunbeltsoftware.com with the body: unsubscribe exchangelist ** 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. ** --- To manage subscriptions click here: http://lyris.sunbelt-software.com/read/my_forums/ or send an email to listmana...@lyris.sunbeltsoftware.com with the body: unsubscribe exchangelist
RE: Processing Unread Email
I'd look at using Powershell and the EWS Managed API. Glen Scales has some excellent examples of using Powershell with the EWS API on his blog. http://gsexdev.blogspot.com/ From: Joseph L. Casale [mailto:jcas...@activenetwerx.com] Sent: Monday, February 28, 2011 10:57 AM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: Processing Unread Email We don't use Public Folders, and it's the desire of a Manager to deliver mail from a specific alias to a folder in a certain user's MB and if it remains unread for 1 day, forward elsewhere. Is there a way to perform this natively in Exchange 2010 with possibly a PowerShell script I could schedule ay night? If so, the requirement of the mail being unread for 24 hours could extend to simply being unread when the script is run if needed. Or maybe there is a better procedure for this? Thanks! jlc --- To manage subscriptions click here: http://lyris.sunbelt-software.com/read/my_forums/ or send an email to listmana...@lyris.sunbeltsoftware.commailto:listmana...@lyris.sunbeltsoftware.com with the body: unsubscribe exchangelist ** 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. ** --- To manage subscriptions click here: http://lyris.sunbelt-software.com/read/my_forums/ or send an email to listmana...@lyris.sunbeltsoftware.com with the body: unsubscribe exchangelist
RE: Load Balancing Incoming Email Using DNS MX Records
If the sender is implemented properly, there is no difference whatsoever in the OP's question. Per RFC, both choices are completely random. (One being the DNS RFC, which used to be RFC 1034 for IPv4, I don't know what it currently is; the second being the SMTP RFC, which is believe is RFC 2821, but it could've been updated.) A short excerpt from my June 2008 WindowsITPro article DNS and Exchange: Next, there is an MX record, and it points to mail.theessentialexchange.com. The host corresponding to this MX record is defined in this zone file as having an IP address of 64.202.166.12. An MX record for a zone indicates the destination of e-mail for that zone. The number (10 in this example) that follows the MX is referred to as the MX weight and it is used to prioritize which MX record is used when there are multiple MX records. The lower the weight, the higher the priority of the MX record; thus a record having a weight of 10 would be used before a record with a weight of 20. If there are multiple records having the same weight, then a sending server should choose one randomly. Italics mine, of course. :) Regards, Michael B. Smith Consultant and Exchange MVP http://TheEssentialExchange.com From: Campbell, Rob [mailto:rob_campb...@centraltechnology.net] Sent: Monday, February 28, 2011 11:43 AM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Load Balancing Incoming Email Using DNS MX Records I can't think of any reason why having multiple MX records with the same precedence would cause failover to happen any faster if one is down. You may get less delay in getting incoming email processed with multiple MX records with the same precedence because it will be more of a load balancing arrangement than a failover arrangement. IMHO, the biggest downside is going to be when it comes to message tracking. If you're load balancing across multiple mail servers then you're always going to have to check the logs on all the servers. If it's in a failover arrangement, then as long as the primary is up and responding you usually only have to check the logs on the primary server to find the information you're looking for. From: Tu, Kevin [mailto:k...@ccscorporation.ca] Sent: Monday, February 28, 2011 10:30 AM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: Load Balancing Incoming Email Using DNS MX Records Hello, It seems there are two ways to load balancing incoming email using DNS MX records. Method 1: Multiple MX records with equal priority. Method 2: One MX record with multiple IP address. What's the pros and cons? Somebody suggested the Method 1, because multiple MX entries with the same priority will cause the mail to be delivered faster to the alternative server if the first one it tries is unavailable. Is that right? Thanks, This email and any files transmitted with it are solely intended for the use of the addressee(s) and may contain information that is confidential and privileged. If you receive this email in error, please advise us by return email immediately. Please also disregard the contents of the email, delete it and destroy any copies immediately. CCS Corporation and its subsidiaries do not accept liability for the views expressed in the email or for the consequences of any malicious code that may be transmitted with this email. This email is also subject to copyright. No part of it should be reproduced, adapted or transmitted without the written consent of the copyright owner. CCS-06-01-2009 --- To manage subscriptions click here: http://lyris.sunbelt-software.com/read/my_forums/ or send an email to listmana...@lyris.sunbeltsoftware.commailto:listmana...@lyris.sunbeltsoftware.com with the body: unsubscribe exchangelist ** 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. ** --- To manage subscriptions click here: http://lyris.sunbelt-software.com/read/my_forums/ or send an email to listmana...@lyris.sunbeltsoftware.commailto:listmana...@lyris.sunbeltsoftware.com with the body: unsubscribe exchangelist --- To manage subscriptions click here: http://lyris.sunbelt-software.com/read/my_forums/ or send an email to listmana...@lyris.sunbeltsoftware.com with the body: unsubscribe exchangelist
RE: Processing Unread Email
