RE: Named Property Limit
I'm still trying to decide how it will actually affect us. We're at the default limit of ~8000 after only 4-5 months in production on some databases, and moving users to a new DB just to reach the limit againcompletely pointless imo. Anyone else agree? Cheers Richard -Original Message- From: bounce-8462960-8066...@lyris.sunbelt-software.com [mailto:bounce-8462960-8066...@lyris.sunbelt-software.com] On Behalf Of Davies,Matt Sent: 20 March 2009 21:23 To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Named Property Limit I'm surprised I have never seem this error before exchange 2003 Perhaps there is hope after all ~ Ninja Email Security with Cloudmark Spam Engine Gets Image Spam ~ ~ http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Ninja~
RE: Named Property Limit
That does help a little. I'm still confused though on what the named property list is even used for? We do have Event ID: 9667 over and over again for our Storage Group 7. Failed to create a new named property for database SG7\MDB7 because the number of named properties reached the quota limit (9274). User attempting to create the named property: EXCH-HUB$ Named property GUID: 00020386---c000-0046 Named property name/id: x-hostmaurice-mailscanner-information For more information, see Help and Support Center at http://go.microsoft.com/fwlink/events.asp. How did you put a user name to your violators? Did you match the GUID somehow? 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 ~ Ninja Email Security with Cloudmark Spam Engine Gets Image Spam ~ ~ http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Ninja~
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 ~ Ninja Email Security with Cloudmark Spam Engine Gets Image Spam ~ ~ http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Ninja~
Re: Named Property Limit
You can use the perfmons at the bottom of this: http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/bb851495.aspx On Fri, Mar 20, 2009 at 8:30 AM, McCready, Robert rob.mccrea...@dplinc.comwrote: 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 ~ Ninja Email Security with Cloudmark Spam Engine Gets Image Spam ~ ~ http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Ninja~
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 ~ Ninja Email Security with Cloudmark Spam Engine Gets Image Spam ~ ~ http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Ninja~
RE: Named Property Limit
For those running Exchange 2007. http://www.codeplex.com/HeaderFilterAgent Header filter agent that will strip all x-headers from incoming internet email. From: Randal, Phil [mailto:pran...@herefordshire.gov.uk] Sent: Friday, March 20, 2009 12:20 PM 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 ~ Ninja Email Security with Cloudmark Spam Engine Gets Image Spam ~ ~ http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Ninja~
Re: Named Property Limit
Had me concerned for a moment. Glad it has a whitelist, as some X- headers are useful, and perhaps even necessary. On Fri, Mar 20, 2009 at 10:03, Schwartz, Jim jschwa...@bbandt.com wrote: For those running Exchange 2007. http://www.codeplex.com/HeaderFilterAgent Header filter agent that will strip all x-headers from incoming internet email. From: Randal, Phil [mailto:pran...@herefordshire.gov.uk] Sent: Friday, March 20, 2009 12:20 PM 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 ~ Ninja Email Security with Cloudmark Spam Engine Gets Image Spam ~ ~ http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Ninja~
RE: Named Property Limit
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~
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: Named Property Limit
I'm surprised I have never seem this error before exchange 2003 Perhaps there is hope after all -Original Message- From: James Wells [mailto:jam...@gmail.com] Sent: 20 March 2009 20:39 To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: 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
RE: Named Property Limit
I agree about it getting worse as it gets better. I was shocked by the whole powershell thing. I know some people love it, but I think it stinks. Hello 1960's. I had to move a mailbox in the lab the other day from Exchange 2007 back to Exchange 2003 to do an old restore, and the GUI move failed. I then had to type out a 212 character PowerShell command to get it to work. Some Improvement over 2003. HA! Can somebody dumb this Named Property thing down for me in 2007? I'm not understanding here. What is the Named Property list actually used for? What are the consequences for not being able to add to it? It looks like we hit our 16,000 limit over 3 months ago, but nobody has reported any problems sending or receiving email??? -Original Message- From: Steve Moffat [mailto:st...