Title: Message
Would
"fisting" be on that list? :P
-Original Message-From: Martin
Blackstone [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday,
May 31, 2002 9:03 AMTo: MS-Exchange Admin IssuesSubject:
RE: filtering spam
You
are wasting time. Most of the domains are forged an
Title: RE: Del ITems retention: Outlook 97
Jeff,
Spanky is still looking for his $$$
-Original Message-
From: JFadigan
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Friday, May 31, 2002 2:56 PM
To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Del ITems retention:
Outlook 97
Ask spanks to
Title: Message
I
don't remember. But that's why it's a hallucination.
-Original Message-From: John Matteson
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, May 31, 2002 12:32
PMTo: MS-Exchange Admin IssuesSubject: RE:
Simplistic?
I
don't recall that the Rampart district w
Title: Message
PornSweeper, part of the MimeSweeper product
line.
http://www.mimesweeper.com/products/pornsweeper/default.asp
-Original Message-From: William
Lefkovics [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, May 31,
2002 1:25 PMTo: MS-Exchange Admin IssuesSubject: RE:
Title: Message
D5Wringers lactate. =)
-Original Message-From: John Matteson
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]Sent: Friday, May 31, 2002 3:32
PMTo: MS-Exchange Admin IssuesSubject: RE:
Simplistic?
I
don't recall that the Rampart district went down to the
beach.
Joh
Title: Message
I don't
recall that the Rampart district went down to the
beach.
John Matteson; Exchange
ManagerGeac Corporate Infrastructure Systems and
Standards(404) 239 - 2981
Defeat is a state of mind. No one
is ever defeated until defeat has been accepted as a reality. To me, defeat
Here's an interesting development...
If I hit F9 after every sync, I'll get a few more messages added to the
offline folder. As little as 4 or as much as 12 so far...
Rick
-Original Message-
From: Corgiat, Rick [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Friday, May 31, 2002 2:17 PM
To: MS-Excha
yes
-Original Message-
From: Garland Mac Neill [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Thursday, May 30, 2002 12:38 PM
To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Outlook 2002 Sync Error
Are you by chance running NAV CE on your Exchange box?
-Original Message-
From: Dahl, Peter [mailto
Title: Message
I just
have my user's forward the email header information or not delete it and go look
myself.
I take
the domain closest to the originator and block that and all the sub
domains.
That
seems to have gotten MOST of the offensive stuff. Periodically I add a few
more.
Of
cour
Yes, the E2K box is a member of the Exchange 5.5 site. However, not only
within E2K box's Mail Store I see the boxes that I have moved but I also see
them under Private Information Store, Mail Resources of the exchange 5.5 is
this suppose to be right? and if yes why would it not forward the emails
Well, in that case, I believe you are correct. The Recover Deleted
Items is not available in Outlook97.
-Original Message-
From: Sethi, Ali [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Friday, May 31, 2002 11:50 AM
To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Del ITems retention: Outlook 97
Sorry al
Title: RE: Del ITems retention: Outlook 97
Ask spanks to lend me a hand
-Original Message-
From: Sethi, Ali [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Friday, May 31, 2002 2:50 PM
To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Del ITems retention: Outlook 97
Sorry all installation requests requ
I don't remember, and I don't feel like sniffing a connection to find
out again. :)
- Original Message -
From: "William Lefkovics" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "MS-Exchange Admin Issues" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Friday, May 31, 2002 2:16 PM
Subject: RE: How much Bandwidth?
How many packets
Title: Message
sadly,
I remember that too. "Rampart, we have a male caucausian, age 46,
overweight, complaining of dizziness, nausea, and hallucinating about
thongs, starting an IV drip, D5W, wide open".
-Original Message-From: Abercrombie,
Sherry [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
I'm so confused. If you know all this, why are you wasting our time
asking about it?
