Seems like one of the two is not working. First thing I'd do is remove both
of the security restrictions and see if it works in base configuration. If
so add them back one at a time to see which one isn't working. I'm betting
it's the autenticated connections.
- Original Message -
From: "
bounced
> Same site, same org, different name.
> This can't be done this way?
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Daniel Chenault [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Thursday, March 14, 2002 9:06 AM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: Re: Exchange getting bounced
>
>
e said same site, same org, DIFFERENT name...
Andrew,
MCSE (NT & W2K) + CCNA
-----Original Message-
From: Daniel Chenault [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Posted At: Thursday, March 14, 2002 9:25 AM
Posted To: DiscussionGroup
Conversation: Exchange getting bounced
Subject: Re: Exchange getting bounc
As others have pointed out your IIS server got hacked; Exchange itself is
probably fine but I would bet your passwords have been compromised.
Back up Exchange and any data you want to keep. Flatten this box, reinstall
and put the ding-dang security hotfixes on it before putting it back on the
net
The only way you can completely assure that ALL emails are retained is to
turn on journaling.
- Original Message -
From: "Taylor, Mal" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Exchange Discussions" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Friday, March 15, 2002 9:32 AM
Subject: Disabling 'Hard Deletion'
> Mutterings
Are the clients using Word as the e-mail editor?
- Original Message -
From: "Woodruff, Michael" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Exchange Discussions" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Friday, March 15, 2002 9:58 AM
Subject: RE: Conversion to Internet format failed
> Mainly .docs. They are being attac
Here in the States the SEC (Securities Exchange Commission, the folks who
regulate stock-related activities) required the retention of mail a couple
years ago. That's when MS came out with the journaling feature; that is to
say, the purpose of the journaling feature is exactly what you're looking
One cannot prove a negative. Have them give their reasoning for this and
then you can address their concerns.
- Original Message -
From: "paragon400" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Exchange Discussions" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Friday, March 15, 2002 11:32 AM
Subject: eseutil /d
> I have som
It won't hurt Exchange performance but will needlessly break any uptime
metrics.
There is one, count 'em, one difference between an offline and an online
defrag. The former moves the EOF, the latter does not.
- Original Message -
From: "Ray Zorz" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Exchange Discuss
Not really sure. Would that matter? Rich text using word or rich text
> using outlook. Both the same right?
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Daniel Chenault [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Friday, March 15, 2002 11:46 AM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: Re: Co
MAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Friday, March 15, 2002 12:41 PM
Subject: RE: eseutil /d
> Their reasoning is to save disk space (there really is not a disk space
> issue...9 GB store on a 40 GB drive for example)...and to speed up
> backups.
>
> -----Original Message-
> From: Daniel
;)
I seem to recall having to field this question when I was on the stage at
the Boston MEC. My responses now will be the same as they were then. IOW: no
real need unless you really WANT to.
- Original Message -
From: "William Lefkovics" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Exchange Discussions" <[E
The allocated space within the EDB file is marked available for overwrite,
just as when you delete a file off a hard drive. So yes, the data is still
there but all pointers to it have been removed. Given the dynamic nature of
Exchange's database technology it'll probably be overwritten fairly quic
And you've done the reg modification? I know this works as I've done it
several times (actually I think I may have written that article, cant'
remember for sure).
- Original Message -
From: "Finch Brett" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Exchange Discussions" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Saturday, Ma
The Everyone Full Control is the NTFS permission level, not the sharing
permission level which should be Everyone Read.
The Everyone group can be removed from both. Leave the others accounts there
alone.
- Original Message -
From: "Walbert, Bryan (Bryan) %" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Excha
FAQ
- Original Message -
From: "Arch Willingham" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Exchange Discussions" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Monday, March 18, 2002 9:24 AM
Subject: Where is global text set for outgoing messages?
> We need to append text to the bottom of every e-mail message leaving our
>
The secret to how you can use saucer separation in your enterprise.
- Original Message -
From: "Jennifer Baker" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Exchange Discussions" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Friday, March 15, 2002 1:23 AM
Subject: RE: Can exchange 5.5 be set up as a list server?
> I know.. I
It will increase on it's own; you misread the event text.
