Re: Sanity check
Thanks! I had checked the list of *approved* phone users; but of course he was connecting with his personal phone. Bah. On Thu, Nov 1, 2012 at 8:47 PM, Alice Goodman ali...@mckinstry.com wrote: See if a smart phone is involved. I have had that experience here. ** ** Alice ** ** *From:* Candee [mailto:can...@gmail.com] *Sent:* Thursday, November 01, 2012 11:33 AM *To:* MS-Exchange Admin Issues *Subject:* Re: Sanity check ** ** Apparently my server is sending it every eleven minutes, and the appliance is generating the NDR. It seems the message is being marked as a temp-fail instead of a permanent fail. Nov 1 10:22:21 smtp sm-mta[18146]: qA1FCKQc018146: timeout waiting for input from mail.braueronline.com. during client DATA status On Thu, Nov 1, 2012 at 2:04 PM, Candee can...@gmail.com wrote: Good catch - the originating machine is our spam appliance. I don't have access to the logs on that; I emailed the vendor to check for me. Thanks! On Thu, Nov 1, 2012 at 1:44 PM, John Matteson john.matte...@gmail.com wrote: Hi Candee: Try checking the send queue on your gateway system (whatever machine actually processes mail to destinations on the Internet). See if it’s there. If you don’t see it there, then check the connectivity logs there. Also, what is the originating machine for the NDR going to the user? John M. *From:* Candee [mailto:can...@gmail.com] *Sent:* Thursday, November 01, 2012 1:33 PM *To:* MS-Exchange Admin Issues *Subject:* Re: Sanity check Okay, so I was wrong. There's no trace of it in our spam appliance logs. What's next? Move the mailbox? I have been Googling (funny how that became a verb!) all morning, but I haven't found much useful information. On Thu, Nov 1, 2012 at 12:59 PM, Candee can...@gmail.com wrote: Thanks, I will. On Thu, Nov 1, 2012 at 12:52 PM, Michael B. Smith mich...@smithcons.com wrote: I would look in the Connectivity logs to verify, but sounds like it. *From:* Candee [mailto:can...@gmail.com] *Sent:* Thursday, November 1, 2012 12:33 PM *To:* MS-Exchange Admin Issues *Subject:* Sanity check Exchange 2010 - fully patched; Outlook 2010 on the user's end. One user is getting the same NDR every eleven minutes. I don't see any corresponding events in any of the event logs (2 CAS servers, 2 MBX servers). The tracking logs have Receive (SMTP) /Deliver, over and over - each messageID repeated just twice. Am I right in thinking it's on the other side? Thanks! Candee --- To manage subscriptions click here: http://lyris.sunbelt-software.com/read/my_forums/ or send an email to listmana...@lyris.sunbeltsoftware.com with the body: unsubscribe exchangelist --- To manage subscriptions click here: http://lyris.sunbelt-software.com/read/my_forums/ or send an email to listmana...@lyris.sunbeltsoftware.com with the body: unsubscribe exchangelist --- To manage subscriptions click here: http://lyris.sunbelt-software.com/read/my_forums/ or send an email to listmana...@lyris.sunbeltsoftware.com with the body: unsubscribe exchangelist --- To manage subscriptions click here: http://lyris.sunbelt-software.com/read/my_forums/ or send an email to listmana...@lyris.sunbeltsoftware.com with the body: unsubscribe exchangelist --- To manage subscriptions click here: http://lyris.sunbelt-software.com/read/my_forums/ or send an email to listmana...@lyris.sunbeltsoftware.com with the body: unsubscribe exchangelist ** ** ** ** --- To manage subscriptions click here: http://lyris.sunbelt-software.com/read/my_forums/ or send an email to listmana...@lyris.sunbeltsoftware.com with the body: unsubscribe exchangelist --- To manage subscriptions click here: http://lyris.sunbelt-software.com/read/my_forums/ or send an email to listmana...@lyris.sunbeltsoftware.com with the body: unsubscribe exchangelist --- To manage subscriptions click here: http://lyris.sunbelt-software.com/read/my_forums/ or send an email to listmana...@lyris.sunbeltsoftware.com with the body: unsubscribe exchangelist
RE: Sanity check
I would look in the Connectivity logs to verify, but sounds like it. From: Candee [mailto:can...@gmail.com] Sent: Thursday, November 1, 2012 12:33 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: Sanity check Exchange 2010 - fully patched; Outlook 2010 on the user's end. One user is getting the same NDR every eleven minutes. I don't see any corresponding events in any of the event logs (2 CAS servers, 2 MBX servers). The tracking logs have Receive (SMTP) /Deliver, over and over - each messageID repeated just twice. Am I right in thinking it's on the other side? Thanks! Candee --- To manage subscriptions click here: http://lyris.sunbelt-software.com/read/my_forums/ or send an email to listmana...@lyris.sunbeltsoftware.commailto:listmana...@lyris.sunbeltsoftware.com with the body: unsubscribe exchangelist --- To manage subscriptions click here: http://lyris.sunbelt-software.com/read/my_forums/ or send an email to listmana...@lyris.sunbeltsoftware.com with the body: unsubscribe exchangelist