+1 This is actually pretty simple to do. The most complicated piece is forwarding the email to the new destination! :) Regards, Michael B. Smith Consultant and Exchange MVP http://TheEssentialExchange.com From: Campbell, Rob [mailto:rob_campb...@centraltechnology.net] Sent: Monday, February 28, 2011 12:01 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Processing Unread Email I'd look at using Powershell and the EWS Managed API. Glen Scales has some excellent examples of using Powershell with the EWS API on his blog. http://gsexdev.blogspot.com/ From: Joseph L. Casale [mailto:jcas...@activenetwerx.com] Sent: Monday, February 28, 2011 10:57 AM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: Processing Unread Email We don't use Public Folders, and it's the desire of a Manager to deliver mail from a specific alias to a folder in a certain user's MB and if it remains unread for 1 day, forward elsewhere. Is there a way to perform this natively in Exchange 2010 with possibly a PowerShell script I could schedule ay night? If so, the requirement of the mail being unread for 24 hours could extend to simply being unread when the script is run if needed. Or maybe there is a better procedure for this? Thanks! jlc --- To manage subscriptions click here: http://lyris.sunbelt-software.com/read/my_forums/ or send an email to listmana...@lyris.sunbeltsoftware.commailto:listmana...@lyris.sunbeltsoftware.com with the body: unsubscribe exchangelist ** 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. ** --- To manage subscriptions click here: http://lyris.sunbelt-software.com/read/my_forums/ or send an email to listmana...@lyris.sunbeltsoftware.commailto:listmana...@lyris.sunbeltsoftware.com with the body: unsubscribe exchangelist --- To manage subscriptions click here: http://lyris.sunbelt-software.com/read/my_forums/ or send an email to listmana...@lyris.sunbeltsoftware.com with the body: unsubscribe exchangelist
Mailbox not moving because mailbox store not valid value for identity
Trying to move users back from Exchange 2010 to 2003 so we can re-work our servers. On trying to use the EMC to do a local move it failed griping about the rules were larger than 32KB and suggested to use the -IgnoreRuleLimitErrors option. I copied the PS command line from the GUI, and pasted it in PS and now it's griping that the target database is not a valid value for the identity. The command line is: [PS] C:\Windows\system32'scvl.com/Enterprise/Corporate/Administrators/Quest, Jonny' | New-MoveRequest -TargetDatabase 'TELSTAR\First Storage Group\Mailbo x Store (TELSTAR)' -BadItemLimit '10' -IgnoreRuleLimitErrors Mailbox database TELSTAR\First Storage Group\Mailbox Store (TELSTAR) doesn't exist. + CategoryInfo : NotSpecified: (0:Int32) [New-MoveRequest], Manag ementObjectNotFoundException + FullyQualifiedErrorId : 5C402F9F,Microsoft.Exchange.Management.Recipient Tasks.NewMoveRequest Telstar is the Exchange 2003 server. Ideas please? -Paul --- To manage subscriptions click here: http://lyris.sunbelt-software.com/read/my_forums/ or send an email to listmana...@lyris.sunbeltsoftware.com with the body: unsubscribe exchangelist
RE: Mailbox not moving because mailbox store not valid value for identity
Do you have a valid routinggroupconnector? Regards, Michael B. Smith Consultant and Exchange MVP http://TheEssentialExchange.com -Original Message- From: Maglinger, Paul [mailto:pmaglin...@scvl.com] Sent: Monday, February 28, 2011 12:17 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: Mailbox not moving because mailbox store not valid value for identity Trying to move users back from Exchange 2010 to 2003 so we can re-work our servers. On trying to use the EMC to do a local move it failed griping about the rules were larger than 32KB and suggested to use the -IgnoreRuleLimitErrors option. I copied the PS command line from the GUI, and pasted it in PS and now it's griping that the target database is not a valid value for the identity. The command line is: [PS] C:\Windows\system32'scvl.com/Enterprise/Corporate/Administrators/Quest, Jonny' | New-MoveRequest -TargetDatabase 'TELSTAR\First Storage Group\Mailbo x Store (TELSTAR)' -BadItemLimit '10' -IgnoreRuleLimitErrors Mailbox database TELSTAR\First Storage Group\Mailbox Store (TELSTAR) doesn't exist. + CategoryInfo : NotSpecified: (0:Int32) [New-MoveRequest], Manag ementObjectNotFoundException + FullyQualifiedErrorId : 5C402F9F,Microsoft.Exchange.Management.Recipient Tasks.NewMoveRequest Telstar is the Exchange 2003 server. Ideas please? -Paul --- To manage subscriptions click here: http://lyris.sunbelt-software.com/read/my_forums/ or send an email to listmana...@lyris.sunbeltsoftware.com with the body: unsubscribe exchangelist --- To manage subscriptions click here: http://lyris.sunbelt-software.com/read/my_forums/ or send an email to listmana...@lyris.sunbeltsoftware.com with the body: unsubscribe exchangelist
RE: Mailbox not moving because mailbox store not valid value for identity
Hi, You only need to specify the target database in the new-moverequest command get-mailbox blah | new-moverequest -targetdatabase My Database Name (telstar) if in doubt do a get-mailboxdatabase -IncludePreExchange2010 | ft -a to get the exact db name that you need Cheers, Chris From: Maglinger, Paul [pmaglin...@scvl.com] Sent: 28 February 2011 17:17 To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: Mailbox not moving because mailbox store not valid value for identity Trying to move users back from Exchange 2010 to 2003 so we can re-work our servers. On trying to use the EMC to do a local move it failed griping about the rules were larger than 32KB and suggested to use the -IgnoreRuleLimitErrors option. I copied the PS command line from the GUI, and pasted it in PS and now it's griping that the target database is not a valid value for the identity. The command line is: [PS] C:\Windows\system32'scvl.com/Enterprise/Corporate/Administrators/Quest, Jonny' | New-MoveRequest -TargetDatabase 'TELSTAR\First Storage Group\Mailbo x Store (TELSTAR)' -BadItemLimit '10' -IgnoreRuleLimitErrors Mailbox database TELSTAR\First Storage Group\Mailbox Store (TELSTAR) doesn't exist. + CategoryInfo : NotSpecified: (0:Int32) [New-MoveRequest], Manag ementObjectNotFoundException + FullyQualifiedErrorId : 5C402F9F,Microsoft.Exchange.Management.Recipient Tasks.NewMoveRequest Telstar is the Exchange 2003 server. Ideas please? -Paul --- To manage subscriptions click here: http://lyris.sunbelt-software.com/read/my_forums/ or send an email to listmana...@lyris.sunbeltsoftware.com with the body: unsubscribe exchangelist --- To manage subscriptions click here: http://lyris.sunbelt-software.com/read/my_forums/ or send an email to listmana...@lyris.sunbeltsoftware.com with the body: unsubscribe exchangelist
