For IE or some other app?
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Salandra, Justin A.
Sent: Monday, November 22, 2004 2:35 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: [ActiveDir] Configure Check for newer versions of stored pages
How can you configure
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Mulnick, Al
Sent: 22. marraskuuta 2004 22:02
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] Controlling access to AD based on the network tec
hnology used
Can you give some more information about the proposed solution
Kerberos is not supported at least on W2K.
http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;%5BLN%5D;Q248711
There were supposed to be some changes for W2K3, but those were for IPSEC
(such as startup changes etc). I had not heard if they made the changes for
this type of setup.
For 2K3 this
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Mulnick, Al
Sent: Wednesday, November 24, 2004 11:50 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] Hate to beg..
Kerberos is not supported at least on W2K.
http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb
Talk about a great question!
If you think about it, much is written about how or what but not a lot about
why. I find that a shame myself and often structure articles in light of
this.
I always look at it like this:
I upgraded to AD because: 1) I need to maintain a supported environment
:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Mulnick, Al
Sent: Monday, November 29, 2004 11:42 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] What can you *do* with AD??
Talk about a great question!
If you think about it, much is written about how or what but not a lot about
why. I find that a shame myself
Child domains MUST be able to resolve root resources. How you accomplish
that is open but a forwarder doesn't come to mind. Failure to resolve those
names would result in broken replication and other issues.
DNS is not required to be on Windows servers, but it must be on RFC 2052 and
RFC 2136
: Mulnick, Al [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, December 01, 2004 4:55 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] DNS root
Child domains MUST be able to resolve root resources. How you accomplish
that is open but a forwarder doesn't come to mind. Failure to resolve those
names would
shild domain have a secondary copy of the root. true?
2.What was the design descion by MS to have gc's and dc's of the entire
forest only register in the root and not all domain zones?
thanks. you've been great
-Original Message-
From: Mulnick, Al [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday
I'm confused by the statement. Is your problem with duplicates or
case-sensitivity or both?
I would expect some issues with case when it comes to Kerb realms depending
on how you have that implemented and what realms are involved. The regular
day-to-day Active Directory only wouldn't care
and COMPUTER1 as two separate
entries. I'm not the SMS guy, only reporting what he was seeing.
Michael M. Thommes
Argonne National Laboratory
-Original Message-
From: Mulnick, Al [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, December 02, 2004 11:40 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: [ActiveDir
I have not heard of anything like that directly from Microsoft. Been asking
those same questions, but perhaps too quietly.
I can tell you that one reason you won't see the same functionality as
Exchange is that you're dealing with different technology underneath. What
I mean by that is that
the objects. Would also
help greatly for the finger-fumbles.
G.
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Mulnick, Al
Sent: Saturday, 4 December 2004 7:05 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] Restore AD
I have not heard of anything
An additionalsolution would be to give them RPC/HTTP
and let them route via the internet if possible. Couple that with cached
mode as suggested, and you can make their 'experience' that much better.
Putting the data no different drives or trying to replicate
it via the back-end would be
I think you can get what you want using the below tool in conjunction with
http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details.aspx?FamilyID=4814fe3f-92ce-4871-
b8a4-99f98b3f4338DisplayLang=en
Using the /3gb switch is often recommended, but your biggest benefit will
likely come from the disk layout. If
on separate spindles is a no-brainer and
guaranteed to improve things.
Gil I agree with everything Al has ever said Kirkpatrick CTO, NetPro
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Mulnick, Al
Sent: Monday, December 06, 2004 10:54 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED
Title: [ActiveDir] Black Login Screen
Can you give some more information about what those limits
were and how they "worked" around them? I'm interested in context because
there are a lot of variables here.
I've typically seen a lot of folks that just write poor
apps and trip the thresholds
Title: [ActiveDir] Black Login Screen
I think it's still hard to talk about response times until
we know what you are looking at. For example, do you want to know
application response times? Server side response times? Client
response (end to end) times? What makes sense to monitor in terms
Darn near forgot about this one. You might want to have a quick look at the
Mindcraft docs to see if they have something you can use.
http://www.mindcraft.com/directorymark/
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Mike Baudino
Sent: Tuesday,
I have to agree with Joe, that it doesn't sound like normal traffic. You
really should look much more closely at the traffic being sent to see why
and what it actually is.
