Re: MDBDATA Folder
Another question not asked...are these log files RECENT? i.e. How old is the newest file? If they correlate to a store that has been deleted or the log path was moved, BE won't purge that location after backup completes... --James On 1/19/10, Cameron Cooper ccoo...@aurico.com wrote: Exchange new-be here... looking on our exchange server under the following folder \Exchsrvr\MDBDATA and noticed that there are 23.6GB worth of log files in there. Are these safe to delete? _ Cameron Cooper System Administrator | CompTIA A+ Certified Aurico Reports, Inc Phone: 847-890-4021 | Fax: 847-255-1896 ccoo...@aurico.com mailto:ccoo...@aurico.com | www.aurico.com -- Sent from my mobile device
Re: BB Outage
Might want to check your end...Blackberry indicated that full service was restored around 0545 EST. Should have at least seen SOMETHING trickle in by now BIS or something else might be a different story... --James On 12/23/09, Jeff Brown 2jbr...@gmail.com wrote: 7:15 central time and our BB data services are still down. 13+ hours. On Wed, Dec 23, 2009 at 12:13 AM, Jeff Brown 2jbr...@gmail.com wrote: I am on BES, and am not getting any messages. Have reset my phone, still no go. Will I have to reboot BES server? On Wed, Dec 23, 2009 at 12:10 AM, Peter Sam srir...@hotmail.com wrote: BES (only BES) was recovered at 12:20 am EST; there are no backlogs on the RIM side but your local infrastructure (and wireless network provider) may still be processing these backlogs and maybe queued up. -- Date: Wed, 23 Dec 2009 00:05:51 -0600 Subject: Re: BB Outage From: 2jbr...@gmail.com To: exchangelist@lyris.sunbelt-software.com Seeing posts on Blackberry website indicating that some have service restored. Nothing working here as far as I can tell. We first noticed that the internet wasn't working for our BB's, started about noon central, then we lost email service between 5:30 and 6 pm. This is 6 hours long for us at this point. On Tue, Dec 22, 2009 at 9:00 PM, Martin Blackstone mblackst...@gmail.com wrote: This is the kind of chiz that makes people want iPhones! * * -- Hotmail: Trusted email with Microsoft’s powerful SPAM protection. Sign up now. http://clk.atdmt.com/GBL/go/177141664/direct/01/ -- Sent from my mobile device
Re: Retrivein old e-mails mentioning a specific user Exchange 2007
I'd recommend calling a forensic service (I almost always use Iron Mountain). Given enough of your config information, they can restore tapes much faster than you can, and feed them into a discovery engine, exporting only the emails you need to PST. They can also sign off on chain of custody, secure transport, etc if required --James On 10/23/09, Michael B. Smith mich...@owa.smithcons.com wrote: yes, you can do that. i am, in fact, doing that for a number of my own customers right now. you work out a rhythm after a while... From: Graeme Carstairs [loonyto...@gmail.com] Sent: Friday, October 23, 2009 11:17 AM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: Retrivein old e-mails mentioning a specific user Exchange 2007 Hi All, One of our customers has just found out why we recommended and quoted them an e-mail archival system. One of their employees has left and has since started proceedings for constructive dismissal. HIs lawyer requested copies of every e-mail that mentions his name, and the client passed the request to the users who would have been cited as being involved 1st. They retrieved all the e-mails they could and they were passed to his lawyer. Of course you can all guess what happened next, he claims that he knows for a fact there were other e-mails sent by these people that mentioned him, that haven't bee passed on and therefore these people have deliberately deleted them so as to avoid incriminating themselves. So now we get called in to see what we can do for them. They have a single mailbox server Exchange 2007 setup, and it is backed up fully to tape every night, they keep there weekly tapes for a year and there monthly tapes indefinitely. My thinking is to do this in a way that would be seen as safe, would be to setup a lab with a DC and and exchange server restored form the original site backups, and then go back to the 1st tape available after the start date that the e-mail is requested from, (it is looking like 8 months) then restoring the AD, and then the Exchange databases. I am not sure if we can then force the undeletion of all deleted items, and then search the store for all mails with his name in the subject, to, from, cc, bcc and message body fields. Moving that into an archive PST file, and then lather rinse repeat for each and every tape. Putting the files onto a USB HDD and giving it to the lawyer. Is this a workable solution, or does anyone have any better ideas. Of course once completed the e-mail archiver quote is getting reissued immediately. TIA Graeme -- Good news everyone, you have just received and e-mail from me! Ted Turnerhttp://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/authors/t/ted_turner.html - Sports is like a war without the killing. -- Sent from my mobile device
Re: Exchange 2007
I think Microsoft also assumed that partners would step up and make GUI tools that bolted onto the powershell for Exchange and for any other product that they didn't feel like adding a full-feature GUI for...this has become all too common with vendors (well, we have that feature - here's the published API if you actually wanted to use it!) The usual top partners have built stuff around powershell...but they're not targeted at the SMB space. (If there are some that are meant for the non-Enterprise customer, I don't know them very well, because I've been out of that space for a while now). --James On Sun, Oct 18, 2009 at 7:04 PM, Michael B. Smith mich...@owa.smithcons.com wrote: A very common phrase heard on the Microsoft campus these days is to ship is to choose. The windows server common criteria (that is, the features that are required to be in every new server product) require effectively complete control by PowerShell. Once the product teams have engineered that, then the GUI becomes something where things can be easily cut in order to make ship dates. Truth be told, Microsoft sees those smaller folks moving to the cloud - for everything - over the next few years. Broadband and ubiquitous connectivity make that more and more attractive. Enterprise clients and cloud computing are where you see the primary investments being made. I think it's a mistake. But hey, they might be right. I'm just reminded that IBM and The Bunch (Burroughs, Univac, NCR, CDC, Honeywell) all thought that those pesky PCs would never replace them (for you youngun's, those are [were] the six top mainframe manufacturers in the 60s/70s/80s). From: James Hill [james.h...@superamart.com.au] Sent: Sunday, October 18, 2009 6:21 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Exchange 2007 1] Lots of normal functionality (i.e., things your average admin will need to do) isn't in the GUI console. You have to do it in PowerShell. Why do they continue down this path? Whilst I understand the benefits of using Powershell (it has saved me a lot of time in certain instances) I don't understand why features/functions that make sense to be in the GUI as well aren't in there. Even the simple ability to see mailbox size for example SHOULD have been in the GUI for 07. There are a lot of SMB's that have jack of all trade admins managing the exchange environment. They don't have time to specialise and therefore can't become a Powershell expert. I really don't understand where Microsoft is going with this. -Original Message- From: Michael B. Smith [mailto:mich...@owa.smithcons.com] Sent: Saturday, 17 October 2009 12:48 AM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Exchange 2007 Now that it's RTM'ed, I can express my opinion publically. I've got a couple of bad things to say about it: 1] Lots of normal functionality (i.e., things your average admin will need to do) isn't in the GUI console. You have to do it in PowerShell. 2] Retention Policies are a step backwards from Messaging Records Management. 3] The implementation of the Archive Mailbox is half-baked, at best. 4] All of the Continous Replication solutions are gone - I'm most disappointed with the removal of SCR and LCR which did not require Windows Enterprise. The only HA solution is DAG (based on failover clustering, which requires Windows Enteprise). In USD, this puts about a $6K licensing premium on HA. 5] STILL no two-box HA solution. While you can colocate CA/HT on MB now, for that to be a HA solution, you have to have a clustered LB solution sitting in front (if the LB isn't clustered, then you don't have a HA solution - you just have a resilient backend). With the cost of that, you might as well have two more CA/HT boxes sitting in front running Windows NLB. 6] No method of doing an upgrade without either: a] breaking HA of an existing installation, or b] purchasing new hardware. 7] Microsoft is pushing SATA for storage HARD. People using SAN are now at a price/feature disadvantage. Not using SAN is going to be a hard-sell for a lots of techies, I think, when just one release ago they were pushing management for lots of expensive SAN disk. Not to say that there aren't lots of good/great features - there are. As always - you should evaluate the features/functionality for each company, one by one. From: Jason Gurtz [jasongu...@npumail.com] Sent: Friday, October 16, 2009 10:31 AM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Exchange 2007 If you're about to deploy an Exchange server and can wait, I am hearing only good things about Exchange 2010. Finally, useful cross-browser OWA! It was about time :) ~JasonG
Re: Outsourcing Discussion
Lots of other good responses... Only thing I'll add, is that most large outsourcing efforts (i.e. all helpdesk and level 2 support, 6000 developers replaced by offshore staff, etc) really come down to accountability, as the base reason. At some point (often because of perceived incompetence by senior management combined with bad HR policies), there's an assumption that if it's too difficult to make thousands of individual people accountable for a specific function...then it might be easier to hold a contract or a vendor accountable. Does it ever really work that way? Nope. But that's usually because contracts for outsourcing a support function aren't written well enough, not because it's impossible to achieve... --James On Tue, Oct 13, 2009 at 8:57 PM, Sherry Abercrombie saber...@gmail.com wrote: Guys and gals, I've returned to college this fall after about 15 years to finally finish up a degree I started on about 25 years ago. One of my classes this semester is Macro Economics. Last night my professor gave us an essay question for a test next Monday that is potentially 50% or more of our test grade. The topic is on outsourcing and I wanted to toss this out for discussion, input, personal experiences etc etc. The questions I have to answer are: What is the economic justification given for outsourcing? Where is the outsourcing taking place? (Obviously, I'm focusing on the IT field, specifically technical support) What types of jobs are these workers performing? What is the benefit to the business? To foreign workers? I talked with my professor and told her what approach I wanted to take, from the end user perspective, and that I had experienced the tech support being outsourced. She liked that idea a lot. Obviously, I will be looking for other news articles to support my essay. What I'm looking for is thoughts, opinions, personal experiences from an end user perspective, has anyone here been outsourced? What was that like? I'm just taking an informal poll from a group of my peers that I know has had personal experience in some way with this subject. Try to keep it on topic, I did get Stu's OK before sending this, so a big Thanks Stu for the use of these lists to help with my exam. -- Sherry Abercrombie Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic. Arthur C. Clarke Sent from Haltom City, TX, United States
Categorizer failures
Exchange 2003 SP2, running on Windows 2003 SP2 in Windows 2003 domain (all Exchange servers and all users+mailboxes in one domain in a two-domain forest). For the past week or so, we've had two major Categorizer problems, randomly on almost all 30 of our Exchange servers: 1) Messages Awaiting Directory Lookup (PreCatQueue) will start to fill up...no particular action we've taken will resolve this. It seems to start working again randomly (maybe when the Categorizer starts talking to a different DC?) 2) Random messages, both internal an external recipients affected, will NDR with a 5.1.0 error. With diagnostic logging turned up to full, we see the following events when the problem is going on: EventID 6010 - Categorizer is temporarily unable to process a message. The function 'CCfgConnection::AsyncSearch' called 'CBatchLdapConnection::AsyncSearch' which returned error code '0xc004051f' (). ( f:\tisp2\transmt\src\phatq\cat\ldapstor\cnfgmgr@2353 ) EventID 8260 - Could not open LDAP session to directory 'DC1.domain.local' using local service credentials. Cannot access Address List configuration information. Make sure the server 'DC1.domain.local' is running. Does anyone have any ideas? We have a case open with Microsoft there, but they seem to be scratching their heads as well... We've tried reboots of Exchange servers and DCs, unhooking VSAPI and antivirus scanners on the Exchange side, and DCDIAG from the Exchange server to the DCs, and locally on the DCs are clean. Thanks in advance, if anyone has thoughts... --James
Re: Outlook 2007 best practices whitepaper
You aren't having a problem with meeting requests (in the Inbox) not going on the Calendar as tentative, are you? That processing doesn't happen with Outlook 2007, because the Availability Service does it in Exchange 2007. But when we had your combo of server and Outlook, VIPs that were always 3 days behind on email were missing meetings, because they were no longer automatically processed... --James On 7/22/09, David.Ricci david.ri...@hwinstitute.com wrote: Brand new built exchange server I moved them from an old 2003 standard server. They had the problem on the old server. They are in there own mail store at least most of them are. Server is 4 month old. From: Peter Johnson [mailto:peter.john...@peterstow.com] Sent: Wednesday, July 22, 2009 4:11 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Outlook 2007 best practices whitepaper Are these issue limited to users on a single server? Have u tried doing a integrity check on the mailstore or moving their mailboxes to a different storage group as an idea.? From: David.Ricci [mailto:david.ri...@hwinstitute.com] Sent: 22 July 2009 20:39 To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: Outlook 2007 best practices whitepaper I continue to have calendar issues with outlook 2007 sp2 and Enterprise Exchange 2003 sp2. I cannot convince the powers to be that having a 4 gig mailbox and on cache mode, and having 4 exec admis watch 10 exes calendars via delegation is a bad practice. That they should have a archive solution and keep mailbos under 2 gig. Does anyone have any supporting documentation to support my theory? Thank you David This e-mail and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, distribution, or taking any action in reliance on the information contained in this e-mail is prohibited. If you have received this e-mail in error, please immediately notify our e-mail administrator at supp...@hwinstitute.com mailto:supp...@hwinstitute.com . . -- Sent from my mobile device
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 john.hornbuc...@taylor.k12.fl.us 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 Hornbucklejohn.hornbuc...@taylor.k12.fl.us 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 Hornbucklejohn.hornbuc...@taylor.k12.fl.us 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: Is Exchange Doomed?
I'd say that Exchange MAIL is doomed. But really, Exchange has never enjoyed market share for MAIL. It's integration, calendar/scheduling, archiving and compliance that have kept it at the top. Google has a long way to go to replace EVERY feature that business (especially Enterprise IT) relies on. --James On 6/10/09, Micheal Espinola Jr michealespin...@gmail.com wrote: I dont know if I'd say doomed, but the upcoming features that Google Apps will be pushing are going to be a killer for a lot of smaller organizations. Microsoft wants you into the cloud too, but Google is doing it better IMHO. The desktop, remote/offline (via Google Gears), and mobile integration that they are implementing is remarkable. For the current Gmail haters (esp. IMAP and label related, etc) I can only say that you have to adjust the way you think about mail and how you process it in order to fully appreciate and benefit from what they are doing.[1] I've rethought email and how to deal with it at least 3 times over the past 5 years, allowing myself to be uprooted with the apps I use and the processes I use to display and process it. I've concluded that Google is doing it better than anyone else, and does more work to make it more universally available. YMMV 1. Nope, I'm not getting into it. Its something best discovered on your own. Im not going to be involved in an evangelical debate to convince anyone otherwise. This is too opinionated a topic that has entrenched devotees with various ties to players. -- ME2 On Wed, Jun 10, 2009 at 12:01 PM, Roger Wright rwri...@evatone.com wrote: 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~ -- Sent from my mobile device ~ Ninja Email Security with Cloudmark Spam Engine Gets Image Spam ~ ~ http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Ninja~
Re: EDB file from tape.