Re: Sanity check
Thanks, I will. On Thu, Nov 1, 2012 at 12:52 PM, Michael B. Smith mich...@smithcons.comwrote: I would look in the Connectivity logs to verify, but sounds like it. ** ** *From:* Candee [mailto:can...@gmail.com] *Sent:* Thursday, November 1, 2012 12:33 PM *To:* MS-Exchange Admin Issues *Subject:* Sanity check ** ** Exchange 2010 - fully patched; Outlook 2010 on the user's end. One user is getting the same NDR every eleven minutes. I don't see any corresponding events in any of the event logs (2 CAS servers, 2 MBX servers). The tracking logs have Receive (SMTP) /Deliver, over and over - each messageID repeated just twice. Am I right in thinking it's on the other side? Thanks! Candee --- To manage subscriptions click here: http://lyris.sunbelt-software.com/read/my_forums/ or send an email to listmana...@lyris.sunbeltsoftware.com with the body: unsubscribe exchangelist --- To manage subscriptions click here: http://lyris.sunbelt-software.com/read/my_forums/ or send an email to listmana...@lyris.sunbeltsoftware.com with the body: unsubscribe exchangelist --- To manage subscriptions click here: http://lyris.sunbelt-software.com/read/my_forums/ or send an email to listmana...@lyris.sunbeltsoftware.com with the body: unsubscribe exchangelist
RE: Sanity check
What do the headers look like? Was the NDR issued by your server, or was it accepted and then rejected farther downstream? From: Candee [mailto:can...@gmail.com] Sent: Thursday, November 01, 2012 12:33 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: Re: Sanity check Okay, so I was wrong. There's no trace of it in our spam appliance logs. What's next? Move the mailbox? I have been Googling (funny how that became a verb!) all morning, but I haven't found much useful information. On Thu, Nov 1, 2012 at 12:59 PM, Candee can...@gmail.commailto:can...@gmail.com wrote: Thanks, I will. On Thu, Nov 1, 2012 at 12:52 PM, Michael B. Smith mich...@smithcons.commailto:mich...@smithcons.com wrote: I would look in the Connectivity logs to verify, but sounds like it. From: Candee [mailto:can...@gmail.commailto:can...@gmail.com] Sent: Thursday, November 1, 2012 12:33 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: Sanity check Exchange 2010 - fully patched; Outlook 2010 on the user's end. One user is getting the same NDR every eleven minutes. I don't see any corresponding events in any of the event logs (2 CAS servers, 2 MBX servers). The tracking logs have Receive (SMTP) /Deliver, over and over - each messageID repeated just twice. Am I right in thinking it's on the other side? Thanks! Candee --- To manage subscriptions click here: http://lyris.sunbelt-software.com/read/my_forums/ or send an email to listmana...@lyris.sunbeltsoftware.commailto:listmana...@lyris.sunbeltsoftware.com with the body: unsubscribe exchangelist --- To manage subscriptions click here: http://lyris.sunbelt-software.com/read/my_forums/ or send an email to listmana...@lyris.sunbeltsoftware.commailto:listmana...@lyris.sunbeltsoftware.com with the body: unsubscribe exchangelist --- To manage subscriptions click here: http://lyris.sunbelt-software.com/read/my_forums/ or send an email to listmana...@lyris.sunbeltsoftware.commailto:listmana...@lyris.sunbeltsoftware.com with the body: unsubscribe exchangelist --- To manage subscriptions click here: http://lyris.sunbelt-software.com/read/my_forums/ or send an email to listmana...@lyris.sunbeltsoftware.commailto:listmana...@lyris.sunbeltsoftware.com with the body: unsubscribe exchangelist ** Note: The information contained in this message may be privileged and confidential and protected from disclosure. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, or an employee or agent responsible for delivering this message to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately by replying to the message and deleting it from your computer. ** --- To manage subscriptions click here: http://lyris.sunbelt-software.com/read/my_forums/ or send an email to listmana...@lyris.sunbeltsoftware.com with the body: unsubscribe exchangelist
RE: Sanity check