RE: Mailbox not moving because mailbox store not valid value for identity
Would that cause it to work with the GUI and not with PowerShell? I've been able to successfully move other mailboxes other than this one using the GUI. -Original Message- From: Michael B. Smith [mailto:mich...@smithcons.com] Sent: Monday, February 28, 2011 11:22 AM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Mailbox not moving because mailbox store not valid value for identity Do you have a valid routinggroupconnector? Regards, Michael B. Smith Consultant and Exchange MVP http://TheEssentialExchange.com -Original Message- From: Maglinger, Paul [mailto:pmaglin...@scvl.com] Sent: Monday, February 28, 2011 12:17 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: Mailbox not moving because mailbox store not valid value for identity Trying to move users back from Exchange 2010 to 2003 so we can re-work our servers. On trying to use the EMC to do a local move it failed griping about the rules were larger than 32KB and suggested to use the -IgnoreRuleLimitErrors option. I copied the PS command line from the GUI, and pasted it in PS and now it's griping that the target database is not a valid value for the identity. The command line is: [PS] C:\Windows\system32'scvl.com/Enterprise/Corporate/Administrators/Quest, Jonny' | New-MoveRequest -TargetDatabase 'TELSTAR\First Storage Group\Mailbo x Store (TELSTAR)' -BadItemLimit '10' -IgnoreRuleLimitErrors Mailbox database TELSTAR\First Storage Group\Mailbox Store (TELSTAR) doesn't exist. + CategoryInfo : NotSpecified: (0:Int32) [New-MoveRequest], Manag ementObjectNotFoundException + FullyQualifiedErrorId : 5C402F9F,Microsoft.Exchange.Management.Recipient Tasks.NewMoveRequest Telstar is the Exchange 2003 server. Ideas please? -Paul --- To manage subscriptions click here: http://lyris.sunbelt-software.com/read/my_forums/ or send an email to listmana...@lyris.sunbeltsoftware.com with the body: unsubscribe exchangelist --- To manage subscriptions click here: http://lyris.sunbelt-software.com/read/my_forums/ or send an email to listmana...@lyris.sunbeltsoftware.com with the body: unsubscribe exchangelist --- To manage subscriptions click here: http://lyris.sunbelt-software.com/read/my_forums/ or send an email to listmana...@lyris.sunbeltsoftware.com with the body: unsubscribe exchangelist
RE: Mailbox not moving because mailbox store not valid value for identity
Oh, no; then they all wouldn't work. I didn't understand that. Why not just have the user delete rules (export them, actually; then save them until they can be moved back later, and then reimport them). Regards, Michael B. Smith Consultant and Exchange MVP http://TheEssentialExchange.com -Original Message- From: Maglinger, Paul [mailto:pmaglin...@scvl.com] Sent: Monday, February 28, 2011 12:26 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Mailbox not moving because mailbox store not valid value for identity Would that cause it to work with the GUI and not with PowerShell? I've been able to successfully move other mailboxes other than this one using the GUI. -Original Message- From: Michael B. Smith [mailto:mich...@smithcons.com] Sent: Monday, February 28, 2011 11:22 AM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Mailbox not moving because mailbox store not valid value for identity Do you have a valid routinggroupconnector? Regards, Michael B. Smith Consultant and Exchange MVP http://TheEssentialExchange.com -Original Message- From: Maglinger, Paul [mailto:pmaglin...@scvl.com] Sent: Monday, February 28, 2011 12:17 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: Mailbox not moving because mailbox store not valid value for identity Trying to move users back from Exchange 2010 to 2003 so we can re-work our servers. On trying to use the EMC to do a local move it failed griping about the rules were larger than 32KB and suggested to use the -IgnoreRuleLimitErrors option. I copied the PS command line from the GUI, and pasted it in PS and now it's griping that the target database is not a valid value for the identity. The command line is: [PS] C:\Windows\system32'scvl.com/Enterprise/Corporate/Administrators/Quest, Jonny' | New-MoveRequest -TargetDatabase 'TELSTAR\First Storage Group\Mailbo x Store (TELSTAR)' -BadItemLimit '10' -IgnoreRuleLimitErrors Mailbox database TELSTAR\First Storage Group\Mailbox Store (TELSTAR) doesn't exist. + CategoryInfo : NotSpecified: (0:Int32) [New-MoveRequest], Manag ementObjectNotFoundException + FullyQualifiedErrorId : 5C402F9F,Microsoft.Exchange.Management.Recipient Tasks.NewMoveRequest Telstar is the Exchange 2003 server. Ideas please? -Paul --- To manage subscriptions click here: http://lyris.sunbelt-software.com/read/my_forums/ or send an email to listmana...@lyris.sunbeltsoftware.com with the body: unsubscribe exchangelist --- To manage subscriptions click here: http://lyris.sunbelt-software.com/read/my_forums/ or send an email to listmana...@lyris.sunbeltsoftware.com with the body: unsubscribe exchangelist --- To manage subscriptions click here: http://lyris.sunbelt-software.com/read/my_forums/ or send an email to listmana...@lyris.sunbeltsoftware.com with the body: unsubscribe exchangelist --- To manage subscriptions click here: http://lyris.sunbelt-software.com/read/my_forums/ or send an email to listmana...@lyris.sunbeltsoftware.com with the body: unsubscribe exchangelist
Re: Recovery tools?
