Title: Message
You mean like MIIS
Marchitecture.. Strikes
again.
Todd
From: Rick Kingslan
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, March 17, 2004
12:03 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] Microsoft
Patch
Ahhh geez. Deal with it, Smart
Ass. They like
Title: Message
At
least they didn't call MIIS Windows Identify Information
Server!
--
Roger D. Seielstad -
MTS MCSE MS-MVP Sr. Systems Administrator Inovis Inc.
-Original Message-From: Myrick, Todd
(NIH/CIT)
Title: OT: Exchange 5.5 SMTP Log Parser
Anyone know of a log parser for Exchange 5.5 IMC logs? I downloaded Microsoft's log parser 2.0 but it doesn't seem to do Exchange 5.5 logs. I've got to dig through some big logs files and I was hoping to parse them first.
Mike
Title: OT: Exchange 5.5 SMTP Log Parser
Hey gang,
I am doing some quick research about the
effects of allowing Windows 200x and clients that support dynamic updates
effect on wireless networks, and VPNs.
What seems to be happening now is that we
have host that are enabled for
Title: Message
What
kind of logs, and what are you looking for?
This
is a little log file condenser that I wrote for the IMS logs a while
back:
http://www.wiredeuclid.com/modules.php?op=modloadname=Sectionsfile=indexreq=viewarticleartid=5page=1
Title: Message
Thanks Roger. That will work
perfectly!
Mike
From: Roger Seielstad
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, March 17, 2004
11:42 AMTo: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]'Subject: RE:
[ActiveDir] OT: Exchange 5.5 SMTP Log Parser
What
kind of logs, and what are you looking for?
This
I've got a few
questions about using multiple trees in a forest.
Are there
transitive Kerberos trusts across the trees in Win2k?
Win2k3?
What's the
advantage/disadvantages of going with 3 seperate trees vs 1 single tree with
an empty root and 3 child domains?
Assuming we
Title: Message
I
wrote that a long time ago - but it seems to do the trick for
me.
If
you know perl, you should be able to change it for other
purposes...
--
Roger D. Seielstad -
MTS MCSE MS-MVP Sr. Systems Administrator
I am running an older version of Crystal reports and it has filters to deal with the
logs..
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] on behalf of Celone, Mike
Sent: Wed 3/17/2004 10:06 AM
To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]'
Subject: [ActiveDir] OT: Exchange 5.5 SMTP Log Parser
Anyone
Problem:
In a multi-domain forest with 2003 at the root, 1 2003 child domain, and
8 2000 child domains (all child domains in one tree) when running dcdiag
on any of the 2003 domain controllers in the child domain, it shows
replication latency warnings between the 2003 and all the other domains.
Thoughts inline
From: Celone, Mike
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, March 17, 2004
11:53 AMTo: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]'Subject:
[ActiveDir] Multiple Trees questions
I've got a few
questions about using multiple trees in a forest.
Are there
transitive Kerberos trusts across
One thing does come to mind when in Explorer and you want to see the
entire tree structure [downward from any point] simply hit the * key on the
numeric keypad and it will expand all folders all the way to the bottom of that
branch. For instance, if you
wanted to look for shares in a
Thanks for the reply Al. When I said 3 seperate trees
I meant 3 trees within the same forest. There would be no empty root
domain but we would all be part of the same forest. We are definetly not
looking to go with 3 seperate forests. I'm wondering how much
adminsitration overhead we would
I read the question differently, coming from the standpoint
of everything within a single forest.
If that's correct, then my thoughts:
a) Yes
b) Trees are all about DNS namespaces. If you need
domainA.com and domainB.com and domainC.comwithin the same forest, then
you are forced into
D'OH. Nothing like using a contradictory example to
illustrate my point. Should have been "sub3.domainA.com"
From: Coleman, Hunter
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, March 17, 2004 11:12
AMTo: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]'Subject: RE:
[ActiveDir] Multiple Trees questions
I read the
I think Al is reading your question as multiple forests vs
single forest. Please clarify since I understand your Q to be about one forest
with a single tree vs multiple trees. If you want/need a security boundary
you will end up in a multiple forest environment, but that's due to laws etc if
Return Receipt
Your RE: [ActiveDir] Multiple Trees questions
document
:
Yes that's correct a single forest. Thanks for the
answers.I was pretty sure on most of them but it always helps to make sure
I was reading the information from Microsoft's site
correctly!
Mike
From: Coleman, Hunter
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, March 17, 2004 1:22
PMTo:
Hi Steven,
There is a new dcdiag.exe available (but not publicly yet). If you have a Premier
account, you can reference KB832628. I had a different issue than the one you are
reporting. The new executable solved my problem (truncated output when run with the
/e switch. I believe MS is
I also wrote a lot of things many years ago ;-) I'd still have a closer
look at MACS today...
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of stefano tufillaro
Sent: Dienstag, 16. März 2004 20:37
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] security
now that's a cool tip - didn't know this (been using * for
years, however, I still like to use it when going down a path such as when I'm
on c: and need to get to a program's directory: cd \pro*\que*\migra*\logs
)
/Guido
From: Kevin Sullivan
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Mittwoch, 17.
I will give my rep a call and see if they can get it for me. Would be
nice if MS put up KB's talking about known problems but is another story
for another day.
