I'd wager that Siegfried is fully aware of the differences, probably more so
than most on the list.

The question I have is what's the status of this hotfix with regards to
E2k3? Is there an expectation that this functionality will be included in
the RTM release?

--------------------------------------------------------------
Roger D. Seielstad - MTS MCSE MS-MVP
Sr. Systems Administrator
Inovis Inc.


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Dryden, Karen [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
> Sent: Saturday, June 21, 2003 7:40 AM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: RE: IPM.Post VS. IPM.Note
> 
> 
> I know about the hotfix and am not crazy about installing hotfixes, so
> we're waiting at this point.  Nothing accesses the M: drive on our E2K
> servers, it's excluded from vscan.  We don't do single folder backups
> and our backups run after midnight.  OL2002 works sometimes here, too.
> Nothing is constant.  I know rules fire on notes, but everything from
> the internet comes into PF as posts.  Some of our rules just stop
> working at times, though, on notes with nothing in the logs and with
> logging turned up to max.  If you've never had a lot of PFs in 5.5 and
> now you've gone to E2K, you can't really understand the differences.
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Siegfried Weber [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
> Sent: Friday, June 20, 2003 6:45 PM
> To: Exchange Discussions
> Subject: RE: IPM.Post VS. IPM.Note
> 
> 
> As for being posts instead of notes, see Andy's reply and 
> call Microsoft
> for a free of charge fix.
> 
> I've never used rules much on PF's hence I cannot comment on 
> that. I do
> understand that a rule doesn't fire if it is a post item but it should
> fire on a note item. I'd be interested to hear if you have any
> additional info what's going on. Especially if the store is 
> hit by other
> applications like a MAPI based backup (single folder backup thingy
> maybe?) or an antivirus scanner (either MAPI or ESE/VSAPI based)?
> 
> Also, you do know that you should stay away from the "M: Drive", don't
> you? The symptoms (like the permissions issue - I just tested with
> Outlook 2002 SP2 and it works here) you describe point me into the
> direction that you are running some piece of software which 
> accesses the
> "M: Drive" (like a file based backup or AV scanner) and causes some of
> your grief.
> 
> <Cheers:Siegfried runat="server" />
> 
> Development Lead,
> 
> CDOLive LLC - The Microsoft Messaging and Collaboration Application
> Experts http://www.cdolive.com
>  
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Dryden, Karen [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Sent: Saturday, June 21, 2003 12:06 AM
> > To: Exchange Discussions
> > Subject: RE: IPM.Post VS. IPM.Note
> > 
> > 
> > That's too bad.  We have thousands of PFs and have always
> > encouraged people to opt for a PF rather than a mailbox 
> > anytime they need somewhere to receive email to be viewed by 
> > people who already had a mailbox.  In 5.5, PFs worked pretty 
> > much flawlessly.  In 2000, they're terrible.  The rules just 
> > stop working intermittently.  The PFs that receive mostly 
> > outside mail are now posts, so the rules don't work at all on 
> > those anymore.  The user role permissions are finally cleaned 
> > up so that Exchange 2000 can interpret them.  We only have 
> > replicas on one of our 2000 servers now since replication 
> > caused too much latency.  Sometimes, even though we have 
> > owner permissions on all of the PFs, if we use Outlook 2002 
> > to view the properties, we're told we don't have permission, 
> > but if we view them in OL2000, we can make whatever changes 
> > an owner should be able to make.  Searching for something in 
> > PFs used to be a breeze when they were on our 5.5 servers, 
> > now, you may or may not find what you're looking for even 
> > though you know it's in there.
> > 
> > We're getting to the point that it would be easier to create
> > mailboxes for the PFs that we constantly get called on, the 
> > ones with rules that stop working, mostly, and that's such a 
> > waste to have to create a mailbox when all you really need is 
> > a PF.  I'd guess we got maybe 10 PF calls in the 5 years 
> > we've been running Exchange for actual problems with the 
> > server, not the usual, user doesn't understand the 
> > permissions calls, and now that we've moved our PFs to E2K, 
> > we get at least 10 calls a week with PF server issues, if not 
> > more.  We've turned logging up to highest on everything to do 
> > with PFs and nothing ever shows up in the logs to give us a 
> > clue as to why they sometimes work and sometimes don't.  When 
> > the forwarding rules stop working, a server restart is the 
> > only thing that fixes it.  I'm really beginning to hate PFs.  
> > When I went to MEC2000, in one of the classes, they said that 
> > in E2K, you'd be able to change permissions on PFs without 
> > replacing permissions - what happened to that?  Wouldn't that 
> > be helpful when you have thousands of PFs?  I know, PFAdmin, 
> > which may or may not work correctly.
> > 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Webb, Andy [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Sent: Friday, June 20, 2003 5:36 PM
> > To: Exchange Discussions
> > Subject: RE: IPM.Post VS. IPM.Note
> > 
> > 
> > The line is that it was actually broken in 5.5 and they
> > "fixed" it in E2K.
> > 
> > Why there can't be a choice between Post type public folders
> > and Note (email message) type public folders I don't 
> > understand.  Actually I do - $$$.  There /could/ be a choice 
> > if enough people griped about it.  At this point, E2K3 is 
> > pretty much in the can and so it won't change much there.
> > 
> > Since anything "collaborative" about public folders seems
> > headed toward Sharepoint databases, there's probably not much 
