-
From: Jennifer Baker [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.
>
Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL 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)
> **
: 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 Column on OUTLOOKEXCHANGE.COM:
http://www.outlookexchange.com/articles/drewnicholson/default.asp
Pi
s.net
Take my advice, or I'll spank you a lot.
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Jennifer Baker
Sent: Friday, August 24, 2001 12:15 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: Re: oh, man what a mess
no, he is not. I ca
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
MAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: "Exchange Discussions" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sent: Thursday, 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
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
gt; 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 in
> > this rem
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 understa
*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-
Fr
Out of curiousity, did you check the Queues before restarting
the IMS after you made your config changes?
- Karen
On Thu, 23 Aug 2001, Jennifer Baker wrote:
> I understand that the IMS was setup incorrectly in this remote site.
> My dilemma is that 3000 messages (some 3 years old, some 5 mo
LOL!! Now that's a great domain name! ;o)
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Jennifer Baker
Sent: Thursday, August 23, 2001 11:24 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: oh, man what a mess
I understand that the IMS was
d longstanding design flaw.
>
> Ed Crowley MCSE+Internet MVP
> Tech Consultant
> Compaq Computer Corporation
> All your base are belong to us.
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Jennifer Baker
> Sent:
design flaw.
Ed Crowley MCSE+Internet MVP
Tech Consultant
Compaq Computer Corporation
All your base are belong to us.
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Jennifer Baker
Sent: Thursday, August 23, 2001 10:12 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subjec
After changing a remote IMS from send only Inbound to send Outbound Only
then back to Inbound only mode, many messages (3000) were sent from as far
back as 1999. If the IMS is set to inbound only, would it not send
undeliverables for refused connections or would it just queue the message?
It seem
15 matches
Mail list logo
