Seems like later versions stopped showing it to users though, so leaving it unchanged isn't as big of a deal. We used to have newlyweds get upset to see their old name in the address field. That behavior seems to have changed though.
Sent from my Windows Phone ________________________________ From: Michael B. Smith<mailto:[email protected]> Sent: 5/22/2014 4:04 PM To: [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> Subject: RE: [NTSysADM] RE: Adding employeeNumber field in ADUC user property window ….and, If so, that issue still exists, and always will. It is a key mechanism associated with how Exchange internally identifies mailboxes. From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Crawford, Scott Sent: Thursday, May 22, 2014 6:54 PM To: [email protected] Subject: RE: [NTSysADM] RE: Adding employeeNumber field in ADUC user property window I think you're thinking of legacyExchangeDN. Sent from my Windows Phone ________________________________ From: Ben Scott<mailto:[email protected]> Sent: 5/22/2014 11:32 AM To: [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> Subject: Re: [NTSysADM] RE: Adding employeeNumber field in ADUC user property window On Thu, May 22, 2014 at 1:57 AM, Maglinger, Paul <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: > I would expect any Microsoft product to be able to handle a name change such > as this. Isn't the SID still the Social Security Number of the Windows world? I know Exchange/Outlook, circa 2003 and earlier, had some kind of failure mode if you changed the username and someone within the org had sent them email before. I forget the details. Since we now have a "never change the username" policy, I don't know if the issue still exists, either. The username also shows up all over the registry, and I know older versions of Windows (XP? Definitely 2000.) did not use variables everywhere they should. I don't know if that's been improved or not, for the same reason. -- Ben