See if a smart phone is involved. I have had that experience here. Alice From: Candee [mailto:can...@gmail.com] Sent: Thursday, November 01, 2012 11:33 AM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: Re: Sanity check Apparently my server is sending it every eleven minutes, and the appliance is generating the NDR. It seems the message is being marked as a temp-fail instead of a permanent fail. Nov 1 10:22:21 smtp sm-mta[18146]: qA1FCKQc018146: timeout waiting for input from mail.braueronline.comhttp://mail.braueronline.com. during client DATA status On Thu, Nov 1, 2012 at 2:04 PM, Candee can...@gmail.commailto:can...@gmail.com wrote: Good catch - the originating machine is our spam appliance. I don't have access to the logs on that; I emailed the vendor to check for me. Thanks! On Thu, Nov 1, 2012 at 1:44 PM, John Matteson john.matte...@gmail.commailto:john.matte...@gmail.com wrote: Hi Candee: Try checking the send queue on your gateway system (whatever machine actually processes mail to destinations on the Internet). See if it's there. If you don't see it there, then check the connectivity logs there. Also, what is the originating machine for the NDR going to the user? John M. From: Candee [mailto:can...@gmail.commailto:can...@gmail.com] Sent: Thursday, November 01, 2012 1:33 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: Re: Sanity check Okay, so I was wrong. There's no trace of it in our spam appliance logs. What's next? Move the mailbox? I have been Googling (funny how that became a verb!) all morning, but I haven't found much useful information. On Thu, Nov 1, 2012 at 12:59 PM, Candee can...@gmail.commailto:can...@gmail.com wrote: Thanks, I will. On Thu, Nov 1, 2012 at 12:52 PM, Michael B. Smith mich...@smithcons.commailto:mich...@smithcons.com wrote: I would look in the Connectivity logs to verify, but sounds like it. From: Candee [mailto:can...@gmail.commailto:can...@gmail.com] Sent: Thursday, November 1, 2012 12:33 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: Sanity check Exchange 2010 - fully patched; Outlook 2010 on the user's end. One user is getting the same NDR every eleven minutes. I don't see any corresponding events in any of the event logs (2 CAS servers, 2 MBX servers). The tracking logs have Receive (SMTP) /Deliver, over and over - each messageID repeated just twice. Am I right in thinking it's on the other side? Thanks! Candee --- To manage subscriptions click here: http://lyris.sunbelt-software.com/read/my_forums/ or send an email to listmana...@lyris.sunbeltsoftware.commailto:listmana...@lyris.sunbeltsoftware.com with the body: unsubscribe exchangelist --- To manage subscriptions click here: http://lyris.sunbelt-software.com/read/my_forums/ or send an email to listmana...@lyris.sunbeltsoftware.commailto:listmana...@lyris.sunbeltsoftware.com with the body: unsubscribe exchangelist --- To manage subscriptions click here: http://lyris.sunbelt-software.com/read/my_forums/ or send an email to listmana...@lyris.sunbeltsoftware.commailto:listmana...@lyris.sunbeltsoftware.com with the body: unsubscribe exchangelist --- To manage subscriptions click here: http://lyris.sunbelt-software.com/read/my_forums/ or send an email to listmana...@lyris.sunbeltsoftware.commailto:listmana...@lyris.sunbeltsoftware.com with the body: unsubscribe exchangelist --- To manage subscriptions click here: http://lyris.sunbelt-software.com/read/my_forums/ or send an email to listmana...@lyris.sunbeltsoftware.commailto:listmana...@lyris.sunbeltsoftware.com with the body: unsubscribe exchangelist --- To manage subscriptions click here: http://lyris.sunbelt-software.com/read/my_forums/ or send an email to listmana...@lyris.sunbeltsoftware.commailto:listmana...@lyris.sunbeltsoftware.com with the body: unsubscribe exchangelist --- To manage subscriptions click here: http://lyris.sunbelt-software.com/read/my_forums/ or send an email to listmana...@lyris.sunbeltsoftware.com with the body: unsubscribe exchangelist
RE: licensing sanity check
You are right. They are wrong. http://www.microsoft.com/exchange/en-us/licensing-exchange-server-email.aspx Regards, Michael B. Smith Consultant and Exchange MVP http://TheEssentialExchange.com From: Rick Berry [mailto:rbe...@elevativenetworks.com] Sent: Tuesday, January 10, 2012 12:32 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: licensing sanity check Online Archive in Exchange 2010 requires Enterprise CALs, not Standard, correct? The server itself can be Standard, it's the User/Device CALs that matter ...? Having a disagreement with a licensing rep, think I'm right, want to double check with folks smarter than I here. --- To manage subscriptions click here: http://lyris.sunbelt-software.com/read/my_forums/ or send an email to listmana...@lyris.sunbeltsoftware.commailto:listmana...@lyris.sunbeltsoftware.com with the body: unsubscribe exchangelist --- To manage subscriptions click here: http://lyris.sunbelt-software.com/read/my_forums/ or send an email to listmana...@lyris.sunbeltsoftware.com with the body: unsubscribe exchangelist
Re: licensing sanity check
