Yeah instead of saying a good 10, I probably should have said at least 10. They are spread through a variety of feedback channels over the last 3 or so years from PSS to MVP Wish to Ladybug. I think I have 9 in ladybug right now plus 2 recommendations for things that already should be in the product (perf counters for filtered messages/connections dropped due to filtering, easy mechanism to determine if a non-system user are using a mailbox for something than looking at the calendar).
joe -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Michael B. Smith Sent: Friday, June 10, 2005 10:37 AM To: [email protected] Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] Exchange Mailbox Limits Only 10? :-) Listserv functionality is an area they've identified "for third parties". I'm not a C++ programmer; but a simple facility in perl or vbscript is easy. But to do it all in Exchange (i.e., no external databases), I needed a feature that was promised for Mercury. Regardless, most of this capability is in Sharepoint, and probably could be put together pretty quickly. -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of joe Sent: Friday, June 10, 2005 10:17 AM To: [email protected] Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] Exchange Mailbox Limits All of these stories beg for a moderated DL facility in Exchange. Some people can submit, someone has to moderate and release prior to allowing it to really go out. That same facility could spell check and strip attachments, convert to plain text, stagger the send so it doesn't go out in one huge 270,000 users at once blast but instead 10k every 5 minutes, etc. This is seriously why several larger companies do not use Exchange DL functionality, they pull it out into third party products or even into a simple server with SMTP enabled and a perl script processing the incoming messages and resending them out properly. I have seen more than my share of issues with large companies having Exchange servers getting killed for perf because of uncontrolled DL use and the server taking awhile to bail itself back out of the hole it dug trying to processing the messages. QB DLs scare me to death as I don't have any customers currently using them but wonder how bad it will be once they do. I haven't done really any Exchange programming except for simple scripts and a very brief forray into MAPI to try and figure out how to create a decent reconnect[1]. If I were, I think I would do some coding around the whole DL functionality including the above and other things like logging DL expansion, etc. I would ask for this out of MS but there are many other things I would rather see fixed first in terms of poor implementation of current functionality. I think I have a good 10 bugs logged for Exchange right now that I haven't heard anything other than thanks for submitting. I wouldn't be entirely upset if Exchange didn't release any new features for the next two releases and just focused on solving the issues in the current product experienced in large environments and made things like the permission model more intuitive and simple. joe [1] Hint, don't go there, it is like Dagobah, all icky, stinky, and swampy. However if someone has the source for mbconn or ESM, let me know and I will make an attempt at writing a command line reconnect tool again. -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Burkes, Jeremy [Contractor] Sent: Friday, June 10, 2005 8:39 AM To: [email protected] Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] Exchange Mailbox Limits Don't get me started on attachments. Since I am a contractor for the government we have to do what "they" say even though it goes against good IT practices and even when we try to tell them why it is not smart they want to do it anyway. Email attachments in excess of 20MB are not uncommon in my environment. We still set that limit but email was never meant to handle that size of an attachment. I think you guys are bringing this up just to raise my blood pressure, thanks, LOL! Jeremy -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Brian Desmond Sent: Friday, June 10, 2005 2:19 AM To: [email protected] Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] Exchange Mailbox Limits Now do your users spell shit right in these messages? Every last one of them had a typo today. One of them they even botched the subject - Pruchasing Newsletter. Yesterday or two days ago I forget the Pruchasing department had to send two blast messages, you see they forgot the time & date in message #1. Thanks, Brian Desmond [EMAIL PROTECTED] c - 312.731.3132 -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Rick Kingslan Sent: Friday, June 10, 2005 12:50 AM To: [email protected] Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] Exchange Mailbox Limits ROTLMAO! I share your pain, Brian. Yeah.... Gotta love those 'Send to ALL' DLs - and the obvious misuse of same. "Black bronco in the north parking lot, second level - your lights are on" Ummm, which city/site? I only have 50 of them..... And, I'm guessing the sender knows where he/she is. So, why send to the ENTIRE COMPANY? I could almost understand using the ALL DL for that site. And (I'm really kinda heartless, so excuse this, please) people who leave their lights on need to be reminded that it's their problem - so who cares? OK - apparently I'm cranky at 1AM.... :oD Rick -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Brian Desmond Sent: Thursday, June 09, 2005 11:45 PM To: [email protected] Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] Exchange Mailbox Limits And then I