First off, I've never used a third-party tool to recover or repair a database. However, I've heard good things about this product: http://www.lucid8.com/product/digiscope.asp On Mon, Feb 28, 2011 at 10:23 AM, Castillo, Daniel (Directory Services) daniel.casti...@hp.com wrote: Hi there, So what’s your favorite tool to recover/repair damaged databases/mailboxes? I see many on the web but I am looking for real stories not just ads. Thanks! ~D --- To manage subscriptions click here: http://lyris.sunbelt-software.com/read/my_forums/ or send an email to listmana...@lyris.sunbeltsoftware.com with the body: unsubscribe exchangelist --- To manage subscriptions click here: http://lyris.sunbelt-software.com/read/my_forums/ or send an email to listmana...@lyris.sunbeltsoftware.com with the body: unsubscribe exchangelist
RE: Recovery tools?
Thanks Harry! I am not dealing with this case (lucky me cause it stinks) but as I heard native tools aren’t working to get the stuff fixed L I’ll keep asking in forums for feedback on this. Regards, ~D From: Harry Singh [mailto:hbo...@gmail.com] Sent: Monday, February 28, 2011 11:58 AM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Cc: Castillo, Daniel (Directory Services) Subject: Re: Recovery tools? First off, I've never used a third-party tool to recover or repair a database. However, I've heard good things about this product: http://www.lucid8.com/product/digiscope.asp On Mon, Feb 28, 2011 at 10:23 AM, Castillo, Daniel (Directory Services) daniel.casti...@hp.commailto:daniel.casti...@hp.com wrote: Hi there, So what’s your favorite tool to recover/repair damaged databases/mailboxes? I see many on the web but I am looking for real stories not just ads. Thanks! ~D --- To manage subscriptions click here: http://lyris.sunbelt-software.com/read/my_forums/ or send an email to listmana...@lyris.sunbeltsoftware.commailto:listmana...@lyris.sunbeltsoftware.com with the body: unsubscribe exchangelist --- To manage subscriptions click here: http://lyris.sunbelt-software.com/read/my_forums/ or send an email to listmana...@lyris.sunbeltsoftware.commailto:listmana...@lyris.sunbeltsoftware.com with the body: unsubscribe exchangelist --- To manage subscriptions click here: http://lyris.sunbelt-software.com/read/my_forums/ or send an email to listmana...@lyris.sunbeltsoftware.com with the body: unsubscribe exchangelist
RE: Mailbox not moving because mailbox store not valid value for identity
We have a winner!!! Thanks! -Original Message- From: Chris Boller [mailto:ch...@mahoola.com] Sent: Monday, February 28, 2011 11:23 AM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Mailbox not moving because mailbox store not valid value for identity Hi, You only need to specify the target database in the new-moverequest command get-mailbox blah | new-moverequest -targetdatabase My Database Name (telstar) if in doubt do a get-mailboxdatabase -IncludePreExchange2010 | ft -a to get the exact db name that you need Cheers, Chris From: Maglinger, Paul [pmaglin...@scvl.com] Sent: 28 February 2011 17:17 To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: Mailbox not moving because mailbox store not valid value for identity Trying to move users back from Exchange 2010 to 2003 so we can re-work our servers. On trying to use the EMC to do a local move it failed griping about the rules were larger than 32KB and suggested to use the -IgnoreRuleLimitErrors option. I copied the PS command line from the GUI, and pasted it in PS and now it's griping that the target database is not a valid value for the identity. The command line is: [PS] C:\Windows\system32'scvl.com/Enterprise/Corporate/Administrators/Quest, Jonny' | New-MoveRequest -TargetDatabase 'TELSTAR\First Storage Group\Mailbo x Store (TELSTAR)' -BadItemLimit '10' -IgnoreRuleLimitErrors Mailbox database TELSTAR\First Storage Group\Mailbox Store (TELSTAR) doesn't exist. + CategoryInfo : NotSpecified: (0:Int32) [New-MoveRequest], Manag ementObjectNotFoundException + FullyQualifiedErrorId : 5C402F9F,Microsoft.Exchange.Management.Recipient Tasks.NewMoveRequest Telstar is the Exchange 2003 server. Ideas please? -Paul --- To manage subscriptions click here: http://lyris.sunbelt-software.com/read/my_forums/ or send an email to listmana...@lyris.sunbeltsoftware.com with the body: unsubscribe exchangelist --- To manage subscriptions click here: http://lyris.sunbelt-software.com/read/my_forums/ or send an email to listmana...@lyris.sunbeltsoftware.com with the body: unsubscribe exchangelist --- To manage subscriptions click here: http://lyris.sunbelt-software.com/read/my_forums/ or send an email to listmana...@lyris.sunbeltsoftware.com with the body: unsubscribe exchangelist
RE: Unable to Send-As from Public Folders
Using Outlook 2007 or 2003, I'm simply entering the PF address in the From
field.
