RE: Server hardware specs for E2K3 (WAS: E2K Forest/Domain-prep on Wi n2003 Domain?)
To address Steven's question far below... Thoughts, ideas? Put the logs and database on different physical drives. Makes a hell of a difference under load. All the best, Andy -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 5. august 2003 23:23 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Server hardware specs for E2K3 (WAS: E2K Forest/Domain-prep on Wi n2003 Domain?) Gosh, some companies are truly humorless, aren't they... -Original Message- From: Fyodorov, Andrey [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, August 05, 2003 2:14 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Server hardware specs for E2K3 (WAS: E2K Forest/Domain-prep on Wi n2003 Domain?) No SearchBastard for me The Web site you are attempting to access http://www.searchbastard.com/ is prohibited under the Spherion Internet Usage Policy and has been blocked/restricted. Do not attempt to disable, defeat or circumvent this Company security function. Violation of Spherion's Internet Usage Policy will be reported to your supervisor and may result in disciplinary action, up to and including termination. -Original Message- From: Chris Scharff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, August 05, 2003 4:41 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Re: Server hardware specs for E2K3 (WAS: E2K Forest/Domain-prep on Wi n2003 Domain?) Hmm... I'm all distracted trying to figure out this google thing. Who knew there was any other search engine on the planet beyond www.searchbastard.com? Why would anyone bother? Dual proc would help, but bumping up the RAM would probably help more. If you could only do one, I'd choose the latter. Beyond that... With users who'd fall into my 'typical category' I'd imagine you'd likely be OK (at the very least you will be no worse of with E2K3 on this config than you would be with E2K on it). To be clear this is a new box correct? Because the one downside[1] to a 5.5 to E2K3 migration is that you can't do it in place, but need to swing to new hardware. [1] I see it as a bonus personally. [2] [2] Seriously. From: Dickenson, Steven [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Tue, 5 Aug 2003 15:27:09 -0400 To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Server hardware specs for E2K3 (WAS: E2K Forest/Domain-prep on Wi n2003 Domain?) I guess the question about is it worth the money was more hypothetical. I've since gotten an updated price of $370, which IS worth it to me. As far as hardware goes, I'm looking for a general should be okay, or not a good idea. My PRIV is 6GB, PUB 30MB. About 450 mailboxes. On average, 50 clients connected at a time, with a maximum of 250 (that's how many PCs we have). No idea what the mail volume is. I'm ashamed to say I'm not sure how to track it. We would be running E2K3 SE with McAfee GroupShield on Win2k3 Standard Server. Hardware is P3600, 784MB of RAM, hardware RAID, 18GB RAID1 OS/Pagefile/Apps, 33GB RAID1 Data/Logs. I can go dual proc if it will help. Thoughts, ideas? Steven --- Steven Dickenson [EMAIL PROTECTED] Network Administrator The Key School, Annapolis Maryland -Original Message- From: Chris Scharff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, August 05, 2003 3:10 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Re: E2K Forest/Domain-prep on Win2003 Domain? The hardware requirements for E2K3 vs E2K are generally equivalent, whether that hardware is sufficient for you org is not really something I can say with any degree of certainty. It meets the minimum hardware requirements I believe. Whether or not it is worth $1000 for you is not really a question I can answer. It is for customers who hire me to do the work, since I performed my last E2K migration the weekend after TechEd and haven't looked back since. From: Dickenson, Steven [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Tue, 5 Aug 2003 13:03:45 -0400 To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: E2K Forest/Domain-prep on Win2003 Domain? I have considered that, however we have Exchange 2000 EE free as part of an upgrade advantage purchased with Exchange 5.5 EE. Upgrading to E2K3 EE would cost me upwards of $1000. Is it worth it? In addition, I will be doing the install on a P3600 with 512MB of RAM and 3 18GB RAID1 arrays. Can the hardware cope well? PS - What the he11 does IMNSHO mean? Steven --- Steven Dickenson [EMAIL PROTECTED] Network Administrator The Key School, Annapolis Maryland -Original Message- From: Chris Scharff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, August 05, 2003 12:58 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Re: E2K Forest/Domain-prep on Win2003 Domain? IMNSHO upgrading to W2K at this point is a waste of
RE: Backup Software for Exchange 2000
Some observations: I now get 550Mb/min using BackupExec 8.6 against Exchange 2K (store backup, not BLB) - perhaps the limiting factor is the 100MBit net card. The Exchange server has 16Gb of stores on a PIII 600 with 768Mb RAM and Raid 1 data disks. The backup server is a PIII 450. When we were using single-drive DLT, I was lucky to get 200Mb/min, even with decent drivers. We changed to using removeable disks as backup media (basically using disks as tapes) and the speeds shot up although the rest of the setup remained the same. All the best, Andy -Original Message- From: Paul kondilys [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 6. august 2003 22:34 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Backup Software for Exchange 2000 Wow, how are you doing the gig a minute? I have a 160GB backup and it takes almost 24 hours on Veritas 8.6. It really slows down when it hits the mailboxes though. Do you have the drive mounted directly to the exchange server? Thanks, Paul -Original Message- From: Pillai, Raj [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, August 06, 2003 4:14 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Backup Software for Exchange 2000 A Gig a minute, really? Using Backup exec 8.6? Are you using a remote agent or is it a local backup ?