Quest Recovery Manager for Exchange is by far the best product for the job, in my opinion. --James On 6/8/09, Paul Cookman paul.cook...@selection.co.uk wrote: I am looking for a free tool to extrack an edb file off of a backup tape, backed up with Backup Exec. We upgraded Backupexec and Exchange version a few months back and need to view an old email from a few years back. Ontrack, the free version allows us to view the edb file once extracted but can't get Backupexec to extract an online taken database to a folder as it is asking for the original server. If I could get the edb file off, I could use the free ontrack power tools to view. Any ideas anyone? Paul Cookman * Technical Account Manager [cid:imageabbfa6.jpg@0d20f17a.73bd4117] +44(0) 844 874 1000 * [cid:imageba6bf0.jpg@3516ecc9.15fe48f7] +44(0) 844 874 1001 [cid:image88fc60.jpg@e4fdf19b.0a82484b] paul.cook...@selection.co.uk * www.selection.co.ukhttp://www.selection.co.uk/ [cid:image80ca39.jpg@9254a232.2567426b] This e-mail is confidential and is intended for the exclusive use of the addressee only. Selection Services Plc accepts no liability for personal views expressed. While every effort has been made to ensure the attachments are virus-free, they must be checked before further use, especially those containing encrypted data. If you have any problems with this e-mail, please contact our IT Manager on em...@selection.co.ukmailto:em...@selection.co.uk Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 2758710 Registered Office: Provident House, 122 High Street, Bromley, Kent BR1 1EZ ~ 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 archiving
Not sure about Sharepoint support on all of them...but I would start with Symantec and Commvault. Zantaz will look fine on paper, but I had too many support problems with them in recent years to suggest their product. Above all, do a very extensive test/POC with each. In an isolated environment with as much real test data as you can. Nearly all of the products do the same thing at a high level, but I've always found some specific differences between them that matter to most organizations. You won't find those without a full POC. --James On 5/6/09, Brian Dwyer bdw...@bne.catholic.edu.au wrote: Exchange 2003 (moving to 2007 soon) 14,000 users, 3 mailbox servers, 15 DB's, approx 2 TB data, growing at rate of 100 GB month. 75% of users OWA, 25% Outlook 2003 in cached mode. No Quotas,or retention periods enforced, no archiving. Sounds like a horror story but very few performance issues, very few problems. Really want to implement archiving, but must be a solution that is OWA friendly, and one which does not require any client add ins to OLK as majority of the 17,000 + clients are members of one of the 144 federated (untruseted) domains in our organisation. In early stages of desktop H/W upgrade - Vista/Office 2007. Management have specified that a single enterprise archiving solution - i.e., filestore, email, sharepoint etc, is to be used. Would really appreciate suggestions. Brian (Catholic Education Brisbane, Queensland, Australia) From: David Mazzaccaro [mailto:david.mazzacc...@hudsonhhc.com] Sent: Wednesday, 6 May 2009 10:27 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Exchange archiving Mailbox limits are 300MB warning, 320MB no send, 350MB no send/receive. Am I being to strict??? I also have deleted item retention set for 14 days. I figured these are pretty typical limits? From: Stefan Jafs [mailto:sj...@amico.com] Sent: Tuesday, May 05, 2009 10:30 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Exchange archiving Yes I do __ Stefan Jafs From: Bob Fronk [mailto:b...@btrfronk.com] Sent: May-05-09 9:54 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Exchange archiving I have about 130 users and a 250GB store Wow.. you must have some strict limits set. Bob From: David Mazzaccaro [mailto:david.mazzacc...@hudsonhhc.com] Sent: Tuesday, May 05, 2009 2:43 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Exchange archiving That's good to hear. I have about 160 users and currently have a 24GB store. What kind of hardware is SEA running on? processor, storage? How long are you archiving for? thx From: Stefan Jafs [mailto:sj...@amico.com] Sent: Tuesday, May 05, 2009 1:20 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Exchange archiving I have recently installed the SEA solution. I'm impressed, everything works, we had a bit of a challenge with RPC / HTTP, we had to get another certificate etc. but it's all good now and I had any help I needed from Sunbelt. The setup was included in the cost and Sunbelt came in remotely and had it all configured in about 1,5 hours. I have about 190 users so far I have archived 138 users, my store has gone from 105 Gb to less than 50Gb (or should have if I defragged). It setup to auto archive automatically after 30 days. My external Archived data is about 40 Gigs. It's very seamless to the users, now I'm just trying to get the users to move all their archives.pst back to the inbox. Very happy SEA user. ___ Stefan Jafs From: David Mazzaccaro [mailto:david.mazzacc...@hudsonhhc.com] Sent: Tuesday, May 05, 2009 11:28 AM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Exchange archiving Thanks for the reply. We have just started discussing archiving, and while compliancy is a goal, I suppose it would be nice to reduce the size of the store. I would think that once you have enabled any archiving solution, you will be reducing your store? Won't messages that people are keeping now be archived (moved out of the store) thus reducing the size, and allowing for lower mailbox limits? Thx From: Eric Hanna [mailto:eri...@sunbelt-software.com] Sent: Tuesday, May 05, 2009 11:15 AM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Exchange archiving In my experience, the load on the Exchange server tends to depend on how many mailboxes are being journaled, the amount of journaling mailboxes, and how much traffic is being ran through the Exchange server. Based on these factors, I would say you will probably see about a 5-15% increase in utilization (rough estimate but is what I generally see). As for how granular journaling is: Exchange 2003 is set on the store level while Exchange 2007 can be set at the mailbox level. Lastly,
Re: Exchange archiving
All true..though not completely honest comparisons. If there's a business requirement, size the solution and tell the business how much it costs. Simply telling people I know you spent thousands/millions, but I won't help you store files in a way that's easy for the business to understand doesn't get you very far. --James On 5/7/09, Maglinger, Paul pmaglin...@scvl.com wrote: Ultimately, computers should be a tool that serves the needs of people. Telling people not to use email they way they *want* to use email is not an ideal situation. Sometimes one has to adapt to the limitation of a system, but when possible, it's better to adapt the system to better do the job. Okay... I want to use my car to go 85 mph down the highway, but I have people telling me not to use it that way. I want to use my screwdriver as a pry bar, but there are people telling me not to use it that way. There are people who want to use their computer to download pirated music and movies from the internet, but there are people telling them not to use it that way. There are people who want to connect various USB devices to the company computers, but there are people telling them not to use it that way. There are people who want to use their computer to go to YouTube, Facebook, Twitter, etc., but there are people telling them not to use it that way. There are people who would like to use their computer to hack into corporate businesses, but... -Original Message- From: Ben Scott [mailto:mailvor...@gmail.com] Sent: Wednesday, May 06, 2009 6:29 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: Re: Exchange archiving On Wed, May 6, 2009 at 2:11 PM, John Cook john.c...@pfsf.org wrote: But why isn't an e-mail system a file transfer and storage system? Because it's a database app with performance limits as opposed to a file server. [This message is somewhat vague theory, somewhat devil's advocate, and somewhat philosophy, but I think this is a discussion worth having.] Fundamentally, and from a high level, a database and a filesystem are not all that dissimilar. Indeed, in a lot of the historical literature I've read from the 1940s and 1950s, there isn't a clear distinction between the two. That idea came later. It's not like a filesystem doesn't magically not have performance lists. Do a directory of a folder with tens of thousands of files in it sometime. Slow. Databases and filesystems generally have different optimization goals and feature sets, of course. And that's some of the reason why trying to move large files out of Exchange is a good idea. ESE doesn't do well at that, and NTFS does. But there's more to it than that. As many have said, having more than a few thousand items in a single folder slows Outlook and Exchange way down. See above about large NTFS directories. Both are slow, so going to NTFS simple moves the problem around. One could point to the performance wins that fixed sized records give you in a contiguous file, and that's a reason why databases are good at that. But ESE (Exchange^W Extensible Storage Engine) doesn't use that model, as far as I know. More importantly, I would argue that a mail system has more in common with a filesystem than a traditional database anyway. Message body lengths vary hugely. That's more like files than fixed-length records. Ultimately, computers should be a tool that serves the needs of people. Telling people not to use email they way they *want* to use email is not an ideal situation. Sometimes one has to adapt to the limitation of a system, but when possible, it's better to adapt the system to better do the job. -- Ben ~ 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~ -- Sent from my mobile device ~ Ninja Email Security with Cloudmark Spam Engine Gets Image Spam ~ ~ http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Ninja~
Re: Exchange archiving
Every article I've seen that describes horrible performance seems to be talking about having the journal mailbox on the same Exchange server as the mailboxes being journaled. In my experience, journaling should only be turned on if you have a compliance reason to do so. If that's the case, let your archive product use the journaling as described. If you DO have a compliance requirement, then adding a small server to host journal mailbox(es) shouldn't be too much to ask. If you DON'T have a compliance issue driving this and just want to archive and stub, then I would recommend against journaling. There are vendors that don't require it. Try Mimosa instead of the usual suspects - they don't even require MAPI... --James On 5/5/09, David Mazzaccaro david.mazzacc...@hudsonhhc.com wrote: I am beginning to look into our options for archiving Exchange 2003. It seems like most solutions involve enabling journaling on the exchange server and having the server grab a copy of every email that is sent and received. Then (with a hosted solution for example), the copies of emails get securely sent over the internet to the hosting company's servers where we can log in and view/retrieve them for an archive period. Depending on the length of archiving and the amount of data, cost seems to be around $300 - $600 month. I assume in-house solutions (where you have the journaling service send copies of everything to your own in-house server) is also an option? In either case, how do I know my server can handle enabling journaling? There has to be some major performance impact? Also I assume you can enable journaling on a single (or couple) of test mailboxes? Is this what others are doing? Thanks ~ 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 archiving
Messages taken out are just going to leave you with whitespace. While most of that space will be reused (thus reducing the growth of the store over time), it will never reduce the size of the store on disk without an offline defrag. --James On 5/5/09, David Mazzaccaro david.mazzacc...@hudsonhhc.com wrote: Thanks for the reply. We have just started discussing archiving, and while compliancy is a goal, I suppose it would be nice to reduce the size of the store. I would think that once you have enabled any archiving solution, you will be reducing your store? Won't messages that people are keeping now be archived (moved out of the store) thus reducing the size, and allowing for lower mailbox limits? Thx From: Eric Hanna [mailto:eri...@sunbelt-software.com] Sent: Tuesday, May 05, 2009 11:15 AM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Exchange archiving In my experience, the load on the Exchange server tends to depend on how many mailboxes are being journaled, the amount of journaling mailboxes, and how much traffic is being ran through the Exchange server. Based on these factors, I would say you will probably see about a 5-15% increase in utilization (rough estimate but is what I generally see). As for how granular journaling is: Exchange 2003 is set on the store level while Exchange 2007 can be set at the mailbox level. Lastly, my 2pennies worth for the archiving: There are lots of solutions out there for archiving from open source to products like Symantec Vault. Enabling journaling for Exchange archiving is a popular way to go as it ensures capture of inbound and outbound traffic instead of interacting with individual mailboxes. While this gets your compliancy side, it doesn't do anything for your store sizes. Products like SEA (yes, a shameless plug) are able to archive your journaling mailbox (and only keep a copy for the archives) and also archive mailboxes individually. This will get your compliancy side as well as getting your information store reduced. While all solutions serve their function, it really depends on what you want to accomplish while archiving. Are you looking for archiving as a compliancy solution and/or do you want to get your information store sizes down? Is it more beneficial for you and your company to use a hosting company or would you like to keep it in-house? Sincerely, Eric Hanna Lead Enterprise Technical Services Specialist Sunbelt Software From: David Mazzaccaro [mailto:david.mazzacc...@hudsonhhc.com] Sent: Tuesday, May 05, 2009 10:43 AM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: Exchange archiving I am beginning to look into our options for archiving Exchange 2003. It seems like most solutions involve enabling journaling on the exchange server and having the server grab a copy of every email that is sent and received. Then (with a hosted solution for example), the copies of emails get securely sent over the internet to the hosting company's servers where we can log in and view/retrieve them for an archive period. Depending on the length of archiving and the amount of data, cost seems to be around $300 - $600 month. I assume in-house solutions (where you have the journaling service send copies of everything to your own in-house server) is also an option? In either case, how do I know my server can handle enabling journaling? There has to be some major performance impact? Also I assume you can enable journaling on a single (or couple) of test mailboxes? Is this what others are doing? Thanks ... ~ 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 archiving
It depends. I didn't realize you meant an environment that large. Assuming the archive product empties the journal mailboxes often enough, you can do that with about 12-20 journal mailbox targets. I've implemented this before for that volume of users. Again...the performance warnings never seem to elaborate, but I've never had issues with journaling itself if I have a dedicated server to host the journal destinations. --James On 5/5/09, Don Andrews don.andr...@safeway.com wrote: I'm not sure a small server will handle journaling of all 60k+ active users. Ok, just meant to point out that not all environments are equal. -Original Message- From: James Wells [mailto:jam...@gmail.com] Sent: Tuesday, May 05, 2009 8:51 AM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: Re: Exchange archiving Every article I've seen that describes horrible performance seems to be talking about having the journal mailbox on the same Exchange server as the mailboxes being journaled. In my experience, journaling should only be turned on if you have a compliance reason to do so. If that's the case, let your archive product use the journaling as described. If you DO have a compliance requirement, then adding a small server to host journal mailbox(es) shouldn't be too much to ask. If you DON'T have a compliance issue driving this and just want to archive and stub, then I would recommend against journaling. There are vendors that don't require it. Try Mimosa instead of the usual suspects - they don't even require MAPI... --James On 5/5/09, David Mazzaccaro david.mazzacc...@hudsonhhc.com wrote: I am beginning to look into our options for archiving Exchange 2003. It seems like most solutions involve enabling journaling on the exchange server and having the server grab a copy of every email that is sent and received. Then (with a hosted solution for example), the copies of emails get securely sent over the internet to the hosting company's servers where we can log in and view/retrieve them for an archive period. Depending on the length of archiving and the amount of data, cost seems to be around $300 - $600 month. I assume in-house solutions (where you have the journaling service send copies of everything to your own in-house server) is also an option? In either case, how do I know my server can handle enabling journaling? There has to be some major performance impact? Also I assume you can enable journaling on a single (or couple) of test mailboxes? Is this what others are doing? Thanks ~ 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~ ~ 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: Problem with Meeting room resource.
I'll second the recommendation for Exchange Resource Manager (by Simpler-Webb). One of the best products out there...but sadly, it is being discontinued since Exchange 2007 includes much of its functionality. But you can't come close to it with Exchange 2003+AutoAccept agent. --James On Fri, Apr 24, 2009 at 8:06 AM, Kevan Dickinson kevan.dickin...@cmi-plc.com wrote: Hi Looking into this issue I have found that there are 2 ways of booking resources in Exchange 2003 / Outlook. 1) Direct booking via Outlook. (Which is how we are doing it now) 2) Use the Auto Accpet Agent. This article http://msexchangeteam.com/archive/2006/02/22/420275.aspx seems to describe the different ways very well and the Auto Accept agent would seem to overcome our problem. (People opening Meeting room calandars directly and booking them) Has anyone got any other comments that may help us to decide which way to go? Regards Kevan Dickinson Network Manager NSF-CMI 23 Lodge Road Hanborough Business Park, Long Hanborough, Oxford, OX29 8SJ, UK T:+44 01993 885661 E:kevan.dickin...@nsf-cmi.com W:www.nsf-cmi.com From: Steve Kistenmacher [mailto:s_kistenmac...@hotmail.com] Sent: 23 April 2009 18:19 To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Problem with Meeting room resource. Try logging as the resource account via outlook or owa you may be able to see who booked it. From: David Mazzaccaro [mailto:david.mazzacc...@hudsonhhc.com] Sent: Thursday, April 23, 2009 1:04 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Problem with Meeting room resource. I HIGHLY recommend using ERM (Exchange Resource Manager). I believe it is free if you only need to monitor 2 resources. As for mailbox permissions: Anonymous - READ Everyone - READ HTH From: Kevan Dickinson [mailto:kevan.dickin...@cmi-plc.com] Sent: Thursday, April 23, 2009 11:40 AM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: Problem with Meeting room resource. Hi We use meeting rooms as a resource (As I presume many of you do) to allow people to book meeting rooms via there Outlook Calandar when scheduling meetings. We have had a user access a meeting room calandar directly and book a private appointment. Because the meeting has been booked as Private no one can see who has booked the room. 1) I need to know who has booked it. 2) I need to stop this happening in the future. We don’t mind people viewing the meeting room calandars directly but they must not be able to book them directly. What permisions should I have on the meeting room mailbox that will allow people to view and book meeting rooms as a resourcethrough their Outlook when scheduling a meeting but not be able to edit / book the meeting by directly opening the meeting room calandar via Outlook Calandar, File Open other Peoples Folder Calandar. Can anyone help please? Regards Kevan Dickinson Network Manager NSF-CMI 23 Lodge Road Hanborough Business Park, Long Hanborough, Oxford, OX29 8SJ, UK T:+44 01993 885661 E:kevan.dickin...@nsf-cmi.com W:www.nsf-cmi.com ***Disclaimer*** The contents of this Email may be privileged and are confidential. If you are not the intended recipient, any disclosure, copying, distribution or any action taken or omitted to be taken in reliance on it, is prohibited and may be unlawful. Should you wish to use Email as a mode of communication, NSF-CMi Ltd and its subsidiaries are unable to guarantee the security of Email content outside of our own computer systems. This footnote also confirms that this Email message has been checked by MailMarshal for the presence of computer viruses. Whilst we run anti-virus software, you are solely responsible for ensuring that any Email or attachment you receive is virus free. We disclaim any liability for any damage you suffer as a consequence of receiving any virus. NSF-CMi Ltd Registered in England No: 1899857 Registered Office 4th Floor, 35 New Bridge Street, London, EC4V 6BW ** ***Disclaimer*** The contents of this Email may be privileged and are confidential. If you are not the intended recipient, any disclosure, copying, distribution or any action taken or omitted to be taken in reliance on it, is prohibited and may be unlawful. Should you wish to use Email as a mode of communication, NSF-CMi Ltd and its subsidiaries are unable to guarantee the security of Email content outside of our own computer systems. This footnote also confirms that this Email message has been checked by MailMarshal for the presence of computer viruses. Whilst we run anti-virus software,
Re: Item could not be opened error - Items stuck in queue
Chris, That article is usually talking about 2xchange to Exchange (across connectors) -- but I've also seen it when Exchange 2003 forwards to Sendmail. I'd try the fix in the KB - also had Microsoft analyzing plenty in that case. They may have had an additional step that I can't remember, so you may have to reach out to them. --James On 4/2/09, Chris Larson chr...@xp.etowns.net wrote: I see that this article leads back to this KB article: http://support.microsoft.com/kb/938650 I ran across this during my search and make the registry change on both of our servers, but still the problem persists. We are forwarding mail from the exchange server to a FreeBSD server for delivery and not exchange 2007. The only other part of this is that a copy of that cancellation message is forwarded to our archive account on the first server. I can see that in message tracking, but I don't see any attempt at delivering the item to the hosted server at our ISP. - Original Message - From: Peter Dahl peter.d...@yum.com To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues exchangelist@lyris.sunbelt-software.com Sent: Thursday, April 2, 2009 8:55:35 AM GMT -06:00 US/Canada Central Subject: RE: Item could not be opened error - Items stuck in queue Chris, This looks like a possible match to what you are seeing with the queue. http://social.technet.microsoft.com/Forums/en-US/exchangesvrgeneral/thread/8dec38fa-bf40-4d45-8019-adaab7d77d2a/ From: Chris Larson [mailto:chr...@xp.etowns.net] Sent: Wednesday, April 01, 2009 2:46 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: Re: Item could not be opened error - Items stuck in queue Yes they have been all calendar related. I was able to duplicate serveral times in a row, but it but the only items that would stick in the queue were cancellations. - Original Message - From: Peter Dahl peter.d...@yum.com To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues exchangelist@lyris.sunbelt-software.com Sent: Wednesday, April 1, 2009 3:49:19 PM GMT -06:00 US/Canada Central Subject: RE: Item could not be opened error - Items stuck in queue Are all the messages that are stuck calendar appointment updates or are there standard mail messages in this state as well? You mentioned that you were able to replicate this behavior with your account. Can you consistently replicate this behavior or is it sporadic? From: Chris Larson [mailto:chr...@xp.etowns.net] Sent: Wednesday, April 01, 2009 1:06 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: Re: Item could not be opened error - Items stuck in queue I monitored the logfile and issued a force delivery on the queue and nothing appeared in the SMTP log file related to the e-mail. The queue manager shows the following message: Unable to open the file for delivery. - Original Message - From: Peter Dahl peter.d...@yum.com To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues exchangelist@lyris.sunbelt-software.com Sent: Wednesday, April 1, 2009 12:54:31 PM GMT -06:00 US/Canada Central Subject: RE: Item could not be opened error - Items stuck in queue The logging I was referring to is the SMTP conversation logging not something you would see in the application log. Check out the protocol logging section of this article. http://support.microsoft.com/kb/257265 From: Chris Larson [mailto:chr...@xp.etowns.net] Sent: Wednesday, April 01, 2009 9:37 AM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: Re: Item could not be opened error - Items stuck in queue I have seen this happen to one other user as well once in a while. Mainly all of the messages that become stuck in the connector queue are from the one user. I have been able to replicate it by creating a meeting, inviting my external e-mail account and then canceling the meeting. My cancellation notifications will be stuck in the queue for a couple of days with numerous retries and then NDR with a 4.4.7. The original invitation will be delivered without a problem. I initially thought that maybe one of the stores was corrupted as it seemed to only be affecting calendar meeting requests. That is why the integrity checks were performed. All of the systems are manged by WSUS and Symantec Endpoint Manager and everything is up to date. Scans are run during the week and come up clean. The funny thing is this user has been on three different systems in his office, I have created new profiles, disabled auto-population of the address field and removed those contacts from his contacts list. We have tried with Anti-virus software diabled and uninstalled and it doesn't seem to matter. SMTP logging was enabled on the server, but I actually don't see very any messages other than this: application: warning - 2009/04/01 09:12:48 - MSExchangeTransport (327) - n/a The following call : EcGetMime to the store failed. Error code : -2147467259. MDB : 2241c70c-055c-45da-8a25-ec4b43c13fa7. FID : 1-32. MID : 1-61D103. File : . For more information, click
Re: Calculating Storage for Archiving
That will vary by vendor. I know that when I've used Zantaz, they had a mode that would just analyze/report but not modify anything. You'll have to see what your compression looks like, retention period for the archive, index sizes if searching...but I'd be sure to get a solution that let's you expand or oversubscribe the storage OR plan up front with the vendor how to deisgn the archive to cutoff after a certain date and use new storage for all future. (iex: past - 2008 goes in archive bucket 1, 2009-future goes in archive bucket 2). You probably need the latter method no matter what, because there's no platform that can just expand forever on large archives --James On 3/25/09, John Hornbuckle john.hornbuc...@taylor.k12.fl.us wrote: We're exploring options for e-mail archiving systems. Is there a standard formula that can be used to estimate how much storage space will be required per user? I don't have a clue how to come up with reasonably reliable numbers for this. John Hornbuckle MIS Department Taylor County School District 318 North Clark Street Perry, FL 32347 www.taylor.k12.fl.us ~ 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: Large Mailboxes Performance