CFee
From: Matthew Bullock [mailto:mbull...@root9.com]
Sent: Sunday, February 27, 2011 2:42 PM
To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Unable to Send-As from Public Folders
Sounds like you are trying to Send on Behalf of, which is different from
Send As.
-matt
From: Carol Fee [mailto:c...@massbar.org]
Sent: Friday, February 25, 2011 11:42 AM
To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues
Subject: Unable to Send-As from Public Folders
Single W2K8 Forest and Domain and Exchange org
One Exchange 2003 SP2 server
One Exchange 2007 HT/CAS/Mailbox server
The example Public Folder below had even been deleted, and created from scratch.
We are unable to Send-As from any mail enabled Public Folder. This worked just
fine until the E2K7 server was introduced into the environment, and the Public
Folders were replicated. Then it stopped working. The Outlook error message
is 'You do not have permission to send the message on behalf of the specified
user.
PFDavAdmin Property Editor produces the same results regardless of which server
you connect to. There are no DACL issues.
Public Folders\Community Services DOMAIN\User:Allowed:All-Extended-Rights
DOMAIN\User::Allowed:Send-As DOMAIN\User::Allowed:Send-As
Most user's mailboxes are on the E2K7 server, but I have also tested with a
user who's mailbox is on the E2K3 server.
The results of the get-mailpublicfolder command using EMS on the E2K7 server
are below. I don't understand why it only list my account as having the
permission, when there are actually 3, but I am no more able to do this than
either of the other users.
[PS] C:\Windows\system32get-mailpublicfolder -Identity 'CN=Community Services,C
N=Microsoft Exchange System Objects,DC=massbar,DC=org' |fl
Contacts : {}
DeliverToMailboxAndForward : False
ExternalEmailAddress : expf:COMMUNITY SERVICES856074B04EFF134BE6F
610BDC8A6E02E9BFDFC
ForwardingAddress :
PublicFolderType : Mapi
PhoneticDisplayName:
RootUrl:
AcceptMessagesOnlyFrom : {}
AcceptMessagesOnlyFromDLMembers: {}
AddressListMembership : {}
Alias : CommunityServices
OrganizationalUnit : massbar.org/Microsoft Exchange System Obje
cts
CustomAttribute1 :
CustomAttribute10 :
CustomAttribute11 :
CustomAttribute12 :
CustomAttribute13 :
CustomAttribute14 :
CustomAttribute15 :
CustomAttribute2 :
CustomAttribute3 :
CustomAttribute4 :
CustomAttribute5 :
CustomAttribute6 :
CustomAttribute7 :
CustomAttribute8 :
CustomAttribute9 :
DisplayName: Community Services
EmailAddresses : {SMTP:communityservi...@massbar.org, smtp:
communityserv...@massbar.org}
GrantSendOnBehalfTo: {massbar.org/MBA/Users/Information Service
s/Domain Admins/GPO Test Group/Carol Fee}
HiddenFromAddressListsEnabled : True
LegacyExchangeDN : /O=MASSACHUSETTS BAR ASSOCIATION/OU=MBA_EM
AIL/CN=RECIPIENTS/CN=COMMUNITY SERVICES856
074B04EFF134BE6F610BDC8A6E02E9BFDFC
MaxSendSize: unlimited
MaxReceiveSize : unlimited
PoliciesIncluded : {}
PoliciesExcluded : {}
EmailAddressPolicyEnabled : False
PrimarySmtpAddress : communityservi...@massbar.org
RecipientType : PublicFolder
RecipientTypeDetails : PublicFolder
RejectMessagesFrom : {}
RejectMessagesFromDLMembers: {}
RequireSenderAuthenticationEnabled : False
SimpleDisplayName :
UMDtmfMap : {}
WindowsEmailAddress: communityservi...@massbar.org
IsValid: True
OriginatingServer : MASSBARDC1.massbar.org
ExchangeVersion: 0.0 (6.5.6500.0)
Name : Community Services
DistinguishedName : CN=Community Services,CN=Microsoft Exchang
e System Objects,DC=massbar,DC=org
Identity : massbar.org/Microsoft Exchange System Obje
cts/Community Services
Guid : 2462f7ed-fa8f-4584-ba50-a348170a7a51
ObjectCategory : massbar.org/Configuration/Schema/ms-Exch-P
RE: Load Balancing Incoming Email Using DNS MX Records
I thought DNS would return equally weighted MX results in random or round robin order. From: Michael B. Smith [mailto:mich...@smithcons.com] Sent: Monday, February 28, 2011 9:05 AM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Load Balancing Incoming Email Using DNS MX Records If the sender is implemented properly, there is no difference whatsoever in the OP's question. Per RFC, both choices are completely random. (One being the DNS RFC, which used to be RFC 1034 for IPv4, I don't know what it currently is; the second being the SMTP RFC, which is believe is RFC 2821, but it could've been updated.) A short excerpt from my June 2008 WindowsITPro article DNS and Exchange: Next, there is an MX record, and it points to mail.theessentialexchange.com. The host corresponding to this MX record is defined in this zone file as having an IP address of 64.202.166.12. An MX record for a zone indicates the destination of e-mail for that zone. The number (10 in this example) that follows the MX is referred to as the MX weight and it is used to prioritize which MX record is used when there are multiple MX records. The lower the weight, the higher the priority of the MX record; thus a record having a weight of 10 would be used before a record with a weight of 20. If there are multiple records having the same weight, then a sending server should choose one randomly. Italics mine, of course. :) Regards, Michael B. Smith Consultant and Exchange MVP http://TheEssentialExchange.com From: Campbell, Rob [mailto:rob_campb...@centraltechnology.net] Sent: Monday, February 28, 2011 11:43 AM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Load Balancing Incoming Email Using DNS MX Records I can't think of any reason why having multiple MX records with the same precedence would cause failover to happen any faster if one is down. You may get less delay in getting incoming email processed with multiple MX records with the same precedence because it will be more of a load balancing arrangement than a failover arrangement. IMHO, the biggest downside is going to be when it comes to message tracking. If you're load balancing across multiple mail servers then you're always going to have to check the logs on all the servers. If it's in a failover arrangement, then as long as the primary is up and responding you usually only have to check the logs on the primary server to find the information you're looking for. From: Tu, Kevin [mailto:k...