RE: Not all headers included when forwarding as attachment
Michael, To pick a fine point I wanted to say that I wasn't arguing with you specifically about the feature or Outlook. Though my last couple statements may have veered that direction, those weren't specifically directed at you. (Sorry if there was misunderstanding.) My main argument was about your statement that Outlook retains 100% fidelity on the RFC defined headers. I think I've shown that Outlook may not maintain 100% fidelity on forwarded headers in all cases. As such, your statement, while accurate within the context of the original recipient, is not accurate in the context of forwarded mail. Since the original discussion was regarding forwarding messages, I chose to view your comment in that context where it is not accurate... Maybe the statement should be that Outlook retains 100% fidelity on the RFC defined headers when viewed from the original destination mailbox, but only 99% fidelity when messages are forwarded with full headers intact. :) Peace. Joe P -Original Message- From: Michael B. Smith [mailto:mich...@smithcons.com] Sent: Thursday, May 27, 2010 4:19 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Not all headers included when forwarding as attachment Joe you are arguing with the wrong person. I have no vested interest in this either way. I argued against the named property change, but I lost. The reality is that it would tend to cause Exchange I/O to be higher when the driver in 2007 and 2010 was to get it as low as possible. The decision is made and the functionality has been ripped out of the store. I don't expect it ever to come back. I know how Outlook works at the MAPI level, I know why it works that way (for many but not all things - I do understand address resolution in detail though), but I have nothing to do with the decision tree of how/why features/functionality get implemented or not. Outlook 14 (2010) is locked and loaded. There may be a minor number of new features in future service packs, but core functionality won't change. Your best bet is to get on the TAP/Alpha/whatever for OL 15 and plead your case with the OL team then. Regards, Michael B. Smith Consultant and Exchange MVP http://TheEssentialExchange.com -Original Message- From: Joe Pochedley [mailto:joe.poched...@fivesgroup.com] Sent: Thursday, May 27, 2010 3:29 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Not all headers included when forwarding as attachment Michael, I have to take exception to the statement that Outlook retains 100% fidelity on the RFC defined headers. In multiple tests I observed Outlook change the original To: header line when forwarding an email to an external source. While the argument could be made that both addresses are correct from an original destination mailbox standpoint, the fact is that the SMTP To: address was changed in the forwarded headers. Hence 100% fidelity was not maintained on the RFC defined To: - Destination Address Field. (http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc5322#section-3.6.3) .. Note that I didn't test whether a similar issue happens with Cc: and Bcc: fields too... Since the incoming mail flow path is different for our org depending on the actual To: address, this could lead to some really confusing situations in trying to troubleshoot a delivery problem if headers get mangled during the troubleshooting process... I agree with Jason in that Outlook should *not* touch the internet headers on forwarded messages. This is a poor decision on Microsoft's part. JP -Original Message- From: Michael B. Smith [mailto:mich...@smithcons.com] Sent: Wednesday, May 26, 2010 2:15 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Not all headers included when forwarding as attachment You don't have to pay to make bug reports. You ask for a non-dec and they give it to you. However, you do have to offer a CC up front. Outlook retains 100% fidelity on RFC headers and on pre-existing NAMED PROPERTIES. MAPI maintains 100% fidelity on transport headers at incoming bridgehead (hub) but since Internet named properties are no longer propagated by default as of Exchange 2007 sp2, Outlook 2010 doesn't try to either. That behavior may have been introduced as of Outlook 2007 sp2, you might want to check with an Outlook MVP. The easiest solution, I believe, would be to create an Internet named property for your mailbox databases for the headers in question. There is information on how to do that at msexchangeteam.com; there are a number of posts on that blog from last year about named property behavior changes. I think I blogged about it too; I can't remember. Ah yes, here we go: http://theessentialexchange.com/blogs/michael/archive/2009/06/17/named-properties-what-lies-ahead.aspx Regards, Michael B. Smith Consultant and Exchange MVP http://TheEssentialExchange.com -Original Message- From: Jason Gurtz [mailto:jasongu...@npumail.com] Sent: Wednesday, May 26, 2010 2:00 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin
RE: Not all headers included when forwarding as attachment