- Original Message -
From: "Paul Armstrong" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "MS-Exchange Admin Issues" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Friday, May 31, 2002 1:03 PM
Subject: RE: Corrupt Email in Exchange 2000
Personal
Title: RE: Corrupt Email in Exchange 2000
Can't answer for Paul, but I test my backups. Right after I received the honor of becoming the backup admin after someone left, I got bit in the butt big time because a backup system that was supposed to be backing up a couple of Novell servers went be
Title: Message
http://www.mimesweeper.com/products/pornsweeper/default.asp
Roger Wright
Southern Commerce Bank
___
Ambiguity means telling the
truth when you don't mean to.
-Original Message-From: William Lefkovics
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]Sent: Friday, May 31, 2002 2:25
Sorry all installation requests require a helpdesk ticket. You should know
that by now.
-Original Message-
From: William Lefkovics [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Friday, May 31, 2002 2:22 PM
To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Del ITems retention: Outlook 97
Nobody needs that
Title: Message
I
worked in the lumber industry.
I
don't feel the need to hire a full time quarantine folder
administrator.
-Original Message-From: Matthew
Carpenter [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, May 31, 2002
10:14 AMTo: MS-Exchange Admin IssuesSubject: RE:
Title: Message
Somebody here was telling us about filter software that
could check images, at least rudimentarily (it's a word
now.)
-Original Message-From: Abercrombie,
Sherry [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, May 31, 2002 9:20
AMTo: MS-Exchange Admin IssuesSubject:
Is the E2K box a member of your Exchange 5.5 site? If not, do you have CR's
set to forward the mail from your Exchange 5.5 server to the Exchange 2K
box?
John Matteson; Exchange Manager
Geac Corporate Infrastructure Systems and Standards
(404) 239 - 2981
Defeat is a state of mind. No one is ev
Nobody needs that poor excuse for an email client.
Go install 2000 or 2002 now. There is no OutlookXP. It's 2002.
-Original Message-
From: Sethi, Ali [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Friday, May 31, 2002 9:22 AM
To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues
Subject: Del ITems retention: Outlook 97
H
That's standard.
Sorry.
-Original Message-
From: Paul Armstrong [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Friday, May 31, 2002 8:59 AM
To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues
Subject: Corrupt Email in Exchange 2000
Hello All,
I am having an interesting problem with Exchange 2000 & BackupExec 8.6. Ov
Title: Message
I
concur, I loved that show, it's a shame some people are too young to
remember... Could I get a copy too?
-Original Message-From: Steve Ens
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]Sent: Friday, May 31, 2002 12:20
PMTo: MS-Exchange Admin IssuesSubject: RE:
Simplistic?
Apply Outlook2000 sr-1 at least?
-Original Message-
From: Cross, Tom [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Friday, May 31, 2002 9:01 AM
To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues
Subject: Outlook 2000 offline folder sync problem
Outlook 2000 clients get an exception in OUTLOOK.EXE when opening. This
jus
105 users over an ISDN.
Just so long as they didn't all log on at once.
-Original Message-
From: Andy David [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Friday, May 31, 2002 8:30 AM
To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues
Subject: RE: How much Bandwidth?
I'll add another apology.
In the past, I have seen a
Whay back when Exchange was just coming out, the number batted around was 30
LIGHT users (that is the old stress test definition) could be supported on a
56Kb link. Now that was 30 LIGHT users, with nothing else going on across
the link, no file transfers (other than in mail), no web surfing, no t
Title: RE: Corrupt Email in Exchange 2000
We call them HMU's. High Maintenance Users. Of course, that's when we're in a good mood, if we're not, then they might be called ID10T's.
-Original Message-
From: Paul Armstrong [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Friday, May 31, 2002 12:0
How many packets are needed for a MAPI logon?
-Original Message-
From: Missy Koslosky [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Friday, May 31, 2002 7:55 AM
To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues
Subject: Re: How much Bandwidth?
Shiminy. Each packet is 32kb.