(backup device connected to your exchange server). I have a 35GB backup and verification process which takes approximately 3 hours using BE 8.6 with remote agent. Raj -Original Message- From: Woodruff, Michael [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, August 06, 2003 3:00 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Backup Software for Exchange 2000 I can backup at well over a gig a minute, not sure what you are using. -Original Message- From: Paul kondilys [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, August 06, 2003 3:52 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Backup Software for Exchange 2000 Yeah have to agree...Veritas 8.6 works great. Just make sure your IS is not that big or you'll be in for a long backup process Paul -Original Message- From: Thakkar, Nick [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, August 06, 2003 3:39 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Backup Software for Exchange 2000 We use Verits Backup Exec 8.6 works wellhave restored Information Stores...does brick level also. Nick Thakkar Network Administrator American Medical Response [EMAIL PROTECTED] 209-993-6974 -Original Message- From: Bridges, Samantha [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, August 06, 2003 12:36 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Backup Software for Exchange 2000 Hello All. What kind of backup software do you use for Exchange 2000? Need to do brick levels too. I know...management wants the brick levelstried talking them out of it. Thanks _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchanget 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=exchanget 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=exchanget 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=exchanget ext_mode= lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] ** ** ** This e-mail message, including any attachments, contains information that is confidential, may be protected by the attorney/client or other applicable privileges, and may constitute non-public information. This message is intended to be conveyed only to the designated recipient(s). If you are not the intended recipient of this message, do not read it; please immediately notify the sender that you have received this message in error and delete this message.Unauthorized use, disclosure, dissemination, distribution, reproduction of this message or the information contained in this message or the taking of any action in reliance on it is strictly
New Entourage: glitch
Exchange 2000 SP3 on W2K SP3 Upgraded a number of Mac clients to the new Entourage. Now when doing a send/receive, we get the following annoying dialogue showing up as it gets roughly to the middle of the Public Folders. Never saw it before with plain IMAP with Entourage 10.1.3 on the same Macs. Happens on five out of six clients. Mac no. 6 has no such errors and completes the sync. ** Error Mail could not be received at this time. Explanation The server returned the following error Protocol Error: Expected SPACE not found.. Error 1026 ** Nothing in the exchange logs. Anyone else have this happening? Seems like an error in the IMAP syntax but I haven't had a lot of time to look at it yet. All the best, Andy _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: OWA and the M:
Mine've always been like that... And all the other servers I ever looked at. Andy -Original Message- From: Rob Hackney [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 20. juni 2003 12:51 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: FW: OWA and the M: Hi, I stopped my IIS services recently on and restarting I noticed in the properties for the public and exchange folders that the directory it points to is the M:\domain\public folders and \mbx respectively. Is this by design as I thought the M: did not exist as such? (Sorry for another q on the m drive...) It still seems to work ok tho Support Analyst TKC Group Ltd Unit 5 Ashmead Ind Est Keynsham BS31 1TZ UK 0117 916 1320 This email is confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual(s) to whom it is addressed. It should not be deemed to constitute a binding contract between TKC Group and the recipient(s) unless a purchase order number is quoted. Any views or opinions presented are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of TKC Group Ltd. If you are not the intended recipient(s), please do not copy or disclose its contents. Please return it to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] then delete the email. intY has scanned this email for all known viruses (www.inty.com) _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchanget 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=exchangetext_mode=lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Sending emails that can not be altered
I'd think you'll have to solve this one with an attachment of some sort. All the best, Andy -Original Message- From: Tony Hlabse [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 5. juni 2003 15:39 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Sending emails that can not be altered Due to Martha's problems with altering emails. Someone here asked if there is a way to send and email so that the content can not be altered by the recipient andf then forwarded on _ STOP MORE SPAM with the new MSN 8 and get 2 months FREE* http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchanget 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=exchangetext_mode=lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Arcserve and restoring public folder calander