Correct. I'll try to dig up some links (there are KBs out there now on this; there were originally none). What matters is the critical path - both for common user operations and background tasks, Outlook in Online Mode+Exchange will keep a view of the Inbox,Sent,Calendar and I think one other folder. Exchange can't keep this view for every mailbox always, so some are always being overwritten. When Exchange has to re-generate that view, a large number of total items in it will degrade performance. Factor in an already overtaxed Exchange server, and the problem can have a very real client performance impact. For other folders (including user-created top level folders), the item count matters for views to be created, but they aren't in the critical list and won't be created unless needed by a client. Likewise - Outlook Cached Mode will greatly reduce this impact on the server, but things like archive products, VSAPI, delegation of folders are all back to Online mode. --James On 3/25/09, Webster carlwebs...@gmail.com wrote: -Original Message- From: mqcarp [mailto:mqcarpen...@gmail.com] Subject: Re: Large Mailboxes Performance For clarification, are you suggesting that the count be under 5,000 for inbox and subfolders, or just the inbox? I am not sure if those are calculated together since you can have top level folders outside the inbox also IIRC, MBS in a post a couple of months ago referred to the Inbox, Sent Items and Deleted items as the ones that should be under a certain item count. Webster ~ 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: Large Mailboxes Performance
I'm not Kevin but I'll answer anyway. Microsoft actually said last year in a whitepaper that they don't recommend stubbing, because of what was mentioned here - it saves on size certainly, but if a user never touches their Inbox again, 8 items will quickly become a performance problem. --James On 3/23/09, Jason Benway benw...@jsjcorp.com wrote: Kevin, could you please explain why you don't care for stubs? How would you recommend archiving for Exchange if you want to reduce the size of the store and keep the method of accessing the archived emails through outlook,OWA,smartphones? Thanks,jb -Original Message- From: KevinM [mailto:kev...@wlkmmas.org] Sent: Monday, March 23, 2009 7:21 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Large Mailboxes Performance Large mailboxes.. stubs are the devil.. ~Kevinm WLKMMAS My life http://www.hedonists.ca -Original Message- From: mqcarp [mailto:mqcarpen...@gmail.com] Sent: Monday, March 23, 2009 10:23 AM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: Re: Large Mailboxes Performance Is it safe to say no one in this thread uses a 3rd party archive option at all based on this feedback? On Mon, Mar 23, 2009 at 11:54 AM, William Lefkovics will...@lefkovics.net wrote: I wonder if those very rough guidelines are impacted at all by the performance improvements in the Outlook 2007 cumulative update from February 2009. http://support.microsoft.com/?kbid=968009 (This will be in Office 2007 SP2 also) From: Neil Hobson [mailto:nhob...@gmail.com] Sent: Monday, March 23, 2009 8:10 AM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Large Mailboxes Performance You made me go and look, didn't you? J I remember Ross Smith talking about this at TechEd EMEA and using the 20k figure. I wasn't 100% correct. Turns out that it's the Inbox and Sent Items at 20k, but the Contacts and Calendar are still at 5k. Having said this, keeping everything below 5k is always going to be better. http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/cc535025.aspx From: KevinM [mailto:kev...@wlkmmas.org] Sent: 23 March 2009 14:51 To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Large Mailboxes Performance Do you mean total items in all folders or per folder? It is so hard to get a firm answer on Items per folder. The last great written thing by Nicole I think was no more than 1,000 items per folder. I know it has changed since then. Last I had heard was 10k with the latest stuff. Has Matt or Nicole posting something different to the Exchange blog recently? ~Kevinm WLKMMAS My life http://www.hedonists.ca From: Neil Hobson [mailto:nhob...@gmail.com] Sent: Monday, March 23, 2009 7:36 AM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Large Mailboxes Performance It's all about the number of items in the core folders, like Inbox, Sent Items, Calendar, etc, and also restricted views. In Exchange 2003, the recommendation was to keep the number of items in these folders 5,000. In Exchange 2007, the recommendation is not to exceed 20,000 items (as long as you've designed your infrastructure correctly) From: Mayo, Shay [mailto:shay.m...@absg.com] Sent: 23 March 2009 13:58 To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Large Mailboxes Performance Hey Martin, I do understand that it is more of an Outlook thing but can you elaborate on Control the items in their folders? Thanks Shay From: Martin Blackstone [mailto:mblackst...@gmail.com] Sent: Monday, March 23, 2009 8:55 AM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Large Mailboxes Performance I don't think large mailboxes from an Exchange perspective are a performance issue. The issue mainly lies in Outlook performance and if your users can somehow learn to control the items in their folders, the performance will be fine. From: Mayo, Shay [mailto:shay.m...@absg.com] Sent: Monday, March 23, 2009 6:38 AM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: Large Mailboxes Performance Hey, Just curious what type of performance people have had with large mailboxes on Exchange 2007. Our company has a strict email retention policy that purges email after 30 days, but we have about 200 people though that have special circumstances where they need to store email long term. We implemented an archiving product from C2C about 1 and ½ years ago which turned out to be a far less than desirable solution for our users. We have fully migrated to Exchange 2007 and are kicking around the idea of not having a 3rd party archiving system and just allowing larger mailboxes (3-10 GB) for these special users. So my question is, what kind of performance have you guys seen with mailboxes this large? Do they benefit from Office 2k7 or have they actually ran fine with Office2k3? Lastly, a lot of these users travel and will be using cached Exchange mode. So I am mainly worried about performance from large OSTs Thanks Shay Mayo // Systems Administrator
Re: Named Property Limit
This is not new in Exchange 2007. Same behavior exists in Exchange 2003. And the table is unique per Information Store. --James On 3/20/09, Davies,Matt mdav...@generalatlantic.com wrote: Please forgive me if I appear stupid. Am I reading this whole thread correctly ? Every time exchange 2007 encounters an email with a X-header that it hasn't seen before, it creates a new named property in the table. I'm looking at the amount of x-headers in my inbound emails, 32,000 could very soon become depleted when we implement exchange 2007. I hope Microsoft are planning on resolving this.. Cheers Matt From: Randal, Phil [mailto:pran...@herefordshire.gov.uk] Sent: 20 March 2009 16:20 To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Named Property Limit Set your limit to somewhat less than the hard limit as per the technet articles and wait for your eventlog to fill up :-) Cheers, Phil -- Phil Randal | Networks Engineer Herefordshire Council | Deputy Chief Executive's Office | I.C.T. Services Division Thorn Office Centre, Rotherwas, Hereford, HR2 6JT Tel: 01432 260160 email: pran...@herefordshire.gov.uk Any opinion expressed in this e-mail or any attached files are those of the individual and not necessarily those of Herefordshire Council. This e-mail and any attached files are confidential and intended solely for the use of the addressee. This communication may contain material protected by law from being passed on. If you are not the intended recipient and have received this e-mail in error, you are advised that any use, dissemination, forwarding, printing or copying of this e-mail is strictly prohibited. If you have received this e-mail in error please contact the sender immediately and destroy all copies of it. From: McCready, Robert [mailto:rob.mccrea...@dplinc.com] Sent: 20 March 2009 12:31 To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Named Property Limit Another quick question. Is there any way to see how close we are to the 32k hard limit today? From: Alex Fontana [mailto:afontana...@gmail.com] Sent: Friday, March 20, 2009 1:05 AM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: Re: Named Property Limit Seems this turned into a b-ch fest rather than answering your original question...;-) While I agree this is a ridiculous characteristic in the design and one that opens us up for DoS attacks (eventually), it is what it is and we need to figure out how to work around it. You have a few options; increase the limit, move users off, or find out what is causing it and stop it. My first suggestion is to take inventory of where your databases are as far as named props are concerned, you need to expose some IS counters to see this info, but it'll give you an understanding on whether it's widespread or concentrated on a set of databases (or users). Next start monitoring your event logs. An event ID is logged by default each time a new named prop is added (event id 9873 I believe) and when the quota's been reached (9666, 7, 8, 9). This can help you track down the culprit. Note, the initial limit reached is the default quota...not the limit. My understanding is that when the hard limit (32k) is reached the database will dismount and you will have to restore from backup and move users off. In my situation I found that less than a dozen users were creating hundreds of named props daily for weeks. This was the result of an open source imap client called offlineIMAP. This client is used to bidirectionally synch messages via IMAP. It does this by creating a unique X-header for EVERY message that comes in, as opposed to a single X-header with a specific value. After finding this out I reached out to the users, and being the ridiculously intelligent (and curious) crew they are they crafted a patch for offlineIMAP (http://software.complete.org/software/issues/show/114). Hope this helps. -alex _ This e-mail (including all attachments) is confidential and may be privileged. It is for the exclusive use of the addressee only. If you are not the addressee, you are hereby notified that any dissemination of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please erase all copies of the message and its attachments and notify us immediately at h...@generalatlantic.com mailto:h...@generalatlantic.com. Thank You. ~ 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: Autodiscover service and multiple exchange environments
You may want to try your question over at windows-hied (apologies if you already have...I left that list when I changed jobs). There are some large shops like UT (Texas) that may have needed to address this. --James On 3/12/09, Boggis, Josh josh.bog...@uconn.edu wrote: We have recently deployed Exchange 2007 and setup the autodiscover service. Works great for all of our users. Unfortunately while we are the central IT department for the University, we are not the only area running Exchange. There are several smaller departments that run their own AD Forests / Exchange environments, but their reply address is the same as the one we use. As such their Outlook 2007 clients hit our autodiscover service and they aren't very happy with that. Anyone know how to either turn it off on Outlook, or some method to make their clients happy? ~ 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: Autodiscover service and multiple exchange environments
In that case, it sounds like one or both Exchange orgs need to customize the Office/Outlook installation for some automatic profile creation... --James On 3/12/09, Boggis, Josh josh.bog...@uconn.edu wrote: Thanks. I also should have given the information that the other department is running Exchange 2003, not 2007 like we are. So we have no place to point autodiscover for their users to. -Original Message- From: James Wells [mailto:jam...@gmail.com] Sent: Thursday, March 12, 2009 12:27 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: Re: Autodiscover service and multiple exchange environments You may want to try your question over at windows-hied (apologies if you already have...I left that list when I changed jobs). There are some large shops like UT (Texas) that may have needed to address this. --James On 3/12/09, Boggis, Josh josh.bog...@uconn.edu wrote: We have recently deployed Exchange 2007 and setup the autodiscover service. Works great for all of our users. Unfortunately while we are the central IT department for the University, we are not the only area running Exchange. There are several smaller departments that run their own AD Forests / Exchange environments, but their reply address is the same as the one we use. As such their Outlook 2007 clients hit our autodiscover service and they aren't very happy with that. Anyone know how to either turn it off on Outlook, or some method to make their clients happy? ~ 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~ ~ 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: Virtual vs Physical for E2K7 Mailbox Server
This is a pretty big generalization...but for an Exchange environment with a small(er) number of high-powered mailbox servers, however you want to divide up your resources - CPU, RAM, disk I/O -- you get the same product on physical or virtual. If you aren't going to scale up to a dozen or more less-powerful mailbox servers, then virtualization may not help you; in fact, the TCO for Exchange will be HIGHER when virtualized. The VMWare or even Hyper-V layer has administrative costs and can introduce additional complexity over sitting on physical servers. But virtualization will probably always make sense for other roles, especially if it's already a strategy for your datacenter. On 3/12/09, Brian Dwyer bdw...@bne.catholic.edu.au wrote: Apologies for not thinking before posting. Our organisation is in the process of moving everything to a Virtual environment. Exceptions will be made if necessary but must be justified. NetApps storage is being implemented with blade servers to host virrtual servers at the data centre, with a secnod NetApps storage and blades on-site. Data, VM images/snapshots etc will be replicated from the data centre and backed up here. All servers are currently located in a data centre - we have lost connectivity twice in the last 6 months (cut cables) Main Issue- All exisitng Exchange hardware is up for replacement. We need to- 1. implement an email archiving solution. 2 . upgrade to Exchange 2007 as our 2003 service is reaching capacity. Exchange 2003 services consists of - 2 x FE and 3 X BE mailbox servers with direct attached storage. 1.4 TB of mail in 14 databases. 12,000 users, in 133 locations. 70% use OWA only. Original design was for and E2K7 services on physical servers 2 x Client Access/Hub Transport Servers A single clusted mailbox server with CCR live node and databases in the data centre passive node and database replicas on-site Management would now like the designed reviews for virtualisation The physical servers allocated for the Clustered mailbox server are 32GB DL360 G5's with 4 x quad caore processors. These may be replaced with BL680c GS E7450 2P 8G Svr with 64GB ram and 6 x quad core processors. My preference is for - 2 x VIRTUAL CAS/HUB servers running on existing virtual hosts (1in data cente one on-site) WFS installed on CAS/Hub onsite server. 1 x Clustered Mailbox Serverwith CCR running on the physical BL680c's. Live node in the Data Centre Blade Shelf, Passive Node in the onsite Blade shelf. Live databases on tier 1 storage in the Data Centre Passive databases on tier 2 (or3) storage on site. My reasoning is - Exchange will be on a physical server. The high specs of the BL680c are required as the design has a single back-end server. Exchange 2007 and Server 2008 which will be running on the blade is fully 64-bit compliant and can make use of the RAM and processors much. Licencing costs will be reduced. CCR will provide automatic failover in event of a failure of data centre or nectwork connectivity. Cheers Brian -Original Message- From: Robinson, Chuck [mailto:chuck.robin...@emc.com] Sent: Friday, 13 March 2009 7:11 AM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Virtual vs Physical for E2K7 Mailbox Server Virtualized Scenario : In a failover situation, you would be hosting all 12000 users on 2 virtual servers running on 1 physical host. If utilizing CCR, that would assume you are running the two CCR passive nodes on the remaining physical server as well. There is a lot more information to consider when sizing MBX servers, however my initial calculations says you are going to be over utilized. In a virtual environment, consider N+1 when planning capacity. Chuck Robinson ___ Solutions Architect MCSE: Messaging EMC Consulting Phone: 732-321-3644 | Mobile: 973-865-0394 chuck.robin...@emc.com www.emc.com/consulting Transforming Information Into Business Results -Original Message- From: Brian Dwyer [mailto:bdw...@bne.catholic.edu.au] Sent: Thursday, March 12, 2009 4:53 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Virtual vs Physical for E2K7 Mailbox Server 12000 mailboxes, 14 DB all around 100gb each currently running E2K3 2 x FE 3 xBE - 70% of clients connect via OWA NetApps storage tier1 allocated to Exchange Storage and Servers located in DataCentre - with second storage unit located on-site -opportunity to CCR passive node and DB's - have had 2 instances of loss of connectivity to data centre due to connection failure which results in loss of email. -Original Message- From: Michael B. Smith [mailto:mich...@theessentialexchange.com] Sent: Thursday, 12 March 2009 10:19 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Virtual vs Physical for E2K7 Mailbox Server How many mailboxes? What's the storage backend? How big are the stores? What's the front-end look like? -Original Message- From:
Re: Syncing Gals Between Orgs
$$, but Quest Collaboration Suite provides for this with a great deal of flexibility and no firewall ports to open (syncs data via email payload). --James On 2/24/09, Hurley, Leslie L CIV SPAWAR Charleston leslie.hur...@navy.mil wrote: ADAM / ILM LH* Leslie Hurley Beauty without vanity, strength without violence, courage without ferocity, and all the virtues of man without his vices. -Original Message- From: Mayo, Shay [mailto:shay.m...@absg.com] Sent: Tuesday, February 24, 2009 9:24 To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: Syncing Gals Between Orgs Hey - What are you guys using to sync Global Address Lists between Organizations. It would be Exchange 2007 to Exchange 2007. Thanks Shay CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE. This electronic mail transmission may contain privileged and/or confidential information and is intended only for the review of the party to whom it is addressed. If you have received this transmission in error, please immediately return it to the sender, delete it and destroy it without reading it. Unintended transmission shall not constitute the waiver of the attorney-client or any other privilege. ~ 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: Server not using whitespace
First thing to check is going to be the STM file. No whitespace exists in there to be used. Is this the only store on that disk? If there's more than one, be sure that you are checking event I'd 1221 for all of them... --James On 12/19/08, Sobey, Richard A r.so...@imperial.ac.uk wrote: A strange one, this. EventID 1221 tells me that I have 25GB of whitespace combined in two databases (one has almost 10GB, the other almost 15GB) hosted on the same SAN disk. What is worrying is that the physical free space on that disk has dropped by some 400MB in the past 48 hours. The online defragmentation appears to be completing successfully - after all, that's what I assume 1221 logged means, so why is new mail data not being absorbed? Is there something else in the logs I need to watch for to do with online maintenance tasks? I'm starting to think it's the STM file being written to, since we do have our fair share of POP/IMAP users, so I've started monitoring that file, but if anyone has any more obvious answers I'd love to hear them :) Thanks Richard ~ 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: OT-BB Design
If you're really designing a new BB environment for an ENTERPRISE deployment, then you either need to pay for strong professional services, maybe even 3rd party (or Sprint, as suggested) or you need to hire someone with experience in Enterprise deployment. If you're only talking one or two BES servers, no other MDS or application use...then your requirements aren't as complex as you might think. --James On 12/18/08, Ben Scott mailvor...@gmail.com wrote: On Thu, Dec 18, 2008 at 12:30 PM, John Bowles john_bow...@yahoo.com wrote: Since Blackberry makes it imposible to talk to a design engineer about how to develop an Enterprise class BB infrastructure.. Can anyone point me in the right direction with this? I found the primary documentation that comes with the BES to be pretty good. It included advice on sizing, deployment scenarios, some best practices, etc. (Not like, say, Exchange, where the rule seems to be that MSFT will only publish that kind of thing in a white paper, two years after RTM, buried 37 levels deep in the TechNet site. Not that I'm bitter.) My major complaint is that the BES services constantly log all sorts of crap in the Windows Event Log, and there isn't any documentation on what is routine, ignore and what is real problem. We're a pretty tiny shop, though, so maybe our concerns aren't Enterprisey enough for you. :) All other vendors will help you design it out.. as long as you buy the software and possibly professional services from them.. I don't need the professional services ... I think, for RIM, you will need to buy a TSupport contract to get detailed or tailored design guidance. -- Ben ~ 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: IIS / EAS problem on backend
Also check for 2003 SP2 SNP problems or anything else related to nonpaged pool memory (when the server has problems, go to task manager or perfmon and check the counter for nonpaged pool. If it is too low, like below 32K, something is wrong with a low-level driver). --James On 12/9/08, Michael B. Smith [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Sounds like you are out of memory. Error 10055 is An operation on a socket could not be performed because the system lacked sufficient buffer space or because a queue was full. Have you looked at the HTTP.SYS error files? How much memory is on that computer and what are the boot.ini settings? Regards, Michael B. Smith, MCITP:SA,EMA/MCSE/Exchange MVP My blog: http://TheEssentialExchange.com/blogs/michael I'll be at TEC'2009! http://www.tec2009.com/vegas/index.php From: Sobey, Richard A [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, December 09, 2008 6:17 AM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: IIS / EAS problem on backend Hi all, Our environment is currently mixed with Exchange 2003 backends and Exchange 2007 CAS / HT / Mailbox servers. The error below (Event ID 3027, source Server ActiveSync) is in the application log, extremely frequently, on one of my 2003 backend servers. An error occurred on the socket that is used to process AUTD notifications. The error code is [10055]. As a result, AUTD has been uninitialized, but it will be reinitialized upon receipt of the next Ping request. If you continue to see this message, restart IIS. Followed by: (in separate logged events) IP-based AUTD has been uninitialized. And IP-based AUTD has been initialized. Sometimes the AUTD uninitialized (Event ID 3026) and initialize (3025) events will occur without the socket error. The server is standalone Exchange 2003 EE SP2 (Windows Server 2003 EE SP2) and Symantec Mail Security. No other application runs on the server. The error seems to cause OWA to throw a 500 Server error VERY occasionally. I've been able to reproduce it once with a test account, and only a handful of users have actually reported a problem. Of course, there may be an entirely separate reason for this, but since AUTD is tied in with IIS and therefore OWA, I'm hedging my bets. Does anyone have a clue how to proceed before I open a PSS case? IIS has been restarted, and the entire server was bounced four days ago. Thanks Richard ~ 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: Unified Messaging and Exchange 2007
Nortel and others will differ from Unity. Unity uses Exchange as the voicmail storage; default option for Nortel is to use an Outlook Add-In that pulls voicemails from the CallPilot server. Unity polls Exchange exactly like BES does -- active MAPI connections to every mailbox. --James On 12/8/08, Stefan Jafs [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: We use CallPilot from Nortel and Exchange 2003, this was implemented pre 2007! And as everything Nortel it's not the most user-friendly to work with! But it's nice to get your voice Mail into Outlook and to be able to forward anywhere. ___ Stefan Jafs From: Boggis, Josh [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, December 08, 2008 2:07 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: Unified Messaging and Exchange 2007 We are currently looking at various UM products out there (AVST, Cisco Unity) and am wondering if anyone has any experience with these products? Also, as an Exchange admin, why wouldn't I just want to go with Microsoft's UM? It's another checkbox on the install! I am hoping 3rd party products won't be similar to the difference between a blackberry and active sync device where a blackberry device is around 3 times the server load of a regular user, where an active sync device is around ¼ of a user load. Any information people can share would be appreciated. This email and any attached files are confidential and intended solely for the intended recipient(s). If you are not the named recipient you should not read, distribute, copy or alter this email. Any views or opinions expressed in this email are those of the author and do not represent those of the Amico Corpoartion company. Warning: Although precautions have been taken to make sure no viruses are present in this email, the company cannot accept responsibility for any loss or damage that arise from the use of this email or attachments. ~ 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: Offline Defrag of Exchange store, but disk space is limited
Why would you run an offline defrag whether it's needed or not ? On 11/21/08, William Lefkovics [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: How often do you folks perform offline defrags? Every few years or so, whether it's needed or not. when disk space is running a little low? Add more disks. If disk space is a problem, and you want to get some back, are you forcing archiving somewhere or mailbox cleanup policy (in order to get white space so the information stores will shrink some when your offline defrag is run)? Aren't you going to run into the same problem again soon? Better to solve the problem rather than chase the symptoms. From: Sobey, Richard A [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, November 21, 2008 12:01 AM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Offline Defrag of Exchange store, but disk space is limited I'm sorry to hijack this thread, but the question seems to have been answered, so I don't feel too guilty J How often do you folks perform offline defrags? Do you have a dedicated downtime agreement to do it, or do you have emergency procedures when disk space is running a little low? For my stores, Offline Defrags will be taking 12+ hours (each) at a rough guess, so it's not something can really do on an ad-hoc basis. Cheers Richard From: Reimer, Mark [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 21 November 2008 00:22 To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: Offline Defrag of Exchange store, but disk space is limited Hi folks, We just recently cleared out a bunch of old accounts from Exchange, and would like to do an offline defrag, but we don't have enough disk space where the store is kept to do the defrag. There isn't enough space on the log/system drive either (we just have the two drives). Is there another way to do this? Is it recommended? Our store (we have just one) is about 40 GB, with a STM file of 26 GB (approx). I tried to google it, but nothing came up. Maybe because I'm tired at the end of the day. I'd appreciate any help I can get. Thanks. Mark Reimer, A+, MCSA Windows Servers Networking Prairie Bible Institute Box 4000 Three Hills, AB T0M-2N0 Canada Tel: 403-443-5511, Ext. 3476 Fax: 403-443-5540 Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] www.prairie.edu ~ 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: Mobile admin question