Al
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Jacob Walker
Sent:
Really, CrackLib is a toolset that I'm guessing they want to use to
*prevent* the use of passwords that are too easy. Personally, I would have
suggested that they think this out a lot more. The reason I say that is
that once you build an app like this, you often times want to extend it to
be
the _msdc zone from the root? I don't
think thats possible.
thanks
-Original Message-
From: Mulnick, Al [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, December 01, 2004 4:55 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] DNS root
Child domains MUST be able to resolve root resources. How you
correctly in your environment ;-)
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Mulnick, Al
Sent: Wednesday, December 01, 2004 5:31 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] DNS root
Why? What good would that do for you?
I understand what
Have you tried NMAP?
FWIW, some might be *nix boxes if they're using some version of SAMBA.
It's possible, although they don't always show up as 9x boxes.
I think I have a machine reporting as a 9x server out there somewhere ;0)
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL
Don't know about four back, but you can pull the Password last changed
information.
http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/default.asp?url=/library/en-us/adsi/adsi/i
adsuser_property_methods.asp?frame=true
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of EN
Where did you pull the list that shows 686 vs. 636 in
winldap.h ?
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
joeSent: Thursday, December 09, 2004 11:53 AMTo:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] What is the
LDAPS port?
Those articles list what service is
You may misunderstand ADFIND. It will allow you to specify the attribs you
want vs. which one's you don't want last I checked.
As for your DSQUERY command, why are you limiting to 1000 on the one that
doesn't work? Why not leave it at 0 ?
Al
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL
More information is needed to understand what you want to do. A PST file if
for mail items. AD is LDAP.
What is the end result you need to end up with? How will it be used?
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Dan HINCKLEY
Sent: Friday,
Off-line address book would come to mind. Are they Exchange/Outlook users?
If not, then an alternate solution would have to be figured out. What do
you have to work with?
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Dan HINCKLEY
Sent: Friday,
What boggles me is that LDAP is usually very fast. Much faster than trying
to download the data to their workstations as changes occur. And if they
have enough bandwidth for IMAP, then LDAP should be a slam dunk. If it's
not, it might not be a bad idea to fix that long term.
I would suggest
Intrusion detection and prevention are two different things in my
experience. IDS is used to detect the intrusion. Prevention is a process
lifecycle all it's own.
If you have the opportunity to have something that does both with a single
code-base that would be a good thing IMHO. AV is
Scott, exactly how are you testing that? I haven't been looking to see
which order an OR is returned in the past, but that is not what I would
expect as an answer back from the servers in a working configuration. I
would expect that criteria to continue looking for all matches to the filter
for
Like you haven't heard this before: it depends.
For example: with pointing the current AD integrated ones to the new
Secondary server for resolution
Are you talking about reconfiguring the DC's to use the new server as their
DNS host?
What about the clients? Are you sure none of them are
Have plenty of VLANS. Works fine. Be sure that your VLANS are configured
correctly when you do this.
Al
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Jennifer Fountain
Sent: Friday, December 10, 2004 6:38 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject:
C:\adfind -b ou=companies,dc=domain,dc=com -f
((objectcategory=Person)(objectClass=contact
)) cn createTimeStamp
AdFind V01.17.00cpp Joe Richards ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) May 2004
Using server: wil-dc01.bbtnet.com
dn:CN=Test User,CN=Users,DC=bbtnet,DC=com
createTimeStamp: 20041210144136.0Z
cn: Test
?
Thanks!
Jenn
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Mulnick, Al
Sent: Friday, December 10, 2004 9:18 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] DC in vlan
Have plenty of VLANS. Works fine. Be sure that your VLANS
One thing that bothers me is that DSQUERY should have brought back all the
entries and you should have been able to use it as expected. I'm trying to
figure out why DSQUERY chokes on the amount.
Can you verify that it's the amount that's causing it to choke? Can you run
it without piping the
Is it possible then that you have missing data for some of the users? Can
you run dsquery and check the results?
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Dan HINCKLEY
Sent: Monday, December 13, 2004 3:34 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE:
You didn't say what the BIND domain is or how many actual domains you have
(AD Domains).
That said, have you seen dnscmd.exe and what it can do for you?
http://www.microsoft.com/resources/documentation/WindowsServ/2003/all/deploy
If I understand your request properly, you want to bake into the filter the
ability to do if...then...else logic?
I would imagine an OR statement might be what you want, but that won't first
check the presence of one attribute value and then decide to go on. That's
a program logic issue.
An
You don't have access to the unify address?
I was assuming that the Unify address feature was to be coupled with the
custom LDAP search.
You might get some better luck in their support forums as this is not an
uncommon request I would imagine.