I think this is a case of the OL team saying something like, well, Exchange doesn't support this anymore so we won't either, apparently forgetting they still support connecting to Exchange 2003. We still use Exchange 2003, so this defining of custom named properties doesn't seem to apply to us (and maybe wouldn't matter since it seems to be an OL bug). But correct me if I'm wrong please :) I vaguely remember reading that exchangeteam post you linked to in your blog Mike and I think I was not getting the full gist of what it meant (or maybe choosing to be blissfully ignorant since it didn't apply to us, etc...). So, let me get this straight; any mail from the Internet that touches an Exchange server 2007 SP2 or later WILL NOT retain fidelity!? Full stop. Period. Never again? If that's true; wow, just wow. It seems like a PSS non-dec (whatever that means) doesn't really matter anyway. This will likely be my last post from OL 2010 unless a hotfix shows up since the Cisco ticket has now been open for over a month and I need to get it closed. Too bad; I like the OL ribbon and other new features across the 2010 suite. :( ~JasonG -Original Message- From: Michael B. Smith [mailto:mich...@smithcons.com] Sent: Wednesday, May 26, 2010 14:15 To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Not all headers included when forwarding as attachment You don't have to pay to make bug reports. You ask for a non-dec and they give it to you. However, you do have to offer a CC up front. Outlook retains 100% fidelity on RFC headers and on pre-existing NAMED PROPERTIES. MAPI maintains 100% fidelity on transport headers at incoming bridgehead (hub) but since Internet named properties are no longer propagated by default as of Exchange 2007 sp2, Outlook 2010 doesn't try to either. That behavior may have been introduced as of Outlook 2007 sp2, you might want to check with an Outlook MVP. The easiest solution, I believe, would be to create an Internet named property for your mailbox databases for the headers in question. There is information on how to do that at msexchangeteam.com; there are a number of posts on that blog from last year about named property behavior changes. I think I blogged about it too; I can't remember. Ah yes, here we go: http://theessentialexchange.com/blogs/michael/archive/2009/06/17/named- properties-what-lies-ahead.aspx Regards, Michael B. Smith Consultant and Exchange MVP http://TheEssentialExchange.com -Original Message- From: Jason Gurtz [mailto:jasongu...@npumail.com] Sent: Wednesday, May 26, 2010 2:00 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Not all headers included when forwarding as attachment Thanks Joe, nice to see I'm not the only one. I also posted in the Outlook general forum with not too much response: http://ow.ly/1Qd9D Some discussion occurring on the office development forum too: http://social.msdn.microsoft.com/Forums/en-US/vsto/thread/61a98015-24a4- 47 2c-a100-37b1e99d4ce4?prof=required Apparently a TNEF attachment will retain all info, but that's no better without that guy's future TNEF-MIME (Base64?) proxy. Hopefully a hotfix is on the horizon! Wonder if it makes sense to do a PSS call, though I upchuck at the thought of paying to make a bug report. I'm still hoping against all odds that some decent admin-friendly mail- flow troubleshooting features start trickling in some day. e.g. Ctrl+u raw message view like in T-bird, true deterministic encoding and MIME related choices, and non-buggy plain text editor. *sigh* ~JasonG -Original Message- From: Joe Pochedley [mailto:joe.poched...@fivesgroup.com] Sent: Wednesday, May 26, 2010 12:52 To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Not all headers included when forwarding as attachment Jason, Just wanted to let you know that I was also able to observe a similar issue where the headers displayed in Outlook or OWA do not match the headers in a forwarded message (as an attachment)... In my testing, I forwarded the full messages as attachments to my gmail account. While I didn't see as large a difference of stripped headers, there certainly are differences and items that don't match between Outlook and the forwarded version... For one example, look for the TO: line on each set of headers (example below)... I know that the subscription for this newsletter goes to my joepoched...@namfg.com account... However, the forwarded message has replaced the correct original TO: info with my updated joe.poched...@fivesgroup.com address! (Both addresses are associated with the same mailbox, but the fivesgroup.com address is newer and presently my Primary SMTP address within Exchange. There's no reason Outlook should change this detail on forwarding though.) I was able to observe this specific instance of header mangling on every message sent directly to my old SMTP address. Here's
RE: Not all headers included when forwarding as attachment
Michael, I have to take exception to the statement that Outlook retains 100% fidelity on the RFC defined headers. In multiple tests I observed Outlook change the original To: header line when forwarding an email to an external source. While the argument could be made that both addresses are correct from an original destination mailbox standpoint, the fact is that the SMTP To: address was changed in the forwarded headers. Hence 100% fidelity was not maintained on the RFC defined To: - Destination Address Field. (http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc5322#section-3.6.3) .. Note that I didn't test whether a similar issue happens with Cc: and Bcc: fields too... Since the incoming mail flow path is different for our org depending on the actual To: address, this could lead to some really confusing situations in trying to troubleshoot a delivery problem if headers get mangled during the troubleshooting process... I agree with Jason in that Outlook should *not* touch the internet headers on forwarded messages. This is a poor decision on Microsoft's part. JP -Original Message- From: Michael B. Smith [mailto:mich...