But Windows 2003 mentions there is no more security vulnerability for
running DHCP on domain controller.
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Andy David
Sent: Tuesday, 29 July 2003 4:13 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: Re: DNS DHCP
While this question is better answered on an AD list, or even WinNT-L, I'll
bite.
It depends on the size of your network. It's generally recommended, on
large networks, to separate DNS/DHCP from AD servers, because of logons.
Let's say your company of 1 all log on at 8am EST. We'll, during
Thanks for the Reply. I did post on the AD list...I thought
Thanks anyways.
Sam
-Original Message-
From: Dickenson, Steven [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, July 28, 2003 9:14 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: DNS DHCP Question
While this question is better
There's a security hole in running DHCP on a domain controller in that it
can easily take over name registrations. It's best to run DHCP on a member
server. I believe that DNS is best run in Active Directory Integrated mode
on every domain controller. In Windows 2003, DNS is improved to
:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, July 28, 2003 10:45 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: DNS DHCP Question
There's a security hole in running DHCP on a domain controller in that it
can easily take over name registrations. It's best to run DHCP on a member
server. I believe that DNS is best run
]
To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, July 28, 2003 1:15 PM
Subject: RE: DNS DHCP Question
Can you provide more information, or point me in the direction of said
information, regarding this DHCP security vulnerability.
Thanks,
Steven
---
Steven Dickenson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Network
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: DNS DHCP Question
Can you provide more information, or point me in the direction of said
information, regarding this DHCP security vulnerability.
Thanks,
Steven
---
Steven Dickenson [EMAIL PROTECTED] Network Administrator The Key
School, Annapolis Maryland
http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;en-us;255134
- Original Message -
From: Dickenson, Steven [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, July 28, 2003 1:15 PM
Subject: RE: DNS DHCP Question
Can you provide more information, or point me
All working now thanks, pesky firewall issues.
Bye
Ali
- Original Message -
From: Andy David [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, January 14, 2003 3:31 PM
Subject: Re: DNS and Exchange 5.5 grief
I can not telnet to port 25 on mail.bango.org (MX
What is the name of the domain in question?
- Original Message -
From: AliAdmin [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, January 14, 2003 6:48 AM
Subject: DNS and Exchange 5.5 grief
Hi All
I've installed a new and completely separtate Exchange 5.5
Well the working mail domain is Bango.net, the new one is bango.org
Cheers
Ali
- Original Message -
From: Andy David [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, January 14, 2003 3:15 PM
Subject: Re: DNS and Exchange 5.5 grief
What is the name
, 2003 10:22 AM
Subject: Re: DNS and Exchange 5.5 grief
Well the working mail domain is Bango.net, the new one is bango.org
Cheers
Ali
- Original Message -
From: Andy David [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, January 14, 2003 3:15 PM
Subject
I found this researching a similar problem:
http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;en-us;190366
Hope it helps,
-
Matthew Bailey
LAN Engineer
CSK Auto Inc.
602-631-7486
-
-Original Message-
On Thu, 14 Nov 2002, at 4:05pm, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I am getting the following error. when people try to Reply to All. they
do not get this error if they hit the new message button and put in the
same address.
Obviously, they're not the same address, or it would work. Maybe the
Most likely, this error reflects the originator of the message typing in their
displayed address
wrong. When someone hits reply, double check the address that is in the To: field.
Alex
Jeffery Caudill wrote:
| I am getting the following error. when people try to Reply to All. they do not
Great site.
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Tom Meunier
Sent: Wednesday, August 07, 2002 11:42
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: DNS Site
Spiffy.
http://www.dnsreport.com does it too.
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL
If mailgate1 is always available, will it be the only connector that
takes the mail unless it has reached the maximum number of sessions ?
Yes, although I have seen my 'secondary inbound' box accepting mail when the
'primary' box was clearly available. If you'd like them load balanced then
have
Cheers, that's cleared that up!