@optimum.bm] On Behalf Of Exchange (Sunbelt) Sent: Tuesday, March 17, 2009 5:44 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Named Property Limit Is it just me, or is Exchange getting worse as it gets better..;) S -Original Message- From: Kurt Buff [mailto:kurt.b...@gmail.com] Sent: Tuesday, March 17, 2009 6:31 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: Re: Named Property Limit I don't have an answer for you on that. I suppose a mail gateway between your Exchange box and the Internet could do some whitelisting, and discard any unrecognized headers, but I wouldn't have a good guess as to how to go about it. Kurt On Tue, Mar 17, 2009 at 13:43, McCready, Robert rob.mccrea...@dplinc.com wrote: Is there a way to limit these X-headers, or find out what is causing so many? -Original Message- From: Kurt Buff [mailto:kurt.b...@gmail.com] Sent: Tuesday, March 17, 2009 4:30 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: Re: Named Property Limit One of the things that seems to contribute are X- headers on inbound mail - each new X-header is a new named property. Want to DoS someone? Send them emails with new X-headers - lots of different ones. Spam seems to accumulate them, for one. Just looking at your message from the list, I see 4 different X-headers: X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-ems-proccessed: jxfyzdhlyVyYF5VF4W3Asg== x-ems-stamp: sLcJ9ri/feAlRgbRlwdyOA== Kurt On Tue, Mar 17, 2009 at 13:20, McCready, Robert rob.mccrea...@dplinc.com wrote: I'm not sure I understand this named property quota thing or how we reached our limit... (http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/bb851492.aspx) but my question is, how big of a deal is it really��� We apparently reached our 16,000 limit back in December, yet nobody has had any trouble sending/receiving email. From: McCready, Robert [mailto:rob.mccrea...@dplinc.com] Sent: Monday, March 16, 2009 2:41 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: Event 9667 Quota Limit on Named Property We are running Exchange 2007 SP1.�� Apparently, we have reached our named property quota (which I do not completely understand) on one of our storage groups. Event ID: 9667 Source: MSExchangeIS Compute�� Exchange 2007 mailbox clustered server Failed to create a new named property for database SGx\MDBx because the number of named properties reached the quota limit (9274�� User attempting to create the named property: Hub Transport Server Named property GUID: ----xx Named property name/id: pipe-summary All the fixes I read say to either.. Modify the registry and dismount/remount the database. Create a new Storage Group and move all the mailboxes there. We've only been running Exchange 2007 for about 18 months� Is this a common occurrence (reaching the quota limit Is there any way to find out if there's a particular violator that may have caused us to reach this quota��� Would you recommend Fix number 1 or �� Enough questions? Thanks. Robert ~ 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/Nin��~ ~ 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: Named Property Limit
It's typical of Microsoft, putting in an arbitrary limit in a world where anyone can create any number of X- headers. It's one of those unintended consequences of treating email as a database, I guess. *sigh* 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: 19 March 2009 12:27 To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Named Property Limit I agree about it getting worse as it gets better I was shocked by the whole powershell thing I know some people love it, but I think it stinks. Hello 1960' I had to move a mailbox in the lab the other day from Exchange 2007 back to Exchange 2003 to do an old restore, and the GUI move failed I then had to type out a 212 character PowerShell command to get it to work. Some Improvement over 2003 HA! Can somebody dumb this Named Property thing down for me in 200 I'm not understanding here. What is the Named Property list actually used for? What are the consequences for not being able to add to it? It looks like we hit our 16,000 limit over 3 months ago, but nobody has reported any problems sending or receiving email??? -Original Message- From: Steve Moffat [mailto:st...@optimum.bm] On Behalf Of Exchange (Sunbelt) Sent: Tuesday, March 17, 2009 5:44 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Named Property Limit Is it just me, or is Exchange getting worse as it gets better..;) S -Original Message- From: Kurt Buff [mailto:kurt.b...@gmail.com] Sent: Tuesday, March 17, 2009 6:31 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: Re: Named Property Limit I don't have an answer for you on that. I suppose a mail gateway between your Exchange box and the Internet could do some whitelisting, and discard any unrecognized headers, but I wouldn't have a good guess as to how to go about it. Kurt On Tue, Mar 17, 2009 at 13:43, McCready, Robert rob.mccrea...