- Original Message -
From: "Mario Fernandez" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Exchange Discussions" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Monday, March 18, 2002 6:08 PM
Subject: RE: only 6 Mb after online defrag
> Yes, plenty of disk space on the ha
I assume the CR is an internet address? It's just another SMTP message to
the IMS; the message will queue up and timeout normally.
- Original Message -
From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Exchange Discussions" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Monday, March 18, 2002 5:27 PM
Subject: Journalling questi
The only regular maintenance I recommend is watching the logs. Exchange will
tell you when it's hurting. If it ain't broke, don't fix it.
Whitespace is purely your own decision. Event ID 1221 (from memory; someone
correct me if I misremembered) will tell you how much whitespace is in the
db. How
You'll need to turn on protocol logging to see the actual conversation and
data being passed to understand why your server (rather, your firewall) is
returning the error.
Speaking of which, what are you running as a firewall
(myfirewall.mydomain.com)?
Speaking further of which: it's hard to do t
telnet 207.212.40.254 25
220 wormhole.dionex.com Generic SMTP handler
That ain't Exchange.
- Original Message -
From: "Roger Seielstad" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Exchange Discussions" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Tuesday, March 19, 2002 11:28 AM
Subject: RE: 554 Invalid data in message
> A
st cough it up.
>
> -----Original Message-
> From: Daniel Chenault [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Tuesday, March 19, 2002 9:27 AM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: Re: 554 Invalid data in message
>
>
>
> Speaking further of which: it's hard to do
ject: RE: 554 Invalid data in message
>
>
> I know. I hate this crap. It makes no sense. Believe me, if we want to
find
> out this info, we can. Just cough it up.
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Daniel Chenault [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Tuesday, March 19, 2002
Oh, ghod. Now Andy will be even more insufferable!
- Original Message -
From: "Alverson, Thomas M." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Exchange Discussions" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Tuesday, March 19, 2002 2:38 PM
Subject: RE: Changed NIC - Andy David is GODLIKE!
> OK, so
ODLIKE!
> You're needed on the bridge Number One.
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Daniel Chenault [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Tuesday, March 19, 2002 3:56 PM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: Re: Changed NIC - Andy David is GODLIKE!
>
>
>
RE: Changed NIC - Andy David is GODLIKE!
> Aye Sir. Remember Sir, we pee in the bowl, not around it.
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Daniel Chenault [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Tuesday, March 19, 2002 4:17 PM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: Re: Changed
Bad, bad bidness. Guaranteed data loss. Do it right with SMTP and be done
with it.
- Original Message -
From: "kedar" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Exchange Discussions" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Tuesday, March 19, 2002 5:55 AM
Subject: POP3 Connector Needed
> Hi All,
>
> I know there is a p
The term, I believe, is black-hole router.
- Original Message -
From: "Ben Schorr" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Exchange Discussions" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Tuesday, March 19, 2002 9:54 PM
Subject: RE: Some "Hosts Unreachable" - Follow-up
> Well, the problem is resolved but nobody's enti
Hmmm the meeting room that is the resource has a full mailbox from all
the attachments sent to it in the past and it's hit your mailbox limit? Just
a WAG...
- Original Message -
From: "Phil" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Exchange Discussions" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Wednesday, March 20,
It's a no-brainer to upgrade to Enterprise. Seriously. Just put the CD in
and answer the questions appropriately. Other then the requisite downtime
it's not even a blip on operations.
- Original Message -
From: "Russell Hopkinson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Exchange Discussions" <[EMAIL PRO
Exchange does indeed use up all the available memory. It's designed to do
that.
- Original Message -
From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Exchange Discussions" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Wednesday, March 20, 2002 3:38 PM
Subject: Exchange 5.5 Server
> I am running Exchage Server 5.5 SP4 on NT
ECTED]>
To: "Exchange Discussions" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Wednesday, March 20, 2002 9:40 PM
Subject: RE: Exchange 5.5 Server
> Except the 'fail' part.
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Daniel Chenault [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Wednesday,
*sigh*
BCC
Do I have to, once again (it's in the archives) go into the difference
between the routing info on an SMTP message and the content?