- Original Message -
From: "Ambrose,
I have. It works fine at 14,4. RPC connectivity is not much. Data
transfer on the otherhand...
William
-Original Message-
From: Dillon, Jeff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Friday, May 31, 2002 7:14 AM
To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues
Subject: RE: How much Bandwidth?
It can work over
How many times have you needed to restore a mailbox using this system?
-Original Message-
From: Paul Armstrong [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Friday, May 31, 2002 12:41 PM
To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Corrupt Email in Exchange 2000
Yeah, I am familiar with the list and
I agree just because be reports a backup failed doesn't mean that you got a
"bad" backup. Just have the log emailed to you and it takes just seconds to
determine if it was really a fatal failed backup or not.
dave
-Original Message-
From: Paul Armstrong [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: F
The VERY first think I would do is delete the .OST file. Let OL create a new
one and see if it happens again.
-Original Message-
From: Corgiat, Rick [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Wednesday, May 29, 2002 2:16 PM
To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues
Subject: Outlook 2002 Sync Error
I am getti
Title: Message
You
have a copy? Can you send them to me?
-Original Message-From: Abercrombie,
Sherry [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, May 31, 2002 10:58
AMTo: MS-Exchange Admin IssuesSubject: RE:
Simplistic?
I
remember those tones & use them too. I'm glad s
I have installed and setup E2K, SP2 within the same domain as our existing
Exch 5.5, SP6. I can successfuly move mail boxes from 5.5 to E2K. Internal
messages from boxes within 5.5 are properly sent to boxes within E2K.
However, any messages coming from outside do not get to any of the boxes in
E2
It comes from experience. I have 1400 remote locations with circuits from
64K to 768K+. The remote folks scream when ever corporate decides to send
that 4MB PowerPoint presentation.
-Original Message-
From: Ambrose, Joseph [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Friday, May 31, 2002 12:57 PM
To
Have you tested those backups?
--Kevinm KMAP-SR, M, WLKMMAS, UCC+WCA, And Beyond
http://www.daughtry.ca/ For Graphics and WebDesign, GO here!
-Original Message-
From: Paul Armstrong [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Friday, May 31, 2002 9:41 AM
To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues
Subject: RE:
Title: Message
Dammit. Thanks for using the word "sex".
Now my own filter caught that one. lol
-Original Message-
From: Zangara, Jim
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Friday, May 31, 2002 12:04 PM
To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues
Subject: RE: filtering spam
Check out Message
Not to be a pendant, but if a file is simply skipped, the job does not show
up as "failed" in BE.
It fails if BE thinks its "corrupt", or doesnt have permissions to the file
etc. etc.., the job fails.
I do agree however, that a job status of "incomplete" would be more
descriptive and probably caus
Title: Message
Can't live with 'em...
Can't be paid without 'em...
-Original Message-
From: Abercrombie, Sherry
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Friday, May 31, 2002 11:58 AM
To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues
Subject: RE: filtering spam
Mail Essentials doesn't
have that o
Title: Message
Check out Message Inspector
from Elron SW. It "reads" the email and scores it based on criteria you
set. So even if the word sex was in the body it could potentially flag it
as spam.