Neil have you tried exporting the Sellafield folder to a .pst, deleting it from the PF tree and then letting Arcserver restore the whole folder? All the best, Andy -Original Message- From: Neil Doody [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 2. juni 2003 16:04 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Arcserve and restoring public folder calander I know this is a long shot because arcserve is so crap, but I was wondering if someone may have an answer :o Basically ive been backing up with arcserve the public folders, today I have needed to restore something. I have the exchange agent which as far as I know is correctly installed, everything checks out fine anyway. I do a restore by session, because I have given a serial number to all the tapes in my pool by day, so I choose 104, which would be Thursdays backup. I go to the public folders in the exchange agent, I choose Sellafield calendar, it says that it is just over 2 meg in size, I choose to restore to original location and click run. The backup job runs but comes up with this message :- E8603 Failed to write to database. (DBNAME=Public Folders\Sellafield Calendar, EC=EXCH Exchange Agent - (402) Exchange system error.) However, the backup seems to restore one item from the calendar. Ive tried running it for alternate destinations, but it just crashes. It appears that there is 2 meg of data backed up, yet it only attempts to restore 33KB? Is there any other way of getting data off this tape? _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchanget 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=exchangetext_mode=lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Boot drives smoked
Dunno why this bounced before... Here we go again. Fwd: No idea if it works, but it might be cheaper than hours spent setting up a new server and recovering, depending on your environment and how recoverable it is. $850-$950 http://www.ontrack.com/special/0602pc1exchangead.asp http://www.msexchange.org/software_reviews/Ontrack_PowerControls_v10_Rec overy_and_Administration.html All the best, Andy PowerControls is a recovery and administration utility that allows you to extract mailbox data from an offline .EDB file, something that has hitherto been well nigh impossible for the majority of Exchange Admins. Data is copied using a simple drag-and-drop operation from the source into the target. The source can be either a PRIV.EDB file (private Information Store), or a PUB.EDB file (public Information Store). The target can be either a .PST file (Personal Folders file) or an on-line Exchange Information Store. There is also a viewer that displays individual mailbox or folder items and a search facility that can make messages easier to locate within the Information Store. Blah blah blah... -Original Message- From: Ed Crowley [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 26. januar 2003 18:15 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Boot drives smoked That is correct. I thought I made it pretty clear in my original response to your question: I believe you'll need to build a new server with the same version, service pack, patch level, and server name, and do a disaster recovery. When you can mount the store, you can then do an Exmerge. For 12 mailboxes, you could also simply manually copy the contents with Outlook if you wanted. 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:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Matt Sent: Sunday, January 26, 2003 8:40 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Boot drives smoked Sorry it's been a busy week, With just having tha data bases in the exchange folder I guessing I will have to reload exchage with all same svc pks and get the store mounted. Then use exmerge or just log into the server to retrieve mail and folders for each mailbox. Outlook will be useless to me till the server is running!! Correct?! Was a os mirror scsi controller smoked smoked both drives. Wish I did have at least one hd. -Original Message- From: Ed Crowley [mailto:curspice@ baspacbell.net] Sent: Saturday, January 25, 2003 1:03 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Boot drives smoked With Outlook to a PST, then from a PST to the new server. 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:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Matt Sent: Saturday, January 25, 2003 4:21 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Boot drives smoked Simply copy with outlook you mean after server is rebuilt? -Original Message- From: Ed Crowley [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, January 23, 2003 10:44 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Boot drives smoked I believe you'll need to build a new server with the same version, service pack, patch level, and server name, and do a disaster recovery. When you can mount the store, you can then do an Exmerge. For 12 mailboxes, you could also simply manually copy the contents with Outlook if you wanted. Ed Crowley MCSE+I MVP Technical Consultant hp Services One man's Spam is another man's UCE. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Matt Sent: Thursday, January 23, 2003 7:58 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Boot drives smoked Exchange 5.5 sp3 and nt 4.0 was sp6. Boot drives mirrored smoked. Still have Databases pub and priv. Do not need server any longer but need mail and folders turned into pst's. Only 12 boxes were on this server. What's the best and fastest way to do this? Exmerge? _ 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] _ 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] _ 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] _ List posting FAQ:
RE: Very strange problems occuring
Set the speed of the adaptors and switches as described. If they don't work at 100MBit try setting them to 10Mbit and see if that works for reference sake. If 100MBit doesn't work but 10MBit does, check the cabling and associated wiring stuff (patch leads, sockets etc.) the *whole* way from the switch to the PC. Easy way to circumvent this for testing is by using a long Cat 5 patch lead. If your wiring is certified and installed for Category 5 or above then you're OK for 100MBit. If its Cat 3 or Cat 4 you might be getting trouble from there. I've seen some odd behaviour from cable problems with certain net cards (connections start off OK and then degrade until they're unuseable). All the best, Andy -Original Message- From: mike dilworth [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 27. november 2002 13:11 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Re: Very strange problems occuring set NICS and switch ports all to 100Mbps full duplex, mike - Original Message - From: David Lloyd [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, November 27, 2002 2:04 PM Subject: Very strange problems occuring