RE: lesser of the evils - ssl or smtp
This forum has a higher turnover rate than McDonalds. -Original Message- From: Jon Butler [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 08 June 2002 00:53 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: lesser of the evils - ssl or smtp Yeah, you're right. Even though I posted just my Exchange experience, I probably don't know a thing about other enterprise-level technologies. And I did miss your sarcasm -- sorry for mistaking you for someone that can post without slamming someone. Don't worry dude, they've got operations now that can fix your shortcomings. I'm off this list. I need to find one with less egos and more professionalism ... someplace where ideas are shared, not trampled and pissed on. Maybe I'm just naive. -Original Message- From: Slinger, Gary [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, June 07, 2002 6:35 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: lesser of the evils - ssl or smtp Um, Jon? You posted your experience the other day. I don't think you get to comment on large enterprises and 4 or 5 nine's with only 1 to 3 servers in a site... You missed it, but I was being sarcastic when I asked for your experience with storage management. Your response kinda proved my point. You're wrong in your statements below - absolutely necessary and non-negotiable FFS! There are SEVERAL people on this list with REAL deployments that do that and that ARE large enterprises. Do you every check where people work or what their experience is before you post? You might find it enlightening... G. -Original Message- From: Jon Butler [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, June 07, 2002 21:34 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: lesser of the evils - ssl or smtp Here's what's so sacred: your users' ability to generate revenue. It's all a matter of perspective -- to someone in a small office with a handful of users, intrustion detection and DMZs sound ridiculous, and in a lot of cases probably are. To someone in a large enterprise envrionment with uptime requirements of 4 or 5 nine's, it's absolutely necessary and non-negotiable, and in those situations the notion of having internet traffic talking directly to an internal server is about as likely as a CEO forgiving you when 3000 of your users can't work because you thought all that extra work was tiresome. -Original Message- From: Cook, Jason [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, June 07, 2002 4:21 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: lesser of the evils - ssl or smtp What is it that's so sacred you're protecting. OWA with SSL through a firewall is adequate for most places. The mail is secure and that's it. Gotta have credentials to get in...so that's it. DMZ is a waste of time to me. Constantly monitoring and patching/fixing dmz boxes gets to be tiresome. I mean, they're gonna get blasted for sure and if they get taken out, so does whatever service you're running...unless they're redundant. So what's the point? Besides, you've opened up 80 to get to the backend Exchange box anyway. Jason Cook J.H. Ellwood and Associates Network Administrator [EMAIL PROTECTED] -Original Message- From: Ragar, Russell [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, June 07, 2002 3:02 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: lesser of the evils - ssl or smtp Regarding Outlook Web Access deployments, particularly with Exchange 2000, I can see a large benefit to deploying a front end server in the DMZ which communicates to the Internet client using SSL and the backend mailbox servers over HTTP. Not only is there off-loading of the encryption processing, but it provides you a location for containing external attacks. Yes, in a sense, all servers in the DMZ are sacrificial victims. The theory is that you keep your sacrificial victims in a contained area so they can be monitored carefully and you fall back and reformat them as soon as they are compromised. Obviously you need both intrusion detection and host-based firewalling with the DMZ (to prevent compromise of the DMZ from host to host). If there were no front-end server (direct OWA access on the mailbox server) you couldn't possibly monitor it as well since it is performing many more functions. Also, you certainly couldn't scrub it easily if it were compromised. If you were running a front-end server internally (no-DMZ), if that box were compromised it could be used as a staging area for an attack on all your internal systems. So, yes, the assumption is that all machines in your DMZ will eventually be compromised and they are suspect. Okay, given my recommended configuration, the essential problem is that the front-end server has to have access to some key internal services in order to function. The trick would appear to be to lock down those
Veritas Netbackup error on MSX 5.5
We use netbackup from Veritas as a backup solution. when we perform mailbox backups we get the following error on some mailboxes. I have looked and dealt with veritas and they are saying its an exchange issue and not veritas. Has anyone got any idea what could be causing this and a possible solution. Error we get. 06/09/2002 08:14:29 mastersrv ourserver.domain.com from client ourserver.domain.com: WRN - can't open Exchange Mailbox message: ?UsersLastname, Usersfirstname? Top of Information Store? Calender (0xFE05:FS_ACCESS_DENIED) _ 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: Veritas Netbackup error on MSX 5.5
I would check all the permissions on the Information store. Regards Mr Louis Joyce Data Support Specialist BT Ignite eSolutions -Original Message- From: Kulwinder [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 10 June 2002 09:55 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Veritas Netbackup error on MSX 5.5 We use netbackup from Veritas as a backup solution. when we perform mailbox backups we get the following error on some mailboxes. I have looked and dealt with veritas and they are saying its an exchange issue and not veritas. Has anyone got any idea what could be causing this and a possible solution. Error we get. 06/09/2002 08:14:29 mastersrv ourserver.domain.com from client ourserver.domain.com: WRN - can't open Exchange Mailbox message: ?UsersLastname, Usersfirstname? Top of Information Store? Calender (0xFE05:FS_ACCESS_DENIED) _ 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: Veritas Netbackup error on MSX 5.5
Permissons are setup fine, because normal backups work, and also the error comes up on only some mailboxes and others work fine, which to be shows that permissions are setup fine. Service account admin rights on the IS I would check all the permissions on the Information store. Regards Mr Louis Joyce Data Support Specialist BT Ignite eSolutions -Original Message- From: Kulwinder [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 10 June 2002 09:55 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Veritas Netbackup error on MSX 5.5 We use netbackup from Veritas as a backup solution. when we perform mailbox backups we get the following error on some mailboxes. I have looked and dealt with veritas and they are saying its an exchange issue and not veritas. Has anyone got any idea what could be causing this and a possible solution. Error we get. 06/09/2002 08:14:29 mastersrv ourserver.domain.com from client ourserver.domain.com: WRN - can't open Exchange Mailbox message: ?UsersLastname, Usersfirstname? Top of Information Store? Calender (0xFE05:FS_ACCESS_DENIED) _ 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: Veritas Netbackup error on MSX 5.5
Are you carrying out bricklevel backups? Regards Mr Louis Joyce Data Support Specialist BT Ignite eSolutions -Original Message- From: Kulwinder [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 10 June 2002 10:14 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Veritas Netbackup error on MSX 5.5 Permissons are setup fine, because normal backups work, and also the error comes up on only some mailboxes and others work fine, which to be shows that permissions are setup fine. Service account admin rights on the IS I would check all the permissions on the Information store. Regards Mr Louis Joyce Data Support Specialist BT Ignite eSolutions -Original Message- From: Kulwinder [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 10 June 2002 09:55 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Veritas Netbackup error on MSX 5.5 We use netbackup from Veritas as a backup solution. when we perform mailbox backups we get the following error on some mailboxes. I have looked and dealt with veritas and they are saying its an exchange issue and not veritas. Has anyone got any idea what could be causing this and a possible solution. Error we get. 06/09/2002 08:14:29 mastersrv ourserver.domain.com from client ourserver.domain.com: WRN - can't open Exchange Mailbox message: ?UsersLastname, Usersfirstname? Top of Information Store? Calender (0xFE05:FS_ACCESS_DENIED) _ 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 Outlook2K
Hi all, I noticed on my laptop if I have Out of Office feature turned on and someone sends me a message they will get a notification as expected. However, any subsequent msgs sent by that user do not seem to generate Out of Office notification/replies. Is this the way Outlook 2000 is meant to behave or am I missing something. My system is using Windows ME with Office 2000 Premium. Any ideas? Many thanks. Mustafa Ibrahim _ 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: Re Outlook2K
It is by design. It helps to prevent message looping. If the sender suddenly turns his/her OOF on then your OOF reply may trigger off another reply and so on and so on. Regards Mr Louis Joyce Data Support Specialist BT Ignite eSolutions -Original Message- From: Mustafa Ibrahim [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 10 June 2002 11:16 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Re Outlook2K Hi all, I noticed on my laptop if I have Out of Office feature turned on and someone sends me a message they will get a notification as expected. However, any subsequent msgs sent by that user do not seem to generate Out of Office notification/replies. Is this the way Outlook 2000 is meant to behave or am I missing something. My system is using Windows ME with Office 2000 Premium. Any ideas? Many thanks. Mustafa Ibrahim _ 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: Re Outlook2K
This is the way it works. I mean, once you know they're out of the office, why would you want to keep getting notified? Neil -Original Message- From: Mustafa Ibrahim [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Posted At: 10 June 2002 11:16 Posted To: Swynk Exchange List Conversation: Re Outlook2K Subject: Re Outlook2K Hi all, I noticed on my laptop if I have Out of Office feature turned on and someone sends me a message they will get a notification as expected. However, any subsequent msgs sent by that user do not seem to generate Out of Office notification/replies. Is this the way Outlook 2000 is meant to behave or am I missing something. My system is using Windows ME with Office 2000 Premium. Any ideas? Many thanks. Mustafa Ibrahim _ 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] * This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual to whom it is addressed. Any view or opinions presented are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of Silversands, or any of its subsidiary companies. If you have received this email in error, please contact our Support Desk immediately on 01202-360360 or email [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: Re Outlook2K
Great... not even noon on Monday and we've got a winner already for I can't read the manual or the help files... -Original Message- From: Mustafa Ibrahim [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, June 10, 2002 11:16 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Re Outlook2K Hi all, I noticed on my laptop if I have Out of Office feature turned on and someone sends me a message they will get a notification as expected. However, any subsequent msgs sent by that user do not seem to generate Out of Office notification/replies. Is this the way Outlook 2000 is meant to behave or am I missing something. My system is using Windows ME with Office 2000 Premium. Any ideas? Many thanks. Mustafa Ibrahim _ 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: Veritas Netbackup error on MSX 5.5
Yes we are carrying out Brick level backups - _ 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]
Message Journalling Question
When you enable message journalling does it journal inbound and outbound mail as well as internal email as well or is that a separate hack on the individual servers to get the internal email. Dot _ 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: Message Journalling Question
I'll assume you mean for Exchange 5.5. Check this out: http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;EN-US;q239427 There's sections for journaling Internet email, local messages, etc. Neil -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Posted At: 10 June 2002 12:18 Posted To: Swynk Exchange List Conversation: Message Journalling Question Subject: Message Journalling Question When you enable message journalling does it journal inbound and outbound mail as well as internal email as well or is that a separate hack on the individual servers to get the internal email. Dot _ 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] * This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual to whom it is addressed. Any view or opinions presented are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of Silversands, or any of its subsidiary companies. If you have received this email in error, please contact our Support Desk immediately on 01202-360360 or email [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: lesser of the evils - ssl or smtp
Caution: Filling is hot. -Original Message- From: Myles, Damian [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, June 10, 2002 4:02 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: lesser of the evils - ssl or smtp This forum has a higher turnover rate than McDonalds. -Original Message- From: Jon Butler [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 08 June 2002 00:53 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: lesser of the evils - ssl or smtp Yeah, you're right. Even though I posted just my Exchange experience, I probably don't know a thing about other enterprise-level technologies. And I did miss your sarcasm -- sorry for mistaking you for someone that can post without slamming someone. Don't worry dude, they've got operations now that can fix your shortcomings. I'm off this list. I need to find one with less egos and more professionalism ... someplace where ideas are shared, not trampled and pissed on. Maybe I'm just naive. -Original Message- From: Slinger, Gary [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, June 07, 2002 6:35 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: lesser of the evils - ssl or smtp Um, Jon? You posted your experience the other day. I don't think you get to comment on large enterprises and 4 or 5 nine's with only 1 to 3 servers in a site... You missed it, but I was being sarcastic when I asked for your experience with storage management. Your response kinda proved my point. You're wrong in your statements below - absolutely necessary and non-negotiable FFS! There are SEVERAL people on this list with REAL deployments that do that and that ARE large enterprises. Do you every check where people work or what their experience is before you post? You might find it enlightening... G. -Original Message- From: Jon Butler [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, June 07, 2002 21:34 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: lesser of the evils - ssl or smtp Here's what's so sacred: your users' ability to generate revenue. It's all a matter of perspective -- to someone in a small office with a handful of users, intrustion detection and DMZs sound ridiculous, and in a lot of cases probably are. To someone in a large enterprise envrionment with uptime requirements of 4 or 5 nine's, it's absolutely necessary and non-negotiable, and in those situations the notion of having internet traffic talking directly to an internal server is about as likely as a CEO forgiving you when 3000 of your users can't work because you thought all that extra work was tiresome. -Original Message- From: Cook, Jason [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, June 07, 2002 4:21 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: lesser of the evils - ssl or smtp What is it that's so sacred you're protecting. OWA with SSL through a firewall is adequate for most places. The mail is secure and that's it. Gotta have credentials to get in...so that's it. DMZ is a waste of time to me. Constantly monitoring and patching/fixing dmz boxes gets to be tiresome. I mean, they're gonna get blasted for sure and if they get taken out, so does whatever service you're running...unless they're redundant. So what's the point? Besides, you've opened up 80 to get to the backend Exchange box anyway. Jason Cook J.H. Ellwood and Associates Network Administrator [EMAIL PROTECTED] -Original Message- From: Ragar, Russell [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, June 07, 2002 3:02 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: lesser of the evils - ssl or smtp Regarding Outlook Web Access deployments, particularly with Exchange 2000, I can see a large benefit to deploying a front end server in the DMZ which communicates to the Internet client using SSL and the backend mailbox servers over HTTP. Not only is there off-loading of the encryption processing, but it provides you a location for containing external attacks. Yes, in a sense, all servers in the DMZ are sacrificial victims. The theory is that you keep your sacrificial victims in a contained area so they can be monitored carefully and you fall back and reformat them as soon as they are compromised. Obviously you need both intrusion detection and host-based firewalling with the DMZ (to prevent compromise of the DMZ from host to host). If there were no front-end server (direct OWA access on the mailbox server) you couldn't possibly monitor it as well since it is performing many more functions. Also, you certainly couldn't scrub it easily if it were compromised. If you were running a front-end server internally (no-DMZ), if that box were compromised it could be used as a staging area for an attack on all your internal systems. So, yes, the assumption is that all machines in your DMZ will eventually be compromised and they are suspect. Okay, given