@smithcons.com] Sent: Wednesday, May 26, 2010 2:15 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Not all headers included when forwarding as attachment You don't have to pay to make bug reports. You ask for a non-dec and they give it to you. However, you do have to offer a CC up front. Outlook retains 100% fidelity on RFC headers and on pre-existing NAMED PROPERTIES. MAPI maintains 100% fidelity on transport headers at incoming bridgehead (hub) but since Internet named properties are no longer propagated by default as of Exchange 2007 sp2, Outlook 2010 doesn't try to either. That behavior may have been introduced as of Outlook 2007 sp2, you might want to check with an Outlook MVP. The easiest solution, I believe, would be to create an Internet named property for your mailbox databases for the headers in question. There is information on how to do that at msexchangeteam.com; there are a number of posts on that blog from last year about named property behavior changes. I think I blogged about it too; I can't remember. Ah yes, here we go: http://theessentialexchange.com/blogs/michael/archive/2009/06/17/named-properties-what-lies-ahead.aspx Regards, Michael B. Smith Consultant and Exchange MVP http://TheEssentialExchange.com -Original Message- From: Jason Gurtz [mailto:jasongu...@npumail.com] Sent: Wednesday, May 26, 2010 2:00 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Not all headers included when forwarding as attachment Thanks Joe, nice to see I'm not the only one. I also posted in the Outlook general forum with not too much response: http://ow.ly/1Qd9D Some discussion occurring on the office development forum too: http://social.msdn.microsoft.com/Forums/en-US/vsto/thread/61a98015-24a4-47 2c-a100-37b1e99d4ce4?prof=required Apparently a TNEF attachment will retain all info, but that's no better without that guy's future TNEF-MIME (Base64?) proxy. Hopefully a hotfix is on the horizon! Wonder if it makes sense to do a PSS call, though I upchuck at the thought of paying to make a bug report. I'm still hoping against all odds that some decent admin-friendly mail-flow troubleshooting features start trickling in some day. e.g. Ctrl+u raw message view like in T-bird, true deterministic encoding and MIME related choices, and non-buggy plain text editor. *sigh* ~JasonG -Original Message- From: Joe Pochedley [mailto:joe.poched...@fivesgroup.com] Sent: Wednesday, May 26, 2010 12:52 To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Not all headers included when forwarding as attachment Jason, Just wanted to let you know that I was also able to observe a similar issue where the headers displayed in Outlook or OWA do not match the headers in a forwarded message (as an attachment)... In my testing, I forwarded the full messages as attachments to my gmail account. While I didn't see as large a difference of stripped headers, there certainly are differences and items that don't match between Outlook and the forwarded version... For one example, look for the TO: line on each set of headers (example below)... I know that the subscription for this newsletter goes to my joepoched...@namfg.com account... However, the forwarded message has replaced the correct original TO: info with my updated joe.poched...@fivesgroup.com address! (Both addresses are associated with the same mailbox, but the fivesgroup.com address is newer and presently my Primary SMTP address within Exchange. There's no reason Outlook should change this detail on forwarding though.) I was able to observe this specific instance of header mangling on every message sent directly to my old SMTP address. Here's example headers after I shuffled lines to make them match as close as possible. I didn't delete anything, just re-arranged to make differences more
RE: Not all headers included when forwarding as attachment
Joe you are arguing with the wrong person. I have no vested interest in this either way. I argued against the named property change, but I lost. The reality is that it would tend to cause Exchange I/O to be higher when the driver in 2007 and 2010 was to get it as low as possible. The decision is made and the functionality has been ripped out of the store. I don't expect it ever to come back. I know how Outlook works at the MAPI level, I know why it works that way (for many but not all things - I do understand address resolution in detail though), but I have nothing to do with the decision tree of how/why features/functionality get implemented or not. Outlook 14 (2010) is locked and loaded. There may be a minor number of new features in future service packs, but core functionality won't change. Your best bet is to get on the TAP/Alpha/whatever for OL 15 and plead your case with the OL team then. Regards, Michael B. Smith Consultant and Exchange MVP http://TheEssentialExchange.com -Original Message- From: Joe Pochedley [mailto:joe.poched...@fivesgroup.com] Sent: Thursday, May 27, 2010 3:29 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Not all headers included when forwarding as attachment Michael, I have to take exception to the statement that Outlook retains 100% fidelity on the RFC defined headers. In multiple tests I observed Outlook change the original To: header line when forwarding an email to an external source. While the argument could be made that both addresses are correct from an original destination mailbox standpoint, the fact is that the SMTP To: address was changed in the forwarded headers. Hence 100% fidelity was not maintained on the RFC defined To: - Destination Address Field. (http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc5322#section-3.6.3) .. Note that I didn't test whether a similar issue happens with Cc: and Bcc: fields too... Since the incoming mail flow path is different for our org depending on the actual To: address, this could lead to some really confusing situations in trying to troubleshoot a delivery problem if headers get mangled during the troubleshooting process... I agree with Jason in that Outlook should *not* touch the internet headers on forwarded messages. This is a poor decision on Microsoft's part. JP -Original Message- From: Michael B. Smith [mailto:mich...