Al
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL
/ASP.NET
ASPInsider Member - MCP
http://www.orcsweb.com/
Powerful Web Hosting Solutions
#1 in Service and Support
- Original Message -
From: Mulnick, Al [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, December 15, 2004 4:25 PM
Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] Sequence LDAP query
You
server to point to do that's where my thinking is at,
because the new secondary server have the zones and records in place now the
way I want them...
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Mulnick, Al
Sent: Friday, December 17, 2004 8:14 AM
Can you reword that another way? What are you trying to accomplish in this?
Your subject says one thing, but your question says another the way I read
it.
Al
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Sharif Naser
Sent: Sunday, December 19, 2004
. is that possible like can i read the active
directory log know what operation has been done in active directory.
regards,
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] on behalf of Mulnick, Al
Sent: Mon 12/20/2004 7:07 PM
To: ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org
Cc:
Subject:RE
I can tell Brett needs a little more sugar ;)
One other question to add to that: are you using AV software and if so, are
you using any exclusions? Both in the VM guest and on the host?
Just curiuos. And bored. AV is a common piece to look at with jet
technology and may apply here.
Al
no
Personally, I think I'd use a different method to create those contacts.
CDOEXM was made for this sort of stuff.
http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/default.asp?url=/library/en-us/e2k3/e2k3/_
cdo_imailrecipient_mailenable.asp
Al
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL
Have you looked at what Windows 2003 Server can offer in this scenario? I
mean, since you're already Active Directory and all.
I think you'll likely want to take a look at checking for the updated pieces
as well, but only after you've implemented. Don't discount that portion
when looking as
GPO can do this for him. Have you looked at the GPO's for setting rights on
services?
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Sudhir Kaushal
Sent: Thursday, December 23, 2004 9:21 AM
To: ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org
Subject: [ActiveDir]
Title: DHCP
I'm looking for more precise information for DHCP sizing and I'd appreciate any real-world information as well.
What I'm trying to find out is how much registry space one DHCP server requires at max capacity. I realize that a DHCP server puts information in the registry for
Regards,
Jorge
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Mulnick, Al
Sent: maandag 3 januari 2005 15:15
To: ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org
Subject: [ActiveDir] DHCP
I'm looking for more precise information for DHCP sizing and I'd appreciate
] On Behalf Of Mulnick, Al
Sent: Monday, January 03, 2005 10:13 AM
To: ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org
Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] DHCP
Thanks John. I saw that one as well, but it doesn't tell me
enough information about how much of an impact I can expect
on the registry. I understand
Does that solve the original problem? I read that post differently.
Al
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Darren Mar-Elia
Sent: Monday, January 03, 2005 7:45 PM
To: ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org
Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] wireless DC
Ok.
For those users that it returns blank, does this return blank as well?
wscript.echo ADSysInfo.UserName
Or just the for the groups?
Can you post the rest of the code if any? That might be helpful as well.
al
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf
suggestions i would appreciate it
J
-Oorspronkelijk bericht-
Van: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Namens Mulnick, Al
Verzonden: dinsdag 4 januari 2005 15:19
Aan: ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org
Onderwerp: RE: [ActiveDir] wireless DC
Does that solve the original problem? I read
I haven't seen that and it's not what I would expect. I would have expected
a failure instead or replacing the WINS entry.
Do you get the same results if you do use an index?
add dns [name=]InterfaceName [addr=] DNSAddress [[index=]DNSIndex]
It's not listed as 'required' but seems that you
) 354-1464 (direct)
(202) 371-1549 (fax)
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
|-+--
| | Mulnick, Al |
| | [EMAIL PROTECTED]|
| | Sent by: |
| | [EMAIL PROTECTED
in a linked list, and thusly the scalability to
many scopes
degrades linearly (linear is usually unacceptable).
Just a thought.
Cheers,
Brett Shirley
On Tue, 4 Jan 2005, Mulnick, Al wrote:
That helps a great deal, thank you.
Although I'll still need
Out of curiosity, did you get your question answered? The original that I
read was that you wanted to know if you had two separate forests with
trusts, would that create the same risks as if they were in the same forest.
I *think* I read that correctly. I think John had a lot of great
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Mulnick, Al
Sent: Friday, January 07, 2005 4:09 PM
To: ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org
Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] Forest trusts vs trusts within forests
Out of curiosity, did you get your question answered? The original
Conflicting information:
(http://www.microsoft.com/technet/itsolutions/cits/interopmigration/unix/use
cdirw/06wsdsu.mspx)
To sum it up, SNTP and NTP are supposed to be interchangeable and
compatible. Reality is, some verbs/commands aren't.