How would that have changed the scenario here, Tim? That device would still have to talk back to the ActiveSync server to establish the session, yes? On 11/20/08, Tim Vander Kooi [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Yet another reason to upgrade to Exchange 2007 and Direct Push. :) From: Don Andrews [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, November 20, 2008 11:30 AM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Mobile admin question In other words, if the person now in possession doesn't want it remotely wiped, all they need to do is turn off activesync until they get the data they want. Allowing remote wipe is an option controlled by the device holder. From: Bingham, Kevin [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, November 20, 2008 9:14 AM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Mobile admin question Yes; the status showing in the list of devices for a mailbox changes once the Wipe is acknowledged. The Wipe is basically pending until the phone tries to Sync again. From: Joe Heaton [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, November 20, 2008 11:07 AM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: Mobile admin question I'll post this in the NTSysadmin list also, but the app is on Exchange, so I figured I'd start here. Using the mobileadmin tool, once I initiate a remote wipe, is there any way to see if/when it happens? Also, should I have the phone itself turned on? Does it require the phone to run a sync to the server? New to this, so any help would be appreciated. Joe Heaton AISA Employment Training Panel 1100 J Street, 4th Floor Sacramento, CA 95814 (916) 327-5276 [EMAIL PROTECTED] This e-mail is intended for the use of the addressee(s) only and may contain privileged, confidential, or proprietary information that is exempt from disclosure under law. If you have received this message in error, please inform us promptly by reply e-mail, then delete the e-mail and destroy any printed copy. Thank you. ~ 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: defrag error
And be sure you're using the same version of eseutil as your Exchange store was last mounted with... On 11/13/08, Jake Gardner [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I'm not 100% on this but what about copying the /mbdata folder to the ext drive, run eseutil on it there. Just make sure you're all backed up! Thanks, Jake Gardner TTC Network Administrator Ext. 246 From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, November 13, 2008 3:42 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: defrag error Anyone have an idea? I just placed a external drive that is 150 gigs and same error occurred. I'm stumped.HELPSOS Thanks, Thomas From: Thomas Gonzalez Sent: Thursday, November 13, 2008 9:12 AM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: defrag error So my journal / archive server is ran out of space...ok no problem. Dismount store, shutdown all services, open a command window type in the command and tell it to create the temp on a drive that has plenty of space: I run the command...and I receive this error below: Any ideas? TIA. Thomas D:\Program Files\Exchsrvr\bineseutil /d D:\program files\exchsrvr\mdbdata\priv 1.edb /tf:\tempdfrg.edb Microsoft(R) Exchange Server Database Utilities Version 6.5 Copyright (C) Microsoft Corporation. All Rights Reserved. Initiating DEFRAGMENTATION mode... Database: D:\program files\exchsrvr\mdbdata\priv1.edb Streaming File: D:\program files\exchsrvr\mdbdata\priv1.STM Temp. Database: f:\tempdfrg.edb Temp. Streaming File: f:\tempdfrg.STM Operation terminated with error -1808 (JET_errDiskFull, No space left on disk) a fter 4.166 seconds. This email and any attached files are confidential and intended solely for the intended recipient(s). If you are not the named recipient you should not read, distribute, copy or alter this email. Any views or opinions expressed in this email are those of the author and do not represent those of the Girl Scouts of Southwest Texas. Warning: Although precautions have been taken to make sure no viruses are present in this email, Girl Scouts of Southwest Texas cannot accept responsibility for any loss or damage that arise from the use of this email or attachments. This email and any attached files are confidential and intended solely for the intended recipient(s). If you are not the named recipient you should not read, distribute, copy or alter this email. Any views or opinions expressed in this email are those of the author and do not represent those of the Girl Scouts of Southwest Texas. Warning: Although precautions have been taken to make sure no viruses are present in this email, Girl Scouts of Southwest Texas cannot accept responsibility for any loss or damage that arise from the use of this email or attachments. ***Teletronics Technology Corporation*** This e-mail is confidential and may also be privileged. If you are not the addressee or authorized by the addressee to receive this e-mail, you may not disclose, copy, distribute, or use this e-mail. If you have received this e-mail in error, please notify the sender immediately by reply e-mail or by telephone at 267-352-2020 and destroy this message and any copies. Thank you. *** ~ 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: Outlook Popup
1) Have the program written to avoid that prompt by using the trust center code. (Not likely) 2) Install ClickYes. http://www.contextmagic.com/express-clickyes/ I suggestion option 2 ;) --James On Thu, Nov 13, 2008 at 8:06 PM, Greg Mulholland [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Anybody know if there is a way to disable the outlook popup 'A program is trying to send an email message on your behalf etc. Accept, Deny Preferably in Outlook 2003 but anything will do Thanks Greg ~ Ninja Email Security with Cloudmark Spam Engine Gets Image Spam ~ ~ http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Ninja~
Re: Software to display conference room meeting info
Steelcase RoomWizards will do the trick (for a steep price). Their second generation of product is much better than the first (updated embedded linux, flash HDD, etc). Integrates with Exchange via WebDAV. http://www.steelcase.com/na/roomwizard_products.aspx?f=12117 --James On Tue, Nov 11, 2008 at 2:54 PM, John Stroud [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Ok, so we have had a recent spate of folks here who need to book a previously reserved conference room for their own purpose and wish to know who has the room and why. While I'm sure we all know of several ways to accomplish this within Outlook and Delegation/Resource management, TPTB have determined the best solution is to have an LCD panel over or outside each room (we only have eight rooms) to display the current day's or current meeting's schedule in the room and list the meeting organizer(s), and optionally the topic(s). After a bit of research I found this…. http://www.digitalsigns.com.au/omnivex/calendarlink.php DigitalSigns Ltd. does not appear to operate in the US and therein lies my question; is there any offering like Calendar Link available in the US to simply display meeting data directly from the Exchange store, presumably a MAPI client of some sort? If there is one, I cannot seem to find it, and would appreciate any pointers to a source. There is no need to have this app actually manage the booking – Exchange does that well enough. Thanks! John Stroud · Senior System Administrator· [EMAIL PROTECTED] w: 415.348.7699 · c: 510.501.9173 · f: 415.348.7020 LookSmart · Smart Choices. Made Easy. 625 Second Street, San Francisco, CA 94107 ~ Ninja Email Security with Cloudmark Spam Engine Gets Image Spam ~ ~ http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Ninja~
Re: Report spam
Ironport uses its on reputation scoring - and it's quite good. You will spend more time whitelisting smaller domains that get caught up in others' spamming than you will on spam getting through. They also let you use Brightmail as an engine. You might have more luck participating in that one. But just ask your account rep. Only reason I don't know the answer is because we DON'T have that particular problem (and most Ironport shops don't). --James On 11/10/08, Martin Blackstone [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I'm sure they have some kind of submission service. My Mailfrontier used to have a submission email I could setup. Users could forward their spam to it then it would do something with it. I didn't use it because once you let them complain about something once, they complain forever. J From: David McSpadden [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, November 10, 2008 7:01 AM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Report spam I am getting an Ironport. I should talk with their support on how to report any spam getting through their box and how to blacklist it in their device? _ From: Bob Fronk [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, November 10, 2008 10:02 AM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Report spam Run an appliance and/or software to handle your SPAM. I use a barracuda on the edge, and Ninja on Exchange. Bob Fronk [EMAIL PROTECTED] From: David McSpadden [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, November 10, 2008 9:57 AM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: Report spam Right now I pay someone to host my Internet email for my company. I am looking to take it in house to my Exchange box that is being mostly unused. Right now when a spam makes it through I file save it and sent it to the company that hosts my email and they get it on an RBL or some other such list. How would I have my users report spam that makes it through to me so I can block it for all users. I see the sender block list in my Outlook but I feel like that is only for that one user and all the other users could still be getting it. How do I blacklist in Exchange 2003??? Data Security is everyone's responsibility. ~ 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: A/V Scanning
The only reason NOT to do both is if you have some very large stores with very large mailbox item counts. VSAPI scanning can start to be a performance problem in those environments. For environments with reasonable quotas - no reason not to scan at every level. On 11/7/08, Randal, Phil [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Even if you use the same vendor, there's still a chance that the A/V patterns might be updated after arrival at the gateway and before the recipient tries to access the email. My votes is for both, and multiple scan engines on both gateway and information store. Cheers, Phil -- Phil Randal | Networks Engineer Herefordshire Council | Deputy Chief Executive's Office | I.C.T. Services Division Thorn Office Centre, Rotherwas, Hereford, HR2 6JT Tel: 01432 260160 email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Any opinion expressed in this e-mail or any attached files are those of the individual and not necessarily those of Herefordshire Council. This e-mail and any attached files are confidential and intended solely for the use of the addressee. This communication may contain material protected by law from being passed on. If you are not the intended recipient and have received this e-mail in error, you are advised that any use, dissemination, forwarding, printing or copying of this e-mail is strictly prohibited. If you have received this e-mail in error please contact the sender immediately and destroy all copies of it. From: Kennedy, Jim [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 07 November 2008 14:46 To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: A/V Scanning Both, and use different vendors for each system. I had one slip past the gateway AV but get caught by the Exchange server. From: Roger Wright [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, November 07, 2008 9:14 AM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: A/V Scanning Need some thoughts on anti-virus scanning. If all email is scanned at the gateway, is it still advisable to have scanning software for the information store? I'm thinking that while it adds more depth to the protection, it really doesn't do much unless it uses different engines than the gateway. Any concensus on this? Roger Wright Network Administrator Evatone, Inc. 727.572.7076 x388 _ Any smoothly functioning technology will have the appearance of magic.--Clarke ~ 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 Monitoring
You've eliminated Server 2003 SP2 SNP (TCP chimney) as a cause, right? On 11/7/08, Eric Woodford [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: We're trying to install intrust, but due to the number of apps on the server, we keep having issues with non-paged pooled memory(sp?). It's the straw that keeps crashing the win2k3/exch2k3 servers.. Exch 2007, on our Win2008 servers, rock solid. On Fri, Nov 7, 2008 at 5:20 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hey all, Clients wants to track what domain admins or users with sufficient rights to view mailboxes are actually viewing. Problem is that I can see that x user connected to y mailbox via the event viewer, but I cannot tell them what x user viewed in y mailbox. Is their any 3rd party or tool by MS that will log what is actually being accessed in an exchange mailbox? Contacts, Calendars, Tasks, Inbox, etc.. The issues is that most of the staff allow their calendar to be viewed via delegated rights, so all the event viewer logging is essentially useless for those accounts. Thanks Greg ~ 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: Stopped being spoofed
There are also solutions that stamp all your outgoing email with a custom X-Header. When valid NDRs come back, they will contain this header in the original message. All other NDRs can be safely ignored. --James On 10/20/08, Micheal Espinola Jr [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Implement sender authentication mechanisms such as SPF and Sender ID. Thats what they are for. Of course, it depends on if the recipient is using SPF as well. But it absolutely helps. Be sure to use -all in the authentication string to enforce a rejection. ~all in many cases will not cause the forged message to be rejected, unless the anti-spam application has been tweaked to do so. I *will* reject a ~all, but many products wont by default or wont at all. Beyond that, you are looking at getting into anti-spam methodologies that involve Message-ID tracking and other header scrutiny methods that aren't truly proved or perfected yet. On Mon, Oct 20, 2008 at 7:37 AM, Beckett, William (Bill) [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: What is the best methodology to prevent user email addresses being spoofed and having NDRs being returned to those accounts? I know we can't prevent the spoofing but is there no way to stop the NDRs? -- ME2 ~ 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 archive/PST consolidation
The answer to this problem is usually to ingest and index the PSTs, and leave them searchable from the vendor's Outlook plugin. GFI (I think) has a brand-new release that advertises archive retrieval without stubs (not sure how) - but it sounds like a client plugin that let's you display archived mail as if it were in the Inbox. With Microsoft leaning heavily against traditional stubbing with long retention periods, I'm hoping other vendors find a way to do something similar. --James On 10/17/08, Maglinger, Paul [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: We just implemented Sunbelt, still getting familiar with it. We were going to do the same thing but discovered that even with compression, 3GB worth of PSTs added about 700MB to the user's mailbox. As our limits for mailboxes are 60MB warning, 70MB no send, and 80MB no receive, doing this for all of our users would grow our information store quite a bit larger than we want it to. Until we can figure something else out, it seems we're stuck with PSTs for awhile. -Paul From: John Cook [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, October 16, 2008 5:19 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: Re: Exchange archive/PST consolidation Probably because they throw great parties! John W. Cook Systems Administrator Partnership For Strong Families From: William Lefkovics To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Sent: Thu Oct 16 18:07:33 2008 Subject: RE: Exchange archive/PST consolidation Three or four Exchange MVPs work for Mimosa. I suspect there is a reason for that. http://www.mimosasystems.com/ From: Damien Solodow [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, October 16, 2008 2:28 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: Exchange archive/PST consolidation We're looking at an Exchange archiving solution, particularly something we can use to pull in all the existing PST files so they can be presented to the user. This way PSTs are dead, D-E-D, dead. If the archiver also works on file stores, Sharepoint, etc that's gravy. Any experiences to share, suggestions, warnings, etc? TIA Damien Solodow Senior System Administrator Infrastructure Services Group Information Services Indiana Business College [EMAIL PROTECTED] Direct - (317) 217-6881 CONFIDENTIALITY STATEMENT: The information transmitted, or contained or attached to or with this Notice is intended only for the person or entity to which it is addressed and may contain Protected Health Information (PHI), confidential and/or privileged material. Any review, transmission, dissemination, or other use of, and taking any action in reliance upon this information by persons or entities other than the intended recipient without the express written consent of the sender are prohibited. This information may be protected by the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 (HIPAA), and other Federal and Florida laws. Improper or unauthorized use or disclosure of this information could result in civil and/or criminal penalties. Consider the environment. Please don't print this e-mail unless you really need to. ~ 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 2003 Hard Drives Filling UP
Once online maintenance runs, you should see Event ID 1221 in the Application Log - that will show how much whitespace is available in the EDB file. Exchange will use up that white space before expanding the EDB file on disk (IF you have multiple stores on the same disk, be sure to watch all of them - if one out of four has no whitespace, for example, you'll still be losing free disk space). If disk space has gotten critical - note that the STM file CAN continue to grow, and may grow quickly if you have POP/IMAP clients. The only way to free up space in the STM file is to perform an offline defrag. --James On Fri, Oct 10, 2008 at 9:29 AM, Bingham, Kevin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The nightly online maintenance, as Michael described, will do the actual work to free up the space. You can't get it back immediately… well, I suppose you could modify the schedule for the maintenance to include the whole day, and restart the services to initiate it immediately, but that would be disruptive, detrimental to end user performance, and just generally not recommended. From: Chris Pohlschneider [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, October 10, 2008 7:21 AM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Exchange 2003 Hard Drives Filling UP Ok I checked the Deleted Mailbox Retention for the database and it was set for 180 days. I changed that value to 0 for now because I need the white space to be reused immediately. Will I be able to reuse this white space immediately or does some sort of process need to run on the server for this to happen? From: Brumbaugh, Luke [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, October 10, 2008 10:03 AM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Exchange 2003 Hard Drives Filling UP Check mailbox policy for system cleanup times. From: Bingham, Kevin [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, October 10, 2008 10:00 AM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Exchange 2003 Hard Drives Filling UP Check for Deleted Mailbox Retention on the Limits tab of the database properties. The deleted mailboxes are retained in the database for this period of time; the freed space will not be reusable until then. From: Chris Pohlschneider [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, October 10, 2008 6:50 AM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: Exchange 2003 Hard Drives Filling UP Hello All: I am fairly new with Exchange 2003 and I have inherited an Exchange server that has not been properly managed in the past. What I am running into is that priv1.edb file and priv1.stm files are growing at a rapid pace. In the past, there have been no restrictions set on mailboxes and I know that is causing this issue because people are not cleaning up any old e-mails. I have cleaned up some old mailboxes by archiving them to pst file and then deleting the mailbox out of Exchange. This has totaled around 10GB of space that should be reused by exchange. However, I am noticing that my priv1.edb file is still growing a little bit each day. My assumption was that it would not grow for a little while at least since I freed up 10GB of space. Would anyone be able to give me some pointers on why this file continues to grow? I know in order to reclaim disk space, I would have to do an offline defrag, but it does not make since to me why the file is still growing. Thanks for any help in advance. Windows Server 2003 Standard with Service Pack 2 Exchange 2003 Enterprise Chris Pohlschneider Network Administrator [EMAIL PROTECTED] 937-494-2559 This e-mail is intended for the use of the addressee(s) only and may contain privileged, confidential, or proprietary information that is exempt from disclosure under law. If you have received this message in error, please inform us promptly by reply e-mail, then delete the e-mail and destroy any printed copy. Thank you. ** CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: The information transmitted in this message is intended only for the person or entity to which it is addressed and may contain confidential and/or privileged material. Any review, retransmission, dissemination or other use of this information by persons or entities other than the intended recipient is prohibited. If you received this in error, please contact the sender and destroy all copies of this document. Thank you. Butler Animal Health Supply ** This e-mail is intended for the use of the addressee(s) only and may contain privileged, confidential, or proprietary information that is exempt from disclosure under law. If you have received this message in error, please inform us promptly by reply e-mail, then delete
Re: Small Fopah
Michael, Are those documented somewhere (I believe you - I've always asked for those as something other than a services deliverable, and never got them). --James On 10/9/08, Michael B. Smith [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Microsoft guidance says that if you are doing streaming backups, you should target 35 GB per store as an opti-max value, never exceeding 50 GB. If you are doing VSS backups, never exceed 100 GB. If you are doing continuous replication backups (that is, backing up the passive copy), never exceed 200 GB. These are recommendations, not we won't support you if you exceed these values. The right answer for a given company for the maximum size of a store is: whatever you can backup and restore within your SLA. MSFT recommends that you ignore SIS when planning for the size of your mailbox stores. Regards, Michael B. Smith, MCITP:SA,EMA/MCSE/Exchange MVP My blog: http://TheEssentialExchange.com/blogs/michael Link with me at: http://www.linkedin.com/in/theessentialexchange -Original Message- From: Michelle Weaver [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, October 09, 2008 1:05 AM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Small Fopah One large store in Exchange 2003 isn't a good thing. I know in Exchange 2000, one giant store worked fine, but in 2003, it changed. We had a gigantic store, 163 GB (or some ridiculous number like that). We never could have recovered it, and it wasn't backing up properly because one backup wouldn't be finished when the next one wanted to start. No matter how we tried to tweak the timing, it never seemed to work. Log files never purged, hard drives filled up, Exchange went offline. It was ugliness all around. We broke the one store into 4 information stores with several databases in each one, trying to keep the database files smaller than 30 GB. I can't remember where I found that magic number, very well could have been some random thing I dreamed up, but we didn't have problems with Exchange going offline after that. We had no mailbox quotas and no limit to attachments either. A silly, silly way to run Exchange, but the very importants didn't seem to care much for the finer points of the technology. They just wanted complete freedom. I spent a month moving mailboxes into the other stores, after hours, then ran an offline defrag on the emptied store to get the space back. Every month I'd send notes to people with extremely large mailboxes (more than 500 MB). The subject line read Piggy mailboxes, and I included instructions for cleaning up mailboxes. It offended many customers, but it also shamed them into cleaning out the garbage. Remember, if the size of the database is 100 GB prior to a big purge effort and the customers delete 50 GB of crap, the size of the database remains 100 GB, but the store still has 50 GB to grow before it will get bigger than the 100 GB it was before the cleanup. An offline defrag is required to get the empty space back, but the store won't grow again until the amount of data grows back to the original size, as if that empty 50 GB of data is just a placeholder, waiting to be filled. Either way, you didn't commit a faux pas. The way you're running it, with the exception of the no quota thing, is considered best practice, not one large store. Michelle Weaver Systems Administrator, Materials Research Institute Penn State University -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wed 10/8/2008 8:26 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: Small Fopah Oh magic genies of Exchange, (Rubbing furiously) Well I believe about a year ago I made a Exchange Fopah with my Stores. Exch 2003 Sp2, Enterprise The thinking was that data in the main Store is growing quite large and the recovery time with our current backup tape drive would have taken 12 to 14 hours..So Veritas estimated.. verified with a tech on the line..yadda yadda.. Mgmt was not happy with that wanted it to be lower without spending money and wanted the stores broken up by Groups.. Admin Staff, Finance, Sales, etc.. The desire was to be able to recover someone's folder or data more quickly than having to do an entire IS recovery of all mailboxes and just recover the depts. Store data.. So I broke it up knowing that SIS would be lost if Email went across stores.. It was brought up to mgmt but they said the majority of email was dept localized. I didn't think so and did not fight hard enough, but.. Now fast forward a year and we are sitting with 5 stores but oh look they all have grown at about the same rate because they send email to everyone regardless so I now make a copy 5 times for every email and attachment.. Did I mention that they refused to set store limits and mandated 20gig file transfers allowed via SMTP..Oh I lost that one hard... CEO had to be able to send videos to his other buddies and the dept heads as well.. So now the
Change Outlook RPC bind order?