RE: Veritas Netbackup error on MSX 5.5
Well, then stop that. -Original Message- From: Kulwinder [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, June 10, 2002 6:56 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Veritas Netbackup error on MSX 5.5 Yes we are carrying out Brick level backups - _ 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] -- The information contained in this email message is privileged and confidential information intended only for the use of the individual or entity to whom it is addressed. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copy of this message is strictly prohibited. If you have received this email in error, please immediately notify Veronis Suhler Stevenson by telephone (212)935-4990, fax (212)381-8168, or email ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) and delete the message. Thank you. == _ 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: lesser of the evils - ssl or smtp
The point, which you're missing, is for OWA (or a FE server) to work in the DMZ, you're punching a few dozen holes in the firewall to begin with, so you've already given that box significant internal reign, in addition to having opened a few dozen ports on the firewall that potentially give other access as well. Or you open on port for ssl only. -- Roger D. Seielstad - MCSE Sr. Systems Administrator Peregrine Systems Atlanta, GA -Original Message- From: Ragar, Russell [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, June 07, 2002 6:21 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: lesser of the evils - ssl or smtp Okay, your specific point is that having a FE server in the internal network is as good as having one in the DMZ? Well, if the FE server in the internal network is compromised it has open access to all of your internal network. So, there would be be no difference if all of the hosts and workstations within your internal network were hardened to the security level provided by the firewall between the DMZ and your internal network. But, practically, I've never found that to be a possibility. I suppose if I personally created every internal system I could achieve this, but I'd be swamped trying to do this with more than a few dozen machines. Minimally, you'd need a software firewall on all your internal hosts and workstations (which admittedly is where technology seems to be heading). I suppose you could put a router access-control list between your FE server and the rest of your internal network, but really that would just be a way of recreating a DMZ. But this path will become more elaborate than deploying the DMZ. What is your fear of implementing a DMZ? It's no more complicated than the initial firewall deployment and often can be done with the same hardware/software used for that firewall. My assumption is that you have an internal network. I suppose if there wasn't one, then my arguments might be tenuous. Regarding costs, you can't really design without attention to costs (hardware, software, technician time, user disruption/training). Yes, you can build rather than buy to some extent (open source firewalls, intrusion detection scripts you design yourself, etc) but that would just push up the technician time and expertise requirements to save hardware and software costs. It might be entertaining to totally disregard costs in an engineering solution, but it has almost no practical value. Ultimately, resource allocation is the primary limiting factor in all engineering designs, so I can't ignore costs in proposing any solution. Russell Ragar, MCSE+I, CNE, CCNA Senior Network Engineer PowerTV, Inc. -Original Message- From: Chris Scharff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, June 07, 2002 2:37 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: lesser of the evils - ssl or smtp -Original Message- Regarding Outlook Web Access deployments, particularly with Exchange 2000, I can see a large benefit to deploying a front end server in the DMZ which communicates to the Internet client using SSL and the backend mailbox servers over HTTP. CS: Specifically over a FE server on the internal network? Not only is there off-loading of the encryption processing, CS: Apparently not over a FE server on the internal network. I too can compare apples and pears and claim an apple is a woefully inadequate pear. but it provides you a location for containing external attacks. CS: How specifically are they contained when between my FE server and my other E2K servers/AD/DNS servers there are a host of ports open, including quite possibly the ports which you used to run your original exploit. Yes, in a sense, all servers in the DMZ are sacrificial victims. The theory is that you keep your sacrificial victims in a contained area so they can be monitored carefully and you fall back and reformat them as soon as they are compromised. CS: What are we using to monitor this box specifically and what exploit did we use to access the box in the first place (any Exchange version 443 based exploit) that our IDS is going to detect the behavior and alert us? Obviously you need both intrusion detection and host-based firewalling with the DMZ (to prevent compromise of the DMZ from host to host). If there were no front-end server (direct OWA access on the mailbox server) you couldn't possibly monitor it as well since it is performing many more functions. CS: This post began with the question of what is the advantage of a particular server in a DMZ. Changing the equation to say 'if we add this, that and the other, and implement a DMZ we'll be more secure than if we just publish our password on the internet' is silly. Also, you certainly couldn't scrub it easily if it were compromised. CS: IBID If
RE: Re Outlook2K
Is this really necessary? -Original Message- From: Slinger, Gary [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 10 June 2002 11:36 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Re Outlook2K Great... not even noon on Monday and we've got a winner already for I can't read the manual or the help files... -Original Message- From: Mustafa Ibrahim [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, June 10, 2002 11:16 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Re Outlook2K Hi all, I noticed on my laptop if I have Out of Office feature turned on and someone sends me a message they will get a notification as expected. However, any subsequent msgs sent by that user do not seem to generate Out of Office notification/replies. Is this the way Outlook 2000 is meant to behave or am I missing something. My system is using Windows ME with Office 2000 Premium. Any ideas? Many thanks. Mustafa Ibrahim _ 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: Re Outlook2K
Thanks Neil and Louis. I had thought as much, but wasn't sure wether or not there was a workaround for those forgetful ones. Some of my Sales users enquired about this, which I then sunsequently tested on my laptop. They keep forgetting if so and so is away on a trip and such like. But thats fine. I am not too concerned about it. Thanks very much folks. -Original Message- From: Neil Hobson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 10 June 2002 11:21 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Re Outlook2K This is the way it works. I mean, once you know they're out of the office, why would you want to keep getting notified? Neil -Original Message- From: Mustafa Ibrahim [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Posted At: 10 June 2002 11:16 Posted To: Swynk Exchange List Conversation: Re Outlook2K Subject: Re Outlook2K Hi all, I noticed on my laptop if I have Out of Office feature turned on and someone sends me a message they will get a notification as expected. However, any subsequent msgs sent by that user do not seem to generate Out of Office notification/replies. Is this the way Outlook 2000 is meant to behave or am I missing something. My system is using Windows ME with Office 2000 Premium. Any ideas? Many thanks. Mustafa Ibrahim _ 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] * This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual to whom it is addressed. Any view or opinions presented are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of Silversands, or any of its subsidiary companies. If you have received this email in error, please contact our Support Desk immediately on 01202-360360 or email [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: lesser of the evils - ssl or smtp
Always read the label. -Original Message- From: Andy David [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 10 June 2002 13:35 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: lesser of the evils - ssl or smtp Caution: Filling is hot. -Original Message- From: Myles, Damian [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, June 10, 2002 4:02 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: lesser of the evils - ssl or smtp This forum has a higher turnover rate than McDonalds. -Original Message- From: Jon Butler [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 08 June 2002 00:53 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: lesser of the evils - ssl or smtp Yeah, you're right. Even though I posted just my Exchange experience, I probably don't know a thing about other enterprise-level technologies. And I did miss your sarcasm -- sorry for mistaking you for someone that can post without slamming someone. Don't worry dude, they've got operations now that can fix your shortcomings. I'm off this list. I need to find one with less egos and more professionalism ... someplace where ideas are shared, not trampled and pissed on. Maybe I'm just naive. -Original Message- From: Slinger, Gary [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, June 07, 2002 6:35 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: lesser of the evils - ssl or smtp Um, Jon? You posted your experience the other day. I don't think you get to comment on large enterprises and 4 or 5 nine's with only 1 to 3 servers in a site... You missed it, but I was being sarcastic when I asked for your experience with storage management. Your response kinda proved my point. You're wrong in your statements below - absolutely necessary and non-negotiable FFS! There are SEVERAL people on this list with REAL deployments that do that and that ARE large enterprises. Do you every check where people work or what their experience is before you post? You might find it enlightening... G. -Original Message- From: Jon Butler [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, June 07, 2002 21:34 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: lesser of the evils - ssl or smtp Here's what's so sacred: your users' ability to generate revenue. It's all a matter of perspective -- to someone in a small office with a handful of users, intrustion detection and DMZs sound ridiculous, and in a lot of cases probably are. To someone in a large enterprise envrionment with uptime requirements of 4 or 5 nine's, it's absolutely necessary and non-negotiable, and in those situations the notion of having internet traffic talking directly to an internal server is about as likely as a CEO forgiving you when 3000 of your users can't work because you thought all that extra work was tiresome. -Original Message- From: Cook, Jason [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, June 07, 2002 4:21 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: lesser of the evils - ssl or smtp What is it that's so sacred you're protecting. OWA with SSL through a firewall is adequate for most places. The mail is secure and that's it. Gotta have credentials to get in...so that's it. DMZ is a waste of time to me. Constantly monitoring and patching/fixing dmz boxes gets to be tiresome. I mean, they're gonna get blasted for sure and if they get taken out, so does whatever service you're running...unless they're redundant. So what's the point? Besides, you've opened up 80 to get to the backend Exchange box anyway. Jason Cook J.H. Ellwood and Associates Network Administrator [EMAIL PROTECTED] -Original Message- From: Ragar, Russell [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, June 07, 2002 3:02 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: lesser of the evils - ssl or smtp Regarding Outlook Web Access deployments, particularly with Exchange 2000, I can see a large benefit to deploying a front end server in the DMZ which communicates to the Internet client using SSL and the backend mailbox servers over HTTP. Not only is there off-loading of the encryption processing, but it provides you a location for containing external attacks. Yes, in a sense, all servers in the DMZ are sacrificial victims. The theory is that you keep your sacrificial victims in a contained area so they can be monitored carefully and you fall back and reformat them as soon as they are compromised. Obviously you need both intrusion detection and host-based firewalling with the DMZ (to prevent compromise of the DMZ from host to host). If there were no front-end server (direct OWA access on the mailbox server) you couldn't possibly monitor it as well since it is performing many more functions. Also, you certainly couldn't scrub it easily if it were compromised. If you were running a front-end server internally (no-DMZ), if that box were compromised it could be used as a
RE: Re Outlook2K