Hi people, We have a very strange problem here with our users. They are working with exchange client and Exchange server 5.5 in an NT 4 domain. One by one they seem to be losing their connections to exchange server. When i go and have a look, i realise they are experiencing packet loss from the ping tests i've done. I realise this my be the wrong group to post to, but recently we have changed all our switches from 3comm to Extreme. Users have now got 100mb to the desktop..this is when we started experiencing these issues. Strange thing is though, if i swap the network card with an identical one, the problem goes away, mostly..or if i put them back on to an old 3comm switch running at 10mbit. Its a long shot...but has anyone come accross this type of problem before? I'm just about to go and buy some new NICs David Sorry if u believe this is the wrong group to send to, but i think there are some good people in this list. CONFIDENTIAL NOTICE This communication contains information which is confidential and may also be privileged. It is for the exclusive use of the intended recipient(s). If you are not the intended recipient please note that any distribution, copying or use of this communication or the information in it is strictly prohibited. If you received this communication in error, please notify us by e-mail or by telephone (020 7770 7000) and then delete the e-mail and any copies of it. _ 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] _ 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] _ 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]
RE: Strange Incoming Mail Problem
Requests to mail.bondyweb.com on port 25 just time out. telnet mail.bondyweb.com 25 Connecting To mail.bondyweb.com...Could not open connection to the host on port 25: Connect failed Check your firewall, and any other things which could cause the appropriate port to be blocked... Check also that any NAT entries are also still in the firewall's config? If it just stopped then it could have been that someone was fiddling. You did restart the SMTP service and/or reboot the server, eh? All the best, Andy -Original Message- From: Simon Bond [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 26. november 2002 15:26 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Strange Incoming Mail Problem Exchange 2000, SP3, W2K SP3. I'm afraid I can't provide a great deal of informatiuon here since there just isn't any! Basically, one day I have a perfectly working mail system then suddenly it stops receiving incoming mail. Outgoing is absolutely fine. There is nothing in the event viewer to suggest a problem and all DNS records appear to be OK. I have three domain names housed on the same box, bondyweb.com, simonbond.com and sacredlondon.co.uk. Bondyweb.com is the main one that is used and I have temporarily forwarded this to another address. However, the other addresses have the same problem and I have left these pointing to my exchange box for testing purposes. Any slightest hint of a suggestion is more than welcome. Cheers Simon _ 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] _ 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]
RE: Incoming Mail not working
Jonathan you don't mention it, but I assume you have set up the appropriate recipient policies in Exchange System Manager i.e. added the public domains which the Exchange server is hosting? If the public email domains are different to the Exchange Server's domain, it needs to know about it. If the domains were different and you didn't insert the desired domains into the recipient policies, internal mail would be OK but you'd get the error you advertise when external sources try and send to you. If you have the recipient policies in place, make sure they're applied, and make sure that the user objects are picking them up in AD UsersComputers. Oh and turn off fixup smtp in the pix [no fixup protocol smtp] whilst setting up, just as a matter of course. You can turn it back on later when you have a more stable environment - then you'll better appreciate the subtelty of the problems it can cause. All the best, Andy -Original Message- From: Jonathan [mailto:jwright;spectore.com] Sent: 12. november 2002 16:55 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Incoming Mail not working I have setup exchange2k in AD domain environment behind a pix firewall . I am able to send email using my exchange server but for some reason I am not able to receive anything. Here is the criteria of my setup. 2 DNS server with AD Intergrated Zones. 2 primary zones created domain.com and domain.org. Exchange 2k with default settings. domain.org is registered with internic as having a primary dns that points to my 2 internal DNS servers using public IP addresses. domain.com is registered with internic as having a primary dns that points to an external dns servers hosted by a consulting company. I've double checked all possibilities. I can send email using Exchange2K to myself and receive the message. When I use an outside email account to send to the excange server I get an undelivered mail message: unknown host: [EMAIL PROTECTED]. When I check my transaction logs I don't get any messages pertaining to incoming mail. How else can I troubleshoot my incoming mails. Is there any step that I'm missing between registering my dns servers with internic to setting up my pixfirewall? Please list some other variables that may resolve my incoming mail. Thanks, J _ 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]
RE: Incoming Mail not working
I take my last post back. Your DNS records are all screwed up. Titaniumcouncil address goes nowhere, spectore.com goes to an iMail server at colony1.net, which I presume isn't an Exchange server hacked to look like an iMail server? Making DNS work properly first would be a really good start... All the best, Andy -Original Message- From: Jonathan [mailto:jwright;spectore.com] Sent: 12. november 2002 17:54 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Incoming Mail not working Domain names are spectore.com and worldtitaniumcouncil.org _ 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]
RE: Swedish characters not displayed correctly in OWA??