Has anyone ever had a valid reason to change Outlook's RPC binding order? (KB 163576). We had some complaints about Outlook performance over VPN, and a consultant recommended that setting as a fix...the customers claim to have seen improvement, but I had never even heard of this setting, client-side... --James -- Sent from my mobile device ~ Ninja Email Security with Cloudmark Spam Engine Gets Image Spam ~ ~ http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Ninja~
Re: Change Outlook RPC bind order?
This is Exchange 2003SP2, Outlook 2003. No clue here...there were a few complaints after a new VPN rollout, and customers CLAIMED they saw improvement after moving ip ahead of rpc in that registry key. Personally, I don't really think it makes a difference. But most folks think it's easier than troubleshooting Outlook performance for VPN users. Until they star complianing again... --James On Fri, Oct 3, 2008 at 12:46 PM, Troy Meyer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: What is your Exchange version? (that applies to section looks mighty old). We have 100s of folks on VPN and Outlook Anywhere with no issues, but we are Exchange 2007 sp1 -troy -Original Message- From: James Wells [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, October 03, 2008 9:41 AM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: Change Outlook RPC bind order? Has anyone ever had a valid reason to change Outlook's RPC binding order? (KB 163576). We had some complaints about Outlook performance over VPN, and a consultant recommended that setting as a fix...the customers claim to have seen improvement, but I had never even heard of this setting, client-side... --James -- Sent from my mobile device ~ 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: ActiveSync Set Up Veterans-GOING OT
Tim, Not sure what your experience level is with BES...but there's some decent reporting baked in that can be run from the console. What kind of reporting is available with Exchange 2007 or add-on tools like SCMDM? (And I don't consider LogParser to be an equivalent to a GUI interface for reports). --James On 9/24/08, Tim Vander Kooi [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: We have just shy of 300 devices here and it is very simple to manage. In over 2 years of working with only WM devices we have had 3 that have lost connection, or had other issues, that had unknown causes. For each of them going to the server, or to ActiveSync on the desktop (prior to Exchange 2007) and deleting the server profile with the device and then re-establishing the connection cleared the problem. When you have a copy of what's on the phone either on the SIM chip, on the Exchange server or on the desktop wiping out a device and starting over is no big deal (whether you are using EAS or BES) so I'm not sure why people make such a big deal out of it. I would never tell someone who already has BES up and running to tear it out and use EAS instead, but I can't think of a reason why you should choose BES over EAS if you are starting from square one today. TVK -Original Message- From: James Wells [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, September 23, 2008 9:13 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: Re: ActiveSync Set Up Veterans-GOING OT I'm curious - is there anyone on list with a large (hundreds or more) WM devices in the hands of customers, using EAS? I'm a fan of EAS and have carried a WM device for years - but for enterprise management, Blackberry DOES have advantages. When a customer calls with a device problem after the initial setup...I have more logs and more options for troubleshooting. --James On 9/23/08, Steve Ens [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Sorry Don, meant Profiles... But again, once you setup Exchange the EAS is basically done and you can have a WM device setup in minutes. Not saying Blackberry is bad, I like the BES...however it takes a little time to setup and then again you need to visit it again each time to add a user. On Tue, Sep 23, 2008 at 5:07 PM, Don Andrews [EMAIL PROTECTED]wrote: We have a couple thousand BBs and a couple of dozen test EAS WM devices (despite policies to the contrary - guess some management folks are more equal than others). We find (possibly due to lack of familiarity) just the opposite. Lots of tech and handholding to get EAS working (non-technical user community) and our user admins have the BES user admin role and can simply point and click to add users and set activation password. (No idea what profile Steve is referring to) Unless you are wide open as far as exchange server access and globally allow ANY user to attempt to connect their personal phone, you will have to specifically allow (or stop disallowing) each new user. The EAS comments are second hand so they may be a bit overstated. - Sent from my BlackBerry Wireless Handheld - Original Message - From: Steve Ens [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues exchangelist@lyris.sunbelt-software.com Sent: Tue Sep 23 15:30:12 2008 Subject: Re: ActiveSync Set Up Veterans-GOING OT I use them both too...less admin with the EAS...no adding users, assigning profiles, etc... On Tue, Sep 23, 2008 at 4:26 PM, Sherry Abercrombie [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I have both ActiveSync BES, personally, I prefer BES, but have no real issues w/EAS. On Tue, Sep 23, 2008 at 4:16 PM, wjh [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: So, do people really like Activesync? Or is that free beats clunky? Connectivity and management through BB or Good seems so much easier. We use Good on our WM devices and the interface is so much better. Tasks and notes work fine, plus no certificate hoops to jump through. Bill mqcarp wrote: I think I have it. I do note that the server setting is very misleading. I ended up using the direct server address ie mail.domain.com instead of the direct OMA address like many documents online suggest ie mail.domain.com/oma I never could get it to work manually configuring the device, but did get it to work with the config utility (I use the web version). I think that portion is due to the certificate validation being included in the config. That said so far only portions of the contacts, no calendar, and only folder structure is coming across at this point. At least we are getting somewhere! On Tue, Sep 23, 2008 at 1:44 PM, mqcarp [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Thank you for sharing Sherry. I still have a few quirks going on so I will keep testing. A dumb mistake was not including the domain name ahead of the user
Re: ActiveSync Set Up Veterans-GOING OT
I'm curious - is there anyone on list with a large (hundreds or more) WM devices in the hands of customers, using EAS? I'm a fan of EAS and have carried a WM device for years - but for enterprise management, Blackberry DOES have advantages. When a customer calls with a device problem after the initial setup...I have more logs and more options for troubleshooting. --James On 9/23/08, Steve Ens [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Sorry Don, meant Profiles... But again, once you setup Exchange the EAS is basically done and you can have a WM device setup in minutes. Not saying Blackberry is bad, I like the BES...however it takes a little time to setup and then again you need to visit it again each time to add a user. On Tue, Sep 23, 2008 at 5:07 PM, Don Andrews [EMAIL PROTECTED]wrote: We have a couple thousand BBs and a couple of dozen test EAS WM devices (despite policies to the contrary - guess some management folks are more equal than others). We find (possibly due to lack of familiarity) just the opposite. Lots of tech and handholding to get EAS working (non-technical user community) and our user admins have the BES user admin role and can simply point and click to add users and set activation password. (No idea what profile Steve is referring to) Unless you are wide open as far as exchange server access and globally allow ANY user to attempt to connect their personal phone, you will have to specifically allow (or stop disallowing) each new user. The EAS comments are second hand so they may be a bit overstated. - Sent from my BlackBerry Wireless Handheld - Original Message - From: Steve Ens [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues exchangelist@lyris.sunbelt-software.com Sent: Tue Sep 23 15:30:12 2008 Subject: Re: ActiveSync Set Up Veterans-GOING OT I use them both too...less admin with the EAS...no adding users, assigning profiles, etc... On Tue, Sep 23, 2008 at 4:26 PM, Sherry Abercrombie [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I have both ActiveSync BES, personally, I prefer BES, but have no real issues w/EAS. On Tue, Sep 23, 2008 at 4:16 PM, wjh [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: So, do people really like Activesync? Or is that free beats clunky? Connectivity and management through BB or Good seems so much easier. We use Good on our WM devices and the interface is so much better. Tasks and notes work fine, plus no certificate hoops to jump through. Bill mqcarp wrote: I think I have it. I do note that the server setting is very misleading. I ended up using the direct server address ie mail.domain.com instead of the direct OMA address like many documents online suggest ie mail.domain.com/oma I never could get it to work manually configuring the device, but did get it to work with the config utility (I use the web version). I think that portion is due to the certificate validation being included in the config. That said so far only portions of the contacts, no calendar, and only folder structure is coming across at this point. At least we are getting somewhere! On Tue, Sep 23, 2008 at 1:44 PM, mqcarp [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Thank you for sharing Sherry. I still have a few quirks going on so I will keep testing. A dumb mistake was not including the domain name ahead of the user name! I have a feeling this may not suit our CEO either, as I keep reading about some limitations. Will see. On Tue, Sep 23, 2008 at 11:58 AM, Sherry Abercrombie [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: http://www.techsack.com/2008/08/19/getting-your-iphone-to-work-with-exchange-active-sync-ssl-certificate/ On 9/23/08, mqcarp [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Interesting, well OMA works fine now both internally and externally, however ActiveSync will not. This is on an iPhone. Still reviewing On Tue, Sep 23, 2008 at 10:53 AM, mqcarp [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I got it worked out but it is excruciatingly slow. Very odd. I will have to look at this. Thanks all On Tue, Sep 23, 2008 at 9:05 AM, Michael B. Smith [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I did this the first time, long ago and far away. It's just part of the process now…here were my comments the first time I had to do it: http://theessentialexchange.com/blogs/michael/archive/2007/11/13/oma-amp-activesync-after-configuring-rpc-https-and-forms-based-authentication.aspx Regards, Michael B. Smith, MCITP:SA,EMA/MCSE/Exchange MVP
Re: Blackberry, or something else?
Have you actually seen any iPhones enforce that particular policy? The documentation and all of our testing indicates that an iPhone WON'T wipe after xx bad PIN attempts. --James On Thu, Sep 4, 2008 at 10:50 AM, Eric Woodford [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Problem we are having with our Windows Mobile devices is security. It's harder to enforce encryption and password policies on the Windows mobile devices. BES has this out of the box. Try telling that iPhone user that their device will wipe if they put their password in wrong 10 times... On Thu, Sep 4, 2008 at 6:42 AM, Pete Howard [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Agreed, Our office has a bunch of berries that were rushed in by the CEO a few years ago. He loves it, so we keep them and they work well but I'm going to have him try a Windows mobile device and explain the cost benefit Pete Howard | Systems Engineer MCSE 3.51-2003 | ESX VCP * EMail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - Original Message From: Matt Moore [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues exchangelist@lyris.sunbelt-software.com Sent: Wednesday, September 3, 2008 10:40:02 PM Subject: RE: Blackberry, or something else? I'm with you! Our office has a BES and a bunch of berries but I hold out! One less point of failure. Die berry die. Although when a user goes swimming with their trusty berry the sticker shock is a sight to behold. =) M -Original Message- From: Michael B. Smith [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, September 03, 2008 7:08 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Blackberry, or something else? Bah humbug. I drink the Windows Mobile kool-aid instead of the BES kool-aid. Just make sure your devices are WM 6.1. :-) (I just had to throw in an opposing opinion.) Regards, Michael B. Smith MCITP:SA,EMA/MCSE/Exchange MVP http://TheEssentialExchange.com -Original Message- From: Kurt Buff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, September 03, 2008 9:51 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: Re: Blackberry, or something else? Interesting. So it would seem that BES uses SQL as a backend for Exchange integration. The latency for our AU and UK offices is pretty consistently between 100-200ms, with regular spikes to above 500ms. That could prove interesting. Kurt On Wed, Sep 3, 2008 at 6:28 PM, Barsodi.John [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: To add, I'm a huge BES fan as well. I have 7 BES servers worldwide...including the countries you have offices in. You need to keep your BES server as close to your Exchange server as possible, which would make sharing SQL difficult as Don suggested. You'll run into worker thread errors if you have high latency between BES Exchange. I've gotten RIM support to confirm up to 300ms max, ideally nothing over 35ms. - John Barsodi -Original Message- From: Don Andrews [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, September 03, 2008 6:11 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: Re: Blackberry, or something else? Your mantra is spot on! I'll say up front that I'm a BES fan. The only limiting factor I can think of is that in order to manage the whole environment as one is the need to share a SQL database across all your BES'. I'd think a sales support type could assist with some recommendations, trade offs etc. - Sent from my BlackBerry Wireless Handheld - Original Message - From: Kurt Buff [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues exchangelist@lyris.sunbelt-software.com Sent: Wed Sep 03 18:51:46 2008 Subject: Re: Blackberry, or something else? Yes, I'm all over the policy thing. Fortunately, I haven't yet set up OMA/ActiveSynch/IMAP-over-SSL/whatever, and the migration from Exchange 5.5 cut off the IMAP and POP for everyone - by design! - so there has been some howling about that. I'm now almost ready to throw the bone to the crowd, but I want it to be the right bone in the right way. Centrally managed on company-issued devices only - that's my mantra. I want the data secure both in transit and at rest. Kurt On Wed, Sep 3, 2008 at 4:59 PM, Troy Meyer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hey Kurt, Any set of devices might work for you, if you guys have money, go with Blackberry and BES because its got a nice central management for what you are looking for. I would say put more effort into shaping policy than worrying about phones. We made that mistake about 2 years ago and found ourselves with 3 mobile mail solutions (activesync, goodlink, BES) and phones from all sorts of vendors and providers and it's a support nightmare. (try telling the one exec using a Palm 600 he needs to upgrade or move to a blackberry). I also wish we had set policy in the beginning regarding security and encryption because its always harder retroactively. Note: I was not employed here during original implementation, but would have loved to be in your
Re: Blackberry, or something else?
1) Outlook can't accomplish the same thing with default Exchange security. Auto-forwarding to the internet is disabled by default, and there are good reasons for it. This setting was changed if your users can do this in Outlook. 2) There's no security there. Email travels in transit over SMTP - even internal company data and emails. BES provides AES encryption. Exchange Activesync is weaker, but at least it uses SSL (HTTPS). --James On Thu, Sep 4, 2008 at 10:49 AM, Murray Freeman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I've been lurking on this discussion for a while because we are small and only now have a small number of BB users. We started a couple of years ago with one BB for our CEO, and we just push his email to his BB using the redirector from BB installed on his workstation rather than the BES. In the last month, 3 other staff members requested use of BB and we didn't even install the BB redirector software on their workstations. We told them to just use OWA. One of them decided to look into other ways to accomplish the same thing, and she is using a Rule in Outlook 2K3 to redirect here email from her inbox to her BB. The reason she did it was it is much more readable than using OWA. My question is, why even use the BES or even the BB redirector if the Outlook client can pretty much accomplish the same thing? Murray ~ 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: Blackberry, or something else?
Yes, Blackberry may lose their service more often than they should. But they do have years and several versions on Exchange Activesync. Microsoft may finally have a solid solution with the needed management features and controls required by corporate customers...but those are first-generation products. Combine the additional CALs required, and Exchange Activesync is no longer the free and superior product in every case. --James On Thu, Sep 4, 2008 at 11:42 AM, Tim Vander Kooi [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Plus you get to sit back and chuckle every month or so when the media reports about the next (seemingly dependable) outage of BB's network. ;-) Cheaper, more reliable, more functional and similar ease of use...add in Mobile Device Manager and you have mobile device encryption and mobile VPN thrown in. Really nice solution. TVK -Original Message- From: Troy Meyer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, September 04, 2008 9:39 AM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Blackberry, or something else? Hey Joe, FYI with E2K7, functional autodiscover services, and Windows Mobile 6.1 you need only the email address and domain password to enroll you phone for EAS, its super sweet. As is that same combo with an Outlook 2007 user where the autodiscover service automatically configures the correct mailbox profile (even OL anywhere outside your firewall). Its miles and miles better than the way it used to be. -troy -Original Message- From: Louis, Joe [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, September 04, 2008 6:59 AM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Blackberry, or something else? I have both BBs and Windows Mobiles out there. Once you get over the idea and get the BES set up (I did it kicking and screaming), the BB that is out in the field is incredibly easy to enroll. And saying that doesn't do it justice. It is much easier that any way I know to remotely enroll a Windows mobile device; especially one that belongs to someone else other than the company. I prefer Windows-Devices/Exchange though. It sure makes reading word/excel attachments much easier (yes I know you can _BUY_ a separate reader for some Office documents on a BB. We just rolled out a few more BBs for our service folk in a test. I see them becoming more prevalent. I made the pitch again after our copier tech came out and closed his ticket from here through his BB. Are any of you folks using BBs doing any customizations for integration with your apps/processes? Joe Louis -Original Message- From: James Wells [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, September 03, 2008 11:36 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: Re: Blackberry, or something else? Remote wipe and some light controls are there in Exchange 2003 SP2. Exchange 2007 adds a large number of controls, if you pay for an Exchange 2007 premium CAL. Microsoft also has a new product, Microsoft System Center Mobile Device Manager, that enables even more policy controls. I've not run across anyone using it yet, though - but the first service pack/feature pack is due out soon. The more advanced controls do require a Windows Mobile 6.x OS. You can't specifically control what devices can connect, but you can (in all versions 2003 SP2 and later) refuse connections to devices that don't implement all of your security policies. For basic password/PIN/wipe security policies, you'll be pretty happy. You can also disable Exchange Activesync, per-user. Data at rest - not guaranteed with any version of Windows Mobile, from what I've seen. -James On Wed, Sep 3, 2008 at 9:28 PM, Michael B. Smith [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: EAS - Exchange ActiveSync CAS - Client Access Server (the role that replaced FE in exchange 2007) Remote wipe and device id control are in Exchange Server 2003 sp2. If you have OWA available in each remote office that's all you need, although I would certainly recommend you have an SSL certificate installed as well. Regards, Michael B. Smith MCITP:SA,EMA/MCSE/Exchange MVP http://TheEssentialExchange.com -Original Message- From: Kurt Buff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, September 03, 2008 10:23 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: Re: Blackberry, or something else? Stuff that you said I don't know what is: EAS? CAS? We're running E2k3 Enterprise in each office, no FE. I have RPC/HTTPS running for most of the US company-issued laptops - haven't extended that to the other offices yet. Stuff that I don't think you addressed, but I could be wrong: How do I centrally manage the devices - remote kill, ensure that only company-issued devices are used, etc., and how do I ensure that data at rest on the devices is secure? Kurt On Wed, Sep 3, 2008 at 7:16 PM, Michael B. Smith [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: You enable/disable it per user (2003/2007). You establish policies and assign them to a user (2007
Re: Blackberry, or something else?