I felt so, yes. Was it really necessary for you to post to several thousand admins about (a) an Outlook issue which doesn't belong on this list, and (b) is a trivial piece of information that was readily available in the help files, or any number of other places such as Technet. Did you read the FAQ? Particularly the bit about what to do before you post? If you don't like the heat, get out of the kitchen, and don't let the door hit you on the ass on the way out. -Original Message- From: Mustafa Ibrahim [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, June 10, 2002 12:38 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Re Outlook2K Is this really necessary? -Original Message- From: Slinger, Gary [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 10 June 2002 11:36 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Re Outlook2K Great... not even noon on Monday and we've got a winner already for I can't read the manual or the help files... -Original Message- From: Mustafa Ibrahim [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, June 10, 2002 11:16 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Re Outlook2K Hi all, I noticed on my laptop if I have Out of Office feature turned on and someone sends me a message they will get a notification as expected. However, any subsequent msgs sent by that user do not seem to generate Out of Office notification/replies. Is this the way Outlook 2000 is meant to behave or am I missing something. My system is using Windows ME with Office 2000 Premium. Any ideas? Many thanks. Mustafa Ibrahim _ 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: lesser of the evils - ssl or smtp
S 80 TCP (HTTP) 389 TCP/UDP (LDAP) 88 TCP/UDP (Kerberos) 53 TCP/UDP (DNS) 135 TCP (RPC Endpoint) 3268 TCP (GC LDAP) 445 TCP (NETLOGON) Plus a static port for RPC 1024 Plus Registry change on DC's for lookups OR 443 TCP (SSL) H.. choices choices. -Original Message- From: Roger Seielstad [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 10 June 2002 13:36 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: lesser of the evils - ssl or smtp The point, which you're missing, is for OWA (or a FE server) to work in the DMZ, you're punching a few dozen holes in the firewall to begin with, so you've already given that box significant internal reign, in addition to having opened a few dozen ports on the firewall that potentially give other access as well. Or you open on port for ssl only. -- Roger D. Seielstad - MCSE Sr. Systems Administrator Peregrine Systems Atlanta, GA -Original Message- From: Ragar, Russell [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, June 07, 2002 6:21 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: lesser of the evils - ssl or smtp Okay, your specific point is that having a FE server in the internal network is as good as having one in the DMZ? Well, if the FE server in the internal network is compromised it has open access to all of your internal network. So, there would be be no difference if all of the hosts and workstations within your internal network were hardened to the security level provided by the firewall between the DMZ and your internal network. But, practically, I've never found that to be a possibility. I suppose if I personally created every internal system I could achieve this, but I'd be swamped trying to do this with more than a few dozen machines. Minimally, you'd need a software firewall on all your internal hosts and workstations (which admittedly is where technology seems to be heading). I suppose you could put a router access-control list between your FE server and the rest of your internal network, but really that would just be a way of recreating a DMZ. But this path will become more elaborate than deploying the DMZ. What is your fear of implementing a DMZ? It's no more complicated than the initial firewall deployment and often can be done with the same hardware/software used for that firewall. My assumption is that you have an internal network. I suppose if there wasn't one, then my arguments might be tenuous. Regarding costs, you can't really design without attention to costs (hardware, software, technician time, user disruption/training). Yes, you can build rather than buy to some extent (open source firewalls, intrusion detection scripts you design yourself, etc) but that would just push up the technician time and expertise requirements to save hardware and software costs. It might be entertaining to totally disregard costs in an engineering solution, but it has almost no practical value. Ultimately, resource allocation is the primary limiting factor in all engineering designs, so I can't ignore costs in proposing any solution. Russell Ragar, MCSE+I, CNE, CCNA Senior Network Engineer PowerTV, Inc. -Original Message- From: Chris Scharff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, June 07, 2002 2:37 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: lesser of the evils - ssl or smtp -Original Message- Regarding Outlook Web Access deployments, particularly with Exchange 2000, I can see a large benefit to deploying a front end server in the DMZ which communicates to the Internet client using SSL and the backend mailbox servers over HTTP. CS: Specifically over a FE server on the internal network? Not only is there off-loading of the encryption processing, CS: Apparently not over a FE server on the internal network. I too can compare apples and pears and claim an apple is a woefully inadequate pear. but it provides you a location for containing external attacks. CS: How specifically are they contained when between my FE server and my other E2K servers/AD/DNS servers there are a host of ports open, including quite possibly the ports which you used to run your original exploit. Yes, in a sense, all servers in the DMZ are sacrificial victims. The theory is that you keep your sacrificial victims in a contained area so they can be monitored carefully and you fall back and reformat them as soon as they are compromised. CS: What are we using to monitor this box specifically and what exploit did we use to access the box in the first place (any Exchange version 443 based exploit) that our IDS is going to detect the behavior and alert us? Obviously you need both intrusion detection and host-based firewalling with the DMZ (to prevent compromise of the DMZ from host to host). If there were no front-end server (direct OWA access on the mailbox server) you couldn't
RE: lesser of the evils - ssl or smtp
Or maybe use IPSec? Rob Ellis -Original Message- From: Myles, Damian [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 10 June 2002 13:08 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: lesser of the evils - ssl or smtp S 80 TCP (HTTP) 389 TCP/UDP (LDAP) 88 TCP/UDP (Kerberos) 53 TCP/UDP (DNS) 135 TCP (RPC Endpoint) 3268 TCP (GC LDAP) 445 TCP (NETLOGON) Plus a static port for RPC 1024 Plus Registry change on DC's for lookups OR 443 TCP (SSL) H.. choices choices. -Original Message- From: Roger Seielstad [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 10 June 2002 13:36 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: lesser of the evils - ssl or smtp The point, which you're missing, is for OWA (or a FE server) to work in the DMZ, you're punching a few dozen holes in the firewall to begin with, so you've already given that box significant internal reign, in addition to having opened a few dozen ports on the firewall that potentially give other access as well. Or you open on port for ssl only. -- Roger D. Seielstad - MCSE Sr. Systems Administrator Peregrine Systems Atlanta, GA -Original Message- From: Ragar, Russell [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, June 07, 2002 6:21 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: lesser of the evils - ssl or smtp Okay, your specific point is that having a FE server in the internal network is as good as having one in the DMZ? Well, if the FE server in the internal network is compromised it has open access to all of your internal network. So, there would be be no difference if all of the hosts and workstations within your internal network were hardened to the security level provided by the firewall between the DMZ and your internal network. But, practically, I've never found that to be a possibility. I suppose if I personally created every internal system I could achieve this, but I'd be swamped trying to do this with more than a few dozen machines. Minimally, you'd need a software firewall on all your internal hosts and workstations (which admittedly is where technology seems to be heading). I suppose you could put a router access-control list between your FE server and the rest of your internal network, but really that would just be a way of recreating a DMZ. But this path will become more elaborate than deploying the DMZ. What is your fear of implementing a DMZ? It's no more complicated than the initial firewall deployment and often can be done with the same hardware/software used for that firewall. My assumption is that you have an internal network. I suppose if there wasn't one, then my arguments might be tenuous. Regarding costs, you can't really design without attention to costs (hardware, software, technician time, user disruption/training). Yes, you can build rather than buy to some extent (open source firewalls, intrusion detection scripts you design yourself, etc) but that would just push up the technician time and expertise requirements to save hardware and software costs. It might be entertaining to totally disregard costs in an engineering solution, but it has almost no practical value. Ultimately, resource allocation is the primary limiting factor in all engineering designs, so I can't ignore costs in proposing any solution. Russell Ragar, MCSE+I, CNE, CCNA Senior Network Engineer PowerTV, Inc. -Original Message- From: Chris Scharff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, June 07, 2002 2:37 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: lesser of the evils - ssl or smtp -Original Message- Regarding Outlook Web Access deployments, particularly with Exchange 2000, I can see a large benefit to deploying a front end server in the DMZ which communicates to the Internet client using SSL and the backend mailbox servers over HTTP. CS: Specifically over a FE server on the internal network? Not only is there off-loading of the encryption processing, CS: Apparently not over a FE server on the internal network. I too can compare apples and pears and claim an apple is a woefully inadequate pear. but it provides you a location for containing external attacks. CS: How specifically are they contained when between my FE server and my other E2K servers/AD/DNS servers there are a host of ports open, including quite possibly the ports which you used to run your original exploit. Yes, in a sense, all servers in the DMZ are sacrificial victims. The theory is that you keep your sacrificial victims in a contained area so they can be monitored carefully and you fall back and reformat them as soon as they are compromised. CS: What are we using to monitor this box specifically and what exploit did we use to access the box in the first place (any Exchange version 443 based exploit) that our IDS is going to detect the behavior and alert us? Obviously you need both
RE: Re Outlook2K
Not only did I think you were gibbering idiot when I read your initial msg, but I now have a much lower opinion of you. So do us a favour and if you have something to say shutup. If I want any shit out of you I'll be sure to squeeze your head little man. Besides, I got better things to do than lower myself to your level of intelligence or lack of it. I have posted this msg because this is a discussion list. In where I come from we have a saying; ...discussion is an exchange of knowledge, argument however, is an exchange of ignorance.. I suggest you sit alone in that dark basement of yours with your conscience and that alone should be judgement enough for you. -Original Message- From: Slinger, Gary [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 10 June 2002 12:53 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Re Outlook2K I felt so, yes. Was it really necessary for you to post to several thousand admins about (a) an Outlook issue which doesn't belong on this list, and (b) is a trivial piece of information that was readily available in the help files, or any number of other places such as Technet. Did you read the FAQ? Particularly the bit about what to do before you post? If you don't like the heat, get out of the kitchen, and don't let the door hit you on the ass on the way out. -Original Message- From: Mustafa Ibrahim [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, June 10, 2002 12:38 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Re Outlook2K Is this really necessary? -Original Message- From: Slinger, Gary [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 10 June 2002 11:36 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Re Outlook2K Great... not even noon on Monday and we've got a winner already for I can't read the manual or the help files... -Original Message- From: Mustafa Ibrahim [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, June 10, 2002 11:16 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Re Outlook2K Hi all, I noticed on my laptop if I have Out of Office feature turned on and someone sends me a message they will get a notification as expected. However, any subsequent msgs sent by that user do not seem to generate Out of Office notification/replies. Is this the way Outlook 2000 is meant to behave or am I missing something. My system is using Windows ME with Office 2000 Premium. Any ideas? Many thanks. Mustafa Ibrahim _ 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] _ 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: Re Outlook2K
errr chaps, off-list perhaps? Just a suggestion. Regards E. -Original Message- From: Mustafa Ibrahim [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Subject: RE: Re Outlook2K Not only did I think you were gibbering idiot when I read your initial msg, but I now have a much lower opinion of you. So do us a favour and if you have something to say shutup. If I want any shit out of you I'll be sure to squeeze your head little man. Besides, I got better things to do than lower myself to your level of intelligence or lack of it. I have posted this msg because this is a discussion list. In where I come from we have a saying; ...discussion is an exchange of knowledge, argument however, is an exchange of ignorance.. I suggest you sit alone in that dark basement of yours with your conscience and that alone should be judgement enough for you. -Original Message- From: Slinger, Gary [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Subject: RE: Re Outlook2K I felt so, yes. Was it really necessary for you to post to several thousand admins about (a) an Outlook issue which doesn't belong on this list, and (b) is a trivial piece of information that was readily available in the help files, or any number of other places such as Technet. Did you read the FAQ? Particularly the bit about what to do before you post? If you don't like the heat, get out of the kitchen, and don't let the door hit you on the ass on the way out. -Original Message- From: Mustafa Ibrahim [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Subject: RE: Re Outlook2K Is this really necessary? -Original Message- From: Slinger, Gary [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Subject: RE: Re Outlook2K Great... not even noon on Monday and we've got a winner already for I can't read the manual or the help files... -Original Message- From: Mustafa Ibrahim [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Subject: Re Outlook2K Hi all, I noticed on my laptop if I have Out of Office feature turned on and someone sends me a message they will get a notification as expected. However, any subsequent msgs sent by that user do not seem to generate Out of Office notification/replies. Is this the way Outlook 2000 is meant to behave or am I missing something. My system is using Windows ME with Office 2000 Premium. Any ideas? Many thanks. Mustafa Ibrahim --- Clearswift monitors, controls and protects all its messaging traffic in compliance with its corporate email policy using Clearswift products. Find out more about Clearswift, its solutions and services at http://www.clearswift.com This communication is confidential and may contain privileged information intended solely for the named addressee(s). It may not be used or disclosed except for the purpose for which it has been sent. If you are not the intended recipient, you must not copy, distribute or take any action in reliance on it. Unless expressly stated, opinions in this message are those of the individual sender and not of Clearswift. If you have received this communication in error, please notify Clearswift by emailing [EMAIL PROTECTED] quoting the sender and delete the message and any attached documents. Clearswift accepts no liability or responsibility for any onward transmission or use of emails and attachments having left the Clearswift domain. _ 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: Re Outlook2K