- Original Message -
From: "Tener, Richard" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Exchange Discussions" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Thursday, March 21, 2002 9:
I know of a financial company in SF that uses off-site data storage. They
told me while I was there that they have tested their DR procedures and can
be 80-90% operational within 24 hours of a complete disaster (i.e. their SF
offices being completely destroyed).
Contact me offlist if you'd like m
It's a Cisco PIX firewall command to tell the PIX to stop acting like it
knows what it's doing.
- Original Message -
From: "Mitchell Mike" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Exchange Discussions" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Thursday, March 21, 2002 10:11 AM
Subject: RE: 554 errors from Hot Mail
> w
"You've reached the inbox of Mike Jamison. I'm out of the office touring SE
Asia for the next two months. Contact Jim Standin at 222-555-1212."
That tells a potentially nefarious person that someone's house is empty and
unattended for two months. It also tells him the name and phone number of an
FAQ
- Original Message -
From: "Chris Haaker" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Exchange Discussions" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Friday, March 22, 2002 2:45 PM
Subject: IMC Queues
> Looking in the IMC Queue for Outbound Mail awaiting delivery I see 10-20
> enteries to the same address all with <
If the FAQ was not illuminating enough may I suggest RFC-821 or 2821?
- Original Message -
From: "Chris Haaker" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Exchange Discussions" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Friday, March 22, 2002 3:55 PM
Subject: Re: IMC Queues
> Perhaps I am dim but I can only find 1 entry
.
>
> Daniel, would this mailbox then collect each and every sent/received
message
> within the site? Just wondering how to enable that to happen. Server-side
> rule, or is there built-in functionality?
>
> Thanks much.
>
> Larry Seltzer
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> -
Again, READ RFC-821/2821.
- Original Message -
From: "Chris Haaker" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Exchange Discussions" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Saturday, March 23, 2002 11:34 AM
Subject: Re: IMC Queues
> After finally finding the answer (I think) at Trend's site . . .
>
> Note that this un
9 PM
Subject: Re: IMC Queues
> I did. Thanks. My mom would be proud of you.
>
> - Original Message -
> From: "Daniel Chenault" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: "Exchange Discussions" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sent: Saturday, March 23, 2002 7:29 PM
&g
Reconfigure your file-level AV software to not scan the \exchsrvr directory
structure
- Original Message -
From: "How, Say Chuan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Exchange Discussions" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Monday, March 25, 2002 12:41 AM
Subject: Evet ID: 2186
> Folks,
> The following even
More likely the recipient's mailbox is full; that's why his mailbox is
unavailable.
- Original Message -
From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Exchange Discussions" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Monday, March 25, 2002 8:12 AM
Subject: RE: Any Explanation? One Way Email
>
> Looks to me like the mai
No, "journalING", not just journal. And it has nothing to do with the
client, it's purely server-side.
- Original Message -
From: "Ed Esgro" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Exchange Discussions" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Monday, March 25, 2002 10:50 AM
Subject: RE: BCC any sent message
> Are y
Did you open the messages and see what might be so odd about them?
- Original Message -
From: "Alverson, Thomas M." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Exchange Discussions" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Monday, March 25, 2002 1:02 PM
Subject: Messages stuck in IMC inbound Queue - EX55 - can't stop IMC
Hehe...
Line-wrapping done at the server or the sending client is an archaic
functionality. The client is now expected to understand how to display a
message. Looks like Netscape is either misconfigured or brain-dead (or
hopelessly outdated).
- Original Message -
From: "Blunt, James H (J
That's not ADC; did you join them to the site during install? It should have
prompted for the name of the 5.5 server and the service account/password.
- Original Message -
From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Exchange Discussions" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Tuesday, March 26, 2002 8:08 AM
Subjec
not that I undid the forest prep & domain prep, I just
> un-installed E2K.
>
> It only asked me at forest prep time originally.
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Daniel Chenault [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: 26 March 2002 14:13
> To: Exchange Discussions
>
Well, something is unusual about them. Not having access to the messages
that's the best I can offer.
- Original Message -
From: "Tom Alverson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Exchange Discussions" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Tuesday, March 26, 2002 2:55 PM
Subject: Re: Messages stuck in IMC inbou
My thoughts exactly, but I'll hold back on the plonk. It's always amusing to
watch newbies flounder in the waves.