Jim Zangara, MCSE+I IT ManagerSpecial Projects Engineer Premiere
Radio Networks A Divis
Personally, I dont care about using Brick Level Backup and I know what you mean about
BE being extremely sensitive. BackupExec can skip a file and it will say your backup
failed. Unless you look at the log and see that it was one error that wasnt important
which caused the backup to fail but i
If deleted item & mailbox retention are both set to 30 days and the backup rotation is
30 days what is the point of brick level backups? Correct me if I am wrong but with
those two settings and a little education the Big Boss should be able to recover his
own deleted item and not have to wait
Title: Message
Mail
Essentials doesn't have that option, but I'll be looking for that on what I'm
migrating to. The only reason the user was ticked was because management
sent out a memo stating that IT would be blocking those kinds of
emails..mgmt didn't have a clue & of course didn't
Title: RE: Corrupt Email in Exchange 2000
I've seen the same thing with Backup Exec 8.6 on an Exchange 5.5 server doing mailbox backups. Personally I think it's just one of those "features" of BE 8.6. On regular data backups, even with Remote Agent & Open Files Options Agent installed I've s
Interesting point
Joseph Ambrose
System and Network Manager
The Conference Board
P: 001-212-339-0443
F: 001-212-836-3802
E: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Visit our Award Winning Web Site: www.conference-board.org
-Original Message-
From: Schwartz, Jim [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Friday,
yup
Joseph Ambrose
System and Network Manager
The Conference Board
P: 001-212-339-0443
F: 001-212-836-3802
E: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Visit our Award Winning Web Site: www.conference-board.org
-Original Message-
From: Missy Koslosky [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Friday, May 31, 2002
Heheheh unfortunately, we're not. I think so many of us are quite used to making so
little work so well. We've got a few remote sites with 5 users riding a 128kbps line
with 32k CIR. That seems to have worked just fine. We see a avg throughput of 70kbps
per second. I haven't really gotten
Yeah, I am familiar with the list and it basically says that Brick Level= BAD. The
reasoning behind this is because it takes up more space on the backup tape and makes
your backup window larger.But if it doesn't matter that the brick level backup is
taking up more tape space and the backup wind
ooohhh... stop, you're hurting my feelings.
It's certainly a known issue. Brick level backups fire errors all of
the time. It's the nature of the beast. There are other, better ways
to recover from mistakenly deleted items. Especially in E2K.
- Original Message -
From: "Joe Irvine"
now there's an intelligent, well-thought out response.
It sounds to me like you might want to call Veritas and see if they can help with the
source of the error. it's probably a known issue.
Thanks,
Joe Irvine
Director of Information Technology
The Business Office, Inc.
(609) 597
Title: Message
You can only do so much. The user needs to
do their part too. If you are getting spam with no text,
block the "no subject" or "no body" messages. I
do that already
-Original Message-
From: Abercrombie, Sherry
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Friday, May 31, 2002
Title: Message
You
are absolutely right Martin, the domains are forged, change frequently & the
from email addresses are faked also. Get some kind of content filtering
software. Currently I use Mail Essentials from GFI, but will be migrating
to a Linux flavored software that is going to be
Please keep conversations on-list.
I take it you're unfamiliar with the Exchange FAQ at
http://www.swinc.com?
- Original Message -
From: "Paul Armstrong" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Friday, May 31, 2002 12:15 PM
Subject: RE: Corrupt Email in Exchange 2000
What do
Title: Message
I
remember those tones & use them too. I'm glad someone else out there
is old enough to remember that show :)
-Original Message-From: John Matteson
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, May 30, 2002 10:35
PMTo: MS-Exchange Admin IssuesSubject: RE:
Si
Hi,
If Deleted Items Retention has been enabled on your Exchange server are you
able to retain your deleted emails from the Outlook 97 client? I don't
think so I think you need Outlook 2k or XP but I just wanted to double check
incase im wrong.
Thanks,
Exchange 5.5 SP4
Windows 2k Server sp2
L
This isn't corrupt information. It's crappy backup methodology.
- Original Message -
From: "Paul Armstrong" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "MS-Exchange Admin Issues" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Friday, May 31, 2002 11:58 AM
Subject: Corrupt Email in Exchange 2000
Hello All,
I am having an inter
We are so no help at all for this guy... = [
--Kevinm KMAP-SR, M, WLKMMAS, UCC+WCA, And Beyond
http://www.daughtry.ca/ For Graphics and WebDesign, GO here!
-Original Message-
From: Neil Hobson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Friday, May 31, 2002 9:11 AM
To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues
Su
A colleague of mine did a design with 10 Outlook users in France over a
64k link, based on the theory of around 5k per session. As I understand
it, performance was acceptable.
