A + has no business in an SMTP address. Exchange 200x should not even let
you create that.
William
- Original Message -
From: Douglas, Josh D. [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, July 02, 2003 12:48 PM
Subject: Exchange 2000 invalid characters
]
Sent: Wednesday, July 02, 2003 12:55 PM
Subject: RE: Exchange 2000 invalid characters
we just put a plus in our dl's so that they are up at the top of the list.
I
guess you would recommend changing that to something else.
-Original Message-
From: William Lefkovics [mailto:[EMAIL
: Clustering... is it worth it?
only 16,000 users? on an 8-node cluster?
-Original Message-
From: William Lefkovics [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, June 27, 2003 8:11 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: Re: Clustering... is it worth it?
But do consider revisiting this with 2003
. Never mind :)
-Original Message-
From: Erik Sojka [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, June 30, 2003 08:42
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Clustering... is it worth it?
you two kiss and make up now.
-Original Message-
From: William Lefkovics [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED
You would use an SMTP Transport Event Sink
Here are a couple of articles to point you to:
http://support.microsoft.com/?kbid=317680
http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;EN-US;317327
Head to MSDN and check out the SMTP transport event sink stuff and go to the
Exchange section and
Versions?
Is the trusted domain with Exchange a resource domain with no users?
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, June 27, 2003 1:05 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: Change Password in Outlook doesn't
Sure.
MSDN has samples of how to do that in the language of your choice:
http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/default.asp?url=/library/en-us/wss/wss/_ex
ch2k_creating_folders.asp
William
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Presley, Steven
Sent:
I think there is a component of 'knowing your audience'.
There may be companies or situations where such a deployment might work or
be worth it. I don't think it fits the average business though.
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Dan
Oh well.
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Ben Winzenz
Sent: Thursday, June 26, 2003 12:01 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Not Open Relay, but...
boggle
You tested someone else's domain at abuse.net without permission? You do
But do consider revisiting this with 2003.
With Microsoft running 16,000 users on an 8-node cluster now.
Windows2003 and Exchange2003 of course.
- Original Message -
From: Martin Blackstone [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, June 27, 2003 5:04 PM
in a
heartbeat. We haven't had any issues - except for a corrupted db which we
attributed to the SAN.
2003 promisses to make clustering better, but we haven't tested that yet.
-Original Message-
From: William Lefkovics [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Fri 6/27/2003 7:10 PM
To: Exchange
that, concur.
-Original Message-
From: William Lefkovics [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, June 27, 2003 9:21 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: Re: Clustering... is it worth it?
Definitely Active/Passive.
The 8-node cluster I mentioned it 5-1 with 2 for snap back up to stream to
tape
, for backups, etc.
Equals 7.
I never claimed 8. I'm perfectly capable of basic math. 8, to my
recollection, notes, and thoughts of the PPT, is wrong.,
-Original Message-
From: William Lefkovics [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Saturday, June 28, 2003 12:58 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject
I used to live just up the street from April Hunter.
- Original Message -
From: Ed Crowley [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, June 23, 2003 1:23 PM
Subject: RE: Monitor Email content
I once flew on the same plane as Michael Tucker.
Ed Crowley
Let it ride.
- Original Message -
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, June 19, 2003 5:34 PM
Subject: RE: HELP EseUtil still going.
I didn't have enough on the Exchange server so I used the /t option and
put
the temp file on a server with
Patience is one of the tools I would include in the Exchange Administrator's
toolkit.
More so with Exchange200x.
- Original Message -
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, June 19, 2003 6:10 PM
Subject: RE: HELP EseUtil still going.
ITS
Of course it's possible. Build the server and do a restore to it. But do
you want to work that hard?
Why the same name? Let's look at that.
Consider using a different name, but join the same site, org. Then move the
mailboxes at your leisure... perhaps via terminal services session from the
I probably should reread this, but this was my answer to this question
A year ago - plus an added point.
Why not to do Brick Level Backups:
1) They take a lng time. At my last position, the priv.edb on
several Exchange servers was huge with several mailboxes exceeding
2GB. Backup windows
Greenwich Mean Time?
- Original Message -
From: Matt Plahtinsky [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, June 18, 2003 11:33 AM
Subject: IIS log Files with wrong date??
W2K Sp3, E2K Sp3 -- only one exchange server.
I setup OWA and im trying to
I'm recycling Scharffisms in celebration of his MVPness.
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Missy Koslosky
Sent: Sunday, June 15, 2003 8:31 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
2000? hmmm...