- Original Message -
From: "Thomas Di Nardo" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Exchange Discussions" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Tuesday, March 26, 2002 6:47 PM
Subject: RE: Prep
If th
what kind of AV are you running?
- Original Message -
From: "Alverson, Thomas M." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Exchange Discussions" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Wednesday, March 27, 2002 4:28 PM
Subject: EX55 sp4: Inbound IMC messages stuck problem update
> A few days ago I reported a problem
EX55 sp4: Inbound IMC messages stuck problem update
> Norton AV for exchange 2.5 (probably latest build - got an update about a
> month ago). I suspected that right away but stopping it made no
difference
> at all.
>
> Tom
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Daniel Ch
I have to admit I'm kinda stumped here. BackupExec v8.6 running latest
driver package using a Seagate/Archive autoloaded (OEMed by Compaq). Works
fine doing file-level backups but when I create a job to backup Exchange 5.5
SP4 it gives "directory not responding" and "store not responding" yet all
Newbie alert! Fresh meat!
- Original Message -
From: "Irfan Malik" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Exchange Discussions" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Wednesday, March 27, 2002 10:22 PM
Subject: RE: protocol error
Dear Mr. Doug,
Please be advise that if you don't have the answer please don't wast
he Exchange administrator and SP on the system doing
the
> backups?
>
> A poorly documented gottcha.
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Daniel Chenault [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Wednesday, March 27, 2002 3:50 PM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: BE 8.6
enter
> credentials in the "Attach As..."
>
> Check if BE Xchg agent service is loading ok on Xchg machine.
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Daniel Chenault [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Wednesday, March 27, 2002 15:50
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Su
Pointy-Haired Boss, from Dilbert.
- Original Message -
From: "Etts, Russell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Exchange Discussions" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Thursday, March 28, 2002 12:06 PM
Subject: RE: Delay Outgoing Mail
> Question -
>
> What does "PHB" mean??
>
> (Putting on flame retardan
Yes. Obvious when you think about it.
- Original Message -
From: "Mitchell Mike" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Exchange Discussions" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Friday, March 29, 2002 12:54 PM
Subject: RE: Containers
> When exmerge a mailbox to move between containers do you have to rebuild a
I can tell you from experience it's no better, but it IS more fun.
- Original Message -
From: "John Matteson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Exchange Discussions" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Friday, March 29, 2002 12:58 PM
Subject: RE: Comm Check
> I'm also experimenting whether being a PITA is
Most likely a Netscape user sending you mail. Netscape erroneously attempts
to login to servers that offer the AUTH command even if the Netscape client
was not configured to login to that server in the first place.
- Original Message -
From: "Shane S." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Exchange Di
It's malformed. It should be sent with multipart/alternative. Additionally
the line:
boundry="InterScan_NT_MIME_Boundry"
should be equivalent to "--=_938802==_.ALT"
and finally the correct word is "boundary" not "boundry". If that's not a
result of your munging tha
If it's a failed dot.com what did they do for connectivity previously?
- Original Message -
From: "King, John" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Exchange Discussions" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Monday, April 01, 2002 9:20 AM
Subject: Remote Site Question
> Hello all,
>
> I am stuck trying to fi
: "King, John" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Exchange Discussions" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Monday, April 01, 2002 9:36 AM
Subject: RE: Remote Site Question
> There is a T1 terminated, but it is not live... yet..
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Danie
Hotfixes should only be installed if you are experiencing the problem for
which the hotfix was created. Willy-nilly installing new patches just
because they exist is the mark of an amatuer.
- Original Message -
From: "McCready, Robert" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Exchange Discussions" <[EMAI
That would be the PHB add-in.
- Original Message -
From: "Ben Schorr" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Exchange Discussions" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Tuesday, April 02, 2002 4:44 PM
Subject: RE: Exchange 5.5 question
> I once had a receptionist who asked me to send out an e-mail to let
> every
I do believe that's TCP returning the error; Exchange is only reporting it.
In proper OSI modeling an application knows nothing about what is happening
on the lower levels and hops is a TCP concept.
