[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Friday, August 24, 2001 9:52 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: oh, man what a mess
more power to the stupid people! who's with me!!
On Fri, 24 Aug 2001, Ed Crowley wrote:
Shoot. I was already going to look for my bat.
Ed Crowley MCSE+Internet MVP
PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Drewski
Sent: Friday, August 24, 2001 6:58 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: oh, man what a mess
How 'bout we just call you Edna?
Drew (MOS)
KWAR2001 website: www.schoolofdefence.org/kwar.html
Read my
Jennifer, please read the list! This is discussed every so often! Setting
an IMS to Inbound Only in Exchange 5.5 and earlier will not keep the MTAs
from routing outbound SMTP mail to the IMS server. The way to keep that
from happening is to change the Address Space so that it has but one entry
I understand that the IMS was setup incorrectly in
this remote site. My dilemma is that 3000 messages (some 3 years old, some 5 months
old) have
apparently been sent after configuring the IMS correctly, (all sent
outbound.)
If this is true:
Setting an IMS to Inbound Only in Exchange 5.5 and
*And*, it's available! (for now)
:)
-Original Message-
From: Don Ely [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Thursday, August 23, 2001 2:23 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: oh, man what a mess
LOL!! Now that's a great domain name! ;o)
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL
it to
outbound did it look at and process those messages.
- Original Message -
From: Jennifer Baker [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, August 23, 2001 1:24 PM
Subject: RE: oh, man what a mess
I understand that the IMS was setup incorrectly
Production servers are not for playing. That's what a lab is for. Is that
someone still there?
- Original Message -
From: Jennifer Baker [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, August 23, 2001 7:41 PM
Subject: Re: oh, man what a mess
Someone
, August 23, 2001 7:41 PM
Subject: Re: oh, man what a mess
Someone apparently was playing with the costs in the remote site and set
it to zero on 11/8/99, Complaints were received during that week, then
someone set it back on 11/15/99, but did not flush the queues.
A big-wig apparently sent
I'll forego the assault, Edna.
- Original Message -
From: Jennifer Baker [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, August 24, 2001 12:14 AM
Subject: Re: oh, man what a mess
no, he is not. I cannot judge, since I am one of those arrogant ignorant
9 matches
Mail list logo