Well... I'd check Appendix D out before you start shooting. http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq_appxd.htm This is a friendly reminder that the odds of a sarcastic response or outright flaming go up significantly if the answer to your question is easily found in the index or table of contents of these resources e.g. Microsoft KB and Technet. And a gentle search through Technet might find a solution to your original question (Q157961). Better luck next time. -Original Message- From: Mustafa Ibrahim [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 10 June 2002 14:22 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Re Outlook2K Not only did I think you were gibbering idiot when I read your initial msg, but I now have a much lower opinion of you. So do us a favour and if you have something to say shutup. If I want any shit out of you I'll be sure to squeeze your head little man. Besides, I got better things to do than lower myself to your level of intelligence or lack of it. I have posted this msg because this is a discussion list. In where I come from we have a saying; ...discussion is an exchange of knowledge, argument however, is an exchange of ignorance.. I suggest you sit alone in that dark basement of yours with your conscience and that alone should be judgement enough for you. -Original Message- From: Slinger, Gary [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 10 June 2002 12:53 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Re Outlook2K I felt so, yes. Was it really necessary for you to post to several thousand admins about (a) an Outlook issue which doesn't belong on this list, and (b) is a trivial piece of information that was readily available in the help files, or any number of other places such as Technet. Did you read the FAQ? Particularly the bit about what to do before you post? If you don't like the heat, get out of the kitchen, and don't let the door hit you on the ass on the way out. -Original Message- From: Mustafa Ibrahim [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, June 10, 2002 12:38 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Re Outlook2K Is this really necessary? -Original Message- From: Slinger, Gary [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 10 June 2002 11:36 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Re Outlook2K Great... not even noon on Monday and we've got a winner already for I can't read the manual or the help files... -Original Message- From: Mustafa Ibrahim [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, June 10, 2002 11:16 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Re Outlook2K Hi all, I noticed on my laptop if I have Out of Office feature turned on and someone sends me a message they will get a notification as expected. However, any subsequent msgs sent by that user do not seem to generate Out of Office notification/replies. Is this the way Outlook 2000 is meant to behave or am I missing something. My system is using Windows ME with Office 2000 Premium. Any ideas? Many thanks. Mustafa Ibrahim _ 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] _ 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]
Error - Event ID: 1110 Source: MSExchangeIS Public
I'm getting the following error: Event ID: 1110 Source: MSExchangeIS Public Description: Error 0x0 occurred while writing per-user information for (user account) on database First Storage Group\Public Information Store (EXCH2). Eric Sabo NT Administrator Computing Services Center California University of Pennsylvania _ 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: Error - Event ID: 1110 Source: MSExchangeIS Public
Check this out: http://www.eventid.net/display.asp?eventid=1110source= Regards Mr Louis Joyce Data Support Specialist BT Ignite eSolutions -Original Message- From: Sabo, Eric [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 10 June 2002 13:45 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Error - Event ID: 1110 Source: MSExchangeIS Public I'm getting the following error: Event ID: 1110 Source: MSExchangeIS Public Description: Error 0x0 occurred while writing per-user information for (user account) on database First Storage Group\Public Information Store (EXCH2). Eric Sabo NT Administrator Computing Services Center California University of Pennsylvania _ 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: Re Outlook2K
I refer you to Damian's answer further up the list. Assuming you can handle reality. -Original Message- From: Mustafa Ibrahim [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, June 10, 2002 13:22 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Re Outlook2K Not only did I think you were gibbering idiot when I read your initial msg, but I now have a much lower opinion of you. So do us a favour and if you have something to say shutup. If I want any shit out of you I'll be sure to squeeze your head little man. Besides, I got better things to do than lower myself to your level of intelligence or lack of it. I have posted this msg because this is a discussion list. In where I come from we have a saying; ...discussion is an exchange of knowledge, argument however, is an exchange of ignorance.. I suggest you sit alone in that dark basement of yours with your conscience and that alone should be judgement enough for you. -Original Message- From: Slinger, Gary [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 10 June 2002 12:53 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Re Outlook2K I felt so, yes. Was it really necessary for you to post to several thousand admins about (a) an Outlook issue which doesn't belong on this list, and (b) is a trivial piece of information that was readily available in the help files, or any number of other places such as Technet. Did you read the FAQ? Particularly the bit about what to do before you post? If you don't like the heat, get out of the kitchen, and don't let the door hit you on the ass on the way out. -Original Message- From: Mustafa Ibrahim [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, June 10, 2002 12:38 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Re Outlook2K Is this really necessary? -Original Message- From: Slinger, Gary [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 10 June 2002 11:36 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Re Outlook2K Great... not even noon on Monday and we've got a winner already for I can't read the manual or the help files... -Original Message- From: Mustafa Ibrahim [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, June 10, 2002 11:16 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Re Outlook2K Hi all, I noticed on my laptop if I have Out of Office feature turned on and someone sends me a message they will get a notification as expected. However, any subsequent msgs sent by that user do not seem to generate Out of Office notification/replies. Is this the way Outlook 2000 is meant to behave or am I missing something. My system is using Windows ME with Office 2000 Premium. Any ideas? Many thanks. Mustafa Ibrahim _ 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] _ 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: Exporting from Outlook 98
The Backup Agent works fine. I use it everyday. You just haven't configured it properly. Useful to you? Probably not, but as valid a comment as your initial pointless and gratuitous comment about Microsoft. If that is the case it is funny that so many other people have complained about the same thing, you may think you are backing up, but just try and restore. As far as setup, an outside consultant had set that up also, I realize now that everything must be tested. Some people defended the CA anti-virus program also, but when we switched to Norton, viruses were caught everytime. Inoculan only caught the virus occasionally. This time I will blame myself, we continued to us Arkansas Backup, Veritas will go on our new server which came in broken, so more delays. Turns out even though we have Exchange Backup agent, it doesn't actually work and it gives no error that it doesn't. Really amazes me how when it rains, it pours. Is exporting to a .pst unreliable? We were having trouble with Outlook on one pc and a consultant did an export and not all the email came back. We are still using Arcserve 2000 for backup and I turned off the bricks level because of reading it was bad news. So how then do I recover a single mailbox. Microsoft is so wonderful, NOT _ 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: Re Outlook2K
That's exactly how it is supposed to work. One reply for each sender, one time. I mean how many times does someone need to know you are out? -Original Message- From: Mustafa Ibrahim [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, June 10, 2002 3:16 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Re Outlook2K Hi all, I noticed on my laptop if I have Out of Office feature turned on and someone sends me a message they will get a notification as expected. However, any subsequent msgs sent by that user do not seem to generate Out of Office notification/replies. Is this the way Outlook 2000 is meant to behave or am I missing something. My system is using Windows ME with Office 2000 Premium. Any ideas? Many thanks. Mustafa Ibrahim _ 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: Re Outlook2K
Tell them to use a descriptive message. I will be out of the office from 6-10 to 6-14, and returning on the 15th -Original Message- From: Mustafa Ibrahim [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, June 10, 2002 4:42 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Re Outlook2K Thanks Neil and Louis. I had thought as much, but wasn't sure wether or not there was a workaround for those forgetful ones. Some of my Sales users enquired about this, which I then sunsequently tested on my laptop. They keep forgetting if so and so is away on a trip and such like. But thats fine. I am not too concerned about it. Thanks very much folks. -Original Message- From: Neil Hobson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 10 June 2002 11:21 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Re Outlook2K This is the way it works. I mean, once you know they're out of the office, why would you want to keep getting notified? Neil -Original Message- From: Mustafa Ibrahim [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Posted At: 10 June 2002 11:16 Posted To: Swynk Exchange List Conversation: Re Outlook2K Subject: Re Outlook2K Hi all, I noticed on my laptop if I have Out of Office feature turned on and someone sends me a message they will get a notification as expected. However, any subsequent msgs sent by that user do not seem to generate Out of Office notification/replies. Is this the way Outlook 2000 is meant to behave or am I missing something. My system is using Windows ME with Office 2000 Premium. Any ideas? Many thanks. Mustafa Ibrahim _ 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] * This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual to whom it is addressed. Any view or opinions presented are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of Silversands, or any of its subsidiary companies. If you have received this email in error, please contact our Support Desk immediately on 01202-360360 or email [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: How to prevent end users from using Outlook personal folders pst
How about denying access to their own hard drives and not allowing to use any network drives? -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Saturday, June 08, 2002 10:13 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Re: How to prevent end users from using Outlook personal folders pst Modprof from the logon script. It won't stop them from creating one, but it'll remove it every time they log on. John Fullbright MOSMWNMTK Subject says it all. I know I can remove the mspst32.dll. But is there anyway to handle this from Exchange. Or via a policy? 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: lesser of the evils - ssl or smtp
Not necessarily a bad idea, but unless OWA access is limited to a corp intranet, I would think that SSL would be the only viable option for a FE OWA server . -Original Message- From: Rob Ellis [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, June 10, 2002 8:18 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: lesser of the evils - ssl or smtp Or maybe use IPSec? Rob Ellis -Original Message- From: Myles, Damian [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 10 June 2002 13:08 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: lesser of the evils - ssl or smtp S 80 TCP (HTTP) 389 TCP/UDP (LDAP) 88 TCP/UDP (Kerberos) 53 TCP/UDP (DNS) 135 TCP (RPC Endpoint) 3268 TCP (GC LDAP) 445 TCP (NETLOGON) Plus a static port for RPC 1024 Plus Registry change on DC's for lookups OR 443 TCP (SSL) H.. choices choices. -Original Message- From: Roger Seielstad [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 10 June 2002 13:36 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: lesser of the evils - ssl or smtp The point, which you're missing, is for OWA (or a FE server) to work in the DMZ, you're punching a few dozen holes in the firewall to begin with, so you've already given that box significant internal reign, in addition to having opened a few dozen ports on the firewall that potentially give other access as well. Or you open on port for ssl only. -- Roger D. Seielstad - MCSE Sr. Systems Administrator Peregrine Systems Atlanta, GA -Original Message- From: Ragar, Russell [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, June 07, 2002 6:21 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: lesser of the evils - ssl or smtp Okay, your specific point is that having a FE server in the internal network is as good as having one in the DMZ? Well, if the FE server in the internal network is compromised it has open access to all of your internal network. So, there would be be no difference if all of the hosts and workstations within your internal network were hardened to the security level provided by the firewall between the DMZ and your internal network. But, practically, I've never found that to be a possibility. I suppose if I personally created every internal system I could achieve this, but I'd be swamped trying to do this with more than a few dozen machines. Minimally, you'd need a software firewall on all your internal hosts and workstations (which admittedly is where technology seems to be heading). I suppose you could put a router access-control list between your FE server and the rest of your internal network, but really that would just be a way of recreating a DMZ. But this path will become more elaborate than deploying the DMZ. What is your fear of implementing a DMZ? It's no more complicated than the initial firewall deployment and often can be done with the same hardware/software used for that firewall. My assumption is that you have an internal network. I suppose if there wasn't one, then my arguments might be tenuous. Regarding costs, you can't really design without attention to costs (hardware, software, technician time, user disruption/training). Yes, you can build rather than buy to some extent (open source firewalls, intrusion detection scripts you design yourself, etc) but that would just push up the technician time and expertise requirements to save hardware and software costs. It might be entertaining to totally disregard costs in an engineering solution, but it has almost no practical value. Ultimately, resource allocation is the primary limiting factor in all engineering designs, so I can't ignore costs in proposing any solution. Russell Ragar, MCSE+I, CNE, CCNA Senior Network Engineer PowerTV, Inc. -Original Message- From: Chris Scharff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, June 07, 2002 2:37 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: lesser of the evils - ssl or smtp -Original Message- Regarding Outlook Web Access deployments, particularly with Exchange 2000, I can see a large benefit to deploying a front end server in the DMZ which communicates to the Internet client using SSL and the backend mailbox servers over HTTP. CS: Specifically over a FE server on the internal network? Not only is there off-loading of the encryption processing, CS: Apparently not over a FE server on the internal network. I too can compare apples and pears and claim an apple is a woefully inadequate pear. but it provides you a location for containing external attacks. CS: How specifically are they contained when between my FE server and my other E2K servers/AD/DNS servers there are a host of ports open, including quite possibly the ports which you used to run your original exploit. Yes, in a sense, all servers in the DMZ are sacrificial victims. The theory is that you keep your sacrificial victims in a contained area so they can be monitored