Adam
-Original Message-
From: Matt Monteleone-Haught [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: 23 April 2002 11:18
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: Re: DNS behaviour with MX preferences...
If mailgate1 is always available, will it be the only connector
On Tue, 23 Apr 2002, at 10:50am, Adam Romain wrote:
If mailgate1 is always available, will it be the only connector that takes
the mail unless it has reached the maximum number of sessions ?
In theory, yes. In practice, always available is not a realistic
condition. Some random mail
Discussions
Subject: Re: DNS behaviour with MX preferences...
If you'd like them load balanced then have the preferencs set the same.
_
List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
Archives: http
Cheers Bud.
-Original Message-
From: Benjamin Scott [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: 23 April 2002 13:05
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: Re: DNS behaviour with MX preferences...
On Tue, 23 Apr 2002, at 10:50am, Adam Romain wrote:
If mailgate1 is always available
Most SMTP servers will try all listed MX records (in increasing preference
order) prior to queuing for later delivery.
Your assumption is correct that mailgate1 would receive all inbound traffic
(to its connection limits).
--
Roger D.
Thank you very much to all who helped me in solving the problem.
Regards,
-Original Message-
From: Ben Winzenz [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Thursday, April 11, 2002 7:09 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject:RE: DNS
See this as an example. This is brain.net.pk
I see what you are talking about.
Mail.wbpr.com has 2 IP's.
Strange
Non-authoritative answer:
wbpr.comMX preference = 100, mail exchanger = mail.wbpr.com
wbpr.comnameserver = nameserver.coqui.net
wbpr.comnameserver = nameserver.coqui.com
mail.wbpr.com internet
PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Martin
Blackstone
Sent: Monday, April 15, 2002 1:04 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: DNS for wbpr.com
I see what you are talking about.
Mail.wbpr.com has 2 IP's.
Strange
Non-authoritative answer:
wbpr.comMX preference = 100, mail exchanger = mail.wbpr.com
They actually have ONE MX record that points to a dual homed server [1].
The 64.213.243.212 address does not respond to port 25. If your server
tries that one first and cannot get a response, it won't try the other IP,
because that host is not responding. They need to clean up their DNS
records
--
Roger D. Seielstad - MCSE
Sr. Systems Administrator
Peregrine Systems
Atlanta, GA
-Original Message-
From: Kevin Miller [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Monday, April 15, 2002 4:08 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: DNS for wbpr.com
DDNS hosted DNS with a multi homed
Discussions
Subject: RE: DNS for wbpr.com
The preference can be anything from 0 to 65534 or so. 10 tends to be
customary as primary, but it doesn't matter.
The issue is indeed on their end - specifically their DNS entries. Your IMC
is doing a lookup for ALL MX records for wbpr.com, and gets back just
By creating the necessary records.
-Original Message-
From: Irfan Malik [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Thursday, April 11, 2002 12:44 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: DNS
Ben, how can I solve this.
-Original Message-
From: Ben Winzenz [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject:RE: DNS
http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;en-us;Q203204
http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;en-us;Q153119
Use these tools on your exchange server. Post the results.
-Original Message-
From: Irfan Malik [mailto
Discussions
Subject: RE: DNS
Ben, how can I solve this.
-Original Message-
From: Ben Winzenz [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Wednesday, April 10, 2002 7:16 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject:RE: DNS
It doesn't appear that you have reverse DNS records for your Exchange
server
]]
Sent: Thursday, April 11, 2002 9:54 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: DNS
You make sure that you have a reverse lookup zone with a PTR
record for your
Exchange server.
Ben Winzenz, MCSE
Network/Systems Administrator
Peregrine Systems
-Original Message-
From: Irfan
!
Ben Winzenz, MCSE
Network/Systems Administrator
Peregrine Systems
-Original Message-
From: Irfan Malik [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Wednesday, April 10, 2002 11:44 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: DNS
Ben, how can I solve this.
-Original Message-
From: Ben Winzenz
?
Thanks.