> > harm in making PF's actually do mail correctly going forward.
> > 
> > 
> > ========================================
> > ERM (Exchange Resource Manager) Released http://www.swinc.com/erm
> > ========================================
> > 
> > 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Joshua R. Morgan [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Posted At: Friday, June 20, 2003 2:31 PM
> > Posted To: Microsoft Exchange
> > Conversation: IPM.Post VS. IPM.Note
> > Subject: RE: IPM.Post VS. IPM.Note
> > 
> > Question then....   Why did they change the functionality?    
> > It worked
> > in 5.5
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > Joshua Morgan
> > Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > 
> > 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Siegfried Weber [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Sent: Friday, June 20, 2003 1:16 PM
> > To: Exchange Discussions
> > Subject: RE: IPM.Post VS. IPM.Note
> > 
> > 
> > 1. The script (which is a slightly modified version of
> > http://www.cdolive.com/changemessageclass.htm) your co-worker
> > found is designed for the Exchange Event Service which is 
> > only provided in Exchange 2000/2003 for backwards 
> > compatibility and I would not recommend using it with 
> > Exchange 2000/2003 due to being not reliable. 2. The issue 
> > you are facing not being able to reply to public folder 
> > messages will neither be fixed with KB817809 nor the script 
> > you mentioned or the one Andy Webb pointed you to. This is a 
> > limitation of Outlook Web Access 2000.
> > 
> > <Cheers:Siegfried runat="server" />
> > 
> > Development Lead,
> > 
> > CDOLive LLC - The Microsoft Messaging and Collaboration
> > Application Experts http://www.cdolive.com
> >  
> > 
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Joshua R. Morgan [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > Sent: Wednesday, June 18, 2003 10:58 PM
> > > To: Exchange Discussions
> > > Subject: IPM.Post VS. IPM.Note
> > > 
> > > 
> > > Windows 2000 SP3
> > > Exchange 2000 SP3
> > > 
> > > Looks like Microsoft released this yesterday. 
> > > http://support.microsoft.com/?id=817809
> > > 
> > > Has anybody had any experience with this issue?  We see it
> > because we
> > > are unable to reply or forward a message in a Public Folder
> > when it is
> > 
> > > accessed through OWA. I was wondering if anyone had any 
> workarounds 
> > > until the SP is released, currently I am troubleshooting
> > issues with
> > > this Script that a coworker of mine found online.
> > > 
> > http://www.netcomitc.com/post2note/esa.htm
> > 
> > All help is appreciated,
> > Joshua
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > Joshua Morgan
> > Method IQ
> > Senior Network Engineer
> > Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > 
> > 
> > _________________________________________________________________
> > List posting FAQ:       http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
> > Web Interface:
> > http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchange&t
> ext_mode=&
> lang=english
> To unsubscribe:         mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Exchange List admin:    [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 
> _________________________________________________________________
> List posting FAQ:       http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
> Web Interface:
> http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchange&t
> ext_mode=&
> lang=english
> To unsubscribe:         mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Exchange List admin:    [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 
> _________________________________________________________________
> List posting FAQ:       http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
> Web Interface:
> http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchange&t
ext_mode=&
lang=english
To unsubscribe:         mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Exchange List admin:    [EMAIL PROTECTED]



_________________________________________________________________
List posting FAQ:       http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
Web Interface:
http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchange&text_mode=&;
lang=english
To unsubscribe:         mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Exchange List admin:    [EMAIL PROTECTED]

_________________________________________________________________
List posting FAQ:       http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
Web Interface:
http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchange&text_mode=&;
lang=english
To unsubscribe:         mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Exchange List admin:    [EMAIL PROTECTED]

_________________________________________________________________
List posting FAQ:       http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
Web Interface:
http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchange&text_mode=&;
lang=english
To unsubscribe:         mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Exchange List admin:    [EMAIL PROTECTED]

_________________________________________________________________
List posting FAQ:       http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
Web Interface:
http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchange&text_mode=&lang
=english
To unsubscribe:         mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Exchange List admin:    [EMAIL PROTECTED]

_________________________________________________________________
List posting FAQ:       http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
Web Interface: 
http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchange&text_mode=&lang=english
To unsubscribe:         mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Exchange List admin:    [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Reply via email to