RE: How to prevent end users from using Outlook personalfolders pst
Repeated blows to the head with a fairly large hammer also works. Serdar Soysal -Original Message- From: Andrey Fyodorov [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, June 10, 2002 9:19 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: How to prevent end users from using Outlook personal folders pst How about denying access to their own hard drives and not allowing to use any network drives? -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Saturday, June 08, 2002 10:13 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Re: How to prevent end users from using Outlook personal folders pst Modprof from the logon script. It won't stop them from creating one, but it'll remove it every time they log on. John Fullbright MOSMWNMTK Subject says it all. I know I can remove the mspst32.dll. But is there anyway to handle this from Exchange. Or via a policy? 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] _ 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: How to prevent end users from using Outlook personal folders pst
There are seldom better technological solutions to behavioural problems than that of a sharp jab to the chin Or something. Regards Mr Louis Joyce Data Support Specialist BT Ignite eSolutions -Original Message- From: Soysal, Serdar [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 10 June 2002 14:30 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: How to prevent end users from using Outlook personal folders pst Repeated blows to the head with a fairly large hammer also works. Serdar Soysal -Original Message- From: Andrey Fyodorov [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, June 10, 2002 9:19 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: How to prevent end users from using Outlook personal folders pst How about denying access to their own hard drives and not allowing to use any network drives? -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Saturday, June 08, 2002 10:13 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Re: How to prevent end users from using Outlook personal folders pst Modprof from the logon script. It won't stop them from creating one, but it'll remove it every time they log on. John Fullbright MOSMWNMTK Subject says it all. I know I can remove the mspst32.dll. But is there anyway to handle this from Exchange. Or via a policy? 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] _ 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: Veritas Netbackup error on MSX 5.5
We do carryout Brick-level backups for when this occurs. Are you carrying out bricklevel backups? Regards Mr Louis Joyce Data Support Specialist BT Ignite eSolutions -Original Message- From: Kulwinder [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 10 June 2002 10:14 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Veritas Netbackup error on MSX 5.5 Permissons are setup fine, because normal backups work, and also the error comes up on only some mailboxes and others work fine, which to be shows that permissions are setup fine. Service account admin rights on the IS I would check all the permissions on the Information store. Regards Mr Louis Joyce Data Support Specialist BT Ignite eSolutions -Original Message- From: Kulwinder [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 10 June 2002 09:55 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Veritas Netbackup error on MSX 5.5 We use netbackup from Veritas as a backup solution. when we perform mailbox backups we get the following error on some mailboxes. I have looked and dealt with veritas and they are saying its an exchange issue and not veritas. Has anyone got any idea what could be causing this and a possible solution. Error we get. 06/09/2002 08:14:29 mastersrv ourserver.domain.com from client ourserver.domain.com: WRN - can't open Exchange Mailbox message: ?UsersLastname, Usersfirstname? Top of Information Store? Calender (0xFE05:FS_ACCESS_DENIED) _ 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: Veritas Netbackup error on MSX 5.5
Im sorry, im getting confused now. Do you get the error when doing a brick level back-up? Or when you just back up the store on its own? Are you saying you only carry out BLB's when you get this type of error? Regards Mr Louis Joyce Data Support Specialist BT Ignite eSolutions -Original Message- From: Kulwinder [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 10 June 2002 14:53 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Veritas Netbackup error on MSX 5.5 We do carryout Brick-level backups for when this occurs. Are you carrying out bricklevel backups? Regards Mr Louis Joyce Data Support Specialist BT Ignite eSolutions -Original Message- From: Kulwinder [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 10 June 2002 10:14 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Veritas Netbackup error on MSX 5.5 Permissons are setup fine, because normal backups work, and also the error comes up on only some mailboxes and others work fine, which to be shows that permissions are setup fine. Service account admin rights on the IS I would check all the permissions on the Information store. Regards Mr Louis Joyce Data Support Specialist BT Ignite eSolutions -Original Message- From: Kulwinder [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 10 June 2002 09:55 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Veritas Netbackup error on MSX 5.5 We use netbackup from Veritas as a backup solution. when we perform mailbox backups we get the following error on some mailboxes. I have looked and dealt with veritas and they are saying its an exchange issue and not veritas. Has anyone got any idea what could be causing this and a possible solution. Error we get. 06/09/2002 08:14:29 mastersrv ourserver.domain.com from client ourserver.domain.com: WRN - can't open Exchange Mailbox message: ?UsersLastname, Usersfirstname? Top of Information Store? Calender (0xFE05:FS_ACCESS_DENIED) _ 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]
SBS 2000 POP connector
I hate it. I frequently find that a user is being sent mail, which the connector downloads from our ISP, and then promptly dumps into a black whole. Deleting and re-creating the affected user entry on the connector resolves it (until next time), but why is it happening, and can I recover any of the lost mail? It happens to random users at random intervals. I want to get rid of the connector, and use smtp for all mail traffic, but until we move to our new infrastructure, I'm stuck with the SBS box from hell. Regards, Rob Ellis _ 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: SBS 2000 POP connector
Why do you need new infrastructure to drop the cludge? -Original Message- From: Rob Ellis [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, June 10, 2002 9:09 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: SBS 2000 POP connector I hate it. I frequently find that a user is being sent mail, which the connector downloads from our ISP, and then promptly dumps into a black whole. Deleting and re-creating the affected user entry on the connector resolves it (until next time), but why is it happening, and can I recover any of the lost mail? It happens to random users at random intervals. I want to get rid of the connector, and use smtp for all mail traffic, but until we move to our new infrastructure, I'm stuck with the SBS box from hell. Regards, Rob Ellis _ 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: Veritas Netbackup error on MSX 5.5
we get the error when doing a BLB only. when doing normal full backups of the store - everything is fine - the mailbox account that we use has the exchange service account set as the nt account, sop has the permissions set. Im sorry, im getting confused now. Do you get the error when doing a brick level back-up? Or when you just back up the store on its own? Are you saying you only carry out BLB's when you get this type of error? Regards Mr Louis Joyce Data Support Specialist BT Ignite eSolutions -Original Message- From: Kulwinder [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 10 June 2002 14:53 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Veritas Netbackup error on MSX 5.5 We do carryout Brick-level backups for when this occurs. Are you carrying out bricklevel backups? Regards Mr Louis Joyce Data Support Specialist BT Ignite eSolutions -Original Message- From: Kulwinder [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 10 June 2002 10:14 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Veritas Netbackup error on MSX 5.5 Permissons are setup fine, because normal backups work, and also the error comes up on only some mailboxes and others work fine, which to be shows that permissions are setup fine. Service account admin rights on the IS I would check all the permissions on the Information store. Regards Mr Louis Joyce Data Support Specialist BT Ignite eSolutions -Original Message- From: Kulwinder [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 10 June 2002 09:55 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Veritas Netbackup error on MSX 5.5 We use netbackup from Veritas as a backup solution. when we perform mailbox backups we get the following error on some mailboxes. I have looked and dealt with veritas and they are saying its an exchange issue and not veritas. Has anyone got any idea what could be causing this and a possible solution. Error we get. 06/09/2002 08:14:29 mastersrv ourserver.domain.com from client ourserver.domain.com: WRN - can't open Exchange Mailbox message: ?UsersLastname, Usersfirstname? Top of Information Store? Calender (0xFE05:FS_ACCESS_DENIED) _ 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: Veritas Netbackup error on MSX 5.5
Reason 245 why you shouldn't do BLB. -Original Message- From: Kulwinder [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, June 10, 2002 10:21 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Veritas Netbackup error on MSX 5.5 we get the error when doing a BLB only. when doing normal full backups of the store - everything is fine - the mailbox account that we use has the exchange service account set as the nt account, sop has the permissions set. Im sorry, im getting confused now. Do you get the error when doing a brick level back-up? Or when you just back up the store on its own? Are you saying you only carry out BLB's when you get this type of error? Regards Mr Louis Joyce Data Support Specialist BT Ignite eSolutions -Original Message- From: Kulwinder [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 10 June 2002 14:53 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Veritas Netbackup error on MSX 5.5 We do carryout Brick-level backups for when this occurs. Are you carrying out bricklevel backups? Regards Mr Louis Joyce Data Support Specialist BT Ignite eSolutions -Original Message- From: Kulwinder [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 10 June 2002 10:14 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Veritas Netbackup error on MSX 5.5 Permissons are setup fine, because normal backups work, and also the error comes up on only some mailboxes and others work fine, which to be shows that permissions are setup fine. Service account admin rights on the IS I would check all the permissions on the Information store. Regards Mr Louis Joyce Data Support Specialist BT Ignite eSolutions -Original Message- From: Kulwinder [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 10 June 2002 09:55 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Veritas Netbackup error on MSX 5.5 We use netbackup from Veritas as a backup solution. when we perform mailbox backups we get the following error on some mailboxes. I have looked and dealt with veritas and they are saying its an exchange issue and not veritas. Has anyone got any idea what could be causing this and a possible solution. Error we get. 06/09/2002 08:14:29 mastersrv ourserver.domain.com from client ourserver.domain.com: WRN - can't open Exchange Mailbox message: ?UsersLastname, Usersfirstname? Top of Information Store? Calender (0xFE05:FS_ACCESS_DENIED) _ 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] -- The information contained in this email message is privileged and confidential information intended only for the use of the individual or entity to whom it is addressed. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copy of this message is strictly prohibited. If you have received this email in error, please immediately notify Veronis Suhler Stevenson by telephone (212)935-4990, fax (212)381-8168, or email ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) and delete the message. Thank you. == _ 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: Veritas Netbackup error on MSX 5.5
Thanks for the info. Well then, might i suggest, as Andy and no doubt other admins would recommend, that you should stop doing BLB's. Here are a few links for you to ponder over. http://mail.tekscan.com/nomailboxes.htm http://www.exchangefaq.org/recovery/0004.php3 Regards Mr Louis Joyce Data Support Analyst -Original Message- From: Kulwinder [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 10 June 2002 15:21 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Veritas Netbackup error on MSX 5.5 we get the error when doing a BLB only. when doing normal full backups of the store - everything is fine - the mailbox account that we use has the exchange service account set as the nt account, sop has the permissions set. Im sorry, im getting confused now. Do you get the error when doing a brick level back-up? Or when you just back up the store on its own? Are you saying you only carry out BLB's when you get this type of error? Regards Mr Louis Joyce Data Support Specialist BT Ignite eSolutions -Original Message- From: Kulwinder [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 10 June 2002 14:53 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Veritas Netbackup error on MSX 5.5 We do carryout Brick-level backups for when this occurs. Are you carrying out bricklevel backups? Regards Mr Louis Joyce Data Support Specialist BT Ignite eSolutions -Original Message- From: Kulwinder [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 10 June 2002 10:14 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Veritas Netbackup error on MSX 5.5 Permissons are setup fine, because normal backups work, and also the error comes up on only some mailboxes and others work fine, which to be shows that permissions are setup fine. Service account admin rights on the IS I would check all the permissions on the Information store. Regards Mr Louis Joyce Data Support Specialist BT Ignite eSolutions -Original Message- From: Kulwinder [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 10 June 2002 09:55 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Veritas Netbackup error on MSX 5.5 We use netbackup from Veritas as a backup solution. when we perform mailbox backups we get the following error on some mailboxes. I have looked and dealt with veritas and they are saying its an exchange issue and not veritas. Has anyone got any idea what could be causing this and a possible solution. Error we get. 06/09/2002 08:14:29 mastersrv ourserver.domain.com from client ourserver.domain.com: WRN - can't open Exchange Mailbox message: ?UsersLastname, Usersfirstname? Top of Information Store? Calender (0xFE05:FS_ACCESS_DENIED) _ 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] _ 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: IIS Authentication changes at reboot