I don't know if its any help, but the default install of Windows 2000 Server SP2 (International English) with a default install of Exchange 2000 Server SP2 (International English) results in OWA correctly displaying Danish, Swedish and Norwegian special characters. You do not need the language packs. Works OK with clients running all the OS I've tried : Mac OS 9, X, Windows 9x through XP. Netscape 6 and up, IE 5 and up, maybe earlier versions. English or European localised versions (Danish, Swedish, Norwegian, German etc.). You say some clients. What is different about the configuration of the machines which display the characters incorrectly? What Exchange/Windows version is running on the server and clients? What language? Are you using Internet Explorer on the clients? What version? What does the browser do about other web pages with Scandinavian characters? I would guess that the clients have some kind of language weirdo going on. Localisations you might want to do : In Exchange System Manager go to... \root\administrative groups\administrative group xyz\servername Right click servername - properties - Locales Make sure Swedish is there. Shouldn't affect the font display in OWA though. All the best, Andy -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 12. august 2002 23:33 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Swedish characters not displayed correctly in OWA?? Hi, when sending mail to some clients via OWA, swedish characters are not displayed correctly!! The swedish characters ÅÖÄ are replaced with ¤! and so on!! Anybody who can help?? Thanks _ 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] _ 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]
RE: OWA setup problems
Jerry first is replication. Depending on the size of your network and your patience this can be a problem. Have you tried domain/user or domain\user or [EMAIL PROTECTED] on the login? One thing I was not aware of is that for a mailbox to be displayed, the user has to have an email address corresponding the AD domain name in their properties (recipient policy might be at fault here). For example, if your AD domain is network.abc but your mail addresses are company.com then Exchange will work fine with that person having a single address of [EMAIL PROTECTED] For OWA to work, they also have to have the SMTP address [EMAIL PROTECTED] All the best, Andy -Original Message- From: Jerry Jones [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 17. juli 2002 15:59 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: OWA setup problems I know its naive of me to believe everything I have read that OWA on exchange 2000 and iis 5.0 should just work. Well I have a test server running just that with sp2 and all other updates as of yesterday. When I use a web browser to goto \\servername\exchange or \\server_ip\exchange I get a box to enter user name password and domain. At first I could enter the name of a person with a mailbox on the server and just get Page cannot be displayed. Now it does not seem to want to authenticate anyone. I enter the password 3 times and then get not autherized. I have created several test accounts with mailboxes and they are enabled for web. This is all on the internal network. I am not crossing any routers or firewalls at all. For that matter all computers are on the same hub. I should add that test workstations logged on as various users can send e-mail back and forth via outlook. So exchange seems to be working fine otherwise. Any ideas? _ 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] _ 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]
RE: Unlimited Quotas
James writes; But then they talk about how the IT guy is a dick etc. Already had that happen. If anyone finds a surefire way to avoid this happening, then they could be Very Rich Very Quick (put me on the DL)... All the best, Andéjà vudy -Original Message- From: Woodrick, Ed [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, July 08, 2002 9:18 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Unlimited Quotas And then when the users come yelling, just point the finger to the direction where blame goes. It's rather amazing how people won't go complaining to a CEO or other decision maker level person. snip _ 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]
RE: One Folder (was Unlimited Quotas)
James I guess it depends on your situation as well as best practices. I've noticed no particular performance degredation with people having 1+ messages in their inbox, or another folder [a là my Exchange List Archive folder...] when they are running on a fast (LAN/10Mbit+) link. Users connecting via slow links (=128Kbit) wait for large folders to appear in Outlook, and it can be unfeasible for them to stack too many messages into one folder. Obviously, attachments are a problem in this situation. Same rule but with lower numbers goes for items in the normal file system when viewed over slow links. Presumably if I got enough users on the end of a 10 or 100Mbit link to the server the performance would degrade if they all have mailboxes with large numbers of items or regularly move big attachments to and from the server. I keep attachments out of individuals mailboxes if possible because with our policies they a) they are not available to others and b) we would hit the 16Gb limit on the mail store in Ex2K std. version PDQ. One reason for us setting a low(ish) limit on mailbox sizes to to encourage people to shift mails into public places, or act upon them and file them for reference. Some of our other sites use the public folder store as a file system with no significant performance degradation outside the increased traffic to and from the server, and the obvious requirement for an Enterprise edition of Exchange and increased disk space. Our servers are pretty capable for the users we have - if you were running a PII 233 with 256Mb of RAM it would obviously croak under any kind of load and you'd have to set some more facist policies. An OWA front end server seems to read the messages on a per-page basis from the back end server which that user is hosted on. Thus if your front server is separated from the back end by a slow link, the performance hit with folders which have large numbers of messages does not appear as great to be as great as when using the full Outlook client over a slow link. All the best, Andy Creuna Danmark A/S Snaregade 10 1205 København K Denmark Tel : +45 22 68 58 23 Fax : +45 70 20 72 42 -Original Message- From: James Liddil [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 9. juli 2002 14:10 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: One Folder (was Unlimited Quotas) OK now that that has been beaten to death, I now want to try and understand the aspects that effect performance (or perceived performance) for users. So the policy will be set at a certain large number for storage. Now will exchange run better if users use folders or does it not matter and I should just let them use the inbox for everything? And along those same lines is keeping all their attachments in exchange a bad thing from a performance standpoint. Again I only want to consider this from the view point of performance and what is best to keep exchange running well. If using only an inbox has a negative impact then and only then is it justified to spend money for training on the use of folders. Never mind making folks more productive (the one box vs. a well organized file cabinet). Jim Liddil _ 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] _ 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]
RE: M Drive
You are trolling, right? Read this http://www.swinc.com/resource/e2kfaq_sec5.htm ..any other questions, see the archives... Leave it there, guys? Please? Andy -Original Message- From: Jeffery Caudill [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 8. juli 2002 23:05 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: M Drive What program can I use to Back-up the M drive and, will this make my server have any problems by doing so _ 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] _ 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]
RE: Outlook 2002 issues with process hanging.