@dplinc.com wrote: Is there a way to limit these X-headers, or find out what is causing so many? -Original Message- From: Kurt Buff [mailto:kurt.b...@gmail.com] Sent: Tuesday, March 17, 2009 4:30 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: Re: Named Property Limit One of the things that seems to contribute are X- headers on inbound mail - each new X-header is a new named property. Want to DoS someone? Send them emails with new X-headers - lots of different ones. Spam seems to accumulate them, for one. Just looking at your message from the list, I see 4 different X-headers: X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-ems-proccessed: jxfyzdhlyVyYF5VF4W3Asg== x-ems-stamp: sLcJ9ri/feAlRgbRlwdyOA== Kurt On Tue, Mar 17, 2009 at 13:20, McCready, Robert rob.mccrea...@dplinc.com wrote: I'm not sure I understand this named property quota thing or how we reached our limit... (http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/bb851492.aspx) but my question is, how big of a deal is it really? We apparently reached our 16,000 limit back in December, yet nobody has had any trouble sending/receiving email. From: McCready, Robert [mailto:rob.mccrea...@dplinc.com] Sent: Monday, March 16, 2009 2:41 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: Event 9667 Quota Limit on Named Property We are running Exchange 2007 SP1. Apparently, we have reached our named property quota (which I do not completely understand) on one of our storage groups. Event ID: 9667 Source: MSExchangeIS Compute Failed to create a new named property for database SGx\MDBx because the number of named properties reached the quota limit (9274 User attempting to create the named property: Hub Transport Server Named property GUID: ----xx Named property name/id: pipe-summary All the fixes I read say to either.. Modify the registry and dismount/remount the database. Create a new Storage Group and move all the mailboxes there. We've only been running Exchange 2007 for about
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 On Thu, Mar 19, 2009 at 5:27 AM, McCready, Robert rob.mccrea...@dplinc.comwrote: I agree about it getting worse as it gets betterĸĸ I was shocked by the whole powershell thingĸĸ I know some people love it, but I think it stinks.ĸ Hello 1960'ĸĸÂ I had to move a mailbox in the lab the other day from Exchange 2007 back to Exchange 2003 to do an old restore, and the GUI move failedĸĸ I then had to type out a 212 character PowerShell command to get it to work.ĸ Some Improvement over 2003ĸĸ HA! Can somebody dumb this Named Property thing down for me in 200ĸĸÂ I'm not understanding here.ĸ *What is the Named Property list actually used for?* *What are the consequences for not being able to add to it?* It looks like we hit our 16,000 limit over 3 months ago, but nobody has reported any problems sending or receiving email??? -Original Message- From: Steve Moffat [mailto:st...@optimum.bm] On Behalf Of Exchange (Sunbelt) Sent: Tuesday, March 17, 2009 5:44 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Named Property Limit Is it just me, or is Exchange getting worse as it gets better..;) S -Original Message- From: Kurt Buff [mailto:kurt.b...@gmail.com] Sent: Tuesday, March 17, 2009 6:31 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: Re: Named Property Limit I don't have an answer for you on that. I suppose a mail gateway between your Exchange box and the Internet could do some whitelisting, and discard any unrecognized headers, but I wouldn't have a good guess as to how to go about it. Kurt On Tue, Mar 17, 2009 at 13:43, McCready, Robert rob.mccrea...@dplinc.com wrote: Is there a way to limit these X-headers, or find out what is causing so many? -Original Message- From: Kurt Buff [mailto:kurt.b...@gmail.com] Sent: Tuesday, March 17, 2009 4:30 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: Re: Named Property Limit One of the things that seems to contribute are X- headers on inbound mail - each new X-header is a new named property. Want to DoS someone? Send them emails with new X-headers - lots of different ones. Spam seems to accumulate them, for one. Just looking at your message from the list, I see 4 different X-headers: X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-ems-proccessed: jxfyzdhlyVyYF5VF4W3Asg== x-ems-stamp: sLcJ9ri/feAlRgbRlwdyOA== Kurt On Tue, Mar 17, 2009 at 13:20, McCready, Robert rob.mccrea...@dplinc.com wrote: I'm not sure I understand this named property quota thing or how we reached our limit... (http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/bb851492.aspx) but my question is, how big of a deal is it really? We apparently reached our 16,000 limit back in December, yet nobody has had any trouble sending/receiving email. From: McCready, Robert [mailto:rob.mccrea...@dplinc.com] Sent: Monday, March 16, 2009 2:41 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: Event 9667 Quota Limit on Named Property We are running Exchange 2007 SP1.ĸĸ―ĸĸ― Apparently, we have reached our named property quota (which I do not completely understand) on one
