I understand what its there for. I also understand that in the case at hand,
its not working as expected. It might be providing some other functionality,
however, that editing might break. A far safer approach is to add an
additional address rather than munging an existing one.

------------------------------------------------------
Roger D. Seielstad - MCSE
Sr. Systems Administrator
Inovis - Formerly Harbinger and Extricity
Atlanta, GA


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Andrey Fyodorov [mailto:afyodorov@;innerhost.com] 
> Sent: Friday, October 18, 2002 12:07 PM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: RE: Validation of migration concept
> 
> 
> LegacyExchangeDN in Exchange exists specifically for this 
> reason - if you want to make an object look like it came from 
> a legacy Exchange 5.5 server
> 
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Roger Seielstad [mailto:roger.seielstad@;inovis.com]
> Sent: Friday, October 18, 2002 11:22 AM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: RE: Validation of migration concept
> 
> 
> I'd suggest adding the X500 rather than changing the 
> legacyExchangeDN. Its
> probably in that format for a reason.
> 
> ------------------------------------------------------
> Roger D. Seielstad - MCSE
> Sr. Systems Administrator
> Inovis - Formerly Harbinger and Extricity
> Atlanta, GA
> 
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Andrey Fyodorov [mailto:afyodorov@;innerhost.com] 
> > Sent: Friday, October 18, 2002 10:17 AM
> > To: Exchange Discussions
> > Subject: RE: Validation of migration concept
> > 
> > 
> > Which one is better?
> > making x500 addresses or changing the LegacyExchangeDN field 
> > to look like the DN from Exchange 5.5 ?
> > 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Webb, Andy [mailto:Andy.Webb@;swinc.com]
> > Sent: Friday, October 18, 2002 5:34 AM
> > To: Exchange Discussions
> > Subject: RE: Validation of migration concept
> > 
> > 
> > Slight revision - Add an x500 (case is significant) proxy address to
> > each user that matches their distinguished name from the old 
> > 5.5 server.
> > For example:
> > x500:/o=Vang/ou=ExchangeSite/cn=Recipients/cn=<user>
> > 
> > It ought to match the legacyExchangeDN value, but it is 
> possible since
> > you created a new environment that it won't.  Don't try and make it
> > match in that case.
> > 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Julian Stone [mailto:julian.stone@;netstore.net] 
> > Posted At: Friday, October 18, 2002 12:28 AM
> > Posted To: Microsoft Exchange
> > Conversation: Validation of migration concept
> > Subject: RE: Validation of migration concept
> > 
> > 
> > In reverse order:
> > 
> > 2. Add an X500 address to each user that points to the old 
> 5.5 server.
> > 
> > 1. After the above is applied, some of the problems may be resolved,
> > other than that ensure that name resolution at each client 
> is working
> > correctly, if not add a 'hosts' entry.
> > 
> > Yours,
> > 
> > Julian Stone
> > 
> > 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Soren Larsen [mailto:SwynkExchangeDiscussionList@;vang.org] 
> > Sent: 17 October 2002 20:19 pm
> > To: Exchange Discussions
> > Subject: Validation of migration concept
> > 
> > 
> > Hello
> > 
> > Having just been through an Exchange 5.5 -> 2000 migration, 
> I need to
> > ask a few questions.
> > 
> > It was chosen to create an new Exchange 2000 organization and 
> > not reuse
> > the old Exchange 5.5. I don't know the reasons for this 
> > design decision
> > - I just had to do the task.
> > 
> > The way I did it was to install the Exchange 2000 organization (1
> > server, 1 site), configure all the required options, mail enable the
> > users, and finally migrate the user mailboxes from Exchange 5.5 to
> > Exchange 2000 with the Migration Wizard.
> > 
> > Migration of the 15 GB mailboxes went smooth with the exception that
> > Migration Wizard forgot some items in about 10 mailboxes.
> > 
> > Now when the new Exchange system has gone into production we are
> > experiencing some very strange and pretty serious problems 
> > productivity
> > wise.
> > 
> > 1. Users are experiencing problems in their Outlook 98 mail 
> > client (yes,
> > I know, not exactly latest technology). Everything from 
> > Outlook hanging
> > for minutes, to Outlook freezing totally. Lots of errors 
> like "Object
> > not found" is given when opening items and using 
> functionality in the
> > Outlook 98 client. All users had new MAPI profiles created 
> > and the forms
> > cache emptied. Anybody on the list has suggestions to what 
> I can do to
> > debug further on the problem?
> > 
> > 2. Users can't reply to old messages migrated from the old 
> > 5.5 server. I
> > was told that Exchange 2000 would recalculate the old Distinguished
> > Names in the mail messages, but this has not happened, as the 
> > users are
> > replying to the old addresses from the 5.5 organization. Can I do
> > anything to solve this issue?
> > 
> > Are there any known issues in running Outlook 98 against an Exchange
> > 2000 server that could cause my problem?
> > 
> > Thanks in advance.
> > 
> > Soren
> > 
> > 
> > _________________________________________________________________
> > List posting FAQ:       http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
> > Archives:               http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp
> > To unsubscribe:         mailto:leave-exchange@;ls.swynk.com
> > 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:leave-exchange@;ls.swynk.com
> > 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:leave-exchange@;ls.swynk.com
> > 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:leave-exchange@;ls.swynk.com
> > 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:leave-exchange@;ls.swynk.com
> 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:leave-exchange@;ls.swynk.com
> 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:leave-exchange@;ls.swynk.com
Exchange List admin:    [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Reply via email to