@smithcons.com] Sent: Wednesday, May 26, 2010 2:15 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Not all headers included when forwarding as attachment You don't have to pay to make bug reports. You ask for a non-dec and they give it to you. However, you do have to offer a CC up front. Outlook retains 100% fidelity on RFC headers and on pre-existing NAMED PROPERTIES. MAPI maintains 100% fidelity on transport headers at incoming bridgehead (hub) but since Internet named properties are no longer propagated by default as of Exchange 2007 sp2, Outlook 2010 doesn't try to either. That behavior may have been introduced as of Outlook 2007 sp2, you might want to check with an Outlook MVP. The easiest solution, I believe, would be to create an Internet named property for your mailbox databases for the headers in question. There is information on how to do that at msexchangeteam.com; there are a number of posts on that blog from last year about named property behavior changes. I think I blogged about it too; I can't remember. Ah yes, here we go: http://theessentialexchange.com/blogs/michael/archive/2009/06/17/named-properties-what-lies-ahead.aspx Regards, Michael B. Smith Consultant and Exchange MVP http://TheEssentialExchange.com -Original Message- From: Jason Gurtz [mailto:jasongu...@npumail.com] Sent: Wednesday, May 26, 2010 2:00 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Not all headers included when forwarding as attachment Thanks Joe, nice to see I'm not the only one. I also posted in the Outlook general forum with not too much response: http://ow.ly/1Qd9D Some discussion occurring on the office development forum too: http://social.msdn.microsoft.com/Forums/en-US/vsto/thread/61a98015-24a4-47 2c-a100-37b1e99d4ce4?prof=required Apparently a TNEF attachment will retain all info, but that's no better without that guy's future TNEF-MIME (Base64?) proxy. Hopefully a hotfix is on the horizon! Wonder if it makes sense to do a PSS call, though I upchuck at the thought of paying to make a bug report. I'm still hoping against all odds that some decent admin-friendly mail-flow troubleshooting features start trickling in some day. e.g. Ctrl+u raw message view like in T-bird, true deterministic encoding and MIME related choices, and non-buggy plain text editor. *sigh* ~JasonG -Original Message- From: Joe Pochedley [mailto:joe.poched...@fivesgroup.com] Sent: Wednesday, May 26, 2010 12:52 To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Not all headers included when forwarding as attachment Jason, Just wanted to let you know that I was also
RE: Not all headers included when forwarding as attachment
I can't say never, but I can say that it's gone for now. Regards, Michael B. Smith Consultant and Exchange MVP http://TheEssentialExchange.com -Original Message- From: Jason Gurtz [mailto:jasongu...@npumail.com] Sent: Thursday, May 27, 2010 11:08 AM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Not all headers included when forwarding as attachment I think this is a case of the OL team saying something like, well, Exchange doesn't support this anymore so we won't either, apparently forgetting they still support connecting to Exchange 2003. We still use Exchange 2003, so this defining of custom named properties doesn't seem to apply to us (and maybe wouldn't matter since it seems to be an OL bug). But correct me if I'm wrong please :) I vaguely remember reading that exchangeteam post you linked to in your blog Mike and I think I was not getting the full gist of what it meant (or maybe choosing to be blissfully ignorant since it didn't apply to us, etc...). So, let me get this straight; any mail from the Internet that touches an Exchange server 2007 SP2 or later WILL NOT retain fidelity!? Full stop. Period. Never again? If that's true; wow, just wow. It seems like a PSS non-dec (whatever that means) doesn't really matter anyway. This will likely be my last post from OL 2010 unless a hotfix shows up since the Cisco ticket has now been open for over a month and I need to get it closed. Too bad; I like the OL ribbon and other new features across the 2010 suite. :( ~JasonG -Original Message- From: Michael B. Smith [mailto:mich...@smithcons.com] Sent: Wednesday, May 26, 2010 14:15 To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Not all headers included when forwarding as attachment You don't have to pay to make bug reports. You ask for a non-dec and they give it to you. However, you do have to offer a CC up front. Outlook retains 100% fidelity on RFC headers and on pre-existing NAMED PROPERTIES. MAPI maintains 100% fidelity on transport headers at incoming bridgehead (hub) but since Internet named properties are no longer propagated by default as of Exchange 2007 sp2, Outlook 2010 doesn't try to either. That behavior may have been introduced as of Outlook 2007 sp2, you might want to check with an Outlook MVP. The easiest solution, I believe, would be to create an Internet named property for your mailbox databases for the headers in question. There is information on how to do that at msexchangeteam.com; there are a number of posts on that blog from last year about named property behavior changes. I think I blogged about it too; I can't remember. Ah yes, here we go: http://theessentialexchange.com/blogs/michael/archive/2009/06/17/name d- properties-what-lies-ahead.aspx Regards, Michael B. Smith Consultant and Exchange MVP http://TheEssentialExchange.com -Original Message- From: Jason Gurtz [mailto:jasongu...