Re: Named Property Limit
One of the things that seems to contribute are X- headers on inbound mail - each new X-header is a new named property. Want to DoS someone? Send them emails with new X-headers - lots of different ones. Spam seems to accumulate them, for one. Just looking at your message from the list, I see 4 different X-headers: X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-ems-proccessed: jxfyzdhlyVyYF5VF4W3Asg== x-ems-stamp: sLcJ9ri/feAlRgbRlwdyOA== Kurt On Tue, Mar 17, 2009 at 13:20, McCready, Robert rob.mccrea...@dplinc.com wrote: I’m not sure I understand this named property quota thing or how we reached our limit….. (http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/bb851492.aspx) but my question is, how big of a deal is it really? We apparently reached our 16,000 limit back in December, yet nobody has had any trouble sending/receiving email. From: McCready, Robert [mailto:rob.mccrea...@dplinc.com] Sent: Monday, March 16, 2009 2:41 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: Event 9667 Quota Limit on Named Property We are running Exchange 2007 SP1. Apparently, we have reached our “named property” quota (which I do not completely understand) on one of our storage groups. Event ID: 9667 Source: MSExchangeIS Computer: Exchange 2007 mailbox clustered server Failed to create a new named property for database “SGx\MDBx” because the number of named properties reached the quota limit (9274). User attempting to create the named property: “Hub Transport Server” Named property GUID: ----xx Named property name/id: “pipe-summary” All the fixes I read say to either…. Modify the registry and dismount/remount the database. Create a new Storage Group and move all the mailboxes there. We’ve only been running Exchange 2007 for about 18 months. Is this a common occurrence (reaching the quota limit)? Is there any way to find out if there’s a particular violator that may have caused us to reach this quota??? Would you recommend Fix number 1 or 2? Enough questions? Thanks. Robert ~ Ninja Email Security with Cloudmark Spam Engine Gets Image Spam ~ ~ http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Ninja~
RE: Named Property Limit
Is there a way to limit these X-headers, or find out what is causing so many? -Original Message- From: Kurt Buff [mailto:kurt.b...@gmail.com] Sent: Tuesday, March 17, 2009 4:30 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: Re: Named Property Limit One of the things that seems to contribute are X- headers on inbound mail - each new X-header is a new named property. Want to DoS someone? Send them emails with new X-headers - lots of different ones. Spam seems to accumulate them, for one. Just looking at your message from the list, I see 4 different X-headers: X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-ems-proccessed: jxfyzdhlyVyYF5VF4W3Asg== x-ems-stamp: sLcJ9ri/feAlRgbRlwdyOA== Kurt On Tue, Mar 17, 2009 at 13:20, McCready, Robert rob.mccrea...@dplinc.com wrote: I'm not sure I understand this named property quota thing or how we reached our limit... (http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/bb851492.aspx) but my question is, how big of a deal is it really? We apparently reached our 16,000 limit back in December, yet nobody has had any trouble sending/receiving email. From: McCready, Robert [mailto:rob.mccrea...@dplinc.com] Sent: Monday, March 16, 2009 2:41 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: Event 9667 Quota Limit on Named Property We are running Exchange 2007 SP1. Apparently, we have reached our named property quota (which I do not completely understand) on one of our storage groups. Event ID: 9667 Source: MSExchangeIS Computer: Exchange 2007 mailbox clustered server Failed to create a new named property for database SGx\MDBx because the number of named properties reached the quota limit (9274). User attempting to create the named property: Hub Transport Server Named property GUID: ----xx Named property name/id: pipe-summary All the fixes I read say to either.. Modify the registry and dismount/remount the database. Create a new Storage Group and move all the mailboxes there. We've only been running Exchange 2007 for about 18 months. Is this a common occurrence (reaching the quota limit)? Is there any way to find out if there's a particular violator that may have caused us to reach this quota??? Would you recommend Fix number 1 or 2? Enough questions? Thanks. Robert ~ 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: Named Property Limit
