I've got a couple of higher-ed clients in Virginia. We restrict expansion of
distribution lists, and we've reduced the information we display from the GAL
(via display templates), but we don't otherwise restrict the GAL. I'm not sure
what privacy concerns you are attempting to address.
GAL segm
I would guess anything that's not in a Bcc: field is fair game? I mean, with a
little bit of research, thought and guesswork one could come up with a hidden
address and who it may be...
Have never dealt with your situation exactly- have been doing email since Well,
cc:Mail so... Yeah.
Have sim
*Added to fortunes.txt*
~JasonG
> -Original Message-
> From: Don Andrews [mailto:don.andr...@safeway.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, July 18, 2012 14:51
> To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues
> Subject: RE: Increasing Attachment size for OWA and EWS?
>
> Yeah, got it - "fix this hammer so it drives thes
Yeah, got it - "fix this hammer so it drives these screws - I can't be bothered
to pick up a screwdriver and I pay your salary"
-Original Message-
From: Fred Sawyer [mailto:fsaw...@victuscapitalconsulting.com]
Sent: Wednesday, July 18, 2012 11:45 AM
To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues
Subject:
Fair enough as long as the executive gives you the budget to build your system
to handle it. If they need it and can pay for it give it to them. No shame in
that, we are solution providers.
-Original Message-
From: Fred Sawyer [mailto:fsaw...@victuscapitalconsulting.com]
Sent: Wednesda
It's an effective way to deflect the issue with users. The bounce is never from
your system. :)
-Original Message-
From: Don Andrews [mailto:don.andr...@safeway.com]
Sent: Wednesday, July 18, 2012 2:39 PM
To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Increasing Attachment size for OWA and
Don - I so agree.. Sadly I must hang my head in shame and suck up the
executive order. Most of these large attachments are internal only emails.
Didn't you know email is Latin for "FTP"?
-Original Message-
From: Don Andrews [mailto:don.andr...@safeway.com]
Sent: Wednesday, July 18
HOLY FTP Batman! Just curious what percentage of your
clients/customers/vendors etc. allow that large a message size much less
attachment size?
-Original Message-
From: Fred Sawyer [mailto:fsaw...@victuscapitalconsulting.com]
Sent: Wednesday, July 18, 2012 10:36 AM
To: MS-Exchange Admi
I'm in a meeting where I have to pay semi-attention, so I can't look it up for
you; but there is a fairly recent post on the Exchange Team blog on this topic.
-Original Message-
From: Fred Sawyer [mailto:fsaw...@victuscapitalconsulting.com]
Sent: Wednesday, July 18, 2012 1:36 PM
To: MS-E
We are currently running on Exchange 2010 SP2 RU1 and I have been working on
setting the accepted attachment size to 175MB. The proper values have been set
on TransportConfig, ReceiveConnector's, SendConnector's, and user Message Size
Restrictions. Outlook clients connecting with MAPI are able
I made a statement 7 seven places down that I believe may have changed how
you're reading this where I said "everything was gone". I meant "all the
Exchange servers were gone". In this test we could still recover AD. As
such, AD still believes that the original database names exist so I can'
I should hope not - otherwise I'm going to have to patch all my servers in one
day!
From: bounce-9533916-8066...@lyris.sunbelt-software.com
[mailto:bounce-9533916-8066...@lyris.sunbelt-software.com] On Behalf Of
Stringham, Steven
Sent: 17 July 2012 23:02
To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues
Subject: RE
12 matches
Mail list logo
