RE: [ActiveDir] Little OT: AD, LDAP, Exchange

Title: Message Mailbox Nickname is the Exchange export title for the alias field.  The LDAP name for it is uid.  Here’s a good source for Exchange 5.5 ADSI/LDAP info. http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/default.asp?url=""> Rich   From: Mulnick, Al [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent

[ActiveDir] LDAP populate AD with Exchange 5.5 info

Title: [ActiveDir] LDAP populate AD with Exchange 5.5 info Does anyone have any experience pulling Exchange 5.5 data to populate AD with?  When you upgrade an NT4 domain you end up with almost no info on your AD accounts, but typically all that info exists in the Exchange 5.5 directory (have h

RE: [ActiveDir] LDAP populate AD with Exchange 5.5 info

Title: Message I just finished a migration from NT4 to W3K AD. We had a tremendous amount of info in our exchange directory that we wanted in AD. I used the exchange 2003 ADC to populate the AD with the info from exchange once the accounts were built. It worked almost flawlessly. The only gli

RE: [ActiveDir] LDAP populate AD with Exchange 5.5 info

Title: Message I'd do a 2 for 1 deal and use the Ex2k3 ADC for it. Its a lot more stable and a lot harder to screw up.     -- Roger D. Seielstad - MTS MCSE MS-MVP Sr. Systems Administrator Inovis Inc. -Original Message---

[ActiveDir] E2k3 before upgrading to W2k3

I heard that it is a best practice to move to Exchange 2003 before moving to Windows Server 2003 AD…  Anyone know what the reasoning is behind this?   Joe Pelle Systems Analyst Information Technology Valassis / IT 19975 Victor Parkway Livonia, MI 48152 Tel 734.591.7324  Fax 734.632

[ActiveDir] Desktop Refresh

Title: [ActiveDir] LDAP populate AD with Exchange 5.5 info Strange behavior... We found out that on a W2003 server with a GPO set that logon must run synchroniusly and using a VBS script as logon script on a WIN2000 SP4 workstation the desktop no longer rehreshes by himself, but only after ri

RE: [ActiveDir] E2k3 before upgrading to W2k3

Is you e2k box on w2k?  e2k is not supported running on w2k3.  one possible reason…   Murray Wall, MCSE, B.Ed CCNA/DA Master ASE [EMAIL PROTECTED]   -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Pelle, Joe Sent: Tuesday, November 11, 2003

RE: [ActiveDir] LDAP populate AD with Exchange 5.5 info

Title: Message Charlie,    We also use Fastlane – what were some of the issues you had with their exchange migration piece?   You can contact me via email off list if you would like.   Thanks!   Joe Pelle Systems Analyst Information Technology Valassis / IT 19975 Victor Par

RE: [ActiveDir] E2k3 before upgrading to W2k3

Well, it's certainly a best practice to upgrade to Exchange Server 2003 before you upgrade the server that Exchange runs on to Windows Server 2003. Exchange 2000 is not supported on Windows Server 2003.   As for the rest -- where did you see it documented? From: Pelle, Joe [mailto:[EMAIL P

RE: [ActiveDir] E2k3 before upgrading to W2k3

There are features of Exchange 2003 that are not available unless you are running W2K3.  For example the ability to use snapshot backups.   Dennis From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Pelle, JoeSent: Tuesday, November 11, 2003 10:33 AMTo: [EMAIL PROTECTED]Subject

RE: [ActiveDir] LDAP populate AD with Exchange 5.5 info

Title: Message The migrator console was giving a "catastrophic failure" pop-up when we'd try to connect to the exchange server. We're working through it with Quest tech support now and I expect resolution soon, but I needed something quick on the directory population. It's always fun when you

RE: [ActiveDir] LDAP populate AD with Exchange 5.5 info

Title: Message So you beat our previous project of Zero-to-AD in 45 Days???   Yeah - but you only have one site now, don't you?   -- Roger D. Seielstad - MTS MCSE MS-MVP Sr. Systems Administrator Inovis Inc. -Original Mes

RE: [ActiveDir] E2k3 before upgrading to W2k3

Joe   I can't think of any reason why this would be the case.   There are some advantages to having Windows Server 2003 AD in place before you move to E2K3:   - Link valued replication (improved handling of multi-valued attributes) - Faster intra-site replication (although you can also adjus

RE: [ActiveDir] LDAP populate AD with Exchange 5.5 info

Title: Message The rest of the story is the 3 weeks was cut to 2. :-) Yeah, made the PRGN-Inovis one look slow, but you're right. It's a LOT easier with only one site to deal with. Architecture was a snap and no travel required...   **Charlie KaiserMCSE, CCNASystems Engin

[ActiveDir] OT Exchange 2000 Public Folders Migrated from Ex55

We have moved all the mailboxes and public folders to the new Exchange 2000 server. When we removed the 5.5 server from the site, and turned him off.   We have 2 mail enabled public folders that wont accept mail anymore. Permissions show default is editor, I cannot find anything on MS sit

[ActiveDir] Renaming a Domain

Hi all, I have a question. According to MS: * Domain rename operation is not supported in an Active Directory forest that has Exchange 2000 deployed in it. The domain rename tool will detect this fact and refuse to proceed. I am pondering a domain rename for a child domain in a f

Re: [ActiveDir] Renaming a Domain

You can rename a domain in Windows 2003 - it is messy but can be done. - Original Message - From: "Stuart, Cory G." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Tuesday, November 11, 2003 03:58 Subject: [ActiveDir] Renaming a Domain Hi all, I have a question. According to MS: *

RE: [ActiveDir] Renaming a Domain

Unless you are willing to pay for professional support from MS PSS (BEFORE you begin the exercise) or a consultant who has ACTUALLY done this successfully present in the same room with you, I strongly suggest that you forget that you ever heard the words "Domain Rename". If you don't, your Exchange

RE: [ActiveDir] Renaming a Domain

You know, that one of the many things I like about you Dèjì, you're a realist :-) Thanks, Raymond McClinnis _ From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, November 11, 2003 10:38 PM To: [EMAIL PRO