I don't have an answer for you on that. I suppose a mail gateway between your Exchange box and the Internet could do some whitelisting, and discard any unrecognized headers, but I wouldn't have a good guess as to how to go about it. Kurt On Tue, Mar 17, 2009 at 13:43, McCready, Robert rob.mccrea...@dplinc.com wrote: Is there a way to limit these X-headers, or find out what is causing so many? -Original Message- From: Kurt Buff [mailto:kurt.b...@gmail.com] Sent: Tuesday, March 17, 2009 4:30 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: Re: Named Property Limit One of the things that seems to contribute are X- headers on inbound mail - each new X-header is a new named property. Want to DoS someone? Send them emails with new X-headers - lots of different ones. Spam seems to accumulate them, for one. Just looking at your message from the list, I see 4 different X-headers: X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-ems-proccessed: jxfyzdhlyVyYF5VF4W3Asg== x-ems-stamp: sLcJ9ri/feAlRgbRlwdyOA== Kurt On Tue, Mar 17, 2009 at 13:20, McCready, Robert rob.mccrea...@dplinc.com wrote: I'm not sure I understand this named property quota thing or how we reached our limit... (http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/bb851492.aspx) but my question is, how big of a deal is it really? We apparently reached our 16,000 limit back in December, yet nobody has had any trouble sending/receiving email. From: McCready, Robert [mailto:rob.mccrea...@dplinc.com] Sent: Monday, March 16, 2009 2:41 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: Event 9667 Quota Limit on Named Property We are running Exchange 2007 SP1. Apparently, we have reached our named property quota (which I do not completely understand) on one of our storage groups. Event ID: 9667 Source: MSExchangeIS Computer: Exchange 2007 mailbox clustered server Failed to create a new named property for database SGx\MDBx because the number of named properties reached the quota limit (9274). User attempting to create the named property: Hub Transport Server Named property GUID: ----xx Named property name/id: pipe-summary All the fixes I read say to either.. Modify the registry and dismount/remount the database. Create a new Storage Group and move all the mailboxes there. We've only been running Exchange 2007 for about 18 months. Is this a common occurrence (reaching the quota limit)? Is there any way to find out if there's a particular violator that may have caused us to reach this quota??? Would you recommend Fix number 1 or 2? Enough questions? Thanks. Robert ~ 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: Named Property Limit
Is it just me, or is Exchange getting worse as it gets better..;) S -Original Message- From: Kurt Buff [mailto:kurt.b...@gmail.com] Sent: Tuesday, March 17, 2009 6:31 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: Re: Named Property Limit I don't have an answer for you on that. I suppose a mail gateway between your Exchange box and the Internet could do some whitelisting, and discard any unrecognized headers, but I wouldn't have a good guess as to how to go about it. Kurt On Tue, Mar 17, 2009 at 13:43, McCready, Robert rob.mccrea...@dplinc.com wrote: Is there a way to limit these X-headers, or find out what is causing so many? -Original Message- From: Kurt Buff [mailto:kurt.b...@gmail.com] Sent: Tuesday, March 17, 2009 4:30 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: Re: Named Property Limit One of the things that seems to contribute are X- headers on inbound mail - each new X-header is a new named property. Want to DoS someone? Send them emails with new X-headers - lots of different ones. Spam seems to accumulate them, for one. Just looking at your message from the list, I see 4 different X-headers: X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-ems-proccessed: jxfyzdhlyVyYF5VF4W3Asg== x-ems-stamp: sLcJ9ri/feAlRgbRlwdyOA== Kurt On Tue, Mar 17, 2009 at 13:20, McCready, Robert rob.mccrea...@dplinc.com wrote: I'm not sure I understand this named property quota thing or how we reached our limit... (http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/bb851492.aspx) but my question is, how big of a deal is it really?�� We apparently reached our 16,000 limit back in December, yet nobody has had any trouble sending/receiving email. From: McCready, Robert [mailto:rob.mccrea...@dplinc.com] Sent: Monday, March 16, 2009 2:41 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: Event 9667 Quota Limit on Named Property We are running Exchange 2007 SP1.