I would be very interested to know what they perceive the adverse impact as being.
While RUS can certainly be a PITA, and it's slow and "expensive", I can't think of any reason why it "must be avoided at all cost". There is (yet another) bug (http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;en-us;835156) about how the RUS updates addresses. Perhaps that is it? M -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, November 16, 2004 11:45 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [ActiveDir] Rebuilding RUS - sanity check I have always thought that rebuilding (or updating) the Recipient Update Services after a reconfiguration of Recipient Policies is a "normal", non-destructive procedure. I am just now learning that rebuilding RUS is a "no-no" and must be avoided at all cost. I have not spoken directly to the "source" of this information, so there is no information regarding the perceived adverse impact. Does anyone have any documentation or reference for this mandate? What does rebuilding RUS break in an E2K3/W2K3 environment? Short of having to write additional spaghetti codes to loop through existing objects (~20K in total) and restamping each with new SMTP addresses, what is the recommended way of making sure that newly created RPs are applied to existing objects - if we can't rebuild RUS? Thanks all. Sincerely, D�j� Ak�m�l�f�, MCSE+M MCSA+M MCP+I Microsoft MVP - Directory Services www.readymaids.com - we know IT www.akomolafe.com Do you now realize that Today is the Tomorrow you were worried about Yesterday? -anon List info : http://www.activedir.org/mail_list.htm List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/list_faq.htm List archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir%40mail.activedir.org/ List info : http://www.activedir.org/mail_list.htm List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/list_faq.htm List archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir%40mail.activedir.org/