When setting up a time server from a non-Microsoft
Have you checked the DC in question to see what it's reporting?
You may also want to grab a net trace to see the packets on the wire. Those
two things might help to clarify the issue faster (permissions, incompat,
etc) faster. If the phone switch has a log file or output, that also might
be
Title: time server
If you're going to fix one of them, you may as well
suggest that they fix them all. There're several as seen by a query for
NTP+Windowsserver2003 and you might want to throw in W32Time just for fun.
Theconfusing wording was pervasiveon the
several that I sampled while
Title: Book recommendations please
Just in case it's hard to find:
http://www.microsoft.com/exchange/library
http://www.microsoft.com/ad
I will say you'll find the upgrade information for Exchange
a little easier to find. You'll also find the upgrade to AD 2003 a little
easier to do.
Trying to remember exactly, but I don't think that field is what is
displayed in the GAL. Check your GAL settings and see if they don't use
secretary vs. assistant when they build the GAL.
Al
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Mike Newell
What registry entry? That Kb lists a service pack.??
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Jennifer Fountain
Sent: Wednesday, January 12, 2005 4:48 PM
To: ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org
Subject: [ActiveDir] Socket Backlog Issue
Hi all:
Reason I
Backlog Issue
I have the latest service pack so I only assumed there was another registry
key to adjust.
I already hardened the tcpip stack and still having the error.
Thanks!
Jenn
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Mulnick, Al
Sent
PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Mulnick, Al
Sent: Wednesday, January 12, 2005 5:09 PM
To: ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org
Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] Socket Backlog Issue
Can you tell us the symptoms that led you to this KB? What's the
background?
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED
When you say live backup what exactly are you referring to? Are you using
an openfilemanager to back up the Exchange files with?
al
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of John Parker
Sent: Thursday, January 13, 2005 4:08 PM
To:
Are you sure it's the firewall and not some other setting? For example,
some of the other security settings will prevent you from loading ActiveX
controls and won't even prompt you for that. Firewall has nothing to do
with that.
Once you have connected to a web page via SSL, the conversation
.
Edina, MN. 55435
952-896-9898 Local
800-388-0008 Watts
952-896-9899 Fax
612-804-8769 Cell
952-841-3327 Direct
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Be excellent to each other
---End of Line---
-Original Message-
From: Mulnick, Al [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, January 13, 2005 3:59
Are you asking if Microsoft decided not to use groupofnames in favor of
security groups or are you asking why they put groupofnames in the schema?
I can't speak to the former, but I'd say the latter is due to it being part
of many other ldap schemas (RFC 2256 put defines it).
Many other mailers
So this server was trying to talk to a message wall server?
ewn-lges008.econet-nigeria.com
Is this one of your servers? Is the message wall server yours?
A bare LF is considered a special control character, but you need to find
out where that's getting generated and if the message wall server
enough
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Mulnick, Al
Sent: Tuesday, January 18, 2005 4:55 PM
To: ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org
Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] Urgent!!: exchange 2000
So this server was trying to talk to a message wall server?
ewn
Tools, email accounts, view/change existing
email..
It's on the next page, saying deliver to the following
location.
Rules can do this to you as well. Be a good idea to check
the rules.
To troubleshoot, you may want to turn the client off and
use OWA to see if it's staying in the inbox.
Did you try the OWA route?
Did you also verify that it's not being picked up by a
different client, such as a PDA, POP client etc?
Is there anything else running on this server?
Anti-virus or anything similar? What changed before this started
happening?
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Mulnick, Al
Sent: Thursday, January 13, 2005 5:03 PM
To: ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org
Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] Policies that effect secure websites
Are you sure it's the firewall and not some other setting? For example,
some of the other security settings will prevent
on the machines. I will try the security zones.
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Mulnick, Al
Sent: Thursday, January 13, 2005 5:03 PM
To: ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org
Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] Policies that effect secure websites
Are you sure it's
@mail.activedir.org
Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] Urgent!!: exchange 2000
Where can I check/modify the settings on my exchange box...
I am trying to send to aol domain..
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Mulnick, Al
Sent: Tuesday, January 18, 2005 8
OWA 2K3 would be easier to upgrade to if you wanted OOF or rules based
forwarding to. If you want a permanent alternate recipient, then you'll
need to do a few things:
1) provide a way for them to create a contact item in Active Directory
1a) provide a way for them to be able to update that
Are you looking for risks associated with giving your directory away to a
semi-trusted third party? Did I paraphrase that correctly?