- Original Message -
From: William Lefkovics
Spam-by-proxy is still spam.
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Erik Sojka
Sent: Friday, June 13, 2003 9:18 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Importance: High
Forwarded to the list at Stu's request:
-Original
2 weeks is a long time. I prefer to release my vowels daily.
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Roger Seielstad
Sent: Friday, June 13, 2003 4:22 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Make sure Mr. Sojka sends a cashier's check, not a personal
Thank you Andy.
Sometimes with the numbers, I have to read it twice to make sure of what an
email says 2000 on 2003 in 2003? 2003 on 2000 in 2000? etc, but the
supported installation matrix in that document says it all.
That reference should be the answer to all these questions about
To: Exchange Discussions
There are so many 2003's out there now, it makes your head spin!
- Original Message -
From: William Lefkovics [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, June 13, 2003 1:52 PM
Subject: Re: Exchange 2003 in a 2000 Server forest
Thank
They skip 13.
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of John Etie
Sent: Thursday, June 12, 2003 8:11 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
That's one long outlook.
-Original Message-
From: William Lefkovics [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday
They may want the talent, not the product.
- Original Message -
From: Chris H [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, June 11, 2003 3:50 PM
Subject: OT: Another MS move
totally unrelated but MS just bought RAV anti virus . . .
Any predicitions on
Exchange 2000 RTM.
- Original Message -
From: Steve Molkentin [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, June 11, 2003 3:53 PM
Subject: RE: MS Purchase
Ex2K3 sp1
;)
themolk.
-Original Message-
From: Chris H [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
What are the odds?
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Andy David
Sent: Monday, June 09, 2003 7:29 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Best practices recommend otherwise:
http://www.microsoft.com/technet/treeview/default.asp?url=/technet/prodtechn
Exchange2003 RC1 has proven to be more stable at Microsoft that
Exchange2000 sp3
From a session at TechEd.
All but 1 server at Microsoft have been migrated to Exchange2003. That's
almost 80,000 mailboxes.
William
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Specialist
913-339-6700 x194
-Original Message-
From: William Lefkovics [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, June 09, 2003 10:31 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Why would I want to go to Exchange 2003/Outlook 2003
Exchange2003 RC1 has proven to be more stable at Microsoft
One and the same.
Outlook10 = Outlook2002.
Outlook9=Outlook2000
Outlook12=Outlook2006
- Original Message -
From: Pham, Tuan [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, June 09, 2003 11:15 AM
Subject: Outlook 11
Sorry I have to ask, what is Outlook 11?
U R the I in IT.
- Original Message -
From: Martin Tuip [MVP] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, June 09, 2003 12:01 PM
Subject: Re: EDB Size ?
I'll give you the I from Insurance guy.
** Please prefix your subject header with BETA for posts
Ya, it felt great.
- Original Message -
From: Woodruff, Michael [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, June 04, 2003 5:21 AM
Subject: RE: TechEd
Any news on the release yet?
-Original Message-
From: William Lefkovics [TX] [mailto:[EMAIL
Indeed.
I have dozens of Exchange books. Literally.
If I compare, say, Barry Gerber's Mastering Exchange 5.5 (Sybex) with Paul
Robichaux's book, I get more info in fewer pages in Paul's and the text is
readable. Maybe it's an author-reader compatability thing. I find the
style suitable. No
Approaching 110,000,000 exchange seats out there
That's a lot of people not in their right minds.
Me, I'm left-handed, so I'm an exception.
William
- Original Message -
From: Bridges, Samantha [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, June 04,
and of course
http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
- Original Message -
From: William Lefkovics [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, June 04, 2003 9:46 AM
Subject: Re: Suggested reading for Exchange 5.5?
Indeed.
I have dozens
Thank you, Mr Active Directory MVP.
- Original Message -
From: Roger Seielstad [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, June 04, 2003 9:57 AM
Subject: RE: Suggested reading for Exchange 5.5?
Actually, with the exception of this week, in which most
It works absolutely fine at 7:00am.
- Original Message -
From: Stephen Mynhier [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, June 04, 2003 1:10 PM
Subject: RE: TechEd
No, it's wired, but definitely not a shining example of performance gains
with
http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;en-us;257679 ?
Where are you by the way?
- Original Message -
From: Chris H [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, June 04, 2003 1:41 PM
Subject: Re: TechEd
Anyone care to lend help to a
I would say with a third party application.