Neil
-Original Message-
From: Andy David [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Posted At: 31 May 2002 16:30
Posted To: S
Title: installing first exchange 2000 server in Active Directory
Hi All,
I am trying to install the initial exchange 2000 server. It will be joining an existing org and site. The existing org/site and exchange servers are in 5.5 and NT4 domain.
I have two-way trust between the NT4 domain and
One other issue you may want to look at is the anti-virus client on the
workstation. Many of them are MAPI aware so when the client get the new mail
notification it goes and checks the new mail for an attachment and if one
exists it may download the attachment and scans it for a virus. Where you
c
You got that I meant "3 and 5 k" per user, not M, right?
- Original Message -
From: "Ambrose, Joseph" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "MS-Exchange Admin Issues" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Friday, May 31, 2002 11:42 AM
Subject: RE: How much Bandwidth?
No problem Missy, I got what I needed. Thanks!
Outlook 2000 clients get an exception in OUTLOOK.EXE when opening. This
just started happening on O2K clients that use offline folders a couple days
ago. Believe it or not, we have 98 clients that are syncing just fine (go
figure). The server end is 2K server w/Exch 5.5 SP4.
Here's what we'v
Hello All,
I am having an interesting problem with Exchange 2000 & BackupExec 8.6. Over the past
few weeks, I have been getting errors within BackupExec8.6 when it backs up indivdual
mailboxes in Exchange 2000. There are two mailboxes where it finds messages that it
can't access so therefor
Thanks to all who put their $0.02 in!
Joseph Ambrose
System and Network Manager
The Conference Board
P: 001-212-339-0443
F: 001-212-836-3802
E: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Visit our Award Winning Web Site: www.conference-board.org
-Original Message-
From: Ambrose, Joseph [mailto:[EMAIL PROTE
No problem Missy, I got what I needed. Thanks!
Joseph Ambrose
System and Network Manager
The Conference Board
P: 001-212-339-0443
F: 001-212-836-3802
E: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Visit our Award Winning Web Site: www.conference-board.org
-Original Message-
From: Missy Koslosky [mailto:
Yeah. Too little coffee here. Thanks.
- Original Message -
From: "Kevin Miller" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "MS-Exchange Admin Issues" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Friday, May 31, 2002 11:27 AM
Subject: RE: How much Bandwidth?
3 and 5 mb? Did you mean K?
--Kevinm KMAP-SR, M, WLKMMAS, UCC+WCA
I'll add another apology.
In the past, I have seen a 20 user office set up in much in the same manner
and found that 256 was ample.
-Original Message-
From: Missy Koslosky [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Friday, May 31, 2002 11:24 AM
To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues
Subject: Re: How much B
3 and 5 mb? Did you mean K?
--Kevinm KMAP-SR, M, WLKMMAS, UCC+WCA, And Beyond
http://www.daughtry.ca/ For Graphics and WebDesign, GO here!
-Original Message-
From: Missy Koslosky [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Friday, May 31, 2002 8:24 AM
To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues
Subject: Re: How
My network here used to look like 2 cloud t1's from my WAN, with 48 out
of the cloud to offices. The network was 2,000+% over subscribed but was
still able to support >10 Mapi connections at each office. The big but
here was that we were running PST's at that time. I since have it down
to 500% ove
Much better explanation...
You probably won't. How much of that bandwidth is available? As a rule
of thumb, you need between 3 and 5 MB available per user. For 20 users,
you should be just fine.
Sorry...
- Original Message -
From: "Ambrose, Joseph" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "MS-Exchange
Simply put
We have an office in Brussels that has a network connected to us by a VPN.
Their Exchange server is on our site. All mail flows fine between them. (
IMC is on this side of the pond) this configuration is FINE THE WAY IT IS.
My boss wants to move all their servers over here.