Remote wipe and some light controls are there in Exchange 2003 SP2. Exchange 2007 adds a large number of controls, if you pay for an Exchange 2007 premium CAL. Microsoft also has a new product, Microsoft System Center Mobile Device Manager, that enables even more policy controls. I've not run across anyone using it yet, though - but the first service pack/feature pack is due out soon. The more advanced controls do require a Windows Mobile 6.x OS. You can't specifically control what devices can connect, but you can (in all versions 2003 SP2 and later) refuse connections to devices that don't implement all of your security policies. For basic password/PIN/wipe security policies, you'll be pretty happy. You can also disable Exchange Activesync, per-user. Data at rest - not guaranteed with any version of Windows Mobile, from what I've seen. -James On Wed, Sep 3, 2008 at 9:28 PM, Michael B. Smith [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: EAS - Exchange ActiveSync CAS - Client Access Server (the role that replaced FE in exchange 2007) Remote wipe and device id control are in Exchange Server 2003 sp2. If you have OWA available in each remote office that's all you need, although I would certainly recommend you have an SSL certificate installed as well. Regards, Michael B. Smith MCITP:SA,EMA/MCSE/Exchange MVP http://TheEssentialExchange.com -Original Message- From: Kurt Buff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, September 03, 2008 10:23 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: Re: Blackberry, or something else? Stuff that you said I don't know what is: EAS? CAS? We're running E2k3 Enterprise in each office, no FE. I have RPC/HTTPS running for most of the US company-issued laptops - haven't extended that to the other offices yet. Stuff that I don't think you addressed, but I could be wrong: How do I centrally manage the devices - remote kill, ensure that only company-issued devices are used, etc., and how do I ensure that data at rest on the devices is secure? Kurt On Wed, Sep 3, 2008 at 7:16 PM, Michael B. Smith [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: You enable/disable it per user (2003/2007). You establish policies and assign them to a user (2007). You have them configure their phones to access their regional mail server (if your Exchange server is regionalized). EAS is enabled by default on any CAS (Exchange 2007) or FE (Exchange 2003) server. Regards, Michael B. Smith MCITP:SA,EMA/MCSE/Exchange MVP http://TheEssentialExchange.com -Original Message- From: Kurt Buff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, September 03, 2008 10:10 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: Re: Blackberry, or something else? I'm willing to listen... How does that work? How do I manage it across three countries? What else do I need to know? Kurt On Wed, Sep 3, 2008 at 7:08 PM, Michael B. Smith [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Bah humbug. I drink the Windows Mobile kool-aid instead of the BES kool-aid. Just make sure your devices are WM 6.1. :-) (I just had to throw in an opposing opinion.) Regards, Michael B. Smith MCITP:SA,EMA/MCSE/Exchange MVP http://TheEssentialExchange.com -Original Message- From: Kurt Buff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, September 03, 2008 9:51 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: Re: Blackberry, or something else? Interesting. So it would seem that BES uses SQL as a backend for Exchange integration. The latency for our AU and UK offices is pretty consistently between 100-200ms, with regular spikes to above 500ms. That could prove interesting. Kurt On Wed, Sep 3, 2008 at 6:28 PM, Barsodi.John [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: To add, I'm a huge BES fan as well. I have 7 BES servers worldwide...including the countries you have offices in. You need to keep your BES server as close to your Exchange server as possible, which would make sharing SQL difficult as Don suggested. You'll run into worker thread errors if you have high latency between BES Exchange. I've gotten RIM support to confirm up to 300ms max, ideally nothing over 35ms. - John Barsodi -Original Message- From: Don Andrews [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, September 03, 2008 6:11 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: Re: Blackberry, or something else? Your mantra is spot on! I'll say up front that I'm a BES fan. The only limiting factor I can think of is that in order to manage the whole environment as one is the need to share a SQL database across all your BES'. I'd think a sales support type could assist with some recommendations, trade offs etc. - Sent from my BlackBerry Wireless Handheld - Original Message - From: Kurt Buff [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues exchangelist@lyris.sunbelt-software.com Sent: Wed Sep 03 18:51:46 2008 Subject:
Re: Cisco Unity and Exchange 2007
Try increasing the log level for the WM Service. That will output lots of info about Exchange (and AD) polling. What happens when you run the SyncMWI tool from the depot? Unity operates just like Blackberry, etc. Just a ton of threads that keep a connection open to every subscriber mailbox, waiting for new messages of the right class to arrive (and be unread). It used to be a COM+ application. *Note that I haven't had the misfortune to worry about Unity for about two years, but I'm assuming that piece of the architecture is the same. --James On Tue, Sep 2, 2008 at 2:45 PM, Glen Johnson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Maybe not relevant. as we have a different config but out MWI quit working and restarting the 2 CM servers fixed it. Is this something that just started or has it been that way since implementation? *From:* Beahm, Keith [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] *Sent:* Tuesday, September 02, 2008 12:13 PM *To:* MS-Exchange Admin Issues *Subject:* Cisco Unity and Exchange 2007 We are experiencing a delay in Message Waiting Indicator (MWI) response times for users homed on Exchange 2007. The MWI delay is 90s for E2K7 users and 0s for E2K3 users, but fully functional beyond that. The Touchtone user Interface (TUI) is fully functional with no delay, and E2K7 users still receive all forwarded and new voice messages from Unity. We have a Cisco TAC case open, but the best they can offer is that the CDO.dll package was not shipped in W2K8. We have applied the CDO update referenced in KB951192, but MWI response has not improved. Single forest, single domain, all DCs are W2K3 R2 x64, all Exchange servers are E2K3 SP2 and E2K7 SP1. All E2K7 SP1 servers are hosted on W2K8 Ent SP1. HUB and CAS implemented in same AD site as CCR mailbox clusters (2 qty). Each CCR cluster is Clariion SAN backed, connected with QLogic. 1 node of each CCR is hosted on ESX v3.50 b98103, and the other node is hosted on a Dell PE 2950s . Both CCR clusters have a SCR replica in separate AD site. For unified messaging we currently use Cisco Call Manager v4.13, and Cisco Unity v5.01. Any suggestions or comments that might assist would be greatly appreciated. Keith Beahm -- This communication is from a law firm and may contain confidential and/or privileged information. If it has been sent to you in error, please contact the sender for instructions concerning return or destruction, and do not use or disclose the contents to others. E2K7 HUB Disclaimer Test ~ Ninja Email Security with Cloudmark Spam Engine Gets Image Spam ~ ~ http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Ninja~
Re: Exchange 07 on VMware
For anyone interested, I just saw this KB referenced: http://support.microsoft.com/kb/897615/ It appears to support the complaint on this thread about duplicating problems on Hyper-V or physical. Key section: As part of the investigation, Microsoft may still require the issue to be reproduced independently from the non-Microsoft hardware virtualization software. Where issues are confirmed to be unrelated to the non-Microsoft hardware virtualization software, Microsoft will support its software in a manner that is consistent with support provided when that software is not running together with non-Microsoft hardware virtualization software. --James On Sun, Aug 24, 2008 at 11:10 PM, Steven Peck [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: We don't know that they didn't say HyperV or Physical either. And since when has a support call anywhere not been an excuse for a sales opportunity for someone? :) On Sat, Aug 23, 2008 at 6:04 PM, Martin Blackstone [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: That's not the point. I understand that ESX isn't supported yet. If they were running unsupported and the suspicion was that it was VMWare, they should have said go V2P and leave it there. Not switch to our product. A support call shouldn't be a sales opportunity. -Original Message- From: Steven Peck [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, August 23, 2008 5:45 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: Re: Exchange 07 on VMware But officer, I don't understand why you think I broke the law. I know that the stop sign was there and I ignored it because I hear the city council is considering removing it. I don't understand why you are giving me a ticket because I broke clearly established rules that are going to change at some indeterminate point in the future ... maybe. Also, you might want to read the virtualization guidelines to ensure you at least are running somewhat close to recommendations. Steven On Sat, Aug 23, 2008 at 12:15 PM, Martin Blackstone [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: That's not a solution, Just a worthless answer. By the same logic, if CRM isn't working, maybe Salesforce would! J From: James Wells [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, August 23, 2008 11:18 AM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: Re: Exchange 07 on VMware True - it's not a certification. But they did join, which wasn't public info until this week...but according to the article Steve mentioned, the SVVP program is just as good, from the application standpoint, as Hyper-V. I'm still surprised that any PSS engineer thought it was a good idea to tell you to try Hyper-V as a solution... --James On Sat, Aug 23, 2008 at 8:36 AM, Martin Blackstone [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I don't think VMware has been certified yet. It's in the program though which is great news. From: Steve Moffat [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Exchange (Sunbelt) Sent: Saturday, August 23, 2008 6:16 AM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Exchange 07 on VMware Seen this? http://support.microsoft.com/kb/957006 From: James Wells [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, August 23, 2008 10:00 AM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: Re: Exchange 07 on VMware Well, specific to VMWare and Microsoft...the certification for Server (OS only) was inked this week. There certainly isn't one for CRM yet. But I would scream very loudly for my TAM to here, if that happened with any of our apps. Most customer-facing folks at Microsoft are understanding that Hyper-V is still basically beta software, when compared to VMWare. But no one else at Microsoft wants to admit that, it seems. --James On Fri, Aug 22, 2008 at 6:51 PM, Damian Myles [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Larry, Sorry about the digression.. must be a Friday thing :-).. as James said I'd look at your storage requirements primarily.. unless you have explicit HA requirements James.. that was a premier agreement also with the customer .. maybe the good news hasn't filtered thru.. for me it's just a bit vernacular :-) Cheers, Mylo On 8/23/08, James Wells [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The answer is, it depends. I would certainly want ESX Enterprise features (mostly for HA). Mailbox roles of any kind - be careful on storage requirements. It could get tricky identifying bottlenecks if you are pushing your storage throughput limits, for example. Certainly don't take snapshots of DB or Log disks :) --James On 8/22/08, TechInfo [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Anyone have any info on my original question?? :) -Original Message- From: James Wells [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Aug 22, 2008 4:00 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: Re: Exchange 07 on VMware If you have a Premier agreement, then that should change. VMWare is now supported as a platform
Re: Exchange 07 on VMware
Well, specific to VMWare and Microsoft...the certification for Server (OS only) was inked this week. There certainly isn't one for CRM yet. But I would scream very loudly for my TAM to here, if that happened with any of our apps. Most customer-facing folks at Microsoft are understanding that Hyper-V is still basically beta software, when compared to VMWare. But no one else at Microsoft wants to admit that, it seems. --James On Fri, Aug 22, 2008 at 6:51 PM, Damian Myles [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Larry, Sorry about the digression.. must be a Friday thing :-).. as James said I'd look at your storage requirements primarily.. unless you have explicit HA requirements James.. that was a premier agreement also with the customer .. maybe the good news hasn't filtered thru.. for me it's just a bit vernacular :-) Cheers, Mylo On 8/23/08, James Wells [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The answer is, it depends. I would certainly want ESX Enterprise features (mostly for HA). Mailbox roles of any kind - be careful on storage requirements. It could get tricky identifying bottlenecks if you are pushing your storage throughput limits, for example. Certainly don't take snapshots of DB or Log disks :) --James On 8/22/08, TechInfo [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Anyone have any info on my original question?? :) -Original Message- From: James Wells [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Aug 22, 2008 4:00 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: Re: Exchange 07 on VMware If you have a Premier agreement, then that should change. VMWare is now supported as a platform for Windows Server (it wasn't as of last week). I would expect those trends to start to reverse somewhat, or Microsoft will start to get itself into trouble... --James On 8/22/08, Damian Myles [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Folks, VMWare.. oh.. what a life :-) Just had a call with Microsoft support today concerning CRM 4.0... whilst you may be scratching your head thinking what bearing this may have on Exchange, the gravitas towards Hyper-V (at least in a support sense) is a tad annoying.. I am an advocate of virtualization particularly in certain spheres.. in Exchange terms that relates to the web tier (CAS / ActiveSync et al) so I was mildly put out with the response I had today . VMWare, I recognize, has been historically a best effort approach for support from Microsoft .. V2P has been a requisite in the past for Microsoft support for VMWare users to demonstrably prove that the problem didn't lie in the virtual layer. Today, we were asked today to move our test platforms to Hyper-V, to prove that the problems did not relate to VMWare... for the most part this is either a cop-out or at least a form of nepotism ... anyone else had similar experiences? Cheers, Mylo On 8/22/08, TechInfo [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: My bad, you are correct. From: Miller Bonnie L. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Aug 22, 2008 1:15 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Exchange 07 on VMware Sounds like you have 2950s then, not 2850s? From: TechInfo [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, August 22, 2008 1:13 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Exchange 07 on VMware They are quad core E5430, 32GB RAM. They were purchased as a package with the VMware software, should not be any issue with supporting 64bit. Larry From: Matthew Bullock [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Aug 22, 2008 12:25 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Exchange 07 on VMware What kind of processor does the 2850 have? It needs to have virtualization support for installing a 64bit guest on ESX. From: TechInfo [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, August 22, 2008 10:31 AM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: Exchange 07 on VMware Just thought I'd stir up the pot on the Exchange on VMware discussion again. One of my projects for this year is to migrate to Exchange 07 from 03. We currently have about 600 mailboxes residing on a single server, single site. I purchased a Dell 2850 for this earlier this year. I also installed VMWare ESX 3.5 earlier this year with a couple of Dell 2850's. Now I'm thinking about using the server I have for Exchange, making it another VMware server and then installing Exchange 07 on VMware. I'm just looking for your thoughts (wisdom) from those that have been using it that way on how it is working out. Also, that way would it make sense to break out a separate vm for hub transport? We also have a BES server that I could put on the same vnic to limit that traffic. We do have an enterprise agreement with Microsoft as I know that is always brought up
Re: PF security report?
Sure isdownload PFDavAdmin from microsoft.com. http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details.aspx?FamilyID=635be792-d8ad-49e3-ada4-e2422c0ab424DisplayLang=en It has tools to export all of the public folders and their permission lists to CSV for you. (among many other great features). --James On Fri, Aug 22, 2008 at 8:27 AM, James Kerr [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Heh guys, Other then doing it manually, is there a way to get a report of the permissions for all our public folders for Exchange 2003? James ~ Ninja Email Security with Cloudmark Spam Engine Gets Image Spam ~ ~ http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Ninja~
Re: Active Sync
iPhone 2.0 software will support it. It's a 'normal' looking implementation of Exchange Activesync, as of Exchange 2003 SP2, with the exception of the 'wipe after xx failed PIN attempts' policy. iPhone 1.0 software doesn't have any Activesync support at all and must use IMAP. On Fri, Aug 22, 2008 at 9:52 AM, Michael B. Smith [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Sp2 is required for direct push. Sp1 and before only had AUTD. I'm pretty sure (but not 100%) that the iPhone implementation doesn't include AUTD. Regards, Michael B. Smith MCITP:SA,EMA/MCSE/Exchange MVP http://TheEssentialExchange.com http://theessentialexchange.com/ *From:* Martin Blackstone [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] *Sent:* Friday, August 22, 2008 10:33 AM *To:* MS-Exchange Admin Issues *Subject:* RE: Active Sync SBS supports ActiveSync. By that logic, it should work. *From:* Victor Rodriguez [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] *Sent:* Friday, August 22, 2008 7:21 AM *To:* MS-Exchange Admin Issues *Subject:* Active Sync Good Morning Can anyone tell me if Iphone exchange connectivity Via Active Sync. is supported on windows SBS exchange server 2003 Victor Rodriguez -- This e-Mail and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. If you have received this e-Mail in error please notify the sender via returned e-Mail. Please note that any views or opinions presented in this e-Mail are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of the company. Although IDF operates anti-virus programs, it does not accept responsibility for any damage whatsoever that is caused by viruses being passed. ** Think before you print this message. ** ~ Ninja Email Security with Cloudmark Spam Engine Gets Image Spam ~ ~ http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Ninja~
Re: Modify user's calendar permissions from server
I vote for PFDavAdmin. --James On 8/22/08, Andy Shook [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: SBS 2003 std. fully patched What's the best tool to modify a user's calendar permissions from the server? PFDAVAdmin? WebDAV? Kevin Snook's utility? Thanks, Shook ~ 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: Exchange 07 on VMware
If you have a Premier agreement, then that should change. VMWare is now supported as a platform for Windows Server (it wasn't as of last week). I would expect those trends to start to reverse somewhat, or Microsoft will start to get itself into trouble... --James On 8/22/08, Damian Myles [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Folks, VMWare.. oh.. what a life :-) Just had a call with Microsoft support today concerning CRM 4.0... whilst you may be scratching your head thinking what bearing this may have on Exchange, the gravitas towards Hyper-V (at least in a support sense) is a tad annoying.. I am an advocate of virtualization particularly in certain spheres.. in Exchange terms that relates to the web tier (CAS / ActiveSync et al) so I was mildly put out with the response I had today . VMWare, I recognize, has been historically a best effort approach for support from Microsoft .. V2P has been a requisite in the past for Microsoft support for VMWare users to demonstrably prove that the problem didn't lie in the virtual layer. Today, we were asked today to move our test platforms to Hyper-V, to prove that the problems did not relate to VMWare... for the most part this is either a cop-out or at least a form of nepotism ... anyone else had similar experiences? Cheers, Mylo On 8/22/08, TechInfo [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: My bad, you are correct. From: Miller Bonnie L. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Aug 22, 2008 1:15 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Exchange 07 on VMware Sounds like you have 2950s then, not 2850s? From: TechInfo [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, August 22, 2008 1:13 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Exchange 07 on VMware They are quad core E5430, 32GB RAM. They were purchased as a package with the VMware software, should not be any issue with supporting 64bit. Larry From: Matthew Bullock [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Aug 22, 2008 12:25 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Exchange 07 on VMware What kind of processor does the 2850 have? It needs to have virtualization support for installing a 64bit guest on ESX. From: TechInfo [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, August 22, 2008 10:31 AM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: Exchange 07 on VMware Just thought I'd stir up the pot on the Exchange on VMware discussion again. One of my projects for this year is to migrate to Exchange 07 from 03. We currently have about 600 mailboxes residing on a single server, single site. I purchased a Dell 2850 for this earlier this year. I also installed VMWare ESX 3.5 earlier this year with a couple of Dell 2850's. Now I'm thinking about using the server I have for Exchange, making it another VMware server and then installing Exchange 07 on VMware. I'm just looking for your thoughts (wisdom) from those that have been using it that way on how it is working out. Also, that way would it make sense to break out a separate vm for hub transport? We also have a BES server that I could put on the same vnic to limit that traffic. We do have an enterprise agreement with Microsoft as I know that is always brought up regarding support. Larry Didtel Systems Administrator Stemilt Growers Inc This e-mail transmission and any accompanying documents contain information from the company, Stemilt Growers, Inc., which is confidential or privileged. The information is intended to be for the use of the individual or entity named in this transmission. If you are not the intended recipient, be aware that any disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the contents of this transmission is prohibited. If you have received this transmission in error, please notify us by telephone immediately at 509-663-1451. This e-mail transmission and any accompanying documents contain information from the company, Stemilt Growers, Inc., which is confidential or privileged. The information is intended to be for the use of the individual or entity named in this transmission. If you are not the intended recipient, be aware that any disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the contents of this transmission is prohibited. If you have received this transmission in error, please notify us by telephone immediately at 509-663-1451. This e-mail transmission and any accompanying documents contain information from the company, Stemilt Growers, Inc., which is confidential or privileged. The information is intended to be for the use of the individual or entity named in this transmission. If you are not the intended recipient, be aware that any disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the contents of this transmission is prohibited. If you have received this transmission in error, please notify us by telephone immediately at 509-663-1451. ~ Ninja Email Security with Cloudmark Spam Engine Gets Image Spam ~ ~
Re: Exchange 07 on VMware
The answer is, it depends. I would certainly want ESX Enterprise features (mostly for HA). Mailbox roles of any kind - be careful on storage requirements. It could get tricky identifying bottlenecks if you are pushing your storage throughput limits, for example. Certainly don't take snapshots of DB or Log disks :) --James On 8/22/08, TechInfo [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Anyone have any info on my original question?? :) -Original Message- From: James Wells [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Aug 22, 2008 4:00 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: Re: Exchange 07 on VMware If you have a Premier agreement, then that should change. VMWare is now supported as a platform for Windows Server (it wasn't as of last week). I would expect those trends to start to reverse somewhat, or Microsoft will start to get itself into trouble... --James On 8/22/08, Damian Myles [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Folks, VMWare.. oh.. what a life :-) Just had a call with Microsoft support today concerning CRM 4.0... whilst you may be scratching your head thinking what bearing this may have on Exchange, the gravitas towards Hyper-V (at least in a support sense) is a tad annoying.. I am an advocate of virtualization particularly in certain spheres.. in Exchange terms that relates to the web tier (CAS / ActiveSync et al) so I was mildly put out with the response I had today . VMWare, I recognize, has been historically a best effort approach for support from Microsoft .. V2P has been a requisite in the past for Microsoft support for VMWare users to demonstrably prove that the problem didn't lie in the virtual layer. Today, we were asked today to move our test platforms to Hyper-V, to prove that the problems did not relate to VMWare... for the most part this is either a cop-out or at least a form of nepotism ... anyone else had similar experiences? Cheers, Mylo On 8/22/08, TechInfo [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: My bad, you are correct. From: Miller Bonnie L. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Aug 22, 2008 1:15 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Exchange 07 on VMware Sounds like you have 2950s then, not 2850s? From: TechInfo [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, August 22, 2008 1:13 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Exchange 07 on VMware They are quad core E5430, 32GB RAM. They were purchased as a package with the VMware software, should not be any issue with supporting 64bit. Larry From: Matthew Bullock [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Aug 22, 2008 12:25 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Exchange 07 on VMware What kind of processor does the 2850 have? It needs to have virtualization support for installing a 64bit guest on ESX. From: TechInfo [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, August 22, 2008 10:31 AM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: Exchange 07 on VMware Just thought I'd stir up the pot on the Exchange on VMware discussion again. One of my projects for this year is to migrate to Exchange 07 from 03. We currently have about 600 mailboxes residing on a single server, single site. I purchased a Dell 2850 for this earlier this year. I also installed VMWare ESX 3.5 earlier this year with a couple of Dell 2850's. Now I'm thinking about using the server I have for Exchange, making it another VMware server and then installing Exchange 07 on VMware. I'm just looking for your thoughts (wisdom) from those that have been using it that way on how it is working out. Also, that way would it make sense to break out a separate vm for hub transport? We also have a BES server that I could put on the same vnic to limit that traffic. We do have an enterprise agreement with Microsoft as I know that is always brought up regarding support. Larry Didtel Systems Administrator Stemilt Growers Inc This e-mail transmission and any accompanying documents contain information from the company, Stemilt Growers, Inc., which is confidential or privileged. The information is intended to be for the use of the individual or entity named in this transmission. If you are not the intended recipient, be aware that any disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the contents of this transmission is prohibited. If you have received this transmission in error, please notify us by telephone immediately at 509-663-1451. This e-mail transmission and any accompanying documents contain information from the company, Stemilt Growers, Inc., which is confidential or privileged. The information is intended to be for the use of the individual or entity named in this transmission. If you are not the intended recipient, be aware that any disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the contents of this transmission is prohibited. If you have received this transmission in error, please notify us by telephone immediately at 509-663-1451. This e-mail transmission