- Original Message -
From: Diop [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, June 04, 2003 8:27 AM
Subject: Message filtering
I´m runnning Exchange 5.5
How to prevent all uusers in specific domain from
with the exact event id messages, but the
resoution doesnt apply.
They either say Exchange 2000 or one said DNS is in error, which it is not,
etc.
Where are you?
Chris
- Original Message -
From: William Lefkovics [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, June 04
These are in the same site.
They can ping each other (was that by FQDN?) and have RPC communication
confirmed.
- Original Message -
From: Stephen Mynhier [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, June 04, 2003 2:40 PM
Subject: RE: TechEd
I just
.
-Original Message-
From: William Lefkovics [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Posted At: Wednesday, June 04, 2003 5:37 PM
Posted To: Exchange Discussion List
Conversation: TechEd
Subject: Re: TechEd
These are in the same site.
They can ping each other (was that by FQDN?) and have RPC communication
And do not represent a method of server recovery, so it is a duplicate
process.
I never back up mailboxes individually.
http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq_appxb.htm
- Original Message -
From: Carmila Fresco [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent:
3. Mount database store and use the eseutil tool to create the pst
Eseutil does not create .pst files.
When you get your backup restored to your recovery server (which you ought
to keep around to test restores regularly), you can extract a mailbox with
'ExMerge' to .pst.
-Original
Is it configured to use a firewall in the global settings?
Exchange 2000 Exchange System Manager
Global Settings
Right-click Instant Messaging Settings, and then open the properties
Click the Firewall Topology tab
Unselect the option, This network is protected by a firewall
Using NAT or a proxy?
I'm asleep at the back of several of the Exchange specific presentations.
Except for the one Andy Webb did.
- Original Message -
From: Mynhier, Stephen - contractor [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, June 02, 2003 1:10 PM
Subject: TechEd
Who
No, he's quite heavy.
- Original Message -
From: Martin Tuip [MVP] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, May 28, 2003 10:59 AM
Subject: Re: [Exchange2000] FW: TechEd Attendees - Invitation to Undergrou
nd MEC ED List Event
Miller Light ?
**
If you can't trust your admin, get one you can trust.
- Original Message -
From: Orin Rehorst [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, April 03, 2003 2:28 PM
Subject: High Security for Exchange
Anyone familiar with measures and procedures or
Or are you looking for an email encryption solution?
- Original Message -
From: William Lefkovics [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, April 03, 2003 2:55 PM
Subject: Re: High Security for Exchange
If you can't trust your admin, get one you can
-
From: William Lefkovics [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, April 03, 2003 4:56 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: Re: High Security for Exchange
If you can't trust your admin, get one you can trust.
- Original Message -
From: Orin Rehorst [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange
All these solutions still require an element of trust in an administrator.
- Original Message -
From: Chris Scharff [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, April 03, 2003 3:47 PM
Subject: Re: High Security for Exchange
Start with the NSA
: Thursday, April 03, 2003 4:53 PM
Subject: Re: High Security for Exchange
A decentralized PGP implementation (a generally bad idea... and imperfect
at
best ) doesn't particularly does it?
On 4/3/03 18:36, William Lefkovics [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
All these solutions still require an element
which requires the highest
levels of security should be administered by admins who have the requisite
clearance levels and who are kept in cages during their off hours.
On 4/3/03 18:57, William Lefkovics [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Particularly? No.
Are you requiring inbound email
And you should include your name so people know who the heck they are
talking to.
William
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Public Folder:
Exchange
Sent: Thursday, April 03, 2003 5:55 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
You need to include
Application/System event log say anything?
- Original Message -
From: Benjamin, Bernie [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, April 02, 2003 4:38 PM
Subject: NT Backup is stopped by the information store
Exchange 5.5 Sp3 on NT 4 Sp 5
Exchange
+Internet MVP
Freelance E-Mail Philosopher
Protecting the world from PSTs and Bricked Backups!T
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of William Lefkovics
Sent: Friday, March 28, 2003 10:29 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: Re: Impromptu Poll
Does
.
Ed Crowley MCSE+Internet MVP
Freelance E-Mail Philosopher
Protecting the world from PSTs and Bricked Backups!T
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of William
Lefkovics
Sent: Tuesday, April 01, 2003 1:12 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Does a bigger house take more energy and effort to clean?
If you eat at the buffet are you more likely to get backed up and more
difficult to restore versus a French restaurant?
The chances of corruption exist regardless of database size, but certainly
the larger you allow the database to grow,
Sure, it is good. It's imperfect like all the rest, but certainly can be a
good choice for some companies.