http://www.microsoft.com/exchange/en-us/licensing-exchange-server-email.aspx Carl Webster Consultant and Citrix Technology Professional http://www.CarlWebster.comhttp://www.carlwebster.com/ From: Rick Berry rbe...@elevativenetworks.commailto:rbe...@elevativenetworks.com Reply-To: Admin Issues exchangelist@lyris.sunbelt-software.commailto:exchangelist@lyris.sunbelt-software.com Date: Tue, 10 Jan 2012 17:32:17 + To: Admin Issues exchangelist@lyris.sunbelt-software.commailto:exchangelist@lyris.sunbelt-software.com Subject: licensing sanity check Online Archive in Exchange 2010 requires “Enterprise” CALs, not “Standard”, correct? The server itself can be Standard, it’s the User/Device CALs that matter …? Having a disagreement with a licensing rep, think I’m right, want to double check with folks smarter than I here. --- To manage subscriptions click here: http://lyris.sunbelt-software.com/read/my_forums/ or send an email to listmana...@lyris.sunbeltsoftware.com with the body: unsubscribe exchangelist
RE: licensing sanity check
Q. Can a customer purchase certain features like Archiving or Unified Messaging separately from the Exchange Enterprise CAL? A. No, these features are only available in the Enterprise CAL or E-CAL Suite. http://www.microsoft.com/exchange/en-us/licensing-faq.aspx Jay Reische Enterprise Exchange Administrator Messaging, AD and DNS team Phone: 309-748-4704 reische...@johndeere.commailto:reische...@johndeere.com From: Rick Berry [mailto:rbe...@elevativenetworks.com] Sent: Tuesday, January 10, 2012 11:32 AM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: licensing sanity check Online Archive in Exchange 2010 requires Enterprise CALs, not Standard, correct? The server itself can be Standard, it's the User/Device CALs that matter ...? Having a disagreement with a licensing rep, think I'm right, want to double check with folks smarter than I here. --- To manage subscriptions click here: http://lyris.sunbelt-software.com/read/my_forums/ or send an email to listmana...@lyris.sunbeltsoftware.commailto:listmana...@lyris.sunbeltsoftware.com with the body: unsubscribe exchangelist --- To manage subscriptions click here: http://lyris.sunbelt-software.com/read/my_forums/ or send an email to listmana...@lyris.sunbeltsoftware.com with the body: unsubscribe exchangelist
PTR Sanity Check and Failover
All - Is it RFC Compliant or looked down upon by Anti-SPAM vendors to assign different IP's to the same host name for PTR records? I'm working on documenting soft failover scenarios when the primary ISP link goes down temporarily and all traffic is routed through a backup ISP link. A separate thought, should the above not be recommended, is to possibly create two CAS servers that are NAT'd to different Public IP's but connected to the same MBX server. I'm curious to see how other folks prepare for this type of scenario. I haven't considered a DAG yet because of the amount of resources in involved. Cheers, Harry. --- To manage subscriptions click here: http://lyris.sunbelt-software.com/read/my_forums/ or send an email to listmana...@lyris.sunbeltsoftware.com with the body: unsubscribe exchangelist
RE: PTR Sanity Check and Failover
PTR should be 1:1 mapping to a host name. Anything else isn’t going to provide reliable results. If you want to use multiple connections, then one option would be to route email out through an ISP neutral service, so it doesn’t matter how it gets there. This is what I do for myself and a few of my clients. Email is routed out through a server that lives in a data centre (which also hosts web sites, monitoring etc). You could also use a third party anti-spam service, one of the mail hop services etc. A DAG has nothing to do with this scenario because it is just protecting the data. You could do something with two servers only, as the DAG can live on the same server as the CAS and Hub Transport roles. While on the subject of a DAG, if you are even considering the option of putting in a DAG at any point in the future, configure a CAS array host name and configuration in the server. This will make the implementation of the DAG much more straight forward. CAS array implementation is much easier if done early than trying to retro fit it when the server has been in production a little while with many users connected. Simon. -- Simon Butler MVP: Exchange, MCSE Sembee Ltd. e: si...@sembee.co.uk w: http://www.sembee.co.uk/ w: http://exchange.sembee.info/ w: http://blog.sembee.co.uk/ Need cheap certificates for Exchange, compatible with the iPhone? http://CertificatesForExchange.com/http://certificatesforexchange.com/ for certificates from just $26.99. Need a domain for your certificate? http://DomainsForExchange.net/http://domainsforexchange.net/ Exchange Resources: http://exbpa.com/ From: Harry Singh [mailto:hbo...