Then, that is your problem... You don't change that in IIS admin, because the settings will be overwritten. Change it in the ESM. (Exchange System Manager) Andrew MCSE (W2K NT4) + CCNA -Original Message- From: Tony Hlabse [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Posted At: Sunday, June 09, 2002 8:03 PM Posted To: ExchangeDiscussion Conversation: IIS Authentication changes at reboot Subject: Re: IIS Authentication changes at reboot Yes and clearing Integrated NT Authentication option so just the name and password fields are visible. - Original Message - From: Martin Blackstone [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, June 10, 2002 10:59 AM Subject: RE: IIS Authentication changes at reboot Just for clarification, are you saying that when you (e.i. got rid of domain field prompt) that you did this by setting the default domain in IIS? -Original Message- From: Tony Hlabse [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Sunday, June 09, 2002 7:49 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: IIS Authentication changes at reboot Single Site one server, Windows 2000 Server as a GC and running IIS5 and E2K with SP2 for MS200 and E2K. We changed the Authentication requirements so when a user logs into the Exchange server to access email via OWA, he doesn't have to enter the domain name. (e.i. got rid of domain field prompt). Everything is fine until the customer had to reboot his server. For some reason the Authentication method went back to the default, asking for the domain name. Has anyone else run into this. It happened more than once. My guess is maybe stoppping and starting IIS first before reboot. _ 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: IIS Authentication changes at reboot
Andrew, When you go to HTTP protocol and right click on Exchange Virtual Settings it tells you to use IIS manager to makes changes. - Original Message - From: Andrew Chan [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, June 10, 2002 11:05 AM Subject: RE: IIS Authentication changes at reboot Then, that is your problem... You don't change that in IIS admin, because the settings will be overwritten. Change it in the ESM. (Exchange System Manager) Andrew MCSE (W2K NT4) + CCNA -Original Message- From: Tony Hlabse [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Posted At: Sunday, June 09, 2002 8:03 PM Posted To: ExchangeDiscussion Conversation: IIS Authentication changes at reboot Subject: Re: IIS Authentication changes at reboot Yes and clearing Integrated NT Authentication option so just the name and password fields are visible. - Original Message - From: Martin Blackstone [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, June 10, 2002 10:59 AM Subject: RE: IIS Authentication changes at reboot Just for clarification, are you saying that when you (e.i. got rid of domain field prompt) that you did this by setting the default domain in IIS? -Original Message- From: Tony Hlabse [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Sunday, June 09, 2002 7:49 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: IIS Authentication changes at reboot Single Site one server, Windows 2000 Server as a GC and running IIS5 and E2K with SP2 for MS200 and E2K. We changed the Authentication requirements so when a user logs into the Exchange server to access email via OWA, he doesn't have to enter the domain name. (e.i. got rid of domain field prompt). Everything is fine until the customer had to reboot his server. For some reason the Authentication method went back to the default, asking for the domain name. Has anyone else run into this. It happened more than once. My guess is maybe stoppping and starting IIS first before reboot. _ 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] _ 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: IIS Authentication changes at reboot
Never mind it has to be done at the folder called Exchange under the Virtual HTTP server. Thanks - Original Message - From: Tony Hlabse [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, June 09, 2002 11:12 PM Subject: Re: IIS Authentication changes at reboot Andrew, When you go to HTTP protocol and right click on Exchange Virtual Settings it tells you to use IIS manager to makes changes. - Original Message - From: Andrew Chan [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, June 10, 2002 11:05 AM Subject: RE: IIS Authentication changes at reboot Then, that is your problem... You don't change that in IIS admin, because the settings will be overwritten. Change it in the ESM. (Exchange System Manager) Andrew MCSE (W2K NT4) + CCNA -Original Message- From: Tony Hlabse [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Posted At: Sunday, June 09, 2002 8:03 PM Posted To: ExchangeDiscussion Conversation: IIS Authentication changes at reboot Subject: Re: IIS Authentication changes at reboot Yes and clearing Integrated NT Authentication option so just the name and password fields are visible. - Original Message - From: Martin Blackstone [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, June 10, 2002 10:59 AM Subject: RE: IIS Authentication changes at reboot Just for clarification, are you saying that when you (e.i. got rid of domain field prompt) that you did this by setting the default domain in IIS? -Original Message- From: Tony Hlabse [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Sunday, June 09, 2002 7:49 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: IIS Authentication changes at reboot Single Site one server, Windows 2000 Server as a GC and running IIS5 and E2K with SP2 for MS200 and E2K. We changed the Authentication requirements so when a user logs into the Exchange server to access email via OWA, he doesn't have to enter the domain name. (e.i. got rid of domain field prompt). Everything is fine until the customer had to reboot his server. For some reason the Authentication method went back to the default, asking for the domain name. Has anyone else run into this. It happened more than once. My guess is maybe stoppping and starting IIS first before reboot. _ 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] _ 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: IIS Authentication changes at reboot
You need to go one more level deep... Double click on the Exchange Virtual Settings... Then go to properties of the Exchange folder and other folders... Q290341 Andrew MCSE (W2K NT4) + CCNA -Original Message- From: Tony Hlabse [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Posted At: Sunday, June 09, 2002 8:13 PM Posted To: ExchangeDiscussion Conversation: IIS Authentication changes at reboot Subject: Re: IIS Authentication changes at reboot Andrew, When you go to HTTP protocol and right click on Exchange Virtual Settings it tells you to use IIS manager to makes changes. - Original Message - From: Andrew Chan [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, June 10, 2002 11:05 AM Subject: RE: IIS Authentication changes at reboot Then, that is your problem... You don't change that in IIS admin, because the settings will be overwritten. Change it in the ESM. (Exchange System Manager) Andrew MCSE (W2K NT4) + CCNA -Original Message- From: Tony Hlabse [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Posted At: Sunday, June 09, 2002 8:03 PM Posted To: ExchangeDiscussion Conversation: IIS Authentication changes at reboot Subject: Re: IIS Authentication changes at reboot Yes and clearing Integrated NT Authentication option so just the name and password fields are visible. - Original Message - From: Martin Blackstone [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, June 10, 2002 10:59 AM Subject: RE: IIS Authentication changes at reboot Just for clarification, are you saying that when you (e.i. got rid of domain field prompt) that you did this by setting the default domain in IIS? -Original Message- From: Tony Hlabse [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Sunday, June 09, 2002 7:49 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: IIS Authentication changes at reboot Single Site one server, Windows 2000 Server as a GC and running IIS5 and E2K with SP2 for MS200 and E2K. We changed the Authentication requirements so when a user logs into the Exchange server to access email via OWA, he doesn't have to enter the domain name. (e.i. got rid of domain field prompt). Everything is fine until the customer had to reboot his server. For some reason the Authentication method went back to the default, asking for the domain name. Has anyone else run into this. It happened more than once. My guess is maybe stoppping and starting IIS first before reboot. _ 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] _ 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: slightly OT - Outlook and IE
Yahoo did the same recently. Must be a conspiracy. I blame Elvis [1]. But junk mail relating to mail clients on Exchange? I think you can relax. JDE [1] he denies it. -Original Message- From: Elizabeth Farrell [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, June 10, 2002 9:31 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject:RE: slightly OT - Outlook and IE Also related: If you signed up for Hotmail - or anything else that uses Passport more than a couple of months ago, you may be in for a big surprise. It seems that Microsoft changed the rules while you weren't looking. Unilaterally, Microsoft may have granted itself permission to pass along your personal information to other companies that use Passport on their Web sites. The personal information includes your email address, your birthday, your country and zip code, your gender and occupation. Has Microsoft taken liberties with your data? There's an easy way to check. Go into Hotmail and log into your account. Click Options (to the right of the tab that says Address Book). Click Personal Profile (in the upper left corner). Scroll down to the bottom of the screen and see whether the boxes marked Share my e-mail address and Share my other registration information have been checked. UNCHECK THESE!! Those boxes didn't exist when most people currently signed up for Hotmail, and chances are pretty good they didn't exist when you signed up for it, either. I certainly never gave Microsoft permission to hand out my email address - or my birthday, gender or occupation. Yet both of those boxes on my personal profile were checked. I bet they're checked on your personal profile, too. Worth checking! Regards E. -Original Message- From: Chris Scharff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Subject: RE: slightly OT - Outlook and IE Cool. What's the phone number or contact information at Hotmail for me to contact and get my share of cheap Hotmail e-mail addresses? -Original Message- From: Richard Serafin [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Subject: RE: slightly OT - Outlook and IE Yup, I've bought some myself just because I didn't believe it, I had to try it, 5000 Hotmail address like $29.95 -Original Message- From: Chris Scharff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Subject: RE: slightly OT - Outlook and IE Hotmail sells your address to them. Really. Yes, that must be it. --- Clearswift monitors, controls and protects all its messaging traffic in compliance with its corporate email policy using Clearswift products. Find out more about Clearswift, its solutions and services at http://www.clearswift.com This communication is confidential and may contain privileged information intended solely for the named addressee(s). It may not be used or disclosed except for the purpose for which it has been sent. If you are not the intended recipient, you must not copy, distribute or take any action in reliance on it. Unless expressly stated, opinions in this message are those of the individual sender and not of Clearswift. If you have received this communication in error, please notify Clearswift by emailing [EMAIL PROTECTED] quoting the sender and delete the message and any attached documents. Clearswift accepts no liability or responsibility for any onward transmission or use of emails and attachments having left the Clearswift domain. _ 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: Re Outlook2K
While point (b) is valid, with regard to point (a), out of office notifications are fire on the server and therefore it's a valid topic for this forum. Even if it were an Outlook issue, Outlook issues have traditionally been considered on-topic herein. 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 Slinger, Gary Sent: Monday, June 10, 2002 4:53 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Re Outlook2K I felt so, yes. Was it really necessary for you to post to several thousand admins about (a) an Outlook issue which doesn't belong on this list, and (b) is a trivial piece of information that was readily available in the help files, or any number of other places such as Technet. Did you read the FAQ? Particularly the bit about what to do before you post? If you don't like the heat, get out of the kitchen, and don't let the door hit you on the ass on the way out. -Original Message- From: Mustafa Ibrahim [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, June 10, 2002 12:38 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Re Outlook2K Is this really necessary? -Original Message- From: Slinger, Gary [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 10 June 2002 11:36 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Re Outlook2K Great... not even noon on Monday and we've got a winner already for I can't read the manual or the help files... -Original Message- From: Mustafa Ibrahim [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, June 10, 2002 11:16 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Re Outlook2K Hi all, I noticed on my laptop if I have Out of Office feature turned on and someone sends me a message they will get a notification as expected. However, any subsequent msgs sent by that user do not seem to generate Out of Office notification/replies. Is this the way Outlook 2000 is meant to behave or am I missing something. My system is using Windows ME with Office 2000 Premium. Any ideas? Many thanks. Mustafa Ibrahim _ 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] _ 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: Emails being sent as me
I'm sorry David, I can't do that. John Matteson; Exchange Manager Geac Corporate Infrastructure Systems and Standards (404) 239 - 2981 If I could wish for my life to be perfect, it would be tempting but I would have to decline, for life would no longer teach me anything. --Allyson Jones -Original Message- From: Hansen, Eric [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, June 07, 2002 5:09 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Emails being sent as me My god, its full of stars -Original Message- From: Kim Schotanus [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, June 07, 2002 8:36 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Emails being sent as me my God, mail admin and hasn't heard of KLEZ yet -Original Message- From: Louis Joyce [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 07 June, 2002 4:18 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Emails being sent as me Cue Tener and his amazing link! Regards Mr Louis Joyce Data Support Specialist BT Ignite eSolutions -Original Message- From: RBHATIA [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 07 June 2002 15:04 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Emails being sent as me I have noticed recently emails have been going to people from my address when I haven't sent them. Also, some emails have been sent to me from my company address ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) but such a mailbox does not exist on my server. How can I control this from my Exchange server ? _ 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] _ 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: IIS Authentication changes at reboot
you need to do cscript.exe adsutil.vbs set w3svc/1/root/defaultlogonDomain \ this is from Exchange 2000 hosting whitepaper -Original Message- From: Tony Hlabse [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Sunday, June 09, 2002 10:49 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: IIS Authentication changes at reboot Single Site one server, Windows 2000 Server as a GC and running IIS5 and E2K with SP2 for MS200 and E2K. We changed the Authentication requirements so when a user logs into the Exchange server to access email via OWA, he doesn't have to enter the domain name. (e.i. got rid of domain field prompt). Everything is fine until the customer had to reboot his server. For some reason the Authentication method went back to the default, asking for the domain name. Has anyone else run into this. It happened more than once. My guess is maybe stoppping and starting IIS first before reboot. _ 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: IIS Authentication changes at reboot