Long shot, but... Have had users with this or similar problems when running apps (SETI command line comes to mind) which consmue 100% CPU at normal priority. Not exactly sure why it happens [you can guess at my advised solution to this one and the amount of time I haven't spent fixing it], but it would appear that something to do with Outlook 2002 exit runs at sub-zero priority [only on some machines], and if anything else is running at a higher priority the Outlook process effectively hangs due to ?lack of CPU cycles. If you close the other app, Outlook exits almost immediately. Doesn't happen with Outlook 2000. Happens with Win 2000 and XP Pro as the OS. Funny thing, though. All complainants so far have been using Dell machines. Surely a coincidence? All the best, Andy Creuna Danmark A/S Snaregade 10 1205 København K Denmark Tel : +45 22 68 58 23 Fax : +45 70 20 72 42 -Original Message- From: Anthony L. Sollars [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 26. juni 2002 21:43 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Outlook 2002 issues with process hanging. Has anyone ever noticed this behavior from Outlook 2002, which was installed with Office XP Pro. 1. Whenever I close outlook, the process is never closed just the application GUI. I have to bring up task manager and kill the outlook process before I can re-launch outlook. Any help would be great. This is running on a Dell workstation with Win2k Pro SP2 with all pre-sp3 hot fixes. 2. Running Office XP SP1 with all relevant hot fixes also. 3. Machine is also running as a member of a domain. -Tony S. _ 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] _ 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]
Exchange-related ?AD or IIS problem
I have a problem which relates to some kind of Exchange/IIS/AD issues, and I was wondering if anyone can help. Long post which might eliminate a bunch of have you tried this questions or its a security issue statements. The symptoms of the problem only appear when using OWA but I don't think that OWA/Exchange itself is at fault : hence the Subject of this mail is not OWA Problems. Exchange 2000 SP2 running on 2000 server SP2. Single domain model with multiple sites connected by a high bandwidth VPN over the internet. Here I'll call the sites Oslo, Copenhagen and Stockholm but there are more. Two DCs per site also running as GCs. Single Exchange server per site, with the exception of one site. One site has a front end Exchange server which deals with OWA for the whole company. I'll explain the evidence first. I log into the console of a DC, Exchange server or Workstation with ESM installed in Oslo or Stockholm, as Enterprise Admin, and create a user using the Users and Computers MMC. No problems at all - everything goes as you'd expect. This no-problems situation occurs at every site except one Now I log the console of a DC, Exchange server or Workstation with ESM installed in Copenhagen, as Enterprise Admin, and perform the identical procedure. Everything works just fine, *but* that user will not be able to see OWA : gets a 404 not found [more about that in a moment]. Only that error, no other problems in evidence with the user account. It matters not in which OU I create the user, or on which server I put their mailbox. If I create them using a machine sited in Copenhagen, I get the 404. I've even tried waiting a few days for the pesky replication. About the 404 error from OWA: To work around any security issues with the front end server, I have ended up directly browsing IIS on the servers where that mailbox is sited using the usual link (say) \\cph-2kex01\exhange\mailbox.name When accessing OWA for the users whose profiles work OK (created from any site other than Copenhagen), I get the anticipated password challenge. If I put in their login details, I get to see their mailbox. When accessing OWA for the Users created using machines at the Copenhagen site, I don't get the password challenge/authentication/login box or anything else. Just an almost immediate 404 not found. This does not vary from Exchange server to Exchange server i.e. If I create a user in Stockholm with a mailbox on the Stockholm mailserver from Copenhagen I get the 404. If I create a User in Stockholm with a mailbox on the Stockholm mailserver from Oslo then everything works just fine. I've tried shifting the mailboxes between servers and it doesn't fix the problem. I've tried logging in with their fully qualified usernames, and making sure that usernames/aliases/short names are varied wildly. I have checked that the affected Users have HTTP access enabled in the advanced exchange properties of the UC MMC, that they have the right permissions etc. etc. just in case. I can find no apparent differences between Users created on the Copenhagen site and those created elsewhere. Deleting the user account, recreating it from a good site and reattaching the mailbox fixes the problem. I get the same errors when accessing info through the front end server. Obviously I get the challenge/response to authenticate on the front end server, but once authenticated it passes the details to the Exchnage servers at the back end, and I get the same story. The AD domain has been in production operation for about a year. Exchange 5.5 was in a legacy domain and brought into the AD domain about six months ago. Users created before the introduction of Exchange to the AD domain have