- Original Message -
From: "Hansen, Eric" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Exchange Discussions" <
> Sent: Wednesday, April 03, 2002 5:05 AM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: RE: hops?
>
> I, for one, am deeply disappointed that this thread is not about beer. I
was
> about to jump on this like a donkey on a waffle(1)
> (1) Hi, CJ!
>
> Dale L. Orr
> Networ
Yes. Absolutely. Required AAMOF.
- Original Message -
From: "Woodruff, Michael" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Exchange Discussions" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Wednesday, April 03, 2002 10:27 AM
Subject: RE: Upgrade problems
> I think we originally installed the ADC using Windows 2k CD. Shou
It's not supported. Ex2K might install on it, but not 5.5
- Original Message -
From: "Chris H" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Exchange Discussions" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Wednesday, April 03, 2002 11:04 AM
Subject: Exchange not supported by this version of Windows
> I am trying to install
You have two choices: the UI or command-line import of a CSV. Pick one.
Unless, of course, you want to do some custom coding using DAPI.
- Original Message -
From: "Matt Hoffman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Exchange Discussions" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Thursday, April 04, 2002 10:31 AM
Su
"I don't know"
- Original Message -
From: "Woodruff, Michael" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Exchange Discussions" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Thursday, April 04, 2002 10:52 AM
Subject: RE: Exchange OU
> At least someone say "I don't know".
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Woodruff, Micha
Not sure how that came about. In Site Addressing modify the address (change
the space to something else, hit apply, modify it back to a space, hit apply
and OK, then say yes to the popup). That will rewrite everyone's address.
- Original Message -
From: "Scott Lounder" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Okay, Pink, settle down.
- Original Message -
From: "Newsgroups" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Exchange Discussions" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Thursday, April 04, 2002 6:50 PM
Subject: RE: Recall: hello
Yes you can! With 1010220 all call up to 20 minutes are just 0.99!
-Original Messa
I'm betting these users have tons of folders or, just as bad, a small number
of folders with lots of messages in them.
When a user accesses the root of his mailbox the folders in the root level
are enumerated by the server and passed back to the client. As each folder
is accessed (either by click
ght?
>
> Also, if the user has no emails in his inbox folder (they're all in
> another folder in the mailbox) ... that's not going to make a
> difference, right? ... didn't think so.
>
> Thanks again ... Jim
>
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL P
The Disaster Recovery document covers this. Found at
www.microsoft.com/exchange.
- Original Message -
From: "Patrick" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Exchange Discussions" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Saturday, April 06, 2002 3:07 PM
Subject: Migrating form an existing Exchange 5.5 server to an upg
Yeah, that too.
- Original Message -
From: "Martin Blackstone" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Exchange Discussions" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Saturday, April 06, 2002 3:08 PM
Subject: RE: Migrating form an existing Exchange 5.5 server to an upgraded
Exchange 5.5 server
> http://www.swinc.com/
I've always preferred a furshlugginer(1) pneumatic drill.
1) for those who remember Alfred E. Neuman
- Original Message -
From: "Andy David" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Exchange Discussions" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Sunday, April 07, 2002 4:52 PM
Subject: RE: Need help with Exchange 5.5 to
yes
- Original Message -
From: "CHRIS H" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Exchange Discussions" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Monday, April 08, 2002 4:28 PM
Subject: Restoring Public Folder
> I was reading in the MS Disaster Recovery paper that you do not need to
name
> the server the same name as t
;
> Thanks ... Jim
>
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Daniel
> Chenault
> Sent: Thursday, April 04, 2002 10:58 PM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: Re: Requesting Data errors with SAN and Large Mailboxs
You can remove inherited objects from child leafs.
- Original Message -
From: "Carlos Dinapoli" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Exchange Discussions" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Thursday, April 04, 2002 5:04 PM
Subject: Administrator Permissions
> Hi guys I have the follow quetion:
>
> I have on
By creating a custom form, yes. Quick and easy and you can set it to be the
default form for the org.
But that won't prevent anyone from copying the information into a new
message, saving it out as an file and attaching to a new message or any of a
number of ways to copy the content into a new me
Set that profile to not use password authentication; they'll be prompted for
the creds.