@gmail.com] Sent: 12 August 2011 12:52 To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: PTR Sanity Check and Failover All - Is it RFC Compliant or looked down upon by Anti-SPAM vendors to assign different IP's to the same host name for PTR records? I'm working on documenting soft failover scenarios when the primary ISP link goes down temporarily and all traffic is routed through a backup ISP link. A separate thought, should the above not be recommended, is to possibly create two CAS servers that are NAT'd to different Public IP's but connected to the same MBX server. I'm curious to see how other folks prepare for this type of scenario. I haven't considered a DAG yet because of the amount of resources in involved. Cheers, Harry. --- To manage subscriptions click here: http://lyris.sunbelt-software.com/read/my_forums/ or send an email to listmana...@lyris.sunbeltsoftware.commailto:listmana...@lyris.sunbeltsoftware.com with the body: unsubscribe exchangelist --- To manage subscriptions click here: http://lyris.sunbelt-software.com/read/my_forums/ or send an email to listmana...@lyris.sunbeltsoftware.com with the body: unsubscribe exchangelist
Re: PTR Sanity Check and Failover
Thanks for the information Simon. We currently use Postini for inbound mail and will look into routing out via Postini, if there isn't an additional cost. Since I haven't routed out to a service like this, would be like setting up an authenticated smarthost to this service for outbound mail ? The information on the DAG could prove very helpful since we plan to move in that direction within 6 months. Harry On Fri, Aug 12, 2011 at 8:13 AM, Simon Butler si...@sembee.co.uk wrote: PTR should be 1:1 mapping to a host name. Anything else isn’t going to provide reliable results. If you want to use multiple connections, then one option would be to route email out through an ISP neutral service, so it doesn’t matter how it gets there. This is what I do for myself and a few of my clients. Email is routed out through a server that lives in a data centre (which also hosts web sites, monitoring etc). You could also use a third party anti-spam service, one of the mail hop services etc. ** ** A DAG has nothing to do with this scenario because it is just protecting the data. You could do something with two servers only, as the DAG can live on the same server as the CAS and Hub Transport roles. While on the subject of a DAG, if you are even considering the option of putting in a DAG at any point in the future, configure a CAS array host name and configuration in the server. This will make the implementation of the DAG much more straight forward. CAS array implementation is much easier if done early than trying to retro fit it when the server has been in production a little while with many users connected. ** ** Simon. ** ** ** ** -- Simon Butler MVP: Exchange, MCSE Sembee Ltd. e: si...@sembee.co.uk w: http://www.sembee.co.uk/ w: http://exchange.sembee.info/ w: http://blog.sembee.co.uk/ Need cheap certificates for Exchange, compatible with the iPhone? http://CertificatesForExchange.com/ http://certificatesforexchange.com/for certificates from just $26.99. Need a domain for your certificate? http://DomainsForExchange.net/http://domainsforexchange.net/ ** ** Exchange Resources: http://exbpa.com/ ** ** ** ** ** ** *From:* Harry Singh [mailto:hbo...@gmail.com] *Sent:* 12 August 2011 12:52 *To:* MS-Exchange Admin Issues *Subject:* PTR Sanity Check and Failover ** ** All - Is it RFC Compliant or looked down upon by Anti-SPAM vendors to assign different IP's to the same host name for PTR records? I'm working on documenting soft failover scenarios when the primary ISP link goes down temporarily and all traffic is routed through a backup ISP link. A separate thought, should the above not be recommended, is to possibly create two CAS servers that are NAT'd to different Public IP's but connected to the same MBX server. I'm curious to see how other folks prepare for this type of scenario. I haven't considered a DAG yet because of the amount of resources in involved. Cheers, Harry. --- To manage subscriptions click here: http://lyris.sunbelt-software.com/read/my_forums/ or send an email to listmana...@lyris.sunbeltsoftware.com with the body: unsubscribe exchangelist --- To manage subscriptions click here: http://lyris.sunbelt-software.com/read/my_forums/ or send an email to listmana...@lyris.sunbeltsoftware.com with the body: unsubscribe exchangelist --- To manage subscriptions click here: http://lyris.sunbelt-software.com/read/my_forums/ or send an email to listmana...@lyris.sunbeltsoftware.com with the body: unsubscribe exchangelist
RE: PTR Sanity Check and Failover
