Now that I am not posting on my craptastic iPhone I can give back a semi-decent reply.
> They would never make it as easy as unchecking a box. :-) I remember how many issues that were cause (not only for Exchange but other products such as SQL and SharePoint) by just unchecking that box. Why is it still there? Who the hell knows... As for the VIP comments... A week ago we had a calendar item become corrupt. I was able to find it and fix it, but it was a bit too late. The calendar item that was corrupt was about 3MB. It duplicated itself roughly 200,000 times within the Recoverable Items \ Root and Recoverable Items \ Deletions folder. The mailbox was roughly 600GB. I cried that day. Happy Friday all! ________________________________________ From: [email protected] <[email protected]> on behalf of Maglinger, Paul <[email protected]> Sent: Friday, September 20, 2013 8:56 AM To: [email protected] Subject: RE: [Exchange] RE: Google rejecting email They would never make it as easy as unchecking a box. :-) -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Adam Farage Sent: Thursday, September 19, 2013 8:17 PM To: <[email protected]> Cc: [email protected] Subject: Re: [Exchange] RE: Google rejecting email I thought you can turn off ipv6 if you do it properly, not just unchecking the IPv6 box on the NIC settings? No? Sent from my iPhone > On Sep 19, 2013, at 7:44 PM, "Kurt Buff" <[email protected]> wrote: > > It's not that, exactly. It's that if you turn off IPV6, you're pretty > much no longer in a supported configuration, for some of their > technologies at least. > > And, interestingly, you can turn off Teredo, and might well wish to do > so, without turning off IPv6. It's a transitional technology, and MSFT > will be phasing it out at some point, along with ISATAP and probably > NAT64. > > Kurt > > On Thu, Sep 19, 2013 at 4:22 PM, Micheal Espinola Jr > <[email protected]> wrote: >> Riiight... leave unnecessary services running, because something >> unrelated might break. I understand the concern, but I'd still focus >> minimizing problem vectors over something that may or may not happen. >> If it happens, then deal with that on a case-by-case basis. I've not >> encountered any issues regarding disabling IP6 across the board - >> but, honestly, its crap like that that brings us together here, so >> I'm not pretending weird things can't and don't happen. >> >> I'm inclined to think that Microsoft wants IP6 running for all the >> stats they can gather via the Teredo connections. >> >> -- >> Espi >> >> >> >>> On Thu, Sep 19, 2013 at 3:54 PM, Kurt Buff <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>> Erm - not so much... >>> >>> >>> http://blogs.technet.com/b/netro/archive/2010/11/24/arguments-agains >>> t-disabling-ipv6.aspx >>> and >>> >>> http://blogs.technet.com/b/ipv6/archive/2007/11/08/disabling-ipv6-do >>> esn-t-help.aspx >>> and perhaps >>> >>> http://thommck.wordpress.com/2011/02/08/offline-files-versus-vpn-a-k >>> -a-the-case-of-the-missing-work-online-button/ >>> >>> Kurt >>> >>> On Thu, Sep 19, 2013 at 3:07 PM, Micheal Espinola Jr >>> <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> :-) >>>> >>>> I just gotta throw-in here that if you don't use it - it should be >>>> disabled anyway. >>>> >>>> -- >>>> Espi >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>> On Thu, Sep 19, 2013 at 1:57 PM, Kurt Buff <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> <gasp> >>>>> >>>>> Disable IPv6? >>>>> >>>>> Heresy... >>>>> >>>>> :) >>>>> >>>>> Kurt >>>>> >>>>> On Thu, Sep 19, 2013 at 1:01 PM, Michael B. Smith >>>>> <[email protected]> >>>>> wrote: >>>>>> I found it easier to disable IPv6 core networking, both input >>>>>> rule and output rule. >>>>>> >>>>>> Ymmv. >>>>>> >>>>>> Sent from my Windows Phone >>>>>> ________________________________ >>>>>> From: Adam Farage >>>>>> Sent: 9/19/2013 10:55 PM >>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> To: New Exchange Admin List ([email protected]) >>>>>> Subject: [Exchange] RE: Google rejecting email >>>>>> >>>>>> I actually had someone post this on Reddit (/r/exchangeserver is >>>>>> a subreddit forum thing I created about 3 months ago) who >>>>>> experienced the same issues, and how he resolved it: >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> http://www.reddit.com/r/exchangeserver/comments/1kw7cc/gmail_reje >>>>>> cting_mail_from_exchange_because_sender/ >>>>>> >>>>>> The TL;DR (too long/dont read) version is that he had to run this: >>>>>> >>>>>> " >>>>>> >>>>>> I opened a Command Prompt as Administrator and did: >>>>>> >>>>>> netsh >>>>>> interface >>>>>> 6to4 >>>>>> set state disabled >>>>>> .. >>>>>> teredo >>>>>> set state disabled >>>>>> >>>>>> " >>>>>> >>>>>> Check it out though. Friendly crowd, a few MCSM's and MSFT folk >>>>>> and a Dell guy here and there. >>>>>> >>>>>> We need more MVP's on there (cough cough) >>>>>> ________________________________________ >>>>>> From: [email protected] >>>>>> <[email protected]> on behalf of John Cook >>>>>> <[email protected]> >>>>>> Sent: Thursday, September 19, 2013 3:35 PM >>>>>> To: New Exchange Admin List ([email protected]) >>>>>> Subject: [Exchange] Google rejecting email >>>>>> >>>>>> So I have a user that is sending out mail to a number of Gmail >>>>>> accounts but one of them bounces with this error The sender does >>>>>> not meet basic ipv6 sending guidelines of authentication and rdns >>>>>> resolution of sending ip This has not happened to anyone else and >>>>>> I can email to my Gmail account fine. The recommended fix is to >>>>>> create a reg key and disable IPv6 which I am reticent to do. >>>>>> Exchange 2010 SP3 on 2008R2, I do not have a static >>>>>> IPv6 >>>>>> address on the server nor have I ever noted one in our MX records. >>>>>> Anyone >>>>>> else ever run across this? >>>>>> >>>>>> TIA >>>>>> >>>>>> John W. Cook >>>>>> Network Operations Manager >>>>>> Partnership For Strong Families >>>>>> 5950 NW 1st Place >>>>>> Gainesville, Fl 32607 >>>>>> Office (352)-244-1610 >>>>>> Cell (352) 215-6944 >>>>>> MCSE, MCP+I, MCTS, CompTIA A+, N+, Security+ VSP4, VTSP4 >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> ________________________________ >>>>>> >>>>>> CONFIDENTIALITY STATEMENT: The information transmitted, or >>>>>> contained or attached to or with this Notice is intended only for >>>>>> the person or entity to which it is addressed and may contain >>>>>> Protected Health Information (PHI), confidential and/or >>>>>> privileged material. Any review, transmission, dissemination, or >>>>>> other use of, and taking any action in reliance upon this >>>>>> information by persons or entities other than the intended >>>>>> recipient without the express written consent of the sender are >>>>>> prohibited. This information may be protected by the Health >>>>>> Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 (HIPAA), and >>>>>> other Federal and Florida laws. Improper or unauthorized use or >>>>>> disclosure of this information could result in civil and/or >>>>>> criminal penalties. >>>>>> Consider the environment. Please don't print this e-mail unless >>>>>> you really need to. > >