@npumail.com] Sent: Wednesday, May 26, 2010 2:00 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Not all headers included when forwarding as attachment Thanks Joe, nice to see I'm not the only one. I also posted in the Outlook general forum with not too much response: http://ow.ly/1Qd9D Some discussion occurring on the office development forum too: http://social.msdn.microsoft.com/Forums/en-US/vsto/thread/61a98015-24a 4- 47 2c-a100-37b1e99d4ce4?prof=required Apparently a TNEF attachment will retain all info, but that's no better without that guy's future TNEF-MIME (Base64?) proxy. Hopefully a hotfix is on the horizon! Wonder if it makes sense to do a PSS call, though I upchuck at the thought of paying to make a bug report. I'm still hoping against all odds that some decent admin-friendly mail- flow troubleshooting features start trickling in some day. e.g. Ctrl+u raw message view like in T-bird, true deterministic encoding Ctrl+and MIME related choices, and non-buggy plain text editor. *sigh* ~JasonG -Original Message- From: Joe Pochedley [mailto:joe.poched...@fivesgroup.com] Sent: Wednesday, May 26, 2010 12:52 To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Not all headers included when forwarding as attachment Jason, Just wanted to let you know that I was also able to observe a similar issue where the headers displayed in Outlook or OWA do not match the headers in a forwarded message (as an attachment)... In my testing, I forwarded the full messages as attachments to my gmail account. While I didn't see as large a difference of stripped headers, there certainly are differences and items that don't match between Outlook and the forwarded version... For one example, look for the TO: line on each set of headers (example below)... I know that the subscription for this newsletter goes to my joepoched...@namfg.com account... However, the forwarded message has replaced the correct original TO: info with my updated joe.poched...@fivesgroup.com address! (Both
RE: Not all headers included when forwarding as attachment
Jason, Just wanted to let you know that I was also able to observe a similar issue where the headers displayed in Outlook or OWA do not match the headers in a forwarded message (as an attachment)... In my testing, I forwarded the full messages as attachments to my gmail account. While I didn't see as large a difference of stripped headers, there certainly are differences and items that don't match between Outlook and the forwarded version... For one example, look for the TO: line on each set of headers (example below)... I know that the subscription for this newsletter goes to my joepoched...@namfg.com account... However, the forwarded message has replaced the correct original TO: info with my updated joe.poched...@fivesgroup.com address! (Both addresses are associated with the same mailbox, but the fivesgroup.com address is newer and presently my Primary SMTP address within Exchange. There's no reason Outlook should change this detail on forwarding though.) I was able to observe this specific instance of header mangling on every message sent directly to my old SMTP address. Here's example headers after I shuffled lines to make them match as close as possible. I didn't delete anything, just re-arranged to make differences more apparent at the bottom of each... The aforementioned changed To: line is line 29 in each header. Original message headers as presented in Outlook 2010 / Exchange 2007 OWA: Received: from mail121-tx2-R.bigfish.com (65.55.88.113) by ex-cas.namfg.com (10.1.1.8) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 8.1.393.1; Wed, 26 May 2010 11:28:29 -0400 Received: from mail121-tx2 (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by mail121-tx2-R.bigfish.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9A58715982F9 for joepoched...@namfg.com; Wed, 26 May 2010 15:28:28 + (UTC) X-SpamScore: -30 X-BigFish: vps-30(zzcc3N77f5I541I1996J552W946fmzz272R1202hz4fhzz2fh5eh61h) X-Spam-TCS-SCL: 0:0 Received: from mail121-tx2 (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by mail121-tx2 (MessageSwitch) id 1274887705562932_22654; Wed, 26 May 2010 15:28:25 + (UTC) Received: from TX2EHSMHS025.bigfish.com (unknown [10.9.14.244]) by mail121-tx2.bigfish.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 107F0870052for joepoched...@namfg.com; Wed, 26 May 2010 15:28:24 + (UTC) Received: from chalmers.techtarget.com (206.19.49.33) by TX2EHSMHS025.bigfish.com (10.9.99.125) with Microsoft SMTP Server id 14.0.482.44; Wed, 26 May 2010 15:28:22 + DomainKey-Signature: q=dns; a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; s=ttgt_1024; d=lists.techtarget.com; h=From; b=SB+BVvXBdPOObWbuIOFYvtfO6waiNHLokCFou1b86N68c80g3BttgmfXTWyBr9N+ 4ay/+wxiQQUor4SA+QZbfn10L3USFwLyfKk3aiWrFYgMiOkjxE4QIS7WuqqeNR39 b2VnATT9vw6KbGJQbwWWsOK8LpdMhpi5rL2NQQgOGiU= Received: from [10.200.1.4] ([10.200.1.4:6167]) by chalmers.techtarget.com (envelope-from 767500+2d3-joepochedley=namfg@lists.techtarget.com) (ecelerity 2.2.2.35 r(26825/26848M)) with ECSTREAM id 74/4F-03936-51E3DFB4; Wed, 26 May 2010 11:28:21 -0400 To: joepoched...@namfg.com joepoched...@namfg.com Message-ID: 74.4f.03936.51e3d...