Agreed. There are seldom good technological solutions
to behavioral problems.
At a previous employer, I was tasked to write a
program that walked all file shares and moved
"illegal" files (like PSTs and MDBs) to a quarantine
area. It's not a hard thing to script. (I also had
to write a separate program to find JPGs and BMPs for
porn detection, but that's another story.)
If users are finding that the standard e-mail quota
isn't enough and the IT department is too rigid to
allow exceptions, then maybe it's the policy that's
wrong. Maybe the IT department could get some funding
to buy additional storage if it charged a nominal
annual fee for increased quota while prohibiting the
storage of PSTs on file servers. Then the customers
(users [1]) themselves or their managers can decide
what a necessary quota is. Where is it carved in
stone that an IT department is in a position to judge
the business value of things like mailbox quotas? IT
should try to lay out the rules so that it is a
service provider, not a policeman. Charge-back is a
great way to do that. And by charging for quota, it's
quite easy to keep track. You can even use directory
export in Exchange 5.5 to report the limits.
[1] NOT "lusers", for use of that term reflects
contempt for one's customers, not a good thing in a
service business.
Ed Crowley
Compaq Computer
--- Monteleone-Haught Matt - Millville
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> "We do tell them to sort their mail into personal
> folders if they
> insist on keeping "everything" but we ask them to
> keep them on their Home
> drive. This way, they can keep their mailbox sizes
> down to well below our
> corporate standard limit."
>
> If you are worried about viruses and the potential
> danger of having one run
> ramped on your LAN, then why in God's name would you
> want a user to put
> Email in a Personal Folder? Leave email on the
> email server. If users
> need more room and can make a business case for it,
> then give it to them.
> If your server is running out of room or is
> underpowered then get a bigger
> one or add another.
>
> If you don't want users keeping email on the email
> server, then why even
> have an Exchange server. Any old POP account would
> suffice, they all suck
> equally.
> Is the HD space on the server where the user's "HOME
> DRIVE" is located any
> cheaper then the HD space on the Exchange server?
> Email belongs on an Email
> server, 'nuff said.
>
> Matthew
> Exchange Disaster Recovery, Live it, Learn It, Love
> It, Get yours today!
>
http://www.microsoft.com/TechNet/exchange/technote/edrv3p1.asp
>
> "Besides the technical limitations on the PST
> (remember the P stands for
> Personal, that means you're responsible not the mail
> admin)..." Jim Schwartz
> 8-16-01
>
>
> >>>-----Original Message-----
> >>>From: Gomez, Mary Lou
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> >>>Sent: Monday, September 24, 2001 3:04 PM
> >>>To: Exchange Discussions
> >>>Subject: RE: # of folders in mailboxes
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>"I" am not confused. As I stated in the previous
> response, I
> >>>specifically
> >>>described the folders I was seeing and where they
> were
> >>>located. And yes, I
> >>>do know the difference between the mailbox
> folders and
> >>>personal folders. I
> >>>did not scan for their personal folders, only the
> mailbox folders
> >>>themselves. The scan (GroupShield's On Demand
> Scanner) only scans the
> >>>top-level folders which includes any newly
> created folders
> >>>the users have
> >>>added. We do tell them to sort their mail into
> personal
> >>>folders if they
> >>>insist on keeping "everything" but we ask them to
> keep them
> >>>on their Home
> >>>drive. This way, they can keep their mailbox
> sizes down to
> >>>well below our
> >>>corporate standard limit.
> >>>
> >>>Who cares? I, along with management now care
> because we have
> >>>people who are
> >>>not adhering to our standard. With the virus hit
> we took
> >>>last week, we are
> >>>working on strictly enforcing all of our
> standards. Exchange
> >>>is just one of
> >>>them. We do have mailbox size limits & adhere to
> those. We
> >>>don't raise those
> >>>for anyone, not even the president of the
> company. My
> >>>question originally
> >>>was not on limits...but on reporting out of
> Exchange 5.5. I
> >>>understand that
> >>>2000 will give me various reporting functionality
> but I'm
> >>>not finding the
> >>>same in 5.5.
> >>>Mary Lou
> >>>
> >>> -----Original Message-----
> >>> From: Monteleone-Haught Matt - Millville
> >>>[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> >>> Sent: Monday, September 24, 2001 1:19 PM
> >>> To: Exchange Discussions
> >>> Subject: RE: # of folders in mailboxes
> >>>
> >>> I'm coming in late on this thread so excuse me
> if you've
> >>>answered this.
> >>> What are you using to SCAN the folders with?
> >>>Are you sure
> >>>your scan their
> >>> Personal Folder? Sounds like you are scanning
> >>>the Exchange
> >>>server
> >>> mailboxes, not the Personal folder. You do
> realize that
> >>>they aren't the
> >>> same?????? If my assumption is right and you
> >>>are scan only
> >>>the Exchange
> >>> server mailboxes, then who cares how many
> >>>folders the users
> >>>have. Hell, I'd
> >>> love to see more of my users, get their sh*t
> >>>organized into
> >>>folders, instead
> >>> of having everything heaped into just the
> >>>inbox. If you are
> >>>worried about
> >>> mailbox sizes then institute mailbox limits and
> stick to
> >>>them. There are
> >>> numerous threads in the archives about mailbox
> >>>limits......If any of this
> >>> confuses you, then by a book by Tony Redmond or
> Paul
> >>>Robichaux. You will
> >>> also need to read said book....
> >>>
> >>> Matthew
> >>> Exchange Disaster Recovery, Live it, Learn It,
> >>>Love It, Get
> >>>yours today!
> >>>
>
>>>http://www.microsoft.com/TechNet/exchange/technote/edrv3p1.asp
> >>>
> >>> "Besides the technical limitations on the PST
> >>>(remember the
> >>>P stands for
> >>> Personal, that means you're responsible not the
> mail
> >>>admin)..." Jim Schwartz
> >>> 8-16-01
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> >>>-----Original Message-----
> >>> >>>From: Gomez, Mary Lou
> >>>[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> >>> >>>Sent: Monday, September 24, 2001 1:50 PM
> >>> >>>To: Exchange Discussions
> >>> >>>Subject: RE: # of folders in mailboxes
> >>> >>>
> >>> >>>
> >>> >>>In Outlook, you can have 3 sets of folders:
> top-level
> >>>which
> >>> >>>is your mailbox
> >>> >>>items that come canned with the application
> (Inbox,
> >>>Deleted
> >>> >>>Items, Sent
> >>> >>>Items, Calendar, etc), Public Folders and in
>
> >>>between,
> >>> >>>Personal Folders. When
> >>> >>>running the scan, you can see each
> >>>mailboxes' folders
> >>> >>>(Inbox, Sent Items,
> >>> >>>Deleted Items, etc) being scanned. There are
>
> >>>about 13 on
> >>>the
> >>> >>>average for
> >>> >>>each user mailbox. Some mailboxes, as they
> >>>were being
> >>> >>>scanned, had within
> >>> >>>these top-level folders, subfolders like:
> Inbox - my
> >>> >>>personal stuff, Inbox -
> >>> >>>collections, Inbox - >>>, and the list went
> on. The
> >>>folders
> >>> >>>were not only
> >>> >>>limited to the Inbox.
> >>> >>>
> >>> >>>We instruct our users to go to Options,
> >>>Personal Folders
>
=== message truncated ===
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get email alerts & NEW webcam video instant messaging with Yahoo! Messenger.
http://im.yahoo.com
_________________________________________________________________
List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp
To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Exchange List admin: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