@ccscorporation.ca] Sent: Monday, February 28, 2011 10:30 AM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: Load Balancing Incoming Email Using DNS MX Records Hello, It seems there are two ways to load balancing incoming email using DNS MX records. Method 1: Multiple MX records with equal priority. Method 2: One MX record with multiple IP address. What's the pros and cons? Somebody suggested the Method 1, because multiple MX entries with the same priority will cause the mail to be delivered faster to the alternative server if the first one it tries is unavailable. Is that right? Thanks, This email and any files transmitted with it are solely intended for the use of the addressee(s) and may contain information that is confidential and privileged. If you receive this email in error, please advise us by return email immediately. Please also disregard the contents of the email, delete it and destroy any copies immediately. CCS Corporation and its subsidiaries do not accept liability for the views expressed in the email or for the consequences of any malicious code that may be transmitted with this email. This email is also subject to copyright. No part of it should be reproduced, adapted or transmitted without the written consent of the copyright owner. CCS-06-01-2009 --- To manage subscriptions click here: http://lyris.sunbelt-software.com/read/my_forums/ or send an email to listmana...@lyris.sunbeltsoftware.commailto:listmana...@lyris.sunbeltsoftware.com with the body: unsubscribe exchangelist ** 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. ** --- To manage subscriptions click here: http://lyris.sunbelt-software.com/read/my_forums/ or send an email to listmana...@lyris.sunbeltsoftware.commailto:listmana...@lyris.sunbeltsoftware.com with the body: unsubscribe
RE: Load Balancing Incoming Email Using DNS MX Records
Ah, but there is no difference. In RR, you are not guaranteed which is the first, or subsequent, addess to be returned. Simply that the resolver will return all the addresses in a random order (without repeats). Sent from my HTC Tilt™ 2, a Windows® phone from ATT From: Don Andrews don.andr...@safeway.com Sent: Monday, February 28, 2011 2:49 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues exchangelist@lyris.sunbelt-software.com Subject: RE: Load Balancing Incoming Email Using DNS MX Records I thought DNS would return equally weighted MX results in random or round robin order. From: Michael B. Smith [mailto:mich...@smithcons.com] Sent: Monday, February 28, 2011 9:05 AM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Load Balancing Incoming Email Using DNS MX Records If the sender is implemented properly, there is no difference whatsoever in the OP’s question. Per RFC, both choices are completely random. (One being the DNS RFC, which used to be RFC 1034 for IPv4, I don’t know what it currently is; the second being the SMTP RFC, which is believe is RFC 2821, but it could’ve been updated.) A short excerpt from my June 2008 WindowsITPro article “DNS and Exchange”: Next, there is an MX record, and it points to mail.theessentialexchange.com. The host corresponding to this MX record is defined in this zone file as having an IP address of 64.202.166.12. An MX record for a zone indicates the destination of e-mail for that zone. The number (“10” in this example) that follows the MX is referred to as the “MX weight” and it is used to prioritize which MX record is used when there are multiple MX records. The lower the weight, the higher the priority of the MX record; thus a record having a weight of 10 would be used before a record with a weight of 20. If there are multiple records having the same weight, then a sending server should choose one randomly. Italics mine, of course. :) Regards, Michael B. Smith Consultant and Exchange MVP http://TheEssentialExchange.com From: Campbell, Rob [mailto:rob_campb...@centraltechnology.net] Sent: Monday, February 28, 2011 11:43 AM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Load Balancing Incoming Email Using DNS MX Records I can’t think of any reason why having multiple MX records with the same precedence would cause failover to happen any faster if one is down. You may get less delay in getting incoming email processed with multiple MX records with the same precedence because it will be more of a load balancing arrangement than a failover arrangement. IMHO, the biggest downside is going to be when it comes to message tracking. If you’re load balancing across multiple mail servers then you’re always going to have to check the logs on all the servers. If it’s in a failover arrangement, then as long as the primary is up and responding you usually only have to check the logs on the primary server to find the information you’re looking for. From: Tu, Kevin [mailto:k...@ccscorporation.ca] Sent: Monday, February 28, 2011 10:30 AM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: Load Balancing Incoming Email Using DNS MX Records Hello, It seems there are two ways to load balancing incoming email using DNS MX records. Method 1: Multiple MX records with equal priority. Method 2: One MX record with multiple IP address. What’s the pros and cons? Somebody suggested the Method 1, because multiple MX entries with the same priority will cause the mail to be delivered faster to the alternative server if the first one it tries is unavailable. Is that right? Thanks, This email and any files transmitted with it are solely intended for the use of the addressee(s) and may contain information that is confidential and privileged. If you receive this email in error, please advise us by return email immediately. Please also disregard the contents of the email, delete it and destroy any copies immediately. CCS Corporation and its subsidiaries do not accept liability for the views expressed in the email or for the consequences of any malicious code that may be transmitted with this email. This email is also subject to copyright. No part of it should be reproduced, adapted or transmitted without the written consent of the copyright owner. CCS-06-01-2009 --- To manage subscriptions click here: http://lyris.sunbelt-software.com/read/my_forums/ or send an email to listmana...@lyris.sunbeltsoftware.commailto:listmana...@lyris.sunbeltsoftware.com with the body: unsubscribe exchangelist ** 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
RE: Load Balancing Incoming Email Using DNS MX Records