You cannot change the default HTTP Virtual Server settings in ESM. It refers you to IIS Admin for that. -Original Message- From: Andrew Chan [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, June 10, 2002 11:06 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: IIS Authentication changes at reboot Then, that is your problem... You don't change that in IIS admin, because the settings will be overwritten. Change it in the ESM. (Exchange System Manager) Andrew MCSE (W2K NT4) + CCNA -Original Message- From: Tony Hlabse [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Posted At: Sunday, June 09, 2002 8:03 PM Posted To: ExchangeDiscussion Conversation: IIS Authentication changes at reboot Subject: Re: IIS Authentication changes at reboot Yes and clearing Integrated NT Authentication option so just the name and password fields are visible. - Original Message - From: Martin Blackstone [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, June 10, 2002 10:59 AM Subject: RE: IIS Authentication changes at reboot Just for clarification, are you saying that when you (e.i. got rid of domain field prompt) that you did this by setting the default domain in IIS? -Original Message- From: Tony Hlabse [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Sunday, June 09, 2002 7:49 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: IIS Authentication changes at reboot Single Site one server, Windows 2000 Server as a GC and running IIS5 and E2K with SP2 for MS200 and E2K. We changed the Authentication requirements so when a user logs into the Exchange server to access email via OWA, he doesn't have to enter the domain name. (e.i. got rid of domain field prompt). Everything is fine until the customer had to reboot his server. For some reason the Authentication method went back to the default, asking for the domain name. Has anyone else run into this. It happened more than once. My guess is maybe stoppping and starting IIS first before reboot. _ 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] _ 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]
Hardware Question
All, Our company is buying a new Exchange server. At the start running 5.5 hopefully migrating to E2K sooner rather than later. I was hoping that someone may be able to help me decide whether or not to invest in 1MB or 2MB L2 processor cache rather than buying the 512K L2 cache. This server over the next 5 years may be supporting up to 1,000 users and if someone could give me their opinions on whether 1MB or 2MB of cache will be needed or if the performance gain will even be seen with a server supporting 1,000 users I'd greatly appreciate it. I've been looking to buy a server with dual 1.8 Ghz/512K processors. I have priced other servers that are far more expensive with 1MB or 2MB cache. Any help would be greatly appreciated. Thanks in advance, Brian _ 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: Hardware Question
Not wanting to suggest that you write a blank check, I guess it would depend on the cost. 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 Cooke, Brian Sent: Monday, June 10, 2002 9:04 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Hardware Question All, Our company is buying a new Exchange server. At the start running 5.5 hopefully migrating to E2K sooner rather than later. I was hoping that someone may be able to help me decide whether or not to invest in 1MB or 2MB L2 processor cache rather than buying the 512K L2 cache. This server over the next 5 years may be supporting up to 1,000 users and if someone could give me their opinions on whether 1MB or 2MB of cache will be needed or if the performance gain will even be seen with a server supporting 1,000 users I'd greatly appreciate it. I've been looking to buy a server with dual 1.8 Ghz/512K processors. I have priced other servers that are far more expensive with 1MB or 2MB cache. Any help would be greatly appreciated. Thanks in advance, Brian _ 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: Hardware Question
Amount of users is one thing, but storage and message/time is what you should be concerned with. Go to MS's Exchange site they have tools/papers to guide you. Just go to 2000 and be happy. - Original Message - From: Cooke, Brian [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, June 10, 2002 12:04 PM Subject: Hardware Question All, Our company is buying a new Exchange server. At the start running 5.5 hopefully migrating to E2K sooner rather than later. I was hoping that someone may be able to help me decide whether or not to invest in 1MB or 2MB L2 processor cache rather than buying the 512K L2 cache. This server over the next 5 years may be supporting up to 1,000 users and if someone could give me their opinions on whether 1MB or 2MB of cache will be needed or if the performance gain will even be seen with a server supporting 1,000 users I'd greatly appreciate it. I've been looking to buy a server with dual 1.8 Ghz/512K processors. I have priced other servers that are far more expensive with 1MB or 2MB cache. Any help would be greatly appreciated. Thanks in advance, Brian _ 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: Hardware Question
If you have limited budget, spend your extra cash on memory. Serdar Soysal -Original Message- From: Cooke, Brian [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, June 10, 2002 12:04 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Hardware Question All, Our company is buying a new Exchange server. At the start running 5.5 hopefully migrating to E2K sooner rather than later. I was hoping that someone may be able to help me decide whether or not to invest in 1MB or 2MB L2 processor cache rather than buying the 512K L2 cache. This server over the next 5 years may be supporting up to 1,000 users and if someone could give me their opinions on whether 1MB or 2MB of cache will be needed or if the performance gain will even be seen with a server supporting 1,000 users I'd greatly appreciate it. I've been looking to buy a server with dual 1.8 Ghz/512K processors. I have priced other servers that are far more expensive with 1MB or 2MB cache. Any help would be greatly appreciated. Thanks in advance, Brian _ 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: slightly OT - Outlook and IE
Both yahoo and hotmail used to be great tools. Now, it's a hassle to maintain an account with them. Serdar Soysal -Original Message- From: Ewins, James [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, June 10, 2002 11:22 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: slightly OT - Outlook and IE Yahoo did the same recently. Must be a conspiracy. I blame Elvis [1]. But junk mail relating to mail clients on Exchange? I think you can relax. JDE [1] he denies it. -Original Message- From: Elizabeth Farrell [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, June 10, 2002 9:31 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject:RE: slightly OT - Outlook and IE Also related: If you signed up for Hotmail - or anything else that uses Passport more than a couple of months ago, you may be in for a big surprise. It seems that Microsoft changed the rules while you weren't looking. Unilaterally, Microsoft may have granted itself permission to pass along your personal information to other companies that use Passport on their Web sites. The personal information includes your email address, your birthday, your country and zip code, your gender and occupation. Has Microsoft taken liberties with your data? There's an easy way to check. Go into Hotmail and log into your account. Click Options (to the right of the tab that says Address Book). Click Personal Profile (in the upper left corner). Scroll down to the bottom of the screen and see whether the boxes marked Share my e-mail address and Share my other registration information have been checked. UNCHECK THESE!! Those boxes didn't exist when most people currently signed up for Hotmail, and chances are pretty good they didn't exist when you signed up for it, either. I certainly never gave Microsoft permission to hand out my email address - or my birthday, gender or occupation. Yet both of those boxes on my personal profile were checked. I bet they're checked on your personal profile, too. Worth checking! Regards E. -Original Message- From: Chris Scharff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Subject: RE: slightly OT - Outlook and IE Cool. What's the phone number or contact information at Hotmail for me to contact and get my share of cheap Hotmail e-mail addresses? -Original Message- From: Richard Serafin [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Subject: RE: slightly OT - Outlook and IE Yup, I've bought some myself just because I didn't believe it, I had to try it, 5000 Hotmail address like $29.95 -Original Message- From: Chris Scharff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Subject: RE: slightly OT - Outlook and IE Hotmail sells your address to them. Really. Yes, that must be it. --- Clearswift monitors, controls and protects all its messaging traffic in compliance with its corporate email policy using Clearswift products. Find out more about Clearswift, its solutions and services at http://www.clearswift.com This communication is confidential and may contain privileged information intended solely for the named addressee(s). It may not be used or disclosed except for the purpose for which it has been sent. If you are not the intended recipient, you must not copy, distribute or take any action in reliance on it. Unless expressly stated, opinions in this message are those of the individual sender and not of Clearswift. If you have received this communication in error, please notify Clearswift by emailing [EMAIL PROTECTED] quoting the sender and delete the message and any attached documents. Clearswift accepts no liability or responsibility for any onward transmission or use of emails and attachments having left the Clearswift domain. _ 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: stupid disclaimers
Absolutely nothing. . . I still think that disclaimers are a totally useless annoyance. -Original Message- From: Slinger, Gary [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, June 07, 2002 3:41 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: stupid disclaimers Of course it is - what's to stop me removing your disclaimer before I send it onwards to someone else, and then challenging you to PROVE that the disclaimer was on the SPECIFIC message that I received ? -Original Message- From: Darcy Adams [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, June 07, 2002 23:20 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: stupid disclaimers There is another reason for disclaimers that include things like if you are not the intended recipient. Forwarding. I questioned the head of our legal department on the need for a disclaimer, and he said that it is primarily to protect us *after* the message has left our control. That is, it's there to provide a level of protection in the event a message is forwarded to someone it shouldn't be. I know, I know. . . it's still a bunch of hooey. Darcy -Original Message- From: Charles Carerros [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, June 07, 2002 10:28 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: stupid disclaimers I wasn't clear..sorry palm pilot has taken up two days because I cant get it to sync..and I'm way beyond being frustrated bye it.. But to clarify. Adding a disclaimer to an e-mail is like adding a citation to item under copywrite. You show, very plainly, that you understand the sensitivity of the information and because you have to manually enter the e-mail address you show that you are aware of who you send it to. To add to that you can go into contract law and pull out court cases that argue wither online click Ok to agree type of contracts are not legal. You only need to argue that if digital contracts are not always legal, how can you claim that a disclaimer that is placed on the end of an e-mail (and you can argue that as a standard practice that you stop reading the e-mail if you get to one) can some how hold a legal suit against you. They can't, because disclaimer are not law (where being ignorant of law does not protect you from punishment) you cannot legal enter a contract (such as is implied with a disclaimer) without some proof of knowledge of it. So, if you add the disclaimer to your e-mail, you are stating, Yea, I _know_ that this is sensitive stuff but if I send it out no one can use it in anyway or I can sue them. I'm not sure, but I bet a good lawyer could use that type of angle to destroy all legal ramifications that would favor a disclaimer. -Original Message- From: Ed Crowley [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, June 07, 2002 9:47 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: stupid disclaimers I don't understand how this relates to disclaimers one way or another. 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 Charles Carerros Sent: Friday, June 07, 2002 5:58 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: stupid disclaimers If you get a lawyer out of the office and talking like a human being, (I did this once) you get really interesting information. Like one told me once that if you create a website with all borrowed copywrited materials you should NEVER site the source of the materials in thinking that if you site the source all obligations go away. What you are really doing is giving the lawyer half of what he needs to prosecute you. (Fair use and copyright is based on knowledge of use and then the extent that the use effects the market, in a nutshell that's it). So if you steal something or want to make a lawyer work you DON'T put a disclaimer on it, that way your foreign ignorance and thus bypass the law. Not that I would ever suggestion such a thing. -Original Message- From: Jim Helfer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, June 06, 2002 4:41 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: stupid disclaimers Hmmm. Maybe the SPAM-filter people have it all wrong, and what they should really be doing is pattern-matching on variations of this is not an unsolicited e-mail Opting-In on some exciting offers for herbal viagra in Pittsburgh Jim Helfer -Original Message- From: Ed Crowley [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, June 06, 2002 5:32 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: stupid disclaimers Just like the disclaimer that comes on 50% of the Spam I get that says that this is not an unsolicited e-mail. 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 Dupler, Craig Sent: Thursday, June 06, 2002 2:08 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: stupid disclaimers Do
RE: Hardware Question
Ed, We're looking at a 8K to 10K difference in the cost between the two. Will there be any signifigant/noticable differences? Thanks, Brian -Original Message- From: Ed Crowley [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, June 10, 2002 12:14 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Hardware Question Not wanting to suggest that you write a blank check, I guess it would depend on the cost. 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 Cooke, Brian Sent: Monday, June 10, 2002 9:04 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Hardware Question All, Our company is buying a new Exchange server. At the start running 5.5 hopefully migrating to E2K sooner rather than later. I was hoping that someone may be able to help me decide whether or not to invest in 1MB or 2MB L2 processor cache rather than buying the 512K L2 cache. This server over the next 5 years may be supporting up to 1,000 users and if someone could give me their opinions on whether 1MB or 2MB of cache will be needed or if the performance gain will even be seen with a server supporting 1,000 users I'd greatly appreciate it. I've been looking to buy a server with dual 1.8 Ghz/512K processors. I have priced other servers that are far more expensive with 1MB or 2MB cache. Any help would be greatly appreciated. Thanks in advance, Brian _ 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: slightly OT - Outlook and IE