Lynne
-Original Message-
From: Erik Sojka [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Thursday, April 11, 2002 6:59 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: DNS
And that you're authoritative for the entire reverse zone. If you have a
portion of a class C for example, your ISP may centralize
/Systems Administrator
Peregrine Systems
-Original Message-
From: Lynne July [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Thursday, April 11, 2002 10:29 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: DNS
Reverse lookup is giving me fits for one of my sites - vitalms.com
(209.154.100.11). Although we have
, 2002 11:29 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: DNS
Reverse lookup is giving me fits for one of my sites - vitalms.com
(209.154.100.11). Although we have published the PTR record, it does not
resolve.
Our corporate site - vitalps.com (209.154.100.10) - does resolve properly.
We use
Is your DNS server authoritative for the reverse zone?
-Original Message-
From: Lynne July [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Thursday, April 11, 2002 11:29 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: DNS
Reverse lookup is giving me fits for one of my sites - vitalms.com
will quarantine the message.
You have problem sending only to servers subscribing to mail-abuse.org
services.
- Original Message -
From: Irfan Malik [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, April 11, 2002 12:59 AM
Subject: RE: DNS
Also if my IP is on mail
Thanks peter I am out of the list.
Regards,
-Original Message-
From: Peter Szabo [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Friday, April 12, 2002 3:22 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject:Re: DNS
Irfan,
To get out from the database go to
http://work-rss.mail-abuse.org/rss
: Wednesday, April 10, 2002 2:22 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject:RE: DNS
Q172953
Once again, vague. Maybe this article will help you to form a more detailed
question. Post your problem in detail and what you have done to try and
solve your problem.
-Original Message
. Set
spine.brain.net.pk as the preferred server for that domain for a couple of
days to see if the problem goes away.
-Original Message-
From: Irfan Malik [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Wednesday, April 10, 2002 4:05 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: DNS
Jennifer Hi, if you
:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Wednesday, April 10, 2002 3:36 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject:RE: DNS
That is a generic smtp code. Post the entire error and include the address
or atleast the domain you are trying to send mail to. Is this Exchange sp2?
Your previous issue sounds
:43 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: DNS
Your message did not reach some or all of the intended recipients.
Subject: test
Sent: 4/10/2002 4:03 PM
The following recipient(s) could not be reached:
'[EMAIL PROTECTED]' on 4/10/2002 4:03 PM
The e-mail system
:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Wednesday, April 10, 2002 6:05 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: DNS
Jennifer Hi, if you are talking about my previous problem about
brain.net.pk, which is still there, every evening I have to restart my smtp
service which then sends mail to brain.net.pk domain.
About
: RE: DNS
It doesn't appear that you have reverse DNS records for your Exchange
server. If the receiving domain is doing reverse lookups, they may not
accept mail from your domain.
Ben Winzenz, MCSE
Network/Systems Administrator
Peregrine Systems
-Original Message-
From: Irfan
:Re: DNS
Irfan,
Your server at 202.125.129.114 is in the mail-abuse.org rss database. They
think that your server is an open relay. Is it?
/Peter
- Original Message -
From: Ben Winzenz [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, April 10, 2002 10:15 AM
Ben, how can I solve this.
-Original Message-
From: Ben Winzenz [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Wednesday, April 10, 2002 7:16 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject:RE: DNS
It doesn't appear that you have reverse DNS records for your Exchange
server. If the receiving
Discussions
Subject:Re: DNS
Irfan,
Your server at 202.125.129.114 is in the mail-abuse.org rss database. They
think that your server is an open relay. Is it?
/Peter
- Original Message -
From: Ben Winzenz [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday
If'n they'll change the serial number on their DNS server, the updates will
begin automagically. Otherwise, 24-72 hours is the norm...
You should ask them though...
D
-Original Message-
From: Tony Hlabse [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Friday, January 11, 2002 7:59 AM
To: Exchange
. Verio shouldn't mind,
either.