have this problem. We have CO All (2500 mailboxes) and CPS ALL (60K mailboxes). Today the dumbasses with access to these DLs sent: 1x5K - CPS ALL 1x15K - CO ALL 1x270K - CO ALL (two fricken attachments) 1x9K - CO ALL Now times all that out assuming SIS works perfectly by oh I think 260ish mailstores. Our quotas for teachers (like 50K of them): 60/70/80 and central office employees - 250/400/450. Thanks, Brian Desmond [EMAIL PROTECTED] c - 312.731.3132 -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of joe Sent: Thursday, June 09, 2005 11:30 PM To: [email protected] Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] Exchange Mailbox Limits LOL, a major customer you and I have both worked with currently has mailbox limits of 20MB for most of their 200k or so mailboxes and as a whole, it works fine. I think execs get 50-80MB. I had heard a few people complain that some HTML messages are several MB so it doesn't take but an hour or so for 20MB to get filled up. The response from the folks doing the mailbox quota support was... Stop using HTML for messages. Unless you knew someone who could yell at someone, chances are slim you will get an increase from 20MB. Once Exchange quotas got stored in my AD my quota mysteriously went to 80MB, we could never figure out what the misfire was in the system... I told them I would look into it and get back to them. Seriously though, if you think about it, 20MB for 200K users is a lot of space, no matter how cheap the disk and you have to consider deleted items retention and backup space to go back say 30,60,90 or even more days on top of all of that. You can go quite a ways with 20MB of plain text messages. You don't really often needs graphics and pretty fonts to communicate with folks. I can see companies making judgements along those lines. Especially as more and more reports come out about how email and instant messaging is probably starting to hurt productivity more than help. I have heard of a couple of companies backing away from the email world and seeing tremendous productivity gains and better customer service. joe -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, June 09, 2005 11:51 AM To: [email protected] Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] Exchange Mailbox Limits This is NOT personal, but let me say that your limits are overly restrictive and counter-productive as far as fostering good relationship with your end-users is concerned. In this day and age (html email and all), 25MB is nothing, especially when you consider the fact that hard drive costs are exponentially less than what they used to be 2-3 years ago. That is all my opinion and, again, it's not meant to knock you in a personal way. 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 ________________________________ From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] on behalf of Robin Smith Sent: Thu 6/9/2005 5:22 AM To: [email protected] Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] Exchange Mailbox Limits I'd be interested to hear what others have to say, too. We are stingy with our mailbox limits because the more we give our users the more they abuse it. We limit most 'regular' users to 8MB with a warning at 7MB. When they reach 8MB they can't send. If a regular user's mailbox gets to 15MB then we disable it. This forces the user to do something - either call the Help Desk or clean out their mail. Directors and chiefs and commissioners and such are generally given much higher limits. We start at 25MB and then increase by 10MB if necessary. We do have a handful of users who have no limits whatsoever and their mailboxes are out of control. We are in the process of migrating to Exchange2003 and implementing mailbox manager. Robin ________________________________ From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Mischler Timothy J Contractor NASIC/SCNA Sent: Thursday, June 09, 2005 7:55 AM To: [email protected] Subject: [ActiveDir] Exchange Mailbox Limits Just out of curiosity, those of you who are Exchange Admins, what is the max size that your users can stop sending and receiving? How do you deal with users who are out of the office your whatever reason, so they don't lose emails because their over there limit? Thanks Tim List info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx List archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir%40mail.activedir.org/ List info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx List archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir%40mail.activedir.org/ List info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx List archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir%40mail.activedir.org/ List info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx List archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir%40mail.activedir.org/ List info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx List archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir%40mail.activedir.org/ List info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx List archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir%40mail.activedir.org/ List info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx List archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir%40mail.activedir.org/ List info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx List archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir%40mail.activedir.org/ List info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx List archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir%40mail.activedir.org/