The
I know that problems between servers can occur if the bandwidth between them
falls below a certain number. But if you are talking about clients, sending,
receiving, and syncing, then I really don't know that there is a minimum.
I have a salesman who routinely connects at 9600. His Modem is broken
Title: Message
I
believe he usesdare I say it..
POP
--Kevinm KMAP-SR, M, WLKMMAS, UCC+WCA, And Beyondhttp://www.daughtry.ca/ For Graphics and
WebDesign, GO here!
-Original Message-From: Andy David
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday
Title: Message
Yes, I do not use my 3rd party
to filter by domain. Keywords in subject, header fields, and body work best.
You catch a lot of "interesting" personal mail that way too.personal mail that way too.
-Original Message-
From: Martin Blackstone
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED
Title: Message
My 2
year old has a nice wave file as well.
--Kevinm KMAP-SR, M, WLKMMAS, UCC+WCA, And Beyondhttp://www.daughtry.ca/ For Graphics and
WebDesign, GO here!
-Original Message-From: William
Lefkovics [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, May
30, 2002 10:16 P
As much as it can. The packets are 32k. Let me ask you, why do you need
this information?
--Kevinm KMAP-SR, M, WLKMMAS, UCC+WCA, And Beyond
http://www.daughtry.ca/ For Graphics and WebDesign, GO here!
-Original Message-
From: Ambrose, Joseph [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Friday, May
I think it took me about an hour... And one big Mess up.
How is that for a feeling William?
--Kevinm KMAP-SR, M, WLKMMAS, UCC+WCA, And Beyond
http://www.daughtry.ca/ For Graphics and WebDesign, GO here!
-Original Message-
From: Micheal Espinola Jr [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Frid
That is it right there. check that Check box, the rerun the RUS and re
apply the Default recipients policy. Did the trick for us, after I
"accidentally" deleted the owners account.
--Kevinm KMAP-SR, M, WLKMMAS, UCC+WCA, And Beyond
http://www.daughtry.ca/ For Graphics and WebDesign, GO here!
---
Shiminy. Each packet is 32kb.
- Original Message -
From: "Ambrose, Joseph" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "MS-Exchange Admin Issues" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Friday, May 31, 2002 10:49 AM
Subject: RE: How much Bandwidth?
OK.
How about a minimum number then?
Joseph Ambrose
System and Networ
OK.
How about a minimum number then?
Joseph Ambrose
System and Network Manager
The Conference Board
P: 001-212-339-0443
F: 001-212-836-3802
E: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Visit our Award Winning Web Site: www.conference-board.org
-Original Message-
From: Ambrose, Joseph [mailto:[EMAIL PROT
It can work over as little as a 33.6K link (I've not tried less). Give it
more, and it takes it up to the transmission capabilities of the link and
CPUs involved.
-Original Message-
From: Ambrose, Joseph [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Friday, May 31, 2002 9:44 AM
To: MS-Exchange Admin
That's what it was. As soon as I re-enabled those accounts to inherit
permissions on the Security tab, and reapplied the Default Recipient
Policy - all accounts were visible in the GAL, and all appropriate E-Mail
addresses were applied.
Thanks for the help Kevin! I'm sure it would have taken me
Title: RE: How much Bandwidth?
SOOO long
-Original Message-
From: Missy Koslosky [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Friday, May 31, 2002 9:07 AM
To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues
Subject: Re: How much Bandwidth?
As much as they need.
Seriously, that's like asking "
As much as they need.
Seriously, that's like asking "how long is a piece of string".
Missy
- Original Message -
From: "Ambrose, Joseph" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "MS-Exchange Admin Issues" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Friday, May 31, 2002 9:43 AM
Subject: How much Bandwidth?
