If that happened, I'd imagine a large number of EU companies would take mail away from all "nonessential" employees.
> -----Original Message----- > From: Hurst, Paul [mailto:Paul.Hurst@;eu.sony.com] > Sent: Friday, November 08, 2002 5:38 AM > To: Exchange Discussions > > Ed, > > JFYI It would seem in the EU that soon it might be a legal requirement for > companies to retain email forever, to stop the old 'well we have a policy > that says deleted old emails so you can't sue us for a dodgy email' > excuse. > A whole new meaning to point 2 for us. > > Cheers > > Paul > > Standards are like toothbrushes, > everyone wants one but not yours > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Ed Crowley [mailto:curspice@;pacbell.net] > Sent: 07 November 2002 19:09 > To: Exchange Discussions > Subject: RE: Using a PST for 'overflow' > > > I have a few reasons that an archival system might not be appropriate. > > 1. Cost. > > 2. Retention policies. These systems are in opposition to many > companies' legal departments' opinions that all e-mail older than a > certain age must be destroyed. I'm not arguing that these policies are > valid (I think they almost always are wrong-headed) but that they exist > and have to be followed when so dictated by corporate management. > > 3. Need. Plenty of organizations simply don't need them. Enlightened > database sizing and retention policies can obviate such a requirement in > many cases. Myself, I would prefer spending funds on improved backup > systems rather than an archival system if each achieves the same end > goal of allowing users to store more data. > > Ed Crowley MCSE+Internet MVP kcCC+I > Tech Consultant > hp Services > Protecting the world from PSTs and Bricked Backups! > > > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:bounce-exchange-94760@;ls.swynk.com] On Behalf Of Greg Deckler > Sent: Wednesday, November 06, 2002 3:00 PM > To: Exchange Discussions > Subject: RE: Using a PST for 'overflow' > > > I have ony found one solution to this type of problem and it is called > an Email Archival system. I have no idea why this type of a solution is > not more popular. It gets the information out of the Exchange stores and > off user's hard drives and onto permanent storage on CD's or DVD's. The > systems they have now integrate quite well with Exchange, provide > advanced security capabilities and include full-text searching > capabilities. And users can access the systems via a web browser. > > Why more people do not use these systems is anyone's guess. Apparently > most email admins out there are content with draconian storage policies > or catering to users like poor Russell who is personally buring CD's. It > can all be automated and you can have the best of all worlds. Email > Archival systems folks, they have been around for a long time and work > quite well. > > I recommend them to nearly every client that I work for because there is > so much business knowledge in email that it is almost criminal the way > some companies blast it from their systems after only a week or two. If > they actually understood and appreciated the amount of knowledge and > business process information that they were losing, they would never do > such an incredibly stupid thing. > > And Craig, I have to disagree with you about user provided storage. > Individuals have consistently proven that they simply cannot store, > organize and process large amounts of data. If I received as much snail > mail as email, my entire house would be full of unorganized stacks of > crap. Proper storage of business information should reside on business > systems, not on personally provided storage. Centralization and > automation of storage is incredibly more efficient and productive than > individual users storing their own information. > > > Tongue out of cheek - this is a product design problem of course. > > > > Give me one good reason for Exchange being in the storage or data > > management business. How it ought to work in a world with Active > > Directories and Distributed File System overlays to NTFS is that a > > mailbox should be a pointer to user provided storage. Who provides > > your snail mail box? It's not the post office, unless you are renting > > > a PO Box. Normal delivery is to storage that you provide, structure > > and manage. > > > > Why does Exchange deliver primarily to message stores? Because of a > > lack of sufficient protocols and customer demand to do it right. > > > > If your customer thinks your service is inadequate, your customer is > > not wrong. As someone earlier in this thread said so eloquently (if > > misguidedly) > > > > duh! > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Etts, Russell [mailto:retts@;harman.com] > > Sent: Wednesday, November 06, 2002 8:35 AM > > To: Exchange Discussions > > Subject: RE: Using a PST for 'overflow' > > > > > > Hi there > > > > I have the same issue here. People have PST files that are well over > > a gig, and we had one person go over the 2 gig limit. No matter what > > we tell them, they insist that they need a mailbox over a gig. I > > limit them to a max of 300 megs, no matter how much crying they do. I > > > just don't know what to do. > > > > I have told people once their PSTs hit 600 megs, then I'll transfer it > > > to my machine and burn them a CD rom. > > > > Thanks > > > > Russell > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: David N. Precht [mailto:discussions@;entrysecurity.com] > > Sent: Wednesday, November 06, 2002 6:56 AM > > To: Exchange Discussions > > Subject: RE: Using a PST for 'overflow' > > > > No, just inform them of the 'No PST Backup' policy. > > > > I don't back up PSTs. Period. Either its in their mailbox or it is > > not that important. > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > [mailto:bounce-exchange-224131@;ls.swynk.com] On Behalf Of Sander Van > > Butzelaar > > Sent: Wednesday, November 06, 2002 05:49 > > To: Exchange Discussions > > Subject: RE: Using a PST for 'overflow' > > > > > > I have a couple of users who do the same thing. They don't want to > > delete old mail (for whatever reason) and I can't keep extending their > > > mailbox sizes. So they "move" to PST. Be aware of the risks here! Make > > > a periodic backup of that PST as hard drives are prone to failure. > > > > Sander > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Niki Blowfield - Exchange [mailto:exchangelist@;partition.co.uk] > > Sent: 06 November 2002 12:45 > > To: Exchange Discussions > > Subject: Using a PST for 'overflow' > > > > I was having a discussion with someone the other day and he mentioned > > this phrase in passing, that they used PST files when user mailboxes > > became full > > > > I didn't dwell on this as we were talking about something else, but > > can anyone suggest what he may have meant? We are now enforcing > > stricter limits on mailbox size and would be interested in something > > like this. > > > > For ongoing maintenance, is Outlooks Autoarchiving a viable solution? > > i.e. does this move mail out of the server information store and into > > a PST in the users local profile? > > > > Thanks > > > > _________________________________________________________________ > > 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] > > > ************************************************************************** > ********************* > The information contained in this message or any of its attachments may be > confidential and is intended for the exclusive use of the addressee(s). > Any disclosure, reproduction, distribution or other dissemination or use > of this communication is strictly prohibited without the express > permission of the sender. The views expressed in this email are those of > the individual and not necessarily those of Sony or Sony affiliated > companies. Sony email is for business use only. > > This email and any response may be monitored by Sony United Kingdom > Limited. > (6) > ************************************************************************** > ********************* > > > _________________________________________________________________ > 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]