Thanks!
Steve
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Thommes,
Michael M.
Sent:
I need to get some information on all of our users for a
manager here. I have a script I can alter to get the information, but can I
assume that if the user has a value in the mail attribute that he
or she has an Exchange account? What the manager ultimately wants is a list of
all users,
I am currently trying to get AD authenitication for linux. I have
everything working (login, groups, etc) but I cannot get ldapssl working
correctly.
I am currently getting this in my logs:
nss_ldap: could not search LDAP server - Referral
And I keep getting a segmentation fault when I try to
Just having data in the mail attribute is not neccessarily
an indication that they have a mailbox. That could have been put in
manually or that object could be a contact or a non-mailbox-enabled user entity
etc.
Look for a search criteria that looks for more than one
attribute such as
I found a KB article to upgrade my W2K Group policies for XP, followed
it but it did not work.
When I create a new GPO with an XP box, the new GPO also does not
contain the settings for XP
I found that I could get the extra XP settings into the GPO by
overwriting the administrative templates
1. Yes. It is a single forest, all domains within a single
forest have a transitive trust relationship irregardless of child or tree
status.
2. Actually I consider it more confusing to go with
separate trees. Generally you do it when there is some political battle and
someone doesn't want
oops,
KB 307900
Robert Toole
Robert Toole wrote:
I found a KB article to upgrade my W2K Group policies for XP, followed
it but it did not work.
When I create a new GPO with an XP box, the new GPO also does not
contain the settings for XP
I found that I could get the extra XP settings into
Yes, I changed that to a special users instead of anonymous and still
the same issue. What do you think the referral error is? I can change
anything at this point. What do you think?
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Mulnick, Al
Sent:
How about this as a way forward (nice cliché, eh? :)
Have you logged LDAP connections on the dc? If not, the setting is in the
registry under NTDS\diagnostics. Try increasing the logging (be sure the
event log has the room and will overwrite) and see what gets logged when you
attempt to connect.
doh! :)
I have got to pay closer attention to the terminology in
some of these.
In that case, it's not so tough. Multiple domains
(trees) are not too tough to implement. I'd have to say that a separate
domain doesn't seem neccessary unless you meet one of the five criteria for new
How about this as a way forward (nice cliché, eh? :) Have you logged LDAP connections
on the dc?
Yes, I can login ok. I can query and get groups, etc. Just no go with ssl.
As for the referral, I can't understand why it would try to refer elsewhere exactly.
That's a mystery at the moment,
Robert-
I've seen this behavior too, and yes, manually adding the XP ADMs into a
GPO is safe. However, because XP is supposed to support this
automatically, you might want to check the following policy on your XP
machine that you're using to edit those GPOs:
User Configuration|Administrative
Err nope.
Mail could be set by other things and for other
reasons.
If the user has an exchange mailbox they should have
HOMEMDB or HOMEMTA attributes set so you should be able to get away with just
checking for a value in one or both of those locations. I think I would hit on
homemdb
I wrote a nice little fortune cookie program years ago for when your PC
starts up, however I am still planning on looking at MACS. :o)
-
http://www.joeware.net (download joeware)
http://www.cafeshops.com/joewarenet (wear joeware)
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL
I am wondering if I am reading that filter
incorrectly
( (mailnickname=*) (|
(
(objectCategory=person)
(objectClass=user)
(!
(homeMDB=*)
)
(!
(msExchHomeServerName=*)
) )
(
(objectCategory=person)
(objectClass=user)
(|
(homeMDB=*)
(msExchHomeServerName=*)
) ) ))
It
Hmmm some other things I do
Of course I load ActiveState Perl I have found that
helps my command line working tremendously...
I also register .PL with PATHEXT, as well as .msc. That way
I can type JoeRocks instead of JoeRocks.pl or I can type dsa or adsiedit
without adding the
Title: Message
You know it may be bad to post a bunch of names that they
shouldn't use in a public forum... Someone from marketing may have learned how
to read and will go... Hey, that sounds catchy... And they are already saying
it... Let's do it!
-
http://www.joeware.net
Hi,
we have a sp3 based domain - 6000 users, 2500 computers, empty root, and
a single resource domain. Currently looking at upgrading to sp4 on the
way to Windows 2003. Given our desire to get to w2k3 by fall and our own
testing methods we're considering going from sp3 to w2k3 directly. The
Must have Perl...
The ds tools (dsquery, dsadd, etc) and my own Perl and batch scripts in
c:\tools\bin and c:\tools\bat.
A decent editor. Currently using syn (syn.sourceforge.net)
Add syn, notepad, and wordpad to the sendto menu
And remember the Windows key shortcuts... Much faster than the
Ok so I wanted to write down some fun I have recently
had with some Exchange 2K / AD interactions...
First off, we don't really use Universal Groups.
However we do have a couple, the builtin ones such as schema and enterprise
admins, plus we have two DLs for executives for securing
which is why I have an "All Exchange Enterprise Servers" UG
that contains all"Exchange Domain Server"GGs(just like the
DLGs) - I left theother "Exchange Enterprise Servers" DLGs as they are, as
you can't convert all of them to UGs(only one could keep the name) and the
ACE is used by default
42 matches
Mail list logo