Unfortunately McAfee acquired Deersoft in January, so the Exchange
integrated version is sure to be doomed to mediocrity.
http://www.mcafeeb2b.com/other/jump/deersoft.asp
I am curious Jay, why is a drive letter change discomforting?
William
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Jay Kulsh
Sent: Monday, March 24, 2003 2:30 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Thanks for replying. I am planning to do a full backup as
Your question was very general and you can't expect any specific answers
outside of 'grab the whitepapers and read!'
As I answered elsewhere, you are in a great position to learn, plan and take
charge of this future project.
William
- Original Message -
From: Mitchell Mike [EMAIL
I've called mine lots of names. ;o)
- Original Message -
From: Neil Hobson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, March 24, 2003 6:59 AM
Subject: RE: Renaming E2K server
I did just reply on the MS newsgroups on this, but I'll reply here as
well.
For only 3 people, you can use Outlook to esport to .pst if you're
concerned.
ExMerge will do this while the computer is online. The help file that comes
with is very thorough.
The .pst files are going to take up more room than what that content
occupied in the Exchange database.
William
LOL!
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Nunez, Danny
Sent: Saturday, March 22, 2003 3:36 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
No, it's The Fabulous Bud-E-Luv. Check him out at:
www.budeluv.com/
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL
The total amount of server-side rules must fall under 32k to fit in an RPC
packet.
Consolidate.
Be selective with which rules need to run server-side (you can still add
client-side rules)
William
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Miller,
I use Lingo.
- Original Message -
From: The Geek Q [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, March 19, 2003 12:26 PM
Subject: RE: JScript
How so . . . Exchange admins that don't use scripts to automate procedures
in there environment.
I find that
Yes it does.
William
- Original Message -
From: Edwards, Aaron [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, March 17, 2003 3:44 PM
Subject: WebDAV Exploit
Hi,
Does anyone know if this reg hack in Q241520 requires a reboot? The article
doesn't really say.
should have worded that better. A reboot of the entire server or
just the IIS services?
Aaron
-Original Message-
From: William Lefkovics [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, March 17, 2003 4:21 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: Re: WebDAV Exploit
Yes it does.
William
--
From: William Lefkovics [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Mon, 17 Mar 2003 16:40:10 -0800
Good point. I rebooted, but it is quite likely an IIS restart would
suffice. Sorry, I have nothing firmer.
- Original Message -
From: Edwards
Postfix, baby!
- Original Message -
From: Jim Helfer [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, March 12, 2003 12:14 PM
Subject: RE: SPAM blockin software recommendations.
How hard is it to set up Sendmail ? I had a hard enough time figuring
The Real Time Communication product will be an addon to Windows2003.
- Original Message -
From: Brian Ko [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, March 07, 2003 9:59 AM
Subject: Codename - Greenwich
I think Microsoft's new IM requires Windows 2003,
Yes, sir.
- Original Message -
From: Warren Cundy [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, March 07, 2003 11:00 AM
Subject: ForestPrep
I have two domains in the same forest abc.com, def.com. I have Ex5.5
installed on abc.com, I want to install an
No. (MAPI didn't change) Still a single RPC packet.
- Original Message -
From: Ryan Finnesey [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, March 07, 2003 3:08 PM
Subject: RE: Looking for way to many manage multiple email accounts under
one account...
Is
Doesn't Andy like it when you open your mouth and blow it?
- Original Message -
From: Martin Blackstone [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, February 28, 2003 2:51 PM
Subject: RE: admpack.exe and Exchange 5.5
OK. I was wondering the same thing but
When you install Exchange2000 joining an Exchange5.5 site, there is a lot of
prep work that would eliminate most of your questions. You don't even
mention 'Active Directory Connector'. There is a lot more to know before
effectively answering your question as asked.
I recommend starting here:
are
no where to be found.
That is why I think I have a real issue.
From: William Lefkovics [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: 5.5/2K co-existance
Date: Wed, 26 Feb 2003 10:49:45 -0800
When you install
Frequent false positives (from items like transaction logs) and
potential corruption of data.
W
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of David Lloyd
Sent: Friday, February 21, 2003 2:57 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Can i ask u all why its not
Excellent.
I don't eTrust them as far as I can eThrow them.
Sophos and Panda are underrated, too.
W
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Stephens, Tara
Sent: Thursday, February 20, 2003 8:36 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
I'm sure it's a
That is my preferred method.