@chalmers.techtarget.com From: Windows Server Advisor searchwindowsser...@lists.techtarget.com Date: Wed, 26 May 2010 15:28:18 + Reply-To: no_re...@lists.techtarget.com Subject: Active Directory and PowerShell unite in R2 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: TargetMail E-Mail By TechTarget.com X-content_id: 767500 X-Reverse-DNS: mailhost9.lists.techtarget.com Return-Path: 767500+2d3-joepochedley=namfg@lists.techtarget.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Message headers from attachment forwarded to Gmail: Received: from mail121-tx2-R.bigfish.com (65.55.88.113) by ex-cas.namfg.com (10.1.1.8) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 8.1.393.1; Wed, 26 May 2010 11:28:29 -0400 Received: from mail121-tx2 (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by mail121-tx2-R.bigfish.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9A58715982F9 for joepoched...@namfg.com; Wed, 26 May 2010 15:28:28 + (UTC) X-spamscore: -30 x-bigfish: vps-30(zzcc3N77f5I541I1996J552W946fmzz272R1202hz4fhzz2fh5eh61h) x-spam-tcs-scl: 0:0 Received: from mail121-tx2 (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by mail121-tx2 (MessageSwitch) id 1274887705562932_22654; Wed, 26 May 2010 15:28:25 + (UTC) Received: from TX2EHSMHS025.bigfish.com (unknown [10.9.14.244]) by mail121-tx2.bigfish.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 107F0870052for joepoched...@namfg.com; Wed, 26 May 2010 15:28:24 + (UTC) Received: from chalmers.techtarget.com (206.19.49.33) by TX2EHSMHS025.bigfish.com (10.9.99.125) with Microsoft SMTP Server id 14.0.482.44; Wed, 26 May 2010 15:28:22 + domainkey-signature: q=dns; a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; s=ttgt_1024; d=lists.techtarget.com; h=From; b=SB+BVvXBdPOObWbuIOFYvtfO6waiNHLokCFou1b86N68c80g3BttgmfXTWyBr9N+ 4ay/+wxiQQUor4SA+QZbfn10L3USFwLyfKk3aiWrFYgMiOkjxE4QIS7WuqqeNR39
RE: Not all headers included when forwarding as attachment
Thanks Joe, nice to see I'm not the only one. I also posted in the Outlook general forum with not too much response: http://ow.ly/1Qd9D Some discussion occurring on the office development forum too: http://social.msdn.microsoft.com/Forums/en-US/vsto/thread/61a98015-24a4-47 2c-a100-37b1e99d4ce4?prof=required Apparently a TNEF attachment will retain all info, but that's no better without that guy's future TNEF-MIME (Base64?) proxy. Hopefully a hotfix is on the horizon! Wonder if it makes sense to do a PSS call, though I upchuck at the thought of paying to make a bug report. I'm still hoping against all odds that some decent admin-friendly mail-flow troubleshooting features start trickling in some day. e.g. Ctrl+u raw message view like in T-bird, true deterministic encoding and MIME related choices, and non-buggy plain text editor. *sigh* ~JasonG -Original Message- From: Joe Pochedley [mailto:joe.poched...@fivesgroup.com] Sent: Wednesday, May 26, 2010 12:52 To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Not all headers included when forwarding as attachment Jason, Just wanted to let you know that I was also able to observe a similar issue where the headers displayed in Outlook or OWA do not match the headers in a forwarded message (as an attachment)... In my testing, I forwarded the full messages as attachments to my gmail account. While I didn't see as large a difference of stripped headers, there certainly are differences and items that don't match between Outlook and the forwarded version... For one example, look for the TO: line on each set of headers (example below)... I know that the subscription for this newsletter goes to my joepoched...@namfg.com account... However, the forwarded message has replaced the correct original TO: info with my updated joe.poched...@fivesgroup.com address! (Both addresses are associated with the same mailbox, but the fivesgroup.com address is newer and presently my Primary SMTP address within Exchange. There's no reason Outlook should change this detail on forwarding though.) I was able to observe this specific instance of header mangling on every message sent directly to my old SMTP address. Here's example headers after I shuffled lines to make them match as close as possible. I didn't delete anything, just re-arranged to make differences more apparent at the bottom of each... The aforementioned changed To: line is line 29 in each header. Original message headers as presented in Outlook 2010 / Exchange 2007 OWA: Received: from mail121-tx2-R.bigfish.com (65.55.88.113) by ex- cas.namfg.com (10.1.1.8) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 8.1.393.1; Wed, 26 May 2010 11:28:29 -0400 Received: from mail121-tx2 (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1])by mail121-tx2-R.bigfish.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9A58715982F9 for joepoched...@namfg.com; Wed, 26 May 2010 15:28:28 + (UTC) X-SpamScore: -30 X-BigFish: vps- 30(zzcc3N77f5I541I1996J552W946fmzz272R1202hz4fhzz2fh5eh61h) X-Spam-TCS-SCL: 0:0 Received: from mail121-tx2 (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by mail121-tx2 (MessageSwitch) id 1274887705562932_22654; Wed, 26 May 2010 15:28:25 + (UTC) Received: from TX2EHSMHS025.bigfish.com (unknown [10.9.14.244]) by mail121-tx2.bigfish.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 107F0870052 for joepoched...