If you are a Postini user then it is a simple decision. Route email out through them. Setup the Send Connector to use a smart host and then enter the details that they want (I can’t remember whether it is done by authentication, IP address or both). Most anti-spam providers prefer that solution as it allows them to “learn” about your email. Simon. From: Harry Singh [mailto:hbo...@gmail.com] Sent: 12 August 2011 13:21 To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: Re: PTR Sanity Check and Failover Thanks for the information Simon. We currently use Postini for inbound mail and will look into routing out via Postini, if there isn't an additional cost. Since I haven't routed out to a service like this, would be like setting up an authenticated smarthost to this service for outbound mail ? The information on the DAG could prove very helpful since we plan to move in that direction within 6 months. Harry On Fri, Aug 12, 2011 at 8:13 AM, Simon Butler si...@sembee.co.ukmailto:si...@sembee.co.uk wrote: PTR should be 1:1 mapping to a host name. Anything else isn’t going to provide reliable results. If you want to use multiple connections, then one option would be to route email out through an ISP neutral service, so it doesn’t matter how it gets there. This is what I do for myself and a few of my clients. Email is routed out through a server that lives in a data centre (which also hosts web sites, monitoring etc). You could also use a third party anti-spam service, one of the mail hop services etc. A DAG has nothing to do with this scenario because it is just protecting the data. You could do something with two servers only, as the DAG can live on the same server as the CAS and Hub Transport roles. While on the subject of a DAG, if you are even considering the option of putting in a DAG at any point in the future, configure a CAS array host name and configuration in the server. This will make the implementation of the DAG much more straight forward. CAS array implementation is much easier if done early than trying to retro fit it when the server has been in production a little while with many users connected. Simon. -- Simon Butler MVP: Exchange, MCSE Sembee Ltd. e: si...@sembee.co.ukmailto:si...@sembee.co.uk w: http://www.sembee.co.uk/ w: http://exchange.sembee.info/ w: http://blog.sembee.co.uk/ Need cheap certificates for Exchange, compatible with the iPhone? http://CertificatesForExchange.com/http://certificatesforexchange.com/ for certificates from just $26.99. Need a domain for your certificate? http://DomainsForExchange.net/http://domainsforexchange.net/ Exchange Resources: http://exbpa.com/ From: Harry Singh [mailto:hbo...@gmail.commailto:hbo...@gmail.com] Sent: 12 August 2011 12:52 To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: PTR Sanity Check and Failover All - Is it RFC Compliant or looked down upon by Anti-SPAM vendors to assign different IP's to the same host name for PTR records? I'm working on documenting soft failover scenarios when the primary ISP link goes down temporarily and all traffic is routed through a backup ISP link. A separate thought, should the above not be recommended, is to possibly create two CAS servers that are NAT'd to different Public IP's but connected to the same MBX server. I'm curious to see how other folks prepare for this type of scenario. I haven't considered a DAG yet because of the amount of resources in involved. Cheers, Harry. --- To manage subscriptions click here: http://lyris.sunbelt-software.com/read/my_forums/ or send an email to listmana...@lyris.sunbeltsoftware.commailto:listmana...@lyris.sunbeltsoftware.com with the body: unsubscribe exchangelist --- To manage subscriptions click here: http://lyris.sunbelt-software.com/read/my_forums/ or send an email to listmana...@lyris.sunbeltsoftware.commailto:listmana...@lyris.sunbeltsoftware.com with the body: unsubscribe exchangelist --- To manage subscriptions click here: http://lyris.sunbelt-software.com/read/my_forums/ or send an email to listmana...@lyris.sunbeltsoftware.commailto:listmana...@lyris.sunbeltsoftware.com with the body: unsubscribe exchangelist --- To manage subscriptions click here: http://lyris.sunbelt-software.com/read/my_forums/ or send an email to listmana...@lyris.sunbeltsoftware.com with the body: unsubscribe exchangelist
partial DAG restore, two of four dbs, sanity check