Re: Exchange cached mode
If they're road warriors - take it one step further and publish RPC/HTTPS for them. No VPN required for email. Their complaints might be some silliness, like mobile devices getting the email before cached mode Outlook...but they will be much better off in cached mode. So will your mailbox server. (takes 50% of the DB IOPS, according to Microsoft storage calculators). I've seen corrupt OST files 1% of the time. It can happen, but it's very rare, and the benefits FAR outweigh any risks. --James On Thu, Aug 7, 2008 at 12:31 PM, Scott Schneider [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Just looking for a general consensus. Remote road warriors, is it best to have them use Exchange cached mode on an Exchange 2003 cluster with a 2003 Outlook client. We are upgrading our clients from Outlook 2002 and are looking for best practices. Any gotchas to using/not using cached mode? External users connect through a SonicWall VPN client. Thanks Scott Schneider ~ Ninja Email Security with Cloudmark Spam Engine Gets Image Spam ~ ~ http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Ninja~
Re: Strange OWA redirection
You may have to check the IIS Metabase itself. If a stale IP address is stuck, it may not show in the IIS GUI. The IIS Resource Kit has some good tools - or you can mark the Metabase readable and search the XML for the old IP address. --James On Tue, Aug 5, 2008 at 9:28 AM, Miller Bonnie L. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: We've seen something like this (an old IP sticking around) when changing addresses with IIS before. A couple of places I can think to check on the server that had the previous IP— IIS Admin, properties of the website, web site tab. Make sure the IP address has not been assigned directly to the old IP at some point. Click the advanced button to confirm it does not show up. Control Panel, Network, properties of the NIC, TCPIP properties, advanced, IP Settings tab. Make sure the second IP does not still show up here, and remove it if it does. -Bonnie From: E. Peeters [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, August 04, 2008 1:43 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Strange OWA redirection I have, and I didn't find either. What has me puzzled is that a mere Refresh solves this issue every time. From: May, Jeff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, August 04, 2008 3:15 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Strange OWA redirection Have you checked for DNS issues or hard coded IP on the default web site for your OWA FE server Jeff A. May, Blackberry Certified SA Client Server Engineer III Client Server Engineering/IT Messaging Services Mail Code - 100-99-08-20 E-Mail - [EMAIL PROTECTED] From: E. Peeters [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, August 04, 2008 4:10 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: Strange OWA redirection Hello people, My problem is with Exchange 2003 on Windows 2003. Whenever someone attempts to access my OWA for the first time (per session), the connection is being redirected to an internal (non-routable) IP. Hitting Refresh on the browser opens OWA correctly, and the problem does not occur again until the user begins a new session (logs off or reboots their PC). The IP is the internal IP that the Exchange box was assigned in an earlier deployment, prior to OWA being made available. The Exchange box has a new IP and everything seems to be functioning normally, except for this OWA issue. On the first attempt to connect to OWA, the user is prompted to authenticate and after succesfully doing so, both OWA frames are loaded but their respective content isn't displayed. Rather, the generic web page could not be found is shown. Looking at what each frame does, they are both attempting to load their respective page, but they use the old internal IP for Exchange rather than the FQDN. If the user hits Refresh, the content of each frame is loaded using the FQDN and OWA will function as expected right up until the user logs off or reboots their PC. Afterwards, the first attempt to use OWA will again fail, etc... I have combed the registry to see if I could find any entry that would somehow point to the old Exchange's internal IP, to no avail. This issue started when one box was performing all Exchange functions. I now have front-end and back-end boxes, but the problem hasn't changed. Any suggestion ? Eric ~ Ninja Email Security with Cloudmark Spam Engine Gets Image Spam ~ ~ http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Ninja~
Re: Calendar Access
No - mail-enabled user and mailbox-enabled user are NOT the same. A mail-enabled user has targetAddress populated and basically acts like a mail-enabled contact, for mail-routing purposes. A mailbox-enabled user has is the term for a user object with a mailbox in an Exchange store. --James On 8/5/08, Carl Houseman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: First: You said a contradiction. 'doesn't have an Exchange mailbox' and 'her account is mail enabled' can't both be true. A mail-enabled domain user account *has* a mailbox. Next: An Outlook profile must contain an Exchange account to access calendars stored on the Exchange server. If the calendar was in a public folder, she could access the PF with OWA from here: https://mail.cyberquotient.com/public/ but unfortunately OWA (2003) doesn't get you open other user's calendar. Carl -Original Message- From: Jim Dandy [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, August 05, 2008 4:36 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Calendar Access I have a user who has a domain account but doesn't have an Exchange mailbox. She needs to access a calendar associated with an Exchange mailbox. Her account is mail enabled and she belongs to a mail enabled security group. Her account and the mail enabled security group have Owner permissions on the calendar she needs to access. In Outlook (2003) her profile is configured to access a POP account she has on a different (non-Exchange) system. In Outlook when you click on File | Open, the Other User's Folder... option is grayed out so she is unable to access the calendar. What can I do to get this working? Thanks for your help. ~ 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: CCR Warnings and Errors
Any chance that NIC teaming configured on that node? --James On Mon, Aug 4, 2008 at 9:03 AM, Sascha Riela [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi All, we have installed a widows 2003SP2 X64 environment with exchange 2007 Sp1 Rollup Patch2. I receive every day 3 warnings with source: ClusSvc Category: Node Mgr Event ID:1123 indicating that the node lost communication on the network this message appears for every network connection. Then I have also the error Source: ClusNet Category: None EventID: 1118 indicating cluster service was terminated as requested by Node1. There was no failover nothing just this messages. I can't find nothing about this problem. Does maybe somebody of you have any ideas about this messages ? Thank you for your help Sascha ~ Ninja Email Security with Cloudmark Spam Engine Gets Image Spam ~ ~ http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Ninja~
Re: Moving Mailboxes
Are you running out of transaction log disk space on the destination server? Or are you hitting log checkpoint depth exhaustion because backups are running while you move mailboxes? In either case - circular logging gets dangerous in case of any hardware problems that take your stores offline. Can you add any storage to the destination server for some extra translog space, instead? --James On 7/29/08, Karsten, Matthew [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Exchange Server 2003 SP2. We have always had all of our users (around 1200) in one large store. This single store had grown to be around 400GB. A while ago we decided to start moving all of our users out of this store and into several different stores organized based on desired configuration. We then began moving mailboxes out of the large store in groups into the other stores. This has been going fine for our smaller users. We now have hit a point where we are at our users that have larger mailboxes (200mb - 2gb). As I am moving them in groups, the stores keep dismounting. Looking at the event logs it appears that they are dismounting because the logs are filling up. I did more looking and it appears that the easiest way to fix this is to enable circular logging. Reading more on circular logging, there seem to be mixed opinions on whether it should be enabled or not. So I guess I have 2 questions. 1. Is circular logging the way to go to deal with this? 2. If so, is there anything I need to watch out for? I had been planning just to enable it to finish the mailbox moves and then just turn it off. Matt Karsten ~ 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: Moving Mailboxes
Is this the problem you're having? http://support.microsoft.com/kb/905801 --James On Tue, Jul 29, 2008 at 1:43 PM, Karsten, Matthew [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I think I got plenty of space for the logs on the server (currently 80GB free out of 120GB total on that particular drive). I just verified that the log files are being written to the drive I thought they were. The processor is barely being used on the box so compression wouldn't be bad. Matt From: Campbell, Rob [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, July 29, 2008 2:06 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Moving Mailboxes IMHO – the answer to that depends on your backup and SLA for recoverability. Moving large mailboxes creates a lot of transaction logs. You might want to consider increasing the amount of space you have allocated for the transaction logs temporarily while you're doing the mailbox moves, then cut it back when you're finished. Transaction logs also compress pretty well, so you might consider enabling compression on the transaction log directories if you can afford the processor load without it hurting your performance too much. From: Karsten, Matthew [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, July 29, 2008 12:59 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: Moving Mailboxes Exchange Server 2003 SP2. We have always had all of our users (around 1200) in one large store. This single store had grown to be around 400GB. A while ago we decided to start moving all of our users out of this store and into several different stores organized based on desired configuration. We then began moving mailboxes out of the large store in groups into the other stores. This has been going fine for our smaller users. We now have hit a point where we are at our users that have larger mailboxes (200mb - 2gb). As I am moving them in groups, the stores keep dismounting. Looking at the event logs it appears that they are dismounting because the logs are filling up. I did more looking and it appears that the easiest way to fix this is to enable circular logging. Reading more on circular logging, there seem to be mixed opinions on whether it should be enabled or not. So I guess I have 2 questions. 1. Is circular logging the way to go to deal with this? 2. If so, is there anything I need to watch out for? I had been planning just to enable it to finish the mailbox moves and then just turn it off. Matt Karsten ** 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: Moving Mailboxes
Then it's not space that's a problem...you really need to watch how many mailboxes you move during an ESE backup operation. You can only create 1012-ish uncommitted transaction logs before the storage group is taken offline as a precaution. That works out to ~5GB of mailbox data. Can you halt backups when you do the moves, then immediately take a full backup? --James On Tue, Jul 29, 2008 at 1:54 PM, Karsten, Matthew [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: That would be the one. Matt -Original Message- From: James Wells [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, July 29, 2008 2:48 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: Re: Moving Mailboxes Is this the problem you're having? http://support.microsoft.com/kb/905801 --James On Tue, Jul 29, 2008 at 1:43 PM, Karsten, Matthew [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I think I got plenty of space for the logs on the server (currently 80GB free out of 120GB total on that particular drive). I just verified that the log files are being written to the drive I thought they were. The processor is barely being used on the box so compression wouldn't be bad. Matt From: Campbell, Rob [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, July 29, 2008 2:06 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Moving Mailboxes IMHO - the answer to that depends on your backup and SLA for recoverability. Moving large mailboxes creates a lot of transaction logs. You might want to consider increasing the amount of space you have allocated for the transaction logs temporarily while you're doing the mailbox moves, then cut it back when you're finished. Transaction logs also compress pretty well, so you might consider enabling compression on the transaction log directories if you can afford the processor load without it hurting your performance too much. From: Karsten, Matthew [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, July 29, 2008 12:59 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: Moving Mailboxes Exchange Server 2003 SP2. We have always had all of our users (around 1200) in one large store. This single store had grown to be around 400GB. A while ago we decided to start moving all of our users out of this store and into several different stores organized based on desired configuration. We then began moving mailboxes out of the large store in groups into the other stores. This has been going fine for our smaller users. We now have hit a point where we are at our users that have larger mailboxes (200mb - 2gb). As I am moving them in groups, the stores keep dismounting. Looking at the event logs it appears that they are dismounting because the logs are filling up. I did more looking and it appears that the easiest way to fix this is to enable circular logging. Reading more on circular logging, there seem to be mixed opinions on whether it should be enabled or not. So I guess I have 2 questions. 1. Is circular logging the way to go to deal with this? 2. If so, is there anything I need to watch out for? I had been planning just to enable it to finish the mailbox moves and then just turn it off. Matt Karsten ** 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~ ~ 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: Moving Mailboxes
Also - it's the DESTINATION server that matters for that KB article/backups during mailbox moves. Not the source. (The destination is the only one creating data, so that's the only one generating much in the way of logs). --James On Tue, Jul 29, 2008 at 1:53 PM, Karsten, Matthew [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I don't think I am running out of disk space. I have plenty of free space on the server (80GB free on the log drive). I thought I had the mailbox moves outside of the backup window, but never verified that. I will look into that some more. Now that I have re-read the MS KB Article on this issue, it mentions that, that is probably the place to start. The destination server is actually the same as the source in terms of physical machine. We just gave it additional disk storage space. Matt -Original Message- From: James Wells [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, July 29, 2008 2:08 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: Re: Moving Mailboxes Are you running out of transaction log disk space on the destination server? Or are you hitting log checkpoint depth exhaustion because backups are running while you move mailboxes? In either case - circular logging gets dangerous in case of any hardware problems that take your stores offline. Can you add any storage to the destination server for some extra translog space, instead? --James On 7/29/08, Karsten, Matthew [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Exchange Server 2003 SP2. We have always had all of our users (around 1200) in one large store. This single store had grown to be around 400GB. A while ago we decided to start moving all of our users out of this store and into several different stores organized based on desired configuration. We then began moving mailboxes out of the large store in groups into the other stores. This has been going fine for our smaller users. We now have hit a point where we are at our users that have larger mailboxes (200mb - 2gb). As I am moving them in groups, the stores keep dismounting. Looking at the event logs it appears that they are dismounting because the logs are filling up. I did more looking and it appears that the easiest way to fix this is to enable circular logging. Reading more on circular logging, there seem to be mixed opinions on whether it should be enabled or not. So I guess I have 2 questions. 1. Is circular logging the way to go to deal with this? 2. If so, is there anything I need to watch out for? I had been planning just to enable it to finish the mailbox moves and then just turn it off. Matt Karsten ~ 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: Moving Mailboxes
That's certainly a problem. Unless your SLA lets you alternate incremental and full backups (ie. do moves one night, then incremental backup -- full backup with no moview the next night, etc). For moving large mailboxes - halting full backups during the move operation is pretty much a requirement... For the math on how much 1012 logs will be...if you move mailboxes at a low-usage hour...then nearly all of the translog activity will be from your moves, and 1012 logs x 5MB ~ 5GB of move data. --James On Tue, Jul 29, 2008 at 2:07 PM, Karsten, Matthew [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I never knew how much data the 1012 uncommited transactions logs could hold. If its around 5GB, that's not going to be fun for me, around 40 of my users have over 1GB mailboxes. Then another 120 or so have over 500MB mailboxes. I could make sure backups run right after a move, the problem is, a full backup isn't exactly quick. So when I get to these really large mailboxes, I am going to have to do them in very small groups? I was hoping to avoid extending this out as long as that would take, if I can't, I will deal with that though. Matt -Original Message- From: James Wells [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, July 29, 2008 2:57 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: Re: Moving Mailboxes Then it's not space that's a problem...you really need to watch how many mailboxes you move during an ESE backup operation. You can only create 1012-ish uncommitted transaction logs before the storage group is taken offline as a precaution. That works out to ~5GB of mailbox data. Can you halt backups when you do the moves, then immediately take a full backup? --James On Tue, Jul 29, 2008 at 1:54 PM, Karsten, Matthew [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: That would be the one. Matt -Original Message- From: James Wells [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, July 29, 2008 2:48 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: Re: Moving Mailboxes Is this the problem you're having? http://support.microsoft.com/kb/905801 --James On Tue, Jul 29, 2008 at 1:43 PM, Karsten, Matthew [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I think I got plenty of space for the logs on the server (currently 80GB free out of 120GB total on that particular drive). I just verified that the log files are being written to the drive I thought they were. The processor is barely being used on the box so compression wouldn't be bad. Matt From: Campbell, Rob [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, July 29, 2008 2:06 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Moving Mailboxes IMHO - the answer to that depends on your backup and SLA for recoverability. Moving large mailboxes creates a lot of transaction logs. You might want to consider increasing the amount of space you have allocated for the transaction logs temporarily while you're doing the mailbox moves, then cut it back when you're finished. Transaction logs also compress pretty well, so you might consider enabling compression on the transaction log directories if you can afford the processor load without it hurting your performance too much. From: Karsten, Matthew [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, July 29, 2008 12:59 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: Moving Mailboxes Exchange Server 2003 SP2. We have always had all of our users (around 1200) in one large store. This single store had grown to be around 400GB. A while ago we decided to start moving all of our users out of this store and into several different stores organized based on desired configuration. We then began moving mailboxes out of the large store in groups into the other stores. This has been going fine for our smaller users. We now have hit a point where we are at our users that have larger mailboxes (200mb - 2gb). As I am moving them in groups, the stores keep dismounting. Looking at the event logs it appears that they are dismounting because the logs are filling up. I did more looking and it appears that the easiest way to fix this is to enable circular logging. Reading more on circular logging, there seem to be mixed opinions on whether it should be enabled or not. So I guess I have 2 questions. 1. Is circular logging the way to go to deal with this? 2. If so, is there anything I need to watch out for? I had been planning just to enable it to finish the mailbox moves and then just turn it off. Matt Karsten ** 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
Re: Moving Mailboxes
Not really a tool for that...NetIQ and Quest's migration tools are going to cost a lot, and aren't really meant for this type of move (and might not even work). You're probably stuck with lots of manual effort. --James On Tue, Jul 29, 2008 at 2:25 PM, Karsten, Matthew [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I could alternate incrementals in there if I needed to, they prefer fulls but... Is there a Tool that would make this move easier on me in terms of time, free would be nice, but not required. The math - yeah, that makes sense. I should've thought about that. Matt -Original Message- From: James Wells [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, July 29, 2008 3:12 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: Re: Moving Mailboxes That's certainly a problem. Unless your SLA lets you alternate incremental and full backups (ie. do moves one night, then incremental backup -- full backup with no moview the next night, etc). For moving large mailboxes - halting full backups during the move operation is pretty much a requirement... For the math on how much 1012 logs will be...if you move mailboxes at a low-usage hour...then nearly all of the translog activity will be from your moves, and 1012 logs x 5MB ~ 5GB of move data. --James On Tue, Jul 29, 2008 at 2:07 PM, Karsten, Matthew [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I never knew how much data the 1012 uncommited transactions logs could hold. If its around 5GB, that's not going to be fun for me, around 40 of my users have over 1GB mailboxes. Then another 120 or so have over 500MB mailboxes. I could make sure backups run right after a move, the problem is, a full backup isn't exactly quick. So when I get to these really large mailboxes, I am going to have to do them in very small groups? I was hoping to avoid extending this out as long as that would take, if I can't, I will deal with that though. Matt -Original Message- From: James Wells [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, July 29, 2008 2:57 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: Re: Moving Mailboxes Then it's not space that's a problem...you really need to watch how many mailboxes you move during an ESE backup operation. You can only create 1012-ish uncommitted transaction logs before the storage group is taken offline as a precaution. That works out to ~5GB of mailbox data. Can you halt backups when you do the moves, then immediately take a full backup? --James On Tue, Jul 29, 2008 at 1:54 PM, Karsten, Matthew [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: That would be the one. Matt -Original Message- From: James Wells [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, July 29, 2008 2:48 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: Re: Moving Mailboxes Is this the problem you're having? http://support.microsoft.com/kb/905801 --James On Tue, Jul 29, 2008 at 1:43 PM, Karsten, Matthew [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I think I got plenty of space for the logs on the server (currently 80GB free out of 120GB total on that particular drive). I just verified that the log files are being written to the drive I thought they were. The processor is barely being used on the box so compression wouldn't be bad. Matt From: Campbell, Rob [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, July 29, 2008 2:06 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Moving Mailboxes IMHO - the answer to that depends on your backup and SLA for recoverability. Moving large mailboxes creates a lot of transaction logs. You might want to consider increasing the amount of space you have allocated for the transaction logs temporarily while you're doing the mailbox moves, then cut it back when you're finished. Transaction logs also compress pretty well, so you might consider enabling compression on the transaction log directories if you can afford the processor load without it hurting your performance too much. From: Karsten, Matthew [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, July 29, 2008 12:59 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: Moving Mailboxes Exchange Server 2003 SP2. We have always had all of our users (around 1200) in one large store. This single store had grown to be around 400GB. A while ago we decided to start moving all of our users out of this store and into several different stores organized based on desired configuration. We then began moving mailboxes out of the large store in groups into the other stores. This has been going fine for our smaller users. We now have hit a point where we are at our users that have larger mailboxes (200mb - 2gb). As I am moving them in groups, the stores keep dismounting. Looking at the event logs it appears that they are dismounting because the logs are filling up. I did more looking and it appears that the easiest way to fix this is to enable circular logging. Reading more on circular logging, there seem to be mixed
Re: Exchange Backup Recomendation