Hmm, true. (actually one of the MTA's we have includes a check box to Randomize order of equal MX hosts.) Our DNS seems to return the following sequence for 3 equally weighted hosts; 1-2-3 2-3-1 3-1-2 1-2-3 Assuming all 3 were always answering, that would give us fairly even distribution of connections (as opposed to load). From: Michael B. Smith [mailto:mich...@smithcons.com] Sent: Monday, February 28, 2011 11:55 AM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Load Balancing Incoming Email Using DNS MX Records Ah, but there is no difference. In RR, you are not guaranteed which is the first, or subsequent, addess to be returned. Simply that the resolver will return all the addresses in a random order (without repeats). Sent from my HTC Tilt(tm) 2, a Windows(r) phone from ATT From: Don Andrews don.andr...@safeway.com Sent: Monday, February 28, 2011 2:49 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues exchangelist@lyris.sunbelt-software.com Subject: RE: Load Balancing Incoming Email Using DNS MX Records I thought DNS would return equally weighted MX results in random or round robin order. From: Michael B. Smith [mailto:mich...@smithcons.com] Sent: Monday, February 28, 2011 9:05 AM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Load Balancing Incoming Email Using DNS MX Records If the sender is implemented properly, there is no difference whatsoever in the OP's question. Per RFC, both choices are completely random. (One being the DNS RFC, which used to be RFC 1034 for IPv4, I don't know what it currently is; the second being the SMTP RFC, which is believe is RFC 2821, but it could've been updated.) A short excerpt from my June 2008 WindowsITPro article DNS and Exchange: Next, there is an MX record, and it points to mail.theessentialexchange.com. The host corresponding to this MX record is defined in this zone file as having an IP address of 64.202.166.12. An MX record for a zone indicates the destination of e-mail for that zone. The number (10 in this example) that follows the MX is referred to as the MX weight and it is used to prioritize which MX record is used when there are multiple MX records. The lower the weight, the higher the priority of the MX record; thus a record having a weight of 10 would be used before a record with a weight of 20. If there are multiple records having the same weight, then a sending server should choose one randomly. Italics mine, of course. :) Regards, Michael B. Smith Consultant and Exchange MVP http://TheEssentialExchange.com From: Campbell, Rob [mailto:rob_campb...@centraltechnology.net] Sent: Monday, February 28, 2011 11:43 AM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Load Balancing Incoming Email Using DNS MX Records I can't think of any reason why having multiple MX records with the same precedence would cause failover to happen any faster if one is down. You may get less delay in getting incoming email processed with multiple MX records with the same precedence because it will be more of a load balancing arrangement than a failover arrangement. IMHO, the biggest downside is going to be when it comes to message tracking. If you're load balancing across multiple mail servers then you're always going to have to check the logs on all the servers. If it's in a failover arrangement, then as long as the primary is up and responding you usually only have to check the logs on the primary server to find the information you're looking for. From: Tu, Kevin [mailto:k...@ccscorporation.ca] Sent: Monday, February 28, 2011 10:30 AM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: Load Balancing Incoming Email Using DNS MX Records Hello, It seems there are two ways to load balancing incoming email using DNS MX records. Method 1: Multiple MX records with equal priority. Method 2: One MX record with multiple IP address. What's the pros and cons? Somebody suggested the Method 1, because multiple MX entries with the same priority will cause the mail to be delivered faster to the alternative server if the first one it tries is unavailable. Is that right? Thanks, This email and any files transmitted with it are solely intended for the use of the addressee(s) and may contain information that is confidential and privileged. If you receive this email in error, please advise us by return email immediately. Please also disregard the contents of the email, delete it and destroy any copies immediately. CCS Corporation and its subsidiaries do not accept liability for the views expressed in the email or for the consequences of any malicious code that may be transmitted with this email. This email is also subject to copyright. No part of it should be reproduced, adapted or transmitted without the written consent of the copyright owner. CCS-06-01-2009 --- To manage subscriptions click here: http://lyris.sunbelt-software.com/read/my_forums/ or send an email to
RE: Exchange 2003 Connection Filtering
We don't use connection filtering (we have appliances to do that) but from the description, I suspect you are correct that it will see the connecting server always as your parent company's relay. Any way to add blackberry.net to a whitelist? From: Celone, Mike [mailto:mike.cel...@rfsworld.com] Sent: Monday, February 28, 2011 12:00 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: Exchange 2003 Connection Filtering I've got a question about the Connection Filtering in Exchange 2003. All our incoming email is handled by our parent company's mail relays. They then pass on any mail intended for our server to my Exchange environment. Does the connection filtering in Exchange 2003 look into the headers of the email to see where the email originated from or does it just check the last connection? If it only see the last connection then this won't help me because all email always appears to come from our parent company's mail relays. The reason I ask is lately a lot our Blackberry activation messages are ending up in people's junk mail folders (I think it's related to our Outlook 2010 rollout but I'm not 100% sure yet) and it's causing my activations to fail. I figure if I can add the Blackberry network range to my connection filter that would prevent them from being tagged as junk mail. Mike Celone Manager of Information Systems Radio Frequency Systems v. 203-630-3311 x1031 f. 203-634-2027 m. 203-537-2406 OnNet: 28971031 mike.cel...@rfsworld.comblocked::mailto:mike.cel...@rfsworld.com This message (including any attachments) contains confidential information intended for a specific individual and purpose, and is protected by law. If you are not the intended recipient, you should delete this message. Any disclosure, copying, or distribution of this message, or the taking of any action based on it, is strictly prohibited without the prior consent of its author. --- To manage subscriptions click here: http://lyris.sunbelt-software.com/read/my_forums/ or send an email to listmana...@lyris.sunbeltsoftware.commailto:listmana...@lyris.sunbeltsoftware.com with the body: unsubscribe exchangelist --- To manage subscriptions click here: http://lyris.sunbelt-software.com/read/my_forums/ or send an email to listmana...@lyris.sunbeltsoftware.com with the body: unsubscribe exchangelist
RE: Unable to Send-As from Public Folders
Hi Carol,
In EMC, Public Folder Management Console, properties of the public folder,
select Mail Flow Settings and Delivery Options. This is where users with Send
on Behalf of are configured. Clear all the users, select OK twice to exit out
of the PF properties. Select the public folder you want to set the Send As
rights for but don't open it. On the right pane of the EMC you should see
Manage Send As Permission. This is where you should add the users.