@namfg.com; Wed, 26 May 2010 15:28:24 + (UTC) Received: from chalmers.techtarget.com (206.19.49.33) by TX2EHSMHS025.bigfish.com (10.9.99.125) with Microsoft SMTP Server id 14.0.482.44; Wed, 26 May 2010 15:28:22 + DomainKey-Signature: q=dns; a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; s=ttgt_1024; d=lists.techtarget.com; h=From; b=SB+BVvXBdPOObWbuIOFYvtfO6waiNHLokCFou1b86N68c80g3BttgmfXTWyBr9N+ 4ay/+wxiQQUor4SA+QZbfn10L3USFwLyfKk3aiWrFYgMiOkjxE4QIS7WuqqeNR39 b2VnATT9vw6KbGJQbwWWsOK8LpdMhpi5rL2NQQgOGiU= Received: from [10.200.1.4] ([10.200.1.4:6167]) by chalmers.techtarget.com (envelope-from 767500+2d3-joepochedley=namfg@lists.techtarget.com) (ecelerity 2.2.2.35 r(26825/26848M)) with ECSTREAM id 74/4F- 03936-51E3DFB4; Wed, 26 May 2010 11:28:21 -0400 To: joepoched...@namfg.com joepoched...@namfg.com Message-ID: 74.4f.03936.51e3d...@chalmers.techtarget.com From: Windows Server Advisor searchwindowsser...@lists.techtarget.com Date: Wed, 26 May 2010 15:28:18 + Reply-To: no_re...@lists.techtarget.com Subject: Active Directory and PowerShell unite in R2 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: TargetMail E-Mail By TechTarget.com X-content_id: 767500 X-Reverse-DNS: mailhost9.lists.techtarget.com Return-Path: 767500+2d3-joepochedley=namfg@lists.techtarget.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Message headers from attachment forwarded to Gmail: Received: from mail121-tx2-R.bigfish.com (65.55.88.113) by ex- cas.namfg.com (10.1.1.8) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 8.1.393.1; Wed, 26 May 2010
RE: Not all headers included when forwarding as attachment
You don't have to pay to make bug reports. You ask for a non-dec and they give it to you. However, you do have to offer a CC up front. Outlook retains 100% fidelity on RFC headers and on pre-existing NAMED PROPERTIES. MAPI maintains 100% fidelity on transport headers at incoming bridgehead (hub) but since Internet named properties are no longer propagated by default as of Exchange 2007 sp2, Outlook 2010 doesn't try to either. That behavior may have been introduced as of Outlook 2007 sp2, you might want to check with an Outlook MVP. The easiest solution, I believe, would be to create an Internet named property for your mailbox databases for the headers in question. There is information on how to do that at msexchangeteam.com; there are a number of posts on that blog from last year about named property behavior changes. I think I blogged about it too; I can't remember. Ah yes, here we go: http://theessentialexchange.com/blogs/michael/archive/2009/06/17/named-properties-what-lies-ahead.aspx Regards, Michael B. Smith Consultant and Exchange MVP http://TheEssentialExchange.com -Original Message- From: Jason Gurtz [mailto:jasongu...@npumail.com] Sent: Wednesday, May 26, 2010 2:00 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Not all headers included when forwarding as attachment Thanks Joe, nice to see I'm not the only one. I also posted in the Outlook general forum with not too much response: http://ow.ly/1Qd9D Some discussion occurring on the office development forum too: http://social.msdn.microsoft.com/Forums/en-US/vsto/thread/61a98015-24a4-47 2c-a100-37b1e99d4ce4?prof=required Apparently a TNEF attachment will retain all info, but that's no better without that guy's future TNEF-MIME (Base64?) proxy. Hopefully a hotfix is on the horizon! Wonder if it makes sense to do a PSS call, though I upchuck at the thought of paying to make a bug report. I'm still hoping against all odds that some decent admin-friendly mail-flow troubleshooting features start trickling in some day. e.g. Ctrl+u raw message view like in T-bird, true deterministic encoding and MIME related choices, and non-buggy plain text editor. *sigh* ~JasonG -Original Message- From: Joe Pochedley [mailto:joe.poched...@fivesgroup.com] Sent: Wednesday, May 26, 2010 12:52 To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Not all headers included when forwarding as attachment Jason, Just wanted to let you know that I was also able to observe a similar issue where the headers displayed in Outlook or OWA do not match the headers in a forwarded message (as an attachment)... In my testing, I forwarded the full messages as attachments to my gmail account. While I didn't see as large a difference of stripped headers, there certainly are differences and items that don't match between Outlook and the forwarded version... For one example, look for the TO: line on each set of headers (example below)... I know that the subscription for this newsletter goes to my joepoched...@namfg.com account... However, the forwarded message has replaced the correct original TO: info with my updated joe.poched...@fivesgroup.com address! (Both addresses are associated with the same mailbox, but the fivesgroup.com address is newer and presently my Primary SMTP address within Exchange. There's no reason Outlook should change this detail on forwarding though.) I was able to observe this specific instance of header mangling on every message sent directly to my old SMTP address. Here's example headers after I shuffled lines to make them match as close as possible. I didn't delete anything, just re-arranged to make differences more apparent at the bottom of each... The aforementioned changed To: line is line 29 in each header. Original message headers as presented in Outlook 2010 / Exchange 2007 OWA: Received: from mail121-tx2-R.bigfish.com (65.55.88.113) by ex- cas.namfg.com (10.1.1.8) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 8.1.393.1; Wed, 26 May 2010 11:28:29 -0400 Received: from mail121-tx2 (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1])by mail121-tx2-R.bigfish.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9A58715982F9 for joepoched...@namfg.com; Wed, 26 May 2010 15:28:28 + (UTC) X-SpamScore: -30 X-BigFish: vps- 30(zzcc3N77f5I541I1996J552W946fmzz272R1202hz4fhzz2fh5eh61h) X-Spam-TCS-SCL: 0:0 Received: from mail121-tx2 (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by mail121-tx2 (MessageSwitch) id 1274887705562932_22654; Wed, 26 May 2010 15:28:25 + (UTC) Received: from TX2EHSMHS025.bigfish.com (unknown [10.9.14.244]) by mail121-tx2.bigfish.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 107F0870052 for joepoched...@namfg.com; Wed, 26 May 2010 15:28:24 + (UTC) Received: from chalmers.techtarget.com (206.19.49.33) by TX2EHSMHS025.bigfish.com (10.9.99.125) with Microsoft SMTP Server id 14.0.482.44; Wed, 26 May 2010 15:28:22 + DomainKey-Signature: q=dns; a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; s=ttgt_1024; d