- Original Message -
From: "Mitchell Mike" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Exchange Discussions" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Tuesday, April 09, 2002 10:50 AM
Subject: Needing to open a mailbox to verify...
>
I was about to give step-by-step info but realized that that does not put
bread on the table.
My services are available at $225/hr plus T&E.
- Original Message -
From: "Michel, David" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Exchange Discussions" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Tuesday, April 09, 2002 1:57 PM
arges?
By
> the way, I don't think my question was posed in such a way as to require a
> step-by-step answer. I know how to do the restore, I was looking to see
if
> there was an easier way that I had not thought of and if anyone has been
> through a similar process. I kind of
Tools:Accounts and get properties on his account. Servers:Outgoing mail
server and see to it that "Remember my password" is checked.
That's one hour of consulting time at your going rate.
- Original Message -
From: "David Florea" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Exchange Discussions" <[EMAIL PRO
27;ll give that a try. You're a gentleman & a scholar, et
seq.
-Original Message-
From: Daniel Chenault [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Tuesday, April 09, 2002 1:57 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: Re: OLExpress asks for re-authentication to send
Tools:Accounts and g
Exmerge
- Original Message -
From: "LIU, JEFF" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Exchange Discussions" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Friday, April 05, 2002 11:38 AM
Subject: Retracting
Config:
1,E2K and GW5.5
2,E2K Novell Connector, GW5.5 API
Question:
An user sent a wrong mail to a group in E2K fro
gt; And liked it.
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Daniel Chenault [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Tuesday, April 09, 2002 2:06 PM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: Re: OLExpress asks for re-authentication to send
>
>
> I've been called worse.
>
> ---
I can think of lots of creative ways to deal with horrible managers.
Unfortunately most of them are illegal in all fifty states.
- Original Message -
From: "Tom Meunier" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Exchange Discussions" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Tuesday, April 09, 2002 6:23 PM
Subject: RE: H
First off, recognize that the IMS just sits there waiting for messages to be
handed off to it. That is done by the MTA. The MTA has a list of nine
parameters it looks at to determine a route; cost is the last one of the
nine and the only one exposed in the UI. The others have to do with link
laten
bind and bindback are x.400 terms that the rest of us call
challenge/response login.
- Original Message -
From: "John Strongosky" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Exchange Discussions" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Tuesday, April 09, 2002 7:07 PM
Subject: RE: 9318 and 9322 bind and bindback errors
- Original Message -
From: "NetStar" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Exchange Discussions" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Tuesday, April 09, 2002 8:43 PM
Subject: Re: IMC
> Thanks! What is "UI"?
> --- Daniel Chenault <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
FAQ
- Original Message -
From: "Erik L. Vesneski" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Exchange Discussions" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Wednesday, April 10, 2002 9:43 AM
Subject: Objects In The Drop Down For Email-Adresses
> Hi,
>
> When creating a new email message one presses on the 'To' button an
Okay if you say so.
- Original Message -
From: "Bibel, Laura Y." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Exchange Discussions" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Wednesday, April 10, 2002 9:23 PM
Subject: RE: Prevent the forwarding of an email message.
> If the message composed in Outlook is marked pri
Disclaimers are pretty much worthless but a lot of legal types like to
include them just to CYA.
- Original Message -
From: "Gagrani, Kishore" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Exchange Discussions" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Friday, April 12, 2002 12:43 PM
Subject: E-mail disclaimer
> We are a m
More to the point would be understanding how any user could access another's
mailbox. What does the permissions tab show on this one user's mailbox?
- Original Message -
From: "Pillai, Raj" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Exchange Discussions" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Friday, April 12, 2002 4:0
Please read the docs on the CD. They tell you exactly what permission are
needed. There is no service account, per se, in Ex2K.
Sorry if this seems insulting but from what you've typed below you are NOT
ready to install Ex2K.
- Original Message -
From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Exchange D
Did you accept the meeting? No. Did you even bother keeping the invite? No.
What conclusion is OL supposed to derive from these actions but to forget
the whole thing?
- Original Message -
From: "Wei Yan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Exchange Discussions" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Monday, Apri
501 - 600 of 835 matches
Mail list logo