Not sure what your budget is...but we've been very happy using Quest Recovery Manager for Exchange...it integrates with almost every ESE backup product, and gives you brick-level restores without having to take brick-level backups or use Recovery Storage Groups... With Quest Recovery Manager, you could continue using whatever method you want for backup (even ntbackup) and have much better options on restores. --James On Fri, Jul 25, 2008 at 8:25 AM, Don Guyer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: We've had good results with Commvault. Don Guyer Systems Engineer Information Services Department Prudential Fox Roach/ Trident 431 W. Lancaster Avenue Devon, PA 19333 Ph: (610) 993-3299 Fax: (610) 650-5306 www.prufoxroach.com [EMAIL PROTECTED] -Original Message- From: Alex [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, July 25, 2008 9:15 AM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: Exchange Backup Recomendation I have new Exchange 2003 box serving 1500 users in a campus environment. Currently using NT backup but would like to hear list members results with other solution that will backup at the mailbox level. Thanks! -Alex Alex Robinson CCNA Network Administrator Franklin Road Academy 4700 Franklin Pike Nashville TN, 37220 Help Desk: 615.369.4627 ~ Ninja Email Security with Cloudmark Spam Engine Gets Image Spam ~ ~ http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Ninja~ /pre table width=100%trtd class=body This email and any files transmitted with it are confidentialbr and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity tobr whom they are addressed. It may contain information protected by br state and federal privacy and intellectual property laws.br If you have received this email in error pleasebr notify the sender immediately and delete this e-mail frombr your system. If you are not the named addressee you shouldbr not disseminate, distribute or copy this e-mail, and you arebr notified that disclosing, copying, distributing or taking anybr action in reliance on the contents of this information is strictly prohibited.br /td/tr/table ~ 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: A couple questions about ISA and OWA
I thought you were load-balancing twice because of this statement: This would mean the SSL cert would reside on the load balancer. Then the ISA will inspect the packets and forward it to the load balancer of the CAS servers. In my experience, the setup you're describing becomes overly complicated. There are two goals that I see: security and load balancing/redundancy. You need to plug in a solution for each just one time in the mix. If you want to use ISA, then have your firewall forward port 443 packets straight to ISA and load-balance there, or have the firewall forward to the load balancers and have those devices forward straight to ISA. The reason the network team probably wants SSL termination is so they can see the host headers and have more options on stateful forwarding of the packets. There ARE options to do a pass-thru of port 443 on the load balancer that use the source IP/port to ensure that the forwarding tries to stay on one ISA/web/whatever server, but they might not want to do it... --James On Wed, Jul 16, 2008 at 7:35 PM, Matt Lathrum [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The problem is licensing for us. Our Juniper VPNs are very expensive for concurrent reverse proxy sessions, while ISA server is free for us due to our eCAL licensing. I'm not sure why you are mentioning load balancing after the HLB, because I don't think I asked about that. Their argument is that their firewalls are already handling the security and their load balancers are already handling the SSL conversion, so we just need to proxy it inbound. Speaking of which, they really dislike the OCS Edge model, because it means bypassing their NATs and SSL decryption. But that's a different topic :) -Original Message- From: James Wells [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, July 16, 2008 1:56 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: Re: A couple questions about ISA and OWA If you're load balancing at the first layer (the hardware load balancer), don't do any load balancing further down the line. You also don't need ISA in the mix if you're not doing anything else but passing the traffic or doing AD lookups. If you want an ISA security model, then that needs to be what is hit first. Your network team is talking about load balancing, not security... --James On Wed, Jul 16, 2008 at 2:02 PM, Exchange (Sunbelt) [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Anything's possible. You can publish OWA on 80 if you like, waste of time using ISA Just for that tho' . Yes it makes AD lookups if the ISA server is a domain member, (the preferred method). S From: Matt Lathrum [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, July 16, 2008 3:14 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: A couple questions about ISA and OWA I'm trying to get some design questions straightened out and would appreciate some assistance. I would like to use ISA 2006 to be the reverse proxy of OWA 2007 and CWA 2007. I would like incoming port 443 SSL requests from the Internet to terminate at the load balancer and convert it to port 80, then continue to our two ISA servers. This would mean the SSL cert would reside on the load balancer. Then the ISA will inspect the packets and forward it to the load balancer of the CAS servers. Is this possible? This is a design request by our network team so they can inspect the packets before it hits the ISA servers. They do this for their other traffic and say it's the normal way things are done. Also, does the ISA server itself make AD authentication calls? I'm seeing articles that say yes (http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/bb794722(TechNet.10).aspx and http://www.securityfocus.com/infocus/1807), although a rep from Microsoft has told me it doesn't. If it does make AD auth calls, what port do I have to open through the DMZ to allow that traffic? 88? 389? Thanks in advance. Matt This message is private and confidential. If you have received it in error, please notify the sender and remove it from your system. ~ Ninja Email Security with Cloudmark Spam Engine Gets Image Spam ~ ~ http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Ninja~ This message is private and confidential. If you have received it in error, please notify the sender and remove it from your system. ~ 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: Edge server placement for multi-site configuration
Almost. If eiter site goes down (and goes down means that the server with the MX record doesn't respond on port 25), then all mail will route to the other. if both are down, mail will queu and eventually (normally 2 days for most defaults) expire. But when both are upyou will see traffic on both. Not every MTA obeys MX record weight, and often spammers won't. You'll probably see most of your trafic go to the primary record, though. --James On 7/16/08, Liby Philip Mathew [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Thank you very much, Wells. I forgot to mention that the mail domain is same for both the countries. In this case, I suppose the following will happen: Country A hosts the priority 10 MX record Country B hosts the priority 20 MX record So all the mails for both countries comes to Country A and mails for country B is routed internally thru the VPN to country B. If Country A MX server goes down all the mails will be routed to Country B with 20 priority MX and the mails for country A and Country B will be received at Country B and the mails for country A will routed from Country B to A internally. Am I right in the concept. Regards Liby Philip Mathew Technical Consultant From: James Wells [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tue 15-Jul-08 16:18 To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: Re: Edge server placement for multi-site configuration Here you go, Liby: 1. If they're both using the same email domain (example.com), then you can't control what country receives the external SMTP email. You could list both Edge servers' external IPs as MX records for the domain, but it would be pretty random as to which country receives. You MIGHT be able to use a hosted antispam/mail routing provider to provide this type of logic, or maybe use a hosting provider and rewrite the addresses from [EMAIL PROTECTED] to [EMAIL PROTECTED], and have some logic there. But in any case - once the mail is received by a Hub Transport server -- it'll know how to find the right site and get the mail over where it belongs. 2/3. If memory serves, this is just part of the Receive/Send connectors. The Edge servers are going to have a different logic depending on which type (I think both are created automatically -- but I don't deal with Edge servers on a daily basis. The Technet articles for Edge/Hub subscription should provide more than enough detail). See http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/bb266920(EXCHG.80).aspx 4. Autodiscovery is based on an FQDN (autodiscover.emaildomain.com/path or emaildomain.com/path). If you want to make those stay local and not travel across your site-to-site link, just ensure that the DNS name above (in that order) will resolve to an Exchange server locally that has the service running. Good luck! --James On Tue, Jul 15, 2008 at 2:59 AM, Liby Philip Mathew [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi I have 2 offices in 2 different countries with around 150 users in each. We are planning for 1 domain but 2 sites. The sites are connected by VAN site-to-site links using ISA 2006. Below are my requirements. How can I achieve it? Edge is installed in both countries and subscribed to respective CAS/HT/MB/UM server in respective sites. 1. Email should be send and received by the edge in the respective country. 2. Country A users should be able to tx/rx thru the edge placed in country A, site A 3. Country B users should be able to tx/rx thru the edge placed in country B, site B. 4. How will deploy Autodiscovery services for both countries (sites). Any input/suggestions highly appreciated Regards Liby Philip Mathew Consultant *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 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~ *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
Re: Edge server placement for multi-site configuration
Not as long as you have the same spam protection at both Edge servers On Wed, Jul 16, 2008 at 8:03 AM, Liby Philip Mathew [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Thanks for the info. But, will it be a loop hole for spammers? Regards Liby Philip Mathew Technical Consultant From: James Wells [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wed 16-Jul-08 15:43 To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: Re: Edge server placement for multi-site configuration Almost. If eiter site goes down (and goes down means that the server with the MX record doesn't respond on port 25), then all mail will route to the other. if both are down, mail will queu and eventually (normally 2 days for most defaults) expire. But when both are upyou will see traffic on both. Not every MTA obeys MX record weight, and often spammers won't. You'll probably see most of your trafic go to the primary record, though. --James On 7/16/08, Liby Philip Mathew [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Thank you very much, Wells. I forgot to mention that the mail domain is same for both the countries. In this case, I suppose the following will happen: Country A hosts the priority 10 MX record Country B hosts the priority 20 MX record So all the mails for both countries comes to Country A and mails for country B is routed internally thru the VPN to country B. If Country A MX server goes down all the mails will be routed to Country B with 20 priority MX and the mails for country A and Country B will be received at Country B and the mails for country A will routed from Country B to A internally. Am I right in the concept. Regards Liby Philip Mathew Technical Consultant From: James Wells [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tue 15-Jul-08 16:18 To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: Re: Edge server placement for multi-site configuration Here you go, Liby: 1. If they're both using the same email domain (example.com), then you can't control what country receives the external SMTP email. You could list both Edge servers' external IPs as MX records for the domain, but it would be pretty random as to which country receives. You MIGHT be able to use a hosted antispam/mail routing provider to provide this type of logic, or maybe use a hosting provider and rewrite the addresses from [EMAIL PROTECTED] to [EMAIL PROTECTED], and have some logic there. But in any case - once the mail is received by a Hub Transport server -- it'll know how to find the right site and get the mail over where it belongs. 2/3. If memory serves, this is just part of the Receive/Send connectors. The Edge servers are going to have a different logic depending on which type (I think both are created automatically -- but I don't deal with Edge servers on a daily basis. The Technet articles for Edge/Hub subscription should provide more than enough detail). See http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/bb266920(EXCHG.80).aspx 4. Autodiscovery is based on an FQDN (autodiscover.emaildomain.com/path or emaildomain.com/path). If you want to make those stay local and not travel across your site-to-site link, just ensure that the DNS name above (in that order) will resolve to an Exchange server locally that has the service running. Good luck! --James On Tue, Jul 15, 2008 at 2:59 AM, Liby Philip Mathew [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi I have 2 offices in 2 different countries with around 150 users in each. We are planning for 1 domain but 2 sites. The sites are connected by VAN site-to-site links using ISA 2006. Below are my requirements. How can I achieve it? Edge is installed in both countries and subscribed to respective CAS/HT/MB/UM server in respective sites. 1. Email should be send and received by the edge in the respective country. 2. Country A users should be able to tx/rx thru the edge placed in country A, site A 3. Country B users should be able to tx/rx thru the edge placed in country B, site B. 4. How will deploy Autodiscovery services for both countries (sites). Any input/suggestions highly appreciated Regards Liby Philip Mathew Consultant *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 accepts no responsibility for any errors ,omissions computer viruses and other defects
Re: A couple questions about ISA and OWA
If you're load balancing at the first layer (the hardware load balancer), don't do any load balancing further down the line. You also don't need ISA in the mix if you're not doing anything else but passing the traffic or doing AD lookups. If you want an ISA security model, then that needs to be what is hit first. Your network team is talking about load balancing, not security... --James On Wed, Jul 16, 2008 at 2:02 PM, Exchange (Sunbelt) [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Anything's possible. You can publish OWA on 80 if you like, waste of time using ISA Just for that tho' . Yes it makes AD lookups if the ISA server is a domain member, (the preferred method). S From: Matt Lathrum [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, July 16, 2008 3:14 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: A couple questions about ISA and OWA I'm trying to get some design questions straightened out and would appreciate some assistance. I would like to use ISA 2006 to be the reverse proxy of OWA 2007 and CWA 2007. I would like incoming port 443 SSL requests from the Internet to terminate at the load balancer and convert it to port 80, then continue to our two ISA servers. This would mean the SSL cert would reside on the load balancer. Then the ISA will inspect the packets and forward it to the load balancer of the CAS servers. Is this possible? This is a design request by our network team so they can inspect the packets before it hits the ISA servers. They do this for their other traffic and say it's the normal way things are done. Also, does the ISA server itself make AD authentication calls? I'm seeing articles that say yes (http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/bb794722(TechNet.10).aspx and http://www.securityfocus.com/infocus/1807), although a rep from Microsoft has told me it doesn't. If it does make AD auth calls, what port do I have to open through the DMZ to allow that traffic? 88? 389? Thanks in advance. Matt This message is private and confidential. If you have received it in error, please notify the sender and remove it from your system. ~ Ninja Email Security with Cloudmark Spam Engine Gets Image Spam ~ ~ http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Ninja~
Re: Edge server placement for multi-site configuration
Here you go, Liby: 1. If they're both using the same email domain (example.com), then you can't control what country receives the external SMTP email. You could list both Edge servers' external IPs as MX records for the domain, but it would be pretty random as to which country receives. You MIGHT be able to use a hosted antispam/mail routing provider to provide this type of logic, or maybe use a hosting provider and rewrite the addresses from [EMAIL PROTECTED] to [EMAIL PROTECTED], and have some logic there. But in any case - once the mail is received by a Hub Transport server -- it'll know how to find the right site and get the mail over where it belongs. 2/3. If memory serves, this is just part of the Receive/Send connectors. The Edge servers are going to have a different logic depending on which type (I think both are created automatically -- but I don't deal with Edge servers on a daily basis. The Technet articles for Edge/Hub subscription should provide more than enough detail). See http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/bb266920(EXCHG.80).aspx 4. Autodiscovery is based on an FQDN (autodiscover.emaildomain.com/path or emaildomain.com/path). If you want to make those stay local and not travel across your site-to-site link, just ensure that the DNS name above (in that order) will resolve to an Exchange server locally that has the service running. Good luck! --James On Tue, Jul 15, 2008 at 2:59 AM, Liby Philip Mathew [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi I have 2 offices in 2 different countries with around 150 users in each. We are planning for 1 domain but 2 sites. The sites are connected by VAN site-to-site links using ISA 2006. Below are my requirements. How can I achieve it? Edge is installed in both countries and subscribed to respective CAS/HT/MB/UM server in respective sites. 1. Email should be send and received by the edge in the respective country. 2. Country A users should be able to tx/rx thru the edge placed in country A, site A 3. Country B users should be able to tx/rx thru the edge placed in country B, site B. 4. How will deploy Autodiscovery services for both countries (sites). Any input/suggestions highly appreciated Regards Liby Philip Mathew Consultant *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 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: Ok it's starting BB to iPone
A big part of the iPhone 2.0 is licensing of the Exchange Activesync software from Microsoft. It will allow password policies, remote wipe, etc. Email and Calendar should work flawlessly. I'll know for sure once we get some demos in this week (but from checking the HTTP-agents in our logs, I can see that a few people already have theirs and are working). Whether this is good or bad -- the Exchange copy will overwrite the local email and calendar on the device (only one profile, I guess). The only requirement from an Exchange perspective is to have OWA servers exposed to the internet for HTTPS. If everything else is set to default, Exchange Activesync will work just fine. The only rare exception would be a firewall that wants to block unusual looking HTTP verbs. --James On Mon, Jul 14, 2008 at 9:52 AM, Clayton Doige [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I don't think iPhones do Active Sync do they? I thought you had to do IMAP? 2008/7/14 Stefan Jafs [EMAIL PROTECTED]: I have 1 users asking what happens if he replaces his BB with an iPhone? I'm on the BES server and I assume I delete him on the BES server but what do I need to do on the E2K3? Simply turn on Active Sync? __ Stefan Jafs This email and any attached files are confidential and intended solely for the intended recipient(s). If you are not the named recipient you should not read, distribute, copy or alter this email. Any views or opinions expressed in this email are those of the author and do not represent those of Amico Corporation . Warning: Although precautions have been taken to make sure no viruses are present in this email, the company cannot accept responsibility for any loss or damage that arise from the use of this email or attachments. -- Regards, Clayton [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://alsipius.com ~ Ninja Email Security with Cloudmark Spam Engine Gets Image Spam ~ ~ http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Ninja~
Re: Ok it's starting BB to iPone
That's a pretty good question...and WM5/6 devices have the same issue. There is actually an 'iPhone Configuration Utility' that you can use to locally provision settings/lock down an iPhone with for Enterprise use. One of the tabs lets you install your own certs, in case you use internal PKI for the OWA/EAS SSL. But if you use something from a large cert house (Thawte, Verisign, etc). you should be safe. --James On Mon, Jul 14, 2008 at 10:46 AM, Sam Cayze [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I wonder what type of SSL certs they accept. Each device has a different list of SSL CAs, right? -Original Message- From: James Wells [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, July 14, 2008 10:42 AM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: Re: Ok it's starting BB to iPone A big part of the iPhone 2.0 is licensing of the Exchange Activesync software from Microsoft. It will allow password policies, remote wipe, etc. Email and Calendar should work flawlessly. I'll know for sure once we get some demos in this week (but from checking the HTTP-agents in our logs, I can see that a few people already have theirs and are working). Whether this is good or bad -- the Exchange copy will overwrite the local email and calendar on the device (only one profile, I guess). The only requirement from an Exchange perspective is to have OWA servers exposed to the internet for HTTPS. If everything else is set to default, Exchange Activesync will work just fine. The only rare exception would be a firewall that wants to block unusual looking HTTP verbs. --James On Mon, Jul 14, 2008 at 9:52 AM, Clayton Doige [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I don't think iPhones do Active Sync do they? I thought you had to do IMAP? 2008/7/14 Stefan Jafs [EMAIL PROTECTED]: I have 1 users asking what happens if he replaces his BB with an iPhone? I'm on the BES server and I assume I delete him on the BES server but what do I need to do on the E2K3? Simply turn on Active Sync? __ Stefan Jafs This email and any attached files are confidential and intended solely for the intended recipient(s). If you are not the named recipient you should not read, distribute, copy or alter this email. Any views or opinions expressed in this email are those of the author and do not represent those of Amico Corporation . Warning: Although precautions have been taken to make sure no viruses are present in this email, the company cannot accept responsibility for any loss or damage that arise from the use of this email or attachments. -- Regards, Clayton [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://alsipius.com ~ 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: Ok it's starting BB to iPone
Well, folder management wasn't going to happen...and no, Exchange Activesync isn't 'push' since Microsoft doesn't have control of the communcations stream - it can't be push in the sense that Goodlink and Blackberry use. I'd say it's MUCH better than having a bunch of devices with NO management and NO calendar/contacts, which is what we had with IMAP as the only option in iPhone 1.0... --James On Mon, Jul 14, 2008 at 12:15 PM, Andrew Greene [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: As an iPhone user (both the 1st gen and the new 3G model), I'm very underwhelmed by the ActiveSync functions in the 2.0 software. Push is a bit of a misnomer, unless I've completely configured it wrong, plus it doesn't automatically go out and grab subfolders, nor does it give you the option to select certain folders to do that with - so if you've got server-side rules, it doesn't work well. The wireless calendar function does work well and I'm not currently syncing my contacts (since you can only keep one list of contacts at a time). I'm going to (as always) stick with it and hope for some of these changes to be made in a future firmware update. It definitely makes me want a Blackberry and kind of sorry that I didn't wait for the Bold to come out, but e-mail capabilities were only part of my purchasing equation. Andrew Greene IS Technician / Webmaster City of Anderson -Original Message- From: Steven Peck [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, July 14, 2008 1:01 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: Re: Ok it's starting BB to iPone http://msexchangeteam.com/archive/2008/07/11/449196.aspx First answer to the user is, not this week. Second, check with your boss. Third, TEST that you can enforce the existing policies you do on your BB environment with the activeSync. (Well, test that you can actually get it to work and that it will not negatively impact your work week with additional maintenance and overhead you can't absorbe with the present workload. Fourth, get a device to test with. Not necessarily an iPhone Fifth, get a support model for it. As in SLA = Service Level Agreement, not Service Level Assumption (you are assumed to support anything we bring in and support our effort to move company data on to personal, privatly owned devices with no confidentiality agreement in place). Then put it on the support list. Steven On Mon, Jul 14, 2008 at 9:13 AM, Barsodi.John [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Here you go - Things not included. Ya, you can't create a meeting invite? WTF. http://support.apple.com/manuals/en_US/Enterprise_Deployment_Guide.pdf Exchange ActiveSync Features Not Supported - Not all Exchange features are supported, including, for example: * Folder management * Opening links in email to documents stored on Sharepoint servers * Task synchronization * Setting an out of office autoreply message * Creating meeting invitations * Flagging messages for follow-up - John Barsodi From: Garcia-Moran, Carlos [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, July 14, 2008 8:28 AM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Ok it's starting BB to iPone Negative no notes or tasks L Only Email, Calendar and Contacts. Also there's a downside, It will only sync Either Exchange or Personal Items, so If you have more than one place for Contacts you can only choose one, same for the rest. From: Martin Blackstone [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, July 14, 2008 11:25 AM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Ok it's starting BB to iPone Will it sync Outlook notes? From: Garcia-Moran, Carlos [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, July 14, 2008 8:18 AM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Ok it's starting BB to iPone It works pretty well, if you already have OWA and OMA on the outside of your Firewall. Otherwise you will need to expose those in order for your Iphones to work. We got some here working already and Id have to say it beats my BB hands down in function, plus the extra features are killer. You can download the erase program as well to control the Iphones remotely and to a remote wipe. Setup is very simple and Apple has a config program that you can setup an XML file and email it to the Iphones so the connect back to Exchange. From: Kennedy, Jim [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, July 14, 2008 11:07 AM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Ok it's starting BB to iPone Yep. My son has one, he is the admin type for his company. Active sync is working great for them, they deployed 7 of them the first day. I played a bit with it yesterday, it is an awesome unit. Best feature on it I think is Mario Kart. It works like a wireless wii steering wheelyou just drive along by tilting and turning the whole Iphone. From: Martin Blackstone [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, July 14, 2008 11:01 AM To: MS-Exchange Admin