If I remember right, Outlook will check for send on behalf of rights before
send as, and if it sees that it will use it regardless if the user has send as
rights.
-matt
From: Carol Fee [mailto:c...@massbar.org]
Sent: Monday, February 28, 2011 11:09 AM
To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Unable to Send-As from Public Folders
Using Outlook 2007 or 2003, I'm simply entering the PF address in the From
field.
CFee
From: Matthew Bullock [mailto:mbull...@root9.com]
Sent: Sunday, February 27, 2011 2:42 PM
To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Unable to Send-As from Public Folders
Sounds like you are trying to Send on Behalf of, which is different from
Send As.
-matt
From: Carol Fee [mailto:c...@massbar.org]
Sent: Friday, February 25, 2011 11:42 AM
To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues
Subject: Unable to Send-As from Public Folders
Single W2K8 Forest and Domain and Exchange org
One Exchange 2003 SP2 server
One Exchange 2007 HT/CAS/Mailbox server
The example Public Folder below had even been deleted, and created from scratch.
We are unable to Send-As from any mail enabled Public Folder. This worked just
fine until the E2K7 server was introduced into the environment, and the Public
Folders were replicated. Then it stopped working. The Outlook error message
is 'You do not have permission to send the message on behalf of the specified
user.
PFDavAdmin Property Editor produces the same results regardless of which server
you connect to. There are no DACL issues.
Public Folders\Community Services DOMAIN\User:Allowed:All-Extended-Rights
DOMAIN\User::Allowed:Send-As DOMAIN\User::Allowed:Send-As
Most user's mailboxes are on the E2K7 server, but I have also tested with a
user who's mailbox is on the E2K3 server.
The results of the get-mailpublicfolder command using EMS on the E2K7 server
are below. I don't understand why it only list my account as having the
permission, when there are actually 3, but I am no more able to do this than
either of the other users.
[PS] C:\Windows\system32get-mailpublicfolder -Identity 'CN=Community Services,C
N=Microsoft Exchange System Objects,DC=massbar,DC=org' |fl
Contacts : {}
DeliverToMailboxAndForward : False
ExternalEmailAddress : expf:COMMUNITY SERVICES856074B04EFF134BE6F
610BDC8A6E02E9BFDFC
ForwardingAddress :
PublicFolderType : Mapi
PhoneticDisplayName:
RootUrl:
AcceptMessagesOnlyFrom : {}
AcceptMessagesOnlyFromDLMembers: {}
AddressListMembership : {}
Alias : CommunityServices
OrganizationalUnit : massbar.org/Microsoft Exchange System Obje
cts
CustomAttribute1 :
CustomAttribute10 :
CustomAttribute11 :
CustomAttribute12 :
CustomAttribute13 :
CustomAttribute14 :
CustomAttribute15 :
CustomAttribute2 :
CustomAttribute3 :
CustomAttribute4 :
CustomAttribute5 :
CustomAttribute6 :
CustomAttribute7 :
CustomAttribute8 :
CustomAttribute9 :
DisplayName: Community Services
EmailAddresses : {SMTP:communityservi...@massbar.org, smtp:
communityserv...@massbar.org}
GrantSendOnBehalfTo: {massbar.org/MBA/Users/Information Service
s/Domain Admins/GPO Test Group/Carol Fee}
HiddenFromAddressListsEnabled : True
LegacyExchangeDN : /O=MASSACHUSETTS BAR ASSOCIATION/OU=MBA_EM
AIL/CN=RECIPIENTS/CN=COMMUNITY SERVICES856
074B04EFF134BE6F610BDC8A6E02E9BFDFC
MaxSendSize: unlimited
MaxReceiveSize : unlimited
PoliciesIncluded : {}
PoliciesExcluded : {}
EmailAddressPolicyEnabled : False
PrimarySmtpAddress : communityservi...@massbar.org
RecipientType : PublicFolder
RecipientTypeDetails : PublicFolder
RejectMessagesFrom : {}
RejectMessagesFromDLMembers: {}
RequireSenderAuthenticationEnabled : False