Had a spate of drive failures across a three-server DAG last week (poweredge t710 firmware took out four drives across three machines inside of 24 hour period). I'm back up and running/healed ... but on one of the three, they'd like to take the opportunity to test their Backup Exec 2010 restore abilities. I had already reseeded two of four dbs before this came up, they'd like to drop the other two back in from restores and then re-enable replication. Does it work that way? If I drop two DBs back onto that file system (current replication suspended on those two to this particular target), will re-enabling replication at that point just fill in the delta between the two points in time magically? Or is that my own wishful thinking? Already know that I have a short bit of work to just do a simple reseed of these two and I'm good to go, but they'd like to try the restore as a test. Symantec is suggesting that we need to tear that machine out of the DAG completely, restore whole thing and then re-enable, but I think they're possibly wrong. Not sure what the diff would be between restoring two and re-replicating and restore four dbs/entire machine. I lack insight/skill in knowing that exchange 2010 replication will magically fill in that delta (of about a week's email data) on that restored DB file structure. I believed that it would 'just work', but am hesistant. --- To manage subscriptions click here: http://lyris.sunbelt-software.com/read/my_forums/ or send an email to listmana...@lyris.sunbeltsoftware.com with the body: unsubscribe exchangelist
RE: partial DAG restore, two of four dbs, sanity check
Google for dag offline seed Regards, Michael B. Smith Consultant and Exchange MVP http://TheEssentialExchange.com -Original Message- From: Rick Berry [mailto:rbe...@elevativenetworks.com] Sent: Tuesday, January 18, 2011 3:56 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: partial DAG restore, two of four dbs, sanity check Had a spate of drive failures across a three-server DAG last week (poweredge t710 firmware took out four drives across three machines inside of 24 hour period). I'm back up and running/healed ... but on one of the three, they'd like to take the opportunity to test their Backup Exec 2010 restore abilities. I had already reseeded two of four dbs before this came up, they'd like to drop the other two back in from restores and then re-enable replication. Does it work that way? If I drop two DBs back onto that file system (current replication suspended on those two to this particular target), will re-enabling replication at that point just fill in the delta between the two points in time magically? Or is that my own wishful thinking? Already know that I have a short bit of work to just do a simple reseed of these two and I'm good to go, but they'd like to try the restore as a test. Symantec is suggesting that we need to tear that machine out of the DAG completely, restore whole thing and then re-enable, but I think they're possibly wrong. Not sure what the diff would be between restoring two and re-replicating and restore four dbs/entire machine. I lack insight/skill in knowing that exchange 2010 replication will magically fill in that delta (of about a week's email data) on that restored DB file structure. I believed that it would 'just work', but am hesistant. --- To manage subscriptions click here: http://lyris.sunbelt-software.com/read/my_forums/ or send an email to listmana...@lyris.sunbeltsoftware.com with the body: unsubscribe exchangelist --- To manage subscriptions click here: http://lyris.sunbelt-software.com/read/my_forums/ or send an email to listmana...@lyris.sunbeltsoftware.com with the body: unsubscribe exchangelist
Disk upgrade plan - sanity check, plus another bonus question
All, Win2k3 R2 SP2, patched, E2k3 SP2 patched. C: - RIAD1 73gb OS only E: - RAID1 73gb Exchange Logs only F: - RAID1 300gb Exchange databases only All SAS 10k drives in a Dell 2950 with 3gb RAM E: and F: are filling up. I've purchased two 600gb SAS 15k drives from Dell and plan the following: o- Stop and set to manual the Exchange services. o- Copy the logs from E: to F: o- Change the the drive letter from F: to E: o- Remove the drives for E: from their trays and replace them with the 600gb drives, and label the new RAID1 drive as F: o- Move the databases from E: to F:, then start the Exchange services, go home and have a glass of wine. Am I missing anything? I want to make sure I don't have to make any registry adjustments for the disk change, or something silly like that. Also, separate but slightly related question: Currently, all of the mailboxes are in a single database, including the Message Journaling mailbox. I plan to break this out into at least three separate databases: 1 for Message Journaling, and two or more for individual's mailboxes. All three of the company's servers (AU, UK and US) journal to the US server. Question: Once I put the MJ mailbox in its own database, will I have to fiddle with things in ESM, or will all of the servers pick up the change? Thanks, Kurt
Re: Disk upgrade plan - sanity check, plus another bonus question