Al
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Robert N. Leali
Sent: Thursday, January 20, 2005 3:01 PM
To:
Title: RE: [ActiveDir] LDAP export pros/cons
not sure there are any documented risks. Risks being
relational to the entity taking them.
However, as a disinterested third party I'd have to point
out that the risk is not technical in nature but rather about the information
you're sharing. I
Title: RE: [ActiveDir] LDAP export pros/cons
The crazy thing here, is that they'd have to have the
password too in order to make this a single or simplified-sign-on solution. I'd
see that as a major issue.
A trust has likely more access than you would
want.
Have you looked at what RADIUS
Let me play it back to be sure I have it
correctly.
You want to be able to go back and look at a current
Directory object after they were forced to change their password and look to see
when the user's password expired which then forced them to change the
password?
If so, to my knowledge,
Have you looked at what subinacl can do for you? It's
a reskit utility that deals with permissions.
Scripts would be an easy way to deal with the creation of
accounts.
Al
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Stockbrugger,
Brian L.Sent: Friday, January 21, 2005
Probably about as legal as the disclaimer on a fax. Wiretapping is the
illegal part in most cases, but receiving an email that you shouldn't have
received? I doubt you'd get very far. The argument would go along the
lines of, the email was sent to me and because of the way the SMTP protocol
I missed Deji's post but I'd be interested to hear the legal team's response
to the intended recipient issue if you could post that back. More of a
curiuosity issue, but I'm insanely curious about things ;)
Al
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
this out and had his name on my mind.
I think those educators are rubbing off on me.
Brian
-Original Message-
From: Mulnick, Al [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, January 24, 2005 8:45 AM
To: ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org
Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] Legal Question
I missed Deji's post
Is anybody really familiar with the GPO settings that control the XP2
firewall on/off network configurations?
What I'm trying to do:
I'm trying to setup and test IPSEC vpn connectivity back to the corp network
and use the XP2 firewall as the firewall of choice.
Expected results:
When I am off
That's how I read it the first time. The mind plays
tricks with information we already know,I suppose
;)
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Paul van
GeldropSent: Tuesday, January 25, 2005 4:08 PMTo:
ActiveDir@mail.activedir.orgSubject: RE: [ActiveDir]
It would probably be better if you'd tell us what information you're after
and how you're going about getting it in your script. If you can post the
logic or the whole script that would be helpful.
Keep in mind that the GC has a subset of information in it, so there are
times when you may need
seperately for the phone
list.
Hope this clears things up a little.
jb
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Mulnick, Al
Sent: Wednesday, January 26, 2005 1:50 PM
To: ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org
Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] OT: limiting ldap query
query to single domain
It's a webpage ASP, since we are only reading, permissions shouldn't be a
problem.
jb
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Mulnick, Al
Sent: Wednesday, January 26, 2005 2:39 PM
To: ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org
Subject: RE
Haven't heard of any. What's the problem?
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Douglas M. Long
Sent: Wednesday, January 26, 2005 3:15 PM
To: ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org
Subject: [ActiveDir] OT: Exchange mailbox diff tool
I am having some
-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Mulnick, Al
Sent: Wednesday, January 26, 2005 4:18 PM
To: ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org
Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] OT: Exchange mailbox diff tool
Haven't heard of any. What's the problem?
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED
?? Have you verified that the underlying servers aren't the bottleneck?
Network is fine (did you run the test from the same console each time?)
Al
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Jorge de Almeida
Pinto
Sent: Thursday, January 27, 2005
that is?
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Mulnick, Al
Sent: Thursday, January 27, 2005 9:04 AM
To: ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org
Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] OT: Exchange mailbox diff tool
Cached mode?
Do you get the same result when
I would expect that there's some gotchas in E2K vs. E2K3 where you can do
that with RSG's. Have you taken a look at the DR paper for Exchange yet for
ideas?
Http://www.microsoft.com/exchange/library should have that doc.
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL
IMHO, same risk is taken in regards to being hacked.
As for operational availability risk, a FE server serves two purposes in my
opinion: it allows you to hide the mail store for the user thereby allowing
higher scalability and it also buffers the mail flow if deployed for the
SMTP as well.
Do you have new user objects to connect them to? Have you run mailbox
cleanup agent?
Once restored, these are just data store entries. There is no DS/IS concept
to automatically create directory objects, so you have to create objects for
them.
In your case, you *should* be able to create
601 - 700 of 854 matches
Mail list logo