no problems with OWA wherever they were created. All users created from machines on the Copenhagen site after the introduction of Exchange get the 404. We have only just noticed this now because up 'till now we haven't been using OWA. My conclusions so far: * It is not a problem with the Exchange server(s) because the problem is only evidenced by user creation undertaken on one site. If you create the user at any other site, there are no problems with OWA at all. You get the same reults whichever Exchaneg server you use for the mailbox. * It is probably not a problem with permissions/security because users created with identical characteristics from other sites work just fine, and you can fix the problem using this route. It shouldn't be finger trouble for the same reasons. * It doesn't look like a problem with replication etc. on AD, as there are no untoward errors in any of the AD logs, or reported using dcdiag/netdiag type utilities. My questions: * Has anyone else had this problem? I've had a good look in the archives, technet etc. etc. None of the many articles relating to 404 not found or user creation issues seem to have anything to offer in this case, although I've tried a few of the
RE: Exchange-related ?AD or IIS problem
Mark asks: You say that you joined an Exchange 55 Organisation which had snip on an FE server) Mark we created a new organisation and did a mailbox migration. The exchange orgs never knew about each other. Now with one Front-end OWA box, all your users will need to have at least one SMTP proxy address that matches the virtual Directory local path on that box (e.g. if it is M:\exchange.domain.com\MBX then the users must have a [EMAIL PROTECTED] smtp address which can be primary or secondary) If you have now gone native E2k, have any of the Recipient Policies or RUS's been fiddled such that users created from Copenhagen don't get this extra smtp address? If you manually give them a matching address does it help at all? Q293368 explains it more. Now you're talking [spot on in fact], but you can't mean: http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;JA;q293368 OFFXP: Blue Color Used Twice If Venn Diagram Uses Primary Colors Style (Q293368) ...?!?!? I will add the SMTP addresses (internal domainexternal domain name and mail addresses @internal.domain not present in user profiles in Copenhagen) and see what happens. P.S. Try using DCDIAG and REPLMON from the W2K support tools to check out Chris's suggestions re: GC problems. That I've done. All seems OK. Fingers crossed on the SMTP address front. Thanks for the help so far. All the best, Andy _ 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]
RE: SQ - urgent
I need to find proof that a message sent last Monday was actually sent out... where do I find it? (first time this happens, so I never looked into it...) Exchange system manager - Tools - Message tracking centre You do have the logs retained for more than 1 day, eh? All the best, Andy _ 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]
RE: SQ - urgent
PS I'm not sure that constitutes proof but its the closest you'll get. A -Original Message- From: Andy Grafton Sent: 25. juni 2002 18:56 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: SQ - urgent I need to find proof that a message sent last Monday was actually sent out... where do I find it? (first time this happens, so I never looked into it...) Exchange system manager - Tools - Message tracking centre You do have the logs retained for more than 1 day, eh? All the best, Andy _ 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] _ 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]
RE: Exchange-related ?AD or IIS problem
Thanks for the help with this. The problem was users lacking an SMTP address corresponding to the domain name which the Exchange Server uses in its fully qualified name. With that added in, things work normally and OWA for my problem users seems to function just fine. All the best, Andy (Now wants to work out why user creation by DCs on all but one site added the correct SMTP suffix despite a recipient policy to the contrary in the OU of the User). Creuna Danmark A/S Snaregade 10 1205 København K Denmark Tel : +45 22 68 58 23 Fax : +45 70 20 72 42 -Original Message- From: Andy Grafton Sent: 25. juni 2002 18:15 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Exchange-related ?AD or IIS problem Mark asks: You say that you joined an Exchange 55 Organisation which had snip on an FE server) Mark we created a new organisation and did a mailbox migration. The exchange orgs never knew about each other. Now with one Front-end OWA box, all your users will need to have at least one SMTP proxy address that matches the virtual Directory local path on that box (e.g. if it is M:\exchange.domain.com\MBX then the users must have a [EMAIL PROTECTED] smtp address which can be primary or secondary) If you have now gone native E2k, have any of the Recipient Policies or RUS's been fiddled such that users created from Copenhagen don't get this extra smtp address? If you manually give them a matching address does it help at all? Q293368 explains it more. Now you're talking [spot on in fact], but you can't mean: http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx? scid=kb;JA;q293368 OFFXP: Blue Color Used Twice If Venn Diagram Uses Primary Colors Style (Q293368) ...?!?!? I will add the SMTP addresses (internal domainexternal domain name and mail addresses @internal.domain not present in user profiles in Copenhagen) and see what happens. P.S. Try using DCDIAG and REPLMON from the W2K support tools to check out Chris's suggestions re: GC problems. That I've done. All seems OK. Fingers crossed on the SMTP address front. Thanks for the help so far. All the best, Andy _ 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] _ 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]
