http://support.microsoft.com/kb/280435/EN-US/
I got it working...thanks for all your help, wish I found this earlier!
Travis
"Travis Krampy" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
I am a member of that security group, and I did remove the permissions on
the ohter custom G
Just an opinion, but if your going that route, use Raid 6 if your controller
does it.
Your scenario puts you in jeopardy the moment one drive fails, as during the
rebuild your not redundant.
In Raid 6, two can go and bring you down to zero ft which is no worse than what
you would have your way a
Haha yup sorry bout that, Webster is correct 8 Drives Plus One Hot
Spare, all Fiber 15K
From: Webster [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, June 23, 2008 3:16 PM
To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues
Subject: RE: VMWare RAID 10 or Raid 5
From: Rob Bonfiglio [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject:
From: Rob Bonfiglio [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: VMWare RAID 10 or Raid 5
Is it safe to assume that you meant RAID 5+1?
If not.what is RAID 8?
I believe he means RAID5 configured as 8 drives plus 1 hot spare.
Webster
~ Ninja Email Security with Cloudmark Spam Engine Ge
If you want to go RAID10, do you have enough space for all your VMs +
growth needs? If so, go RAID10, if not go RAID5, I don't think you'll
notice "much" given the size of implementation.
Shook
From: David Baca [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, June
At some point yes ...a SAN would be justified. performance is more important
at this point. My next thought is to eventually move to a SAN. when may
depend on the size of my disks. but really want to see if RAID 10 is worth the
sacrifice of space.
- Original Message
From: Andy Sho
Is it safe to assume that you meant RAID 5+1?
If not.what is RAID 8?
On Mon, Jun 23, 2008 at 2:33 PM, Garcia-Moran, Carlos <
[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Most of our ESX environment is on RAID5 8+1 on an EMC NS20, I haven't
> seen any issues performance wise. Some small SQL DB's and 2 Excha
Thinking long term, would you rather have space or performance? Do you
see this implementation growing to a point where a SAN would be
justified?
Shook
From: David Baca [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, June 23, 2008 2:45 PM
To: MS-Exchange Admin Issu
I am a member of that security group, and I did remove the permissions on
the ohter custom GAL
I created a new custom GAL with default permissions and I still dont see
anything...
"Kennedy, Jim" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
And if it is a new group, did you re
Good questionlocal
- Original Message
From: Andy Shook <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues
Sent: Monday, June 23, 2008 11:44:23 AM
Subject: RE: VMWare RAID 10 or Raid 5
Local array or SAN?
Shook
From:David Baca
[mailto:[EMAIL PR
Local array or SAN?
Shook
From: David Baca [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, June 23, 2008 2:21 PM
To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues
Subject: VMWare RAID 10 or Raid 5
I am looking at installing VMWare in my environment. For about 20
-30 users at th
Most of our ESX environment is on RAID5 8+1 on an EMC NS20, I haven't
seen any issues performance wise. Some small SQL DB's and 2 Exchange
servers (Journal and DR) Depending on your environment and budget RAID5
would be fine
From: David Baca [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, June 23, 20
Mike: the domain is MY domain. This has happened while sending to multiple
external domains [possible 5 or 6] (two of which perform zero filtering). The
funny thing is that when employee #1 was sending to external_Recipient_XYZ and
getting it bounced, Employee #2 was able to successfully send to
I am looking at installing VMWare in my environment. For about 20 -30
users at this point. Have any of you implemented it on a raid 5? I don't
envision anything too intense for useage but if you could give me feedback on
your experience using vmware on raid 5 or raid 10 and your preferenc
And if it is a new group, did you relog after making yourself a member
> -Original Message-
> From: Michael B. Smith [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Monday, June 23, 2008 1:57 PM
> To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues
> Subject: RE: Help with custom GAL
>
> If you remove that security does
If you remove that security does it show up? (And secondly, are you a member
of that group?)
Regards,
Michael B. Smith
MCITP:EM/MCSE/Exchange MVP
http://TheEssentialExchange.com
-Original Message-
From: Travis Krampy [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, June 23, 2008 1:56 PM
To: MS-
It is not listed at all.
The only security that was changed was I added the group that is supposed to
view. Only the default permissions inherated.
I just wanted to be sure it shows up
"Michael B. Smith" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
So you click on the Addres
So you click on the Address Book in Outlook and in the drop-down for address
books, your addr book is not listed at all? Or is it empty?
Did you set any security on the address book within ESM?
Regards,
Michael B. Smith
MCITP:EM/MCSE/Exchange MVP
http://TheEssentialExchange.com
-Original M
mail.domain.com #5.5.0 smtp;503
Is mail.domain.com your domain or the final-recipient domain? How
many external domains does this problem occur with. Is it always the
same ones?
On Mon, Jun 23, 2008 at 11:19 AM, ExchList <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Oh my gosh am I about to hang myself over th
Yes it does...I am not in cached mode.
I tried your link and still nothing.
Anything else I can try?
"Michael B. Smith" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
My bad. I missed the "non-cached mode" too.
Does the preview button give you the expected results?
Regards,
Mi
My bad. I missed the "non-cached mode" too.
Does the preview button give you the expected results?
Regards,
Michael B. Smith
MCITP:EM/MCSE/Exchange MVP
http://TheEssentialExchange.com
-Original Message-
From: Michael B. Smith [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, June 23, 2008 1:22
Not running cached mode...
Thanks
Travis
"Kennedy, Jim" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Is your Outlook running in cached mode? Restart or turn it off. I vote turn
it off.
-Original Message-
From: Travis Krampy [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, Ju
http://theessentialexchange.com/blogs/michael/archive/2007/11/13/forcing-an-
offline-address-book-to-get-updated.aspx
Regards,
Michael B. Smith
MCITP:EM/MCSE/Exchange MVP
http://TheEssentialExchange.com
-Original Message-
From: Travis Krampy [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, June
Is your Outlook running in cached mode? Restart or turn it off. I vote turn it
off.
> -Original Message-
> From: Travis Krampy [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Monday, June 23, 2008 1:17 PM
> To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues
> Subject: Help with custom GAL
>
> Hi
>
> I have an exchange 2003
Hi
I have an exchange 2003 SP2 server, Outlook 2003 NON-Cached mode.
I created this GAL at around 9:00AM and I still do not see the custom GAL in
my Outlook Address list.
I did a update and a rebuild of the RUS.
Anyone know why I cant see this GAL?
Any help on this is greatly appreciated
T
To clarify > This message is coming from their Internal Server to the
internal clients - it is NOT coming from the recipient's mail system.
And it is happening regardless of the who the recipient is.
The settings on the Default SMTP virtual Server are the default
settings.
As much as I can
Joseph,
This seems to be a problem on the mail server receiving the mail. It's
possible they have the authentication set to "Basic and Integrated"
instead of Anonymous. I would inquire with the recipients mail admin to
check and see if that is the case.
HTH,
Tom
___
Oh my gosh am I about to hang myself over this problem; with what seems
to be a simple issue is evading me for a solution.
Exchange 2003 SP2, Windows 2003 R2 (patched)
A few times per week, users will report that when sending to 'one
particular' email address - it gets bounced with the message
I guess the answer is "just do it".
I'd create a new storage group(s) and new stores and use move-mailbox.
Russ' blog tells you how to move the quorum, I'd do it a little differently
by adding in the new disks first so I could use move-mailbox instead of
having to take the SGs offline while
29 matches
Mail list logo
