In a manner of speaking, yes. Can that be prevented? Yes. Option 1: Good design. Option 2: Programming.
Since option 1 seems to be out of the question, I'll happily offer to bid on option 2. -----Original Message----- From: Wendy Reetz To: Exchange Discussions Sent: 8/9/2002 11:59 AM Subject: Re: Help stopping local delivery local delivery delivers a message to users on the server it was sent from? correct? ----- Original Message ----- From: "Chris Scharff" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Exchange Discussions" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Friday, August 09, 2002 12:52 PM Subject: RE: Help stopping local delivery > > 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. > > You'd be surprised the number of people who try to use Exchange for a > 'calendaring server' or 'groupware server' sans e-mail. I've seen it a > number of times in a number of different variants, in a number of forums. > Perhaps it would have been a bit more obvious if you'd adequately detailed > your use case. > > > 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. > > You've now restated this generality 3 times. It means no more to me now than > it did the other 2 times. All mail sent to my domain follows a "specific > route" too, but it doesn't require non-local delivery. What /specifically/ > does this unix machine do with regards to filtering? > > > 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. > > Ah, see your 5,000 users aren't using the Exchange server for mail. > Apparently that's not so obvious to you. > > >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. > > So, some of your users are on Exchange and some are on a foreign mail > system? Or all of your users have Exchange accounts and only some of them > use it for mail? > > >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) > > I'll choose not refrain from believing or not until you elaborate. > > >2) > > boss said so. > > Boss said so what? You still have not properly defined the problem and the > scope of the issue. If I decide to use Exchange and I send myself a mail > message, why does it need to route through the unix box before it arrives in > my inbox? > > > After some headaches I've got the reply to address changed, > > Why does it need to be 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. > > Why would a mail server not deliver mail to a recipient it is responsible > for, but instead forward it to another 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]