RE: kinda OT - RAID on the exchange server
...but for some reason the controllers and external arrays seem to work much better when used with servers other than those manufactured by IBM. As long as you don't use RAID configurations with an e after the number, that is. All the best, Andy -Original Message- From: Mark Peoples [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 5. juni 2002 00:27 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: kinda OT - RAID on the exchange server I'll second that. -Original Message- From: Soysal, Serdar [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, 5 June 2002 12:45 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: kinda OT - RAID on the exchange server We have a number of the x series that support that configuration. Their RAID controllers are very unpredictable and I can't believe the rate of disk failures. Serdar Soysal -Original Message- From: Andy Grafton [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, May 31, 2002 11:06 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: kinda OT - RAID on the exchange server Raid 5e AFAIK incorporates a hot spare into the array by striping unused white space across the disks. Makes for faster access times than a raid 5 array + hot spare as the data is on more live spindles. IBM proprietary. Evil, evil, IBM. All the best, Andy -Original Message- From: Ed Crowley [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]=20 Sent: 31. maj 2002 16:28 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: kinda OT - RAID on the exchange server =20 =20 Please share what RAID5e is. I could only find two hits in=20 AltaVista on that phrase, and both used character sets not in=20 my workstation. _ 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] _ 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] _ 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] _ 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]
RE: Adding some HTML to all outbound messages?
Out CEO wants us to add some HTML to the top of all outbound messages. It is a graphic with a hotlink to our website. 10K total size. How about telling them that the in-flight magazine was wrong, and it can't be done cheaply? It may be the future, but the future will upset a lot of people in the present. How about asking him/her to compromise with a non-html link to the website, at the bottom of the message? I remember seeing evidence somewhere that people are more likely to click on a link positioned at the bottom of a mail, because that is where they end up after they've read it. Even a CEO should understand that logic? Oops ... used both CEO and logic in one sentence. All the best, Andy http://google.com (nothing to do with me : just demonstrating) _ 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]
RE: Adding some HTML to all outbound messages?
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes; Maybe a faq link should be put at the bottom of all list posts instead of...Huh?...what's that?...Oh, I see... Never mind then... ... Aha! but then it has to slip in between the most recent post and all the other long posts alluding to, but not actually saying, READ THE FAQ. ... or we have to snip the other posts and then get flamed for overzealoussnippingtypebehaviour 'cause one can't see at a glance what we're answering (as I have just done). Getting back to the original question: Type append text to outgoing messages exchange 5.5 Into Google and hit the I feel lucky button. - http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;EN-US;q262097 It will give you a good idea of the limitations of the built in MS stuff. or Type append html to outgoing messages exchange 5.5 Into Google and hit the I feel lucky button. - http://www.slipstick.com/addins/content_control.htm Which should sort out the question. All the best, Andy _ 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]
RE: kinda OT - RAID on the exchange server
Ed asks; Please share what RAID5e is. More info: http://www-5.ibm.com/pl/eserver/xseries/ulotki/psref-raidtech.pdf Mind the wrap, mind the .pdf. Andy Creuna Danmark A/S Snaregade 10 1205 København K Denmark Tel : +45 22 68 58 23 Fax : +45 70 20 72 42 _ 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]
RE: kinda OT - RAID on the exchange server
Raid 5e AFAIK incorporates a hot spare into the array by striping unused white space across the disks. Makes for faster access times than a raid 5 array + hot spare as the data is on more live spindles. IBM proprietary. Evil, evil, IBM. All the best, Andy -Original Message- From: Ed Crowley [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]=20 Sent: 31. maj 2002 16:28 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: kinda OT - RAID on the exchange server =20 =20 Please share what RAID5e is. I could only find two hits in=20 AltaVista on that phrase, and both used character sets not in=20 my workstation. _ 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]