�� Apparently, we have reached our named property quota (which I do not completely understand) on one of our storage groups. Event ID: 9667 Source: MSExchangeIS Compute�� Exchange 2007 mailbox clustered server Failed to create a new named property for database SGx\MDBx because the number of named properties reached the quota limit (9274�� User attempting to create the named property: Hub Transport Server Named property GUID: ----xx Named property name/id: pipe-summary All the fixes I read say to either.. Modify the registry and dismount/remount the database. Create a new Storage Group and move all the mailboxes there. We've only been running Exchange 2007 for about 18 months��� Is this a common occurrence (reaching the quota limit)?�� Is there any way to find out if there's a particular violator that may have caused us to reach this quota?�� Would you recommend Fix number 1 or 2��� Enough questions? Thanks. Robert ~ 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: Named Property Limit
I love the MS solution if it happens to a PF database. YIKES! -troy -Original Message- From: Steve Moffat [mailto:st...@optimum.bm] On Behalf Of Exchange (Sunbelt) Sent: Tuesday, March 17, 2009 2:44 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Named Property Limit Is it just me, or is Exchange getting worse as it gets better..;) S -Original Message- From: Kurt Buff [mailto:kurt.b...@gmail.com] Sent: Tuesday, March 17, 2009 6:31 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: Re: Named Property Limit I don't have an answer for you on that. I suppose a mail gateway between your Exchange box and the Internet could do some whitelisting, and discard any unrecognized headers, but I wouldn't have a good guess as to how to go about it. Kurt On Tue, Mar 17, 2009 at 13:43, McCready, Robert rob.mccrea...@dplinc.com wrote: Is there a way to limit these X-headers, or find out what is causing so many? -Original Message- From: Kurt Buff [mailto:kurt.b...@gmail.com] Sent: Tuesday, March 17, 2009 4:30 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: Re: Named Property Limit One of the things that seems to contribute are X- headers on inbound mail - each new X-header is a new named property. Want to DoS someone? Send them emails with new X-headers - lots of different ones. Spam seems to accumulate them, for one. Just looking at your message from the list, I see 4 different X-headers: X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-ems-proccessed: jxfyzdhlyVyYF5VF4W3Asg== x-ems-stamp: sLcJ9ri/feAlRgbRlwdyOA== Kurt On Tue, Mar 17, 2009 at 13:20, McCready, Robert rob.mccrea...@dplinc.com wrote: I'm not sure I understand this named property quota thing or how we reached our limit... (http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/bb851492.aspx) but my question is, how big of a deal is it reall We apparently reached our 16,000 limit back in December, yet nobody has had any trouble sending/receiving email. From: McCready, Robert [mailto:rob.mccrea...@dplinc.com] Sent: Monday, March 16, 2009 2:41 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: Event 9667 Quota Limit on Named Property We are running Exchange 2007 SP1.�� Apparently, we have reached our named property quota (which I do not completely understand) on one of our storage groups. Event ID: 9667 Source: MSExchangeIS Comput� Exchange 2007 mailbox clustered server Failed to create a new named property for database SGx\MDBx because the number of named properties reached the quota limit (92 User attempting to create the named property: Hub Transport Server Named property GUID: ----xx Named property name/id: pipe-summary All the fixes I read say to either.. Modify the registry and dismount/remount the database. Create a new Storage Group and move all the mailboxes there. We've only been running Exchange 2007 for about 18 months� Is this a common occurrence (reaching the quota limit)?�� Is there any way to find out if there's a particular violator that may have caused us to reach this quota� Would you recommend Fix number 1 or��� Enough questions? Thanks. Robert ~ Ninja Email Security with Cloudmark Spam Engine Gets Image Spam ~ � http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Nin��~ ~ Ninja Email Security with Cloudmark Spam Engine Gets Image Spam ~ � http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Nin��~ ~ 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: Named Property Limit
On Tue, Mar 17, 2009 at 6:04 PM, Troy Meyer troy.me...@monacocoach.com wrote: I love the MS solution if it happens to a PF database. YIKES! Wow, you're not kidding. I'm surprised they don't ask you to cut down a tree with a herring. -- Ben ~ Ninja Email Security with Cloudmark Spam Engine Gets Image Spam ~ ~ http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Ninja~