With Exchange5.5, OWA connects to Exchange using MAPI. MAPI by proxy if
you will. Putting the OWA server internal only requires opening port
443 for HTTP-SSL through to the OWA server.
W
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL
The 32k limit is a MAPI limitation. The server-side rules must fit in a
single RPC packet. This limitation is not changing anytime soon.
William
- Original Message -
From: Anthony Roark [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, February 11, 2003 7:24
There are client-side and server-side rules. Server-side rules, though
created with the client, activate on the server without the client open.
http://www.slipstick.com/rules/serverbased.htm
As for other options for auto replies...
http://www.slipstick.com/addins/auto.htm
William
Hmm... 'screen shots of a gal' gets by spam filters
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Mark Rotman
Sent: Tuesday, February 04, 2003 2:39 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Try messageware for the Plus Pack 5.5
http://www.messageware.net
Is it not a best practice to 'shut off' any network entry/access point
that you aren't explicitly using?
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Andrey
Fyodorov
Sent: Wednesday, February 05, 2003 12:10 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
If he
*SCHWING*
No... it is for real-time restores to the production server.
To me this makes OWA improvements total fluff.
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Scoles, Damian
Sent: Wednesday, February 05, 2003 2:10 PM
To: Exchange
No.
If Retained Delted Items does not help, then restore the database to
your recovery server and pull the needed data from there.
William
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Sanjeev Sharma
Sent: Monday, January 27, 2003 4:33 PM
To:
Kinda like Exchange2000 pre-sp1. ;o)
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of prontomail
Sent: Thursday, January 30, 2003 10:15 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
GC!. That's THE keyword. GC. It depends heavily on ONE GC. It does NOT
know
how to
Just like Vegas girls!
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Ed Crowley
Sent: Thursday, January 30, 2003 10:50 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
They'll tell you anything to sell you a box.
Ed Crowley MCSE+Internet MVP kcCC+I
Tech Consultant
why would you want to spend extra money to make it more complex?
By that logic, should we be using a simpler more affordable messaging
solution altogether?
I agree with you, though... your boss actively suggesting a cluster for
Exchange is no time to be passive.
ding ding. *giggle*
William
He's so modest... what with that wicked sense of humour and charm...
he's dead sexy...
... or so I'm told...
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Jacob Jeong
Sent: Thursday, January 30, 2003 2:10 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
You are
95!? That's expensive!
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Peter Szabo
Sent: Thursday, January 30, 2003 4:19 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Sorry Chris, I have my own, starting from '95.
/Peter
- Original Message -
From: Chris
http://snurl.com/oe8
We used to disable the button through a reg edit.
http://support.microsoft.com/?kbid=288119
William
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Clemens, Rick
Sent: Wednesday, January 29, 2003 11:45 AM
To: Exchange
Bummer.
What does the Windows forum say about it?
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Sanjeev Sharma
Sent: Wednesday, January 29, 2003 3:43 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Cc: 'Exchange Discussions'
Importance: High
I am currently having an
I thought the exact same thing. Spend the money on the hardware instead
of the software. You might lose some features, but you might gain in
the long run.
William
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Jorge Herrera
Sent: Wednesday,
Shared folders is a common feature set in other applications, too.
But good deal on the software!
Dear Board of Directors:
Thank you for providing this new messaging and collaboration suite for
our company.
It seems, however, that our hardware is not up to the task of meeting
the messaging
A good starting point:
http://www.microsoft.com/Exchange/techinfo/deployment/2000/E2Kupgradegui
de.asp
William
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Phil Steele
Sent: Monday, January 27, 2003 12:53 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Hi ,
I hope
XADM: Set Deleted Mail Message Retention Time in Exchange Server 5.5
http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;EN-US;246283
XADM: Understanding Deleted Item Retention and Message Deletion Process
http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=KB;en-us;q249680
William
-Original
Of course this would be only for 'tinkering'. :o)
William
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of William
Lefkovics
Sent: Friday, January 24, 2003 11:13 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
It's neat... accessing Titanium on the same server
Ew!
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Jason Rader
Sent: Friday, January 24, 2003 12:40 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
We're going to test it as a DR tool. The ability to set 2 identical
servers, leave one powered down, and if the live
-
From: Tony Hlabse [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Friday, January 24, 2003 4:20 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: Re: Exchange on VMWare
The download does not include it. Be nice and put it on a FTP server for
me to access :-)
- Original Message -
From: William Lefkovics [EMAIL
1 - 100 of 588 matches
Mail list logo