Hello Exchange
Title: Message
my
workstation is WinXP Pro, im connected to a w2k sbs server
Thanks,
-Chris-
IT Director
Sundowner
Interiors
-Original Message-From: Precht, David
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, May 31, 2002 7:33
AMTo: MS-Exchange Admin IssuesSubject: RE: Prob
Thanks guys, I now have a better understanding of OST's
Thanks,
-Chris-
IT Director
Sundowner Interiors
-Original Message-
From: William Lefkovics [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Thursday, May 30, 2002 6:07 PM
To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Looking for Advice...
Exactly.
I'm still checking on that. It looks as though some accounts are not
inheriting perms...
--
Micheal Espinola Jr
"Kevin Miller" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:261305@exchangelist...
>
> I mean the security settings being missing, causing the users to have no
> addresses. I posted that
yes your surmise is almost right benjamin,thanx...But the question is now,
can i devote the SMTP server which was constructed just for a product(the
product pulls mail to the SMTP server using java packet)?..Another words,can
i devote the SMTP server just for one IP address client and one mailbox?
Correction: The policy is applying to the mailboxes that do not have a
problem. The policy is not applying to mailboxes that are accounts that
named after the users first name.
I confirmed this by adding a bogus SMTP address to the policy.
This is very peculiar...
--
Micheal Espinola Jr
"Mic
Hello Exchange Experts!
Can you tell me how much bandwidth the Outlook <-> Exchange RPC connections
uses?
Exch 5.5 sp4
Outlook 97 sr-2 / Outlook 2000
Joseph Ambrose
System and Network Manager
The Conference Board
P: 001-212-339-0443
F: 001-212-836-3802
E: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Visit our Award Wi
Title: Message
just you;)
-Original Message-From: Chris Peden
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]Sent: Thursday, May 30, 2002
11:32 To: MS-Exchange Admin IssuesCc: NT System Admin
IssuesSubject: Problems posting
Anyone else having
problems posting to the lists?
Thanks,
Yep, there is only 1 DGAL.
These mailboxes were imported over a week ago.
Since my original post, I deleted and manually recreated on of the
mailboxes. I noticed that even after waiting overnight, the Default
Recipient Policy was not applied (thus it was never config'd for any
addresses).
I tr
Title: Message
IIRC,
unchecking the "No loss restore" is actually recommended by BE.
-Original Message-From: MHR(Michael
Ross) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, May 31, 2002 9:14
AMTo: MS-Exchange Admin IssuesSubject: RE: restore
IS
well
it was NOT a no loss
Title: Message
well
it was NOT a no loss restore, so maybe that had something to do with
it..
-Original Message-From: Andy David
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, May 31, 2002 8:13
AMTo: MS-Exchange Admin IssuesSubject: RE: restore
IS
Glad
you got it running,
Title: Message
Glad
you got it running, but seriously, all that is not typically required to
restore a full online backup.
Something went amiss somewhere in the process.
-Original Message-From: MHR(Michael
Ross) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, May 31, 2002 9:06
Title: Message
Pretty
much
When
my bosses told me how much they like the filter, I told them how lucky they
were to hire such a perverted mind.
-Original Message-From: Schwartz, Jim
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, May 31, 2002 6:05
AMTo: MS-Exchange Admin Issu
Title: Message
ok
MYSTERY SOLVED
what i
had to do was
restore from the online backup
rename
priv.pat and pub.pat to priv.oldpat pub.oldpat
rename
the restore in progress registry key to restore in
progress.old
run
eseutil /p pub.edb and eseutil /priv.edb in that order
move
all the log fil
Title: Message
It's
made from all the words Martin uses to do his searches on
Kazaa.
-Original Message-From: Martin
Blackstone [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday,
May 31, 2002 9:03 AMTo: MS-Exchange Admin IssuesSubject:
RE: filtering spam
You
are wasting time.
Title: Message
You
are wasting time. Most of the domains are forged and they change every
day.
I have
recently started playing with content filtering. I pulled out a copy of
Webshield SMTP and are blocking by keywords in the subject. It is working great.
Ill bet we are blocking about 75% of
1 - 100 of 113 matches
Mail list logo