-tom
-Original Message-
From: Don Ely [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Posted At: Friday, January 11, 2002 09:55 AM
Posted To: MSExchange Mailing List
Conversation: DNS Changes take how long
Subject: RE: DNS Changes take how long
If'n they'll change
I don't have DNS probs silly... ;o) It's the other guy...
D
-Original Message-
From: Tom Meunier [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Friday, January 11, 2002 8:08 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: DNS Changes take how long
A dig on tripathimaging.com shows a default TTL of 24
to attend to, and I'm a dimwit.
-tom
-Original Message-
From: Don Ely [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Posted At: Friday, January 11, 2002 10:05 AM
Posted To: MSExchange Mailing List
Conversation: DNS Changes take how long
Subject: RE: DNS Changes take how long
I don't have DNS probs
Supposed to happen every 24 hours at midnight EST. Give it 24 hours after
that to propogate.
- Original Message -
From: Tony Hlabse [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, January 11, 2002 9:58 AM
Subject: DNS Changes take how long
Well we are
-
From: Daniel Chenault [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Friday, January 11, 2002 11:43 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: Re: DNS Changes take how long
Supposed to happen every 24 hours at midnight EST. Give it 24 hours after
that to propogate.
- Original Message -
From
:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Posted At: Friday, January 11, 2002 10:05 AM
Posted To: MSExchange Mailing List
Conversation: DNS Changes take how long
Subject: RE: DNS Changes take how long
I don't have DNS probs silly... ;o) It's the other guy...
D
-Original Message-
From: Tom
EST?
-Original Message-
From: Daniel Chenault [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Posted At: Friday, January 11, 2002 10:43 AM
Posted To: MSExchange Mailing List
Conversation: DNS Changes take how long
Subject: Re: DNS Changes take how long
Supposed to happen every 24 hours at midnight
Discussions
Subject: RE: DNS Changes take how long
I stand by my contention that it will take on average
1/2[TTL]. If the TTL is 60 seconds, it will seem immediate
(but given a statistically significant sample will actually
average 30 seconds). Surely you're not saying that every
No, I'm saying the root servers change at midnight. After that it's up to
all the other DNS servers to respect TTL.
- Original Message -
From: Tom Meunier [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, January 11, 2002 11:16 AM
Subject: RE: DNS Changes take
1. Yes.
2. Only if you have routing enabled.
3. Yes, Directory Import.
4. Change that to the Reply Address for each mailbox, also doable through
Directory Import.
Ed Crowley MCSE+I MVP
Tech Consultant
Compaq Computer
There are seldom good technological solutions to behavioral problems.
]]
Sent: Saturday, December 01, 2001 11:41 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: DNS Record?
Doesn't require an internal Mx record, but does create some DNS entries.
That may not be the root cause of the problem... Greater detail on symptoms?
Chris
--
Chris Scharff
Senior Sales Engineer
Doesn't require an internal Mx record, but does create some DNS entries.
That may not be the root cause of the problem... Greater detail on symptoms?
Chris
--
Chris Scharff
Senior Sales Engineer
MessageOne
If you can't measure, you can't manage!
-Original Message-
From: Hooks, Tim
Yes I do have a PIX, and I do get 220 w/ a bunch of
***. I just looked at my PIX config and one of
the lines is fixup protocol smtp 25. This is the
culprit? I will no that statement and see where it
leads me. Thanks for the tip Tom, it is amazing you
knew the error almost verbatim. Thank
yes dump the FIX UP SMTP in the pix
once I did this it was fine (on my 515R)
bill
-Original Message-
From: Julius Bingham [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Wednesday, September 05, 2001 7:02 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: DNS or Exchange2K?
Yes I do have a PIX, and I do get
Do you have a Cisco Pix? On your telnet to [public ip:25] do you get a
220 and a bunch of *** or a valid 220 banner page
indicating the SMTP server, version, time, etc? Bunch of indicates
Cisco Mailguard is most likely the problem. Disable it or upgrade it
with no fixup
64 matches
Mail list logo
