Original question: > Does anyone know how to preempt local delivery? > If the server isn't authoratative for a domain I don't want it accepting > local deliver if there happens to be an smtp address defined for one of the > exchange user. > If the exchange server is authoritative for exch.mydomain.com, then, fine, > local delivery is ok. > If user Joe has an exch.mydomain.com and has a second smtp address defined > of [EMAIL PROTECTED], I want mail sent from user Fred on exch.mydomain.com to > [EMAIL PROTECTED] to actually route off the exchange server to the authoritative > server for joe.com (which is not the exchange server). Right now it does > local delivery by default. Even specifying a smart host doesn not preempt > this local delivery. > > ? Heelp pleeease...
oh, see, I"m sorry, I thought that just telling you that they were logging on & sending mail from their exchange server would imply it is a mail server. My mistake if that wasn't so "obvious" to you. All mail sent to "mydomain.com" goes a specific route. The MX records run it through a machine that does filtering before doing final delivery to the unix machine with the mailboxes. There are 5000+ mailboxes here. Not all of them are going to be using exchange mail server, most will likely stay on this unix server. For those who opt to use the added functionality of exchange (serverside mail, owa, public folders, calendaring, etc) their mail will be forwarded from the unix machine to the exchange server. Reasons for this 1) ease of maintenance (believe it or not, yes, the forward, though inefficient under most circumstances is the most efficient way in ours) 2) boss said so. After some headaches I've got the reply to address changed, however, to do so I have to create alternate smtp addresses on the exchange server of mydomain.com. Mail sent to "mydomain.com" should go to the MX record & does for any address that doesn't have an associated address on the exchange server. If they do, it does local delivery. Which makes perfect sense, I'd have set it up that way as well, it's more efficient in general. However, it's not logically necessary for mail to be delivered locally, so I would think there is a way to override it. Thanks, Wendy PS. I'm on here asking for help, & greatly appreciate everyone that's trying to help, making suggestions, or asking me questions...the newsgroup has been a great help. If you don't think I'm providing enough information for you to help, and you prefer not to ask me to clarify, you don't have to be an ass, just don't respond to the post. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Chris Scharff" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Exchange Discussions" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Friday, August 09, 2002 11:18 AM Subject: RE: Help stopping local delivery > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Wendy Reetz [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > Sent: Friday, August 09, 2002 10:11 AM > > To: Exchange Discussions > > Subject: Re: Help stopping local delivery > > > > Can't tell 5000 users not to send mail while connected to exchange, > > defeats > > the purpose of exchange as a mail server. Yes, I think it's obvious I am > > using it as a mail server, > > No, that wasn't obvious at all based on your posts. If it were obvious, I > wouldn't have given the response that I did. > > >mail just has to go through a particular path > > of > > unix machines to get there. > > "Obviously" you've failed to give anyone enough information on why and how > to provide you with an adequate answer to your query. > > > > & that path is preempted by a couple things: > > 1) > > reply to address (fixed) 2) local delivery (still not sure if I can > > stop). > > > Still too little information. Why does mail need to route through a unix > machine before it is delivered to a local recipient? > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: "Chris Scharff" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > To: "Exchange Discussions" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Sent: Friday, August 09, 2002 10:55 AM > > Subject: RE: Help stopping local delivery > > > > > > > > > > > if it was that easy, I would. :-) > > > > > > OK. Tell the users not to send mail while connected to the Exchange > > server. > > > > > > > I need to have a reply to address on everyone that is authoratative on > > > > another machine. Can do the reply to the suggested way of using a > > second > > > > smtp address set as primary, but, then I get local delivery issues. > > > > > > If you're not using Exchange as a mail server, don't use it as a mail > > > server. > > > > > > > > > > > > _________________________________________________________________ > > > 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] > > > > > > > > > _________________________________________________________________ > > 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] > > _________________________________________________________________ > 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] > _________________________________________________________________ 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]