RE: Not all headers included when forwarding as attachment
Yikes, thanks for the possible work-around! I can say with certainty this was not an issue with 2007 sp2. ~JasonG -Original Message- From: Michael B. Smith [mailto:mich...@smithcons.com] Sent: Wednesday, May 26, 2010 14:15 To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Not all headers included when forwarding as attachment You don't have to pay to make bug reports. You ask for a non-dec and they give it to you. However, you do have to offer a CC up front. Outlook retains 100% fidelity on RFC headers and on pre-existing NAMED PROPERTIES. MAPI maintains 100% fidelity on transport headers at incoming bridgehead (hub) but since Internet named properties are no longer propagated by default as of Exchange 2007 sp2, Outlook 2010 doesn't try to either. That behavior may have been introduced as of Outlook 2007 sp2, you might want to check with an Outlook MVP. The easiest solution, I believe, would be to create an Internet named property for your mailbox databases for the headers in question. There is information on how to do that at msexchangeteam.com; there are a number of posts on that blog from last year about named property behavior changes. I think I blogged about it too; I can't remember. Ah yes, here we go: http://theessentialexchange.com/blogs/michael/archive/2009/06/17/named- properties-what-lies-ahead.aspx Regards, Michael B. Smith Consultant and Exchange MVP http://TheEssentialExchange.com -Original Message- From: Jason Gurtz [mailto:jasongu...@npumail.com] Sent: Wednesday, May 26, 2010 2:00 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Not all headers included when forwarding as attachment Thanks Joe, nice to see I'm not the only one. I also posted in the Outlook general forum with not too much response: http://ow.ly/1Qd9D Some discussion occurring on the office development forum too: http://social.msdn.microsoft.com/Forums/en-US/vsto/thread/61a98015-24a4- 47 2c-a100-37b1e99d4ce4?prof=required Apparently a TNEF attachment will retain all info, but that's no better without that guy's future TNEF-MIME (Base64?) proxy. Hopefully a hotfix is on the horizon! Wonder if it makes sense to do a PSS call, though I upchuck at the thought of paying to make a bug report. I'm still hoping against all odds that some decent admin-friendly mail- flow troubleshooting features start trickling in some day. e.g. Ctrl+u raw message view like in T-bird, true deterministic encoding and MIME related choices, and non-buggy plain text editor. *sigh* ~JasonG -Original Message- From: Joe Pochedley [mailto:joe.poched...@fivesgroup.com] Sent: Wednesday, May 26, 2010 12:52 To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Not all headers included when forwarding as attachment Jason, Just wanted to let you know that I was also able to observe a similar issue where the headers displayed in Outlook or OWA do not match the headers in a forwarded message (as an attachment)... In my testing, I forwarded the full messages as attachments to my gmail account. While I didn't see as large a difference of stripped headers, there certainly are differences and items that don't match between Outlook and the forwarded version... For one example, look for the TO: line on each set of headers (example below)... I know that the subscription for this newsletter goes to my joepoched...@namfg.com account... However, the forwarded message has replaced the correct original TO: info with my updated joe.poched...@fivesgroup.com address! (Both addresses are associated with the same mailbox, but the fivesgroup.com address is newer and presently my Primary SMTP address within Exchange. There's no reason Outlook should change this detail on forwarding though.) I was able to observe this specific instance of header mangling on every message sent directly to my old SMTP address. Here's example headers after I shuffled lines to make them match as close as possible. I didn't delete anything, just re-arranged to make differences more apparent at the bottom of each... The aforementioned changed To: line is line 29 in each header. Original message headers as presented in Outlook 2010 / Exchange 2007 OWA: Received: from mail121-tx2-R.bigfish.com (65.55.88.113) by ex- cas.namfg.com (10.1.1.8) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 8.1.393.1; Wed, 26 May 2010 11:28:29 -0400 Received: from mail121-tx2 (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by mail121-tx2-R.bigfish.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9A58715982F9 for joepoched...@namfg.com; Wed, 26 May 2010 15:28:28 + (UTC) X-SpamScore: -30 X-BigFish: vps- 30(zzcc3N77f5I541I1996J552W946fmzz272R1202hz4fhzz2fh5eh61h) X-Spam-TCS-SCL: 0:0 Received: from mail121-tx2 (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by mail121-tx2 (MessageSwitch) id 1274887705562932_22654; Wed, 26 May 2010 15:28:25 + (UTC) Received: from