It's been awhile since I've had to do this, but isn't there a process for replacing each drive in the mirror one at a time, extend the Virtual Disk, and then use DiskPart to extend the volume in Windows? I guess I would also question why the mirror holding your logs is filling up? Are you running routine backups? It appears the process you outlined should work. I don't believe there are any changes required when you move the journaling mailbox. - Sean On Mon, Aug 2, 2010 at 9:22 AM, Kurt Buff kurt.b...@gmail.com wrote: All, Win2k3 R2 SP2, patched, E2k3 SP2 patched. C: - RIAD1 73gb OS only E: - RAID1 73gb Exchange Logs only F: - RAID1 300gb Exchange databases only All SAS 10k drives in a Dell 2950 with 3gb RAM E: and F: are filling up. I've purchased two 600gb SAS 15k drives from Dell and plan the following: o- Stop and set to manual the Exchange services. o- Copy the logs from E: to F: o- Change the the drive letter from F: to E: o- Remove the drives for E: from their trays and replace them with the 600gb drives, and label the new RAID1 drive as F: o- Move the databases from E: to F:, then start the Exchange services, go home and have a glass of wine. Am I missing anything? I want to make sure I don't have to make any registry adjustments for the disk change, or something silly like that. Also, separate but slightly related question: Currently, all of the mailboxes are in a single database, including the Message Journaling mailbox. I plan to break this out into at least three separate databases: 1 for Message Journaling, and two or more for individual's mailboxes. All three of the company's servers (AU, UK and US) journal to the US server. Question: Once I put the MJ mailbox in its own database, will I have to fiddle with things in ESM, or will all of the servers pick up the change? Thanks, Kurt
Re: Disk upgrade plan - sanity check, plus another bonus question
On Mon, Aug 2, 2010 at 11:46, Sean Martin seanmarti...@gmail.com wrote: It's been awhile since I've had to do this, but isn't there a process for replacing each drive in the mirror one at a time, extend the Virtual Disk, and then use DiskPart to extend the volume in Windows? I guess I would also question why the mirror holding your logs is filling up? Are you running routine backups? There is, but I think it makes sense to replace the log drives, and they are only 73gb. There is one .stm file on there, and it's growing, albeit slowly, and it surely won't hurt to have that drive larger. Doing it this way reduces the number of physical drive swaps necessary. It appears the process you outlined should work. That settle my mind a bit. I don't believe there are any changes required when you move the journaling mailbox. Even better. Thanks for that. Kurt - Sean On Mon, Aug 2, 2010 at 9:22 AM, Kurt Buff kurt.b...@gmail.com wrote: All, Win2k3 R2 SP2, patched, E2k3 SP2 patched. C: - RIAD1 73gb OS only E: - RAID1 73gb Exchange Logs only F: - RAID1 300gb Exchange databases only All SAS 10k drives in a Dell 2950 with 3gb RAM E: and F: are filling up. I've purchased two 600gb SAS 15k drives from Dell and plan the following: o- Stop and set to manual the Exchange services. o- Copy the logs from E: to F: o- Change the the drive letter from F: to E: o- Remove the drives for E: from their trays and replace them with the 600gb drives, and label the new RAID1 drive as F: o- Move the databases from E: to F:, then start the Exchange services, go home and have a glass of wine. Am I missing anything? I want to make sure I don't have to make any registry adjustments for the disk change, or something silly like that. Also, separate but slightly related question: Currently, all of the mailboxes are in a single database, including the Message Journaling mailbox. I plan to break this out into at least three separate databases: 1 for Message Journaling, and two or more for individual's mailboxes. All three of the company's servers (AU, UK and US) journal to the US server. Question: Once I put the MJ mailbox in its own database, will I have to fiddle with things in ESM, or will all of the servers pick up the change? Thanks, Kurt
Exch. 2007 OOF sanity check.
I am not sure why I have gotten myself so confused on the Exchange 2007 out of office settings, but I have. Two Mailbox servers, and one doing Client Access and Hub all with SP1. No edge server. I want to allow internal OOF's but not external OOF's Under Organization Configuration/Hub Transport. I hit the Remote Domains tab and change the default domain to 'Allow None'. Correct? However, all the examples I have googled have shown a remote domain entry on the hub transport for the local domain. So I first need to put one in for that (I currently don't have one) so that I can allow internal OOF's? It is a access control rule list so to speak...it checks from the bottom up until it hits a rule that applies? Just making sure. Everything is working great and I would like to keep it that way. ~ Ninja Email Security with Cloudmark Spam Engine Gets Image Spam ~ ~ http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Ninja~
