a little while there... I
thought I was going nuts...
MP.
-Original Message-
From: Brian Meline [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Friday, 1 February 2002 2:02 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: X.400 problem...
Since you've done everything else, have you checked your DNS setup
Since you've done everything else, have you checked your DNS setup ?
Specifically, what are the entries for your preferred DNS servers ?
What entries do you have for forwarders ?
Are you forwarding to an ISP or other internet DNS service ?
_
EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Wednesday, January 30, 2002 11:17 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: X.400 problem...
That being the case, is it worth deleting the e5.5 IMC (or changing the
addressing to clownpenis.fart), and re-creating the e2k server SMTP
connector at the same time? Will this make th
D]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Mark Peoples
Sent: Wednesday, January 30, 2002 9:17 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: X.400 problem...
That being the case, is it worth deleting the e5.5 IMC (or changing the
addressing to clownpenis.fart), and re-creating the e2k server SMTP
connec
: Thursday, 31 January 2002 4:04 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: X.400 problem...
Then I would guess that something is wrong in the configuration of your
Exchange 2000 SMTP Connector where it won't route to the Internet or it
isn't seen by the other server.
Ed Crowley MCSE+Internet
m PSTs and Bricked Backups!
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Mark Peoples
Sent: Wednesday, January 30, 2002 8:52 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: X.400 problem...
Ed,
I just tried the clownpenis.fart thing... and when I send a mess
: Thursday, 31 January 2002 3:20 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: X.400 problem...
What's the address space tab show on the Exchange 5.5 server? If the
only entry is a star, delete the star entry and add a new one for domain
"clownpenis.fart". Then recalculate routing. See if
ch Consultant
Compaq Computer Corporation
Protecting the world from PSTs and Bricked Backups!
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Mark Peoples
Sent: Wednesday, January 30, 2002 6:57 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: X.400 problem...
Sorr
Yes...
>Did you recalculate routing?
FTR, the routing table in site addressing (e5.5 admin) shows the e2k
server (with SMTP connector) as the routing server, but in the GWART,
the e5.5 IMC is the chosen SMTP route. It doesn't see the e2k SMTP
connector... "When i hit recalculate routing - nothin
, 2002 7:39 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: X.400 problem...
Yep - I have tried that.
I removed it completely, restarted all services to make sure that there
were no residual nasties... and then I watched the mail queue up in the
MTA.
In the end, I had to re-create the e5.5 IMC to get
nuary 2002 2:27 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: X.400 problem...
Well, you could probably start by removing the IMS from the Exchange 5.5
server. Easy rollback from there if needed.
Chris
--
Chris Scharff
Senior Sales Engineer
MessageOne
If you can't measure, you ca
[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Wednesday, January 30, 2002 8:53 PM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: RE: X.400 problem...
>
>
> It may solve the problem... but I am just anticipating the
> consequences if removing the server form the organization
> doesn't work...?
>
---
From: Ed Crowley [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Thursday, 31 January 2002 1:31 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: X.400 problem...
What do you mean an Exchange 2000 server with an Internet Mail Service?
That term does not apply to Windows 2000. I am asking specifically if
you have an SM
eoples [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Wednesday, January 30, 2002 7:12 PM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: RE: X.400 problem...
>
>
> The design goal is to have a native e2k site (remove
> dependencies from, and turn off the e5.5 server).
>
> I can't do this a
Computer Corporation
Protecting the world from PSTs and Bricked Backups!
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Mark Peoples
Sent: Wednesday, January 30, 2002 5:48 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: X.400 problem...
Yes,
I have:
1 e5.5
L PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Wednesday, January 30, 2002 7:12 PM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: RE: X.400 problem...
>
>
> The design goal is to have a native e2k site (remove
> dependencies from, and turn off the e5.5 server).
>
> I can't do this at the moment
: X.400 problem...
Have you installed an SMTP Connector on an Exchange 2000 server?
Ed Crowley MCSE+Internet MVP kcCC+I
Tech Consultant
Compaq Computer Corporation
Protecting the world from PSTs and Bricked Backups!
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On
Have you installed an SMTP Connector on an Exchange 2000 server?
Ed Crowley MCSE+Internet MVP kcCC+I
Tech Consultant
Compaq Computer Corporation
Protecting the world from PSTs and Bricked Backups!
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Mark Pe
EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Thursday, 31 January 2002 12:08 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: X.400 problem...
What's the design goal here?
-Original Message-
From: Mark Peoples
To: Exchange Discussions
Sent: 1/30/2002 6:16 PM
Subject: X.400 problem...
Hi,
I have an e2k server t
What's the design goal here?
-Original Message-
From: Mark Peoples
To: Exchange Discussions
Sent: 1/30/2002 6:16 PM
Subject: X.400 problem...
Hi,
I have an e2k server that routes internet-bound messages to the x400
connector and then to my E5.5 server for tranmission. When I disable the
20 matches
Mail list logo