I still like Yahoo, especially when I'm away and want to pull my POP3 mail from my ISP without dialing in to them. Yahoo's junk mail filters are quite good. Hotmail is a Spam magnet and their filters are poor. 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 Soysal, Serdar Sent: Monday, June 10, 2002 9:31 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: slightly OT - Outlook and IE Both yahoo and hotmail used to be great tools. Now, it's a hassle to maintain an account with them. Serdar Soysal -Original Message- From: Ewins, James [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, June 10, 2002 11:22 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: slightly OT - Outlook and IE Yahoo did the same recently. Must be a conspiracy. I blame Elvis [1]. But junk mail relating to mail clients on Exchange? I think you can relax. JDE [1] he denies it. -Original Message- From: Elizabeth Farrell [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, June 10, 2002 9:31 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject:RE: slightly OT - Outlook and IE Also related: If you signed up for Hotmail - or anything else that uses Passport more than a couple of months ago, you may be in for a big surprise. It seems that Microsoft changed the rules while you weren't looking. Unilaterally, Microsoft may have granted itself permission to pass along your personal information to other companies that use Passport on their Web sites. The personal information includes your email address, your birthday, your country and zip code, your gender and occupation. Has Microsoft taken liberties with your data? There's an easy way to check. Go into Hotmail and log into your account. Click Options (to the right of the tab that says Address Book). Click Personal Profile (in the upper left corner). Scroll down to the bottom of the screen and see whether the boxes marked Share my e-mail address and Share my other registration information have been checked. UNCHECK THESE!! Those boxes didn't exist when most people currently signed up for Hotmail, and chances are pretty good they didn't exist when you signed up for it, either. I certainly never gave Microsoft permission to hand out my email address - or my birthday, gender or occupation. Yet both of those boxes on my personal profile were checked. I bet they're checked on your personal profile, too. Worth checking! Regards E. -Original Message- From: Chris Scharff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Subject: RE: slightly OT - Outlook and IE Cool. What's the phone number or contact information at Hotmail for me to contact and get my share of cheap Hotmail e-mail addresses? -Original Message- From: Richard Serafin [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Subject: RE: slightly OT - Outlook and IE Yup, I've bought some myself just because I didn't believe it, I had to try it, 5000 Hotmail address like $29.95 -Original Message- From: Chris Scharff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Subject: RE: slightly OT - Outlook and IE Hotmail sells your address to them. Really. Yes, that must be it. --- Clearswift monitors, controls and protects all its messaging traffic in compliance with its corporate email policy using Clearswift products. Find out more about Clearswift, its solutions and services at http://www.clearswift.com This communication is confidential and may contain privileged information intended solely for the named addressee(s). It may not be used or disclosed except for the purpose for which it has been sent. If you are not the intended recipient, you must not copy, distribute or take any action in reliance on it. Unless expressly stated, opinions in this message are those of the individual sender and not of Clearswift. If you have received this communication in error, please notify Clearswift by emailing [EMAIL PROTECTED] quoting the sender and delete the message and any attached documents. Clearswift accepts no liability or responsibility for any onward transmission or use of emails and attachments having left the Clearswift domain. _ 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: stupid disclaimers
I think the following disclaimer says it all: DISCLAIMER: The information and opinions expressed on this site are not necessarily the opinions of the author and may be denied or disregarded at a later date. Reading of this paragraph constitutes an agreement on the part of the reader not to hold author responsible for any damaging effects resulting from reading and agreeing with anything printed on this site; furthermore reader waives all future claims resulting from changes in law which may render this disclaimer null and void. This disclaimer is valid in all states with the exception of those states which have laws forbidding the existence of this disclaimer, and in states where such laws exist the reader agrees to read this disclaimer in a state where this disclaimer is binding. -Original Message- From: Darcy Adams [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, June 10, 2002 12:35 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: stupid disclaimers Absolutely nothing. . . I still think that disclaimers are a totally useless annoyance. -Original Message- From: Slinger, Gary [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, June 07, 2002 3:41 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: stupid disclaimers Of course it is - what's to stop me removing your disclaimer before I send it onwards to someone else, and then challenging you to PROVE that the disclaimer was on the SPECIFIC message that I received ? -Original Message- From: Darcy Adams [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, June 07, 2002 23:20 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: stupid disclaimers There is another reason for disclaimers that include things like if you are not the intended recipient. Forwarding. I questioned the head of our legal department on the need for a disclaimer, and he said that it is primarily to protect us *after* the message has left our control. That is, it's there to provide a level of protection in the event a message is forwarded to someone it shouldn't be. I know, I know. . . it's still a bunch of hooey. Darcy -Original Message- From: Charles Carerros [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, June 07, 2002 10:28 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: stupid disclaimers I wasn't clear..sorry palm pilot has taken up two days because I cant get it to sync..and I'm way beyond being frustrated bye it.. But to clarify. Adding a disclaimer to an e-mail is like adding a citation to item under copywrite. You show, very plainly, that you understand the sensitivity of the information and because you have to manually enter the e-mail address you show that you are aware of who you send it to. To add to that you can go into contract law and pull out court cases that argue wither online click Ok to agree type of contracts are not legal. You only need to argue that if digital contracts are not always legal, how can you claim that a disclaimer that is placed on the end of an e-mail (and you can argue that as a standard practice that you stop reading the e-mail if you get to one) can some how hold a legal suit against you. They can't, because disclaimer are not law (where being ignorant of law does not protect you from punishment) you cannot legal enter a contract (such as is implied with a disclaimer) without some proof of knowledge of it. So, if you add the disclaimer to your e-mail, you are stating, Yea, I _know_ that this is sensitive stuff but if I send it out no one can use it in anyway or I can sue them. I'm not sure, but I bet a good lawyer could use that type of angle to destroy all legal ramifications that would favor a disclaimer. -Original Message- From: Ed Crowley [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, June 07, 2002 9:47 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: stupid disclaimers I don't understand how this relates to disclaimers one way or another. 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 Charles Carerros Sent: Friday, June 07, 2002 5:58 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: stupid disclaimers If you get a lawyer out of the office and talking like a human being, (I did this once) you get really interesting information. Like one told me once that if you create a website with all borrowed copywrited materials you should NEVER site the source of the materials in thinking that if you site the source all obligations go away. What you are really doing is giving the lawyer half of what he needs to prosecute you. (Fair use and copyright is based on knowledge of use and then the extent that the use effects the market, in a nutshell that's it). So if you steal something or want to make a lawyer work you DON'T put a disclaimer on it, that way your foreign ignorance and thus bypass the law. Not that I would ever suggestion such a thing. -Original Message- From: Jim Helfer
RE: stupid disclaimers
Oh shit I'm putting that one on mine from now onComedy Gold Sir -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Tim Tullis Sent: Monday, June 10, 2002 9:56 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: stupid disclaimers I think the following disclaimer says it all: DISCLAIMER: The information and opinions expressed on this site are not necessarily the opinions of the author and may be denied or disregarded at a later date. Reading of this paragraph constitutes an agreement on the part of the reader not to hold author responsible for any damaging effects resulting from reading and agreeing with anything printed on this site; furthermore reader waives all future claims resulting from changes in law which may render this disclaimer null and void. This disclaimer is valid in all states with the exception of those states which have laws forbidding the existence of this disclaimer, and in states where such laws exist the reader agrees to read this disclaimer in a state where this disclaimer is binding. -Original Message- From: Darcy Adams [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, June 10, 2002 12:35 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: stupid disclaimers Absolutely nothing. . . I still think that disclaimers are a totally useless annoyance. -Original Message- From: Slinger, Gary [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, June 07, 2002 3:41 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: stupid disclaimers Of course it is - what's to stop me removing your disclaimer before I send it onwards to someone else, and then challenging you to PROVE that the disclaimer was on the SPECIFIC message that I received ? -Original Message- From: Darcy Adams [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, June 07, 2002 23:20 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: stupid disclaimers There is another reason for disclaimers that include things like if you are not the intended recipient. Forwarding. I questioned the head of our legal department on the need for a disclaimer, and he said that it is primarily to protect us *after* the message has left our control. That is, it's there to provide a level of protection in the event a message is forwarded to someone it shouldn't be. I know, I know. . . it's still a bunch of hooey. Darcy -Original Message- From: Charles Carerros [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, June 07, 2002 10:28 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: stupid disclaimers I wasn't clear..sorry palm pilot has taken up two days because I cant get it to sync..and I'm way beyond being frustrated bye it.. But to clarify. Adding a disclaimer to an e-mail is like adding a citation to item under copywrite. You show, very plainly, that you understand the sensitivity of the information and because you have to manually enter the e-mail address you show that you are aware of who you send it to. To add to that you can go into contract law and pull out court cases that argue wither online click Ok to agree type of contracts are not legal. You only need to argue that if digital contracts are not always legal, how can you claim that a disclaimer that is placed on the end of an e-mail (and you can argue that as a standard practice that you stop reading the e-mail if you get to one) can some how hold a legal suit against you. They can't, because disclaimer are not law (where being ignorant of law does not protect you from punishment) you cannot legal enter a contract (such as is implied with a disclaimer) without some proof of knowledge of it. So, if you add the disclaimer to your e-mail, you are stating, Yea, I _know_ that this is sensitive stuff but if I send it out no one can use it in anyway or I can sue them. I'm not sure, but I bet a good lawyer could use that type of angle to destroy all legal ramifications that would favor a disclaimer. -Original Message- From: Ed Crowley [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, June 07, 2002 9:47 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: stupid disclaimers I don't understand how this relates to disclaimers one way or another. 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 Charles Carerros Sent: Friday, June 07, 2002 5:58 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: stupid disclaimers If you get a lawyer out of the office and talking like a human being, (I did this once) you get really interesting information. Like one told me once that if you create a website with all borrowed copywrited materials you should NEVER site the source of the materials in thinking that if you site the source all obligations go away. What you are really doing is giving the lawyer half of what he needs to prosecute you. (Fair use and copyright is based on knowledge of use and then the extent that the use effects the market, in a nutshell
RE: stupid disclaimers
Sent to me by a co-worker: DISCLAIMER: This Email message does not reflect the thoughts or opinions of either myself, my company, my friends or my cat; don't quote me on that; don't quote me on anything; you may distribute this posting and all its associated parts freely but you may not make a profit from it or include the posting in commercial publications without written permission; further redistributions of this document or its parts are allowed; humor is subject to change without notice; humor has been slightly been enlarged to show detail; any resemblance to actual persons, living or dead, is unintentional and purely coincidental; hand wash only, tumble dry on low heat; do not bend, fold, mutilate or spindle; your mileage may vary; no substitutions allowed; for a limited time only; this offer is void where prohibited, taxed or otherwise restricted; humor is provided as is without warranties expressed or implied; user assumes full liabilities; not liable for damages due to use or misuse; no shoes, no shirt, no humor; quantities are limited while supplies last; caveat emptor; read at your own risk; parental advisory - explicit humor; text may contain material some readers may find objectionable, parental guidance is advised; keep away from sunlight, pets, and small children; limit one-per-family please; no money down; no purchase necessary; you need not be present to win; some assembly required; batteries are not included; action figures sold separately; objects may be larger than they appear in the mirror; no preservatives added; safety goggles may be required during use; sealed for your protection, do not use if the safety seal is broken; call before you dig; for external use only; if a rash, redness, irritation or swelling develops, discontinue use; use only with proper ventilation; avoid extreme temperatures and store in a cool, dry place; keep away from open flames and avoid inhaling fumes; avoid contact with mucous membranes; do not puncture, incinerate, or store above 120 degrees Fahrenheit; do not place near flammable or magnetic source; reading this Email message may be hazardous to your health; the best safeguard, second only to abstinence, is the use of a good laugh; text used in this email message is made from 100% recycled electrons and magnetic particles; no animals were used to test the hilarity of this message; no salt, MSG, artificial color or flavor added; if ingested, do not induce vomiting, if symptoms persist consult a humorologist; slippery when wet; must be 18 to enter; possible penalties for early withdrawal; allow four to six weeks for delivery; disclaimer does not cover hurricane, lightening, tornado, tsunami, volcanic eruption, earthquake, flood, and other Acts of God, misuse neglect, unauthorized repair, damage from improper installation, typos, misspelled words, incorrect line voltage, missing or altered serial numbers, sonic boom vibrations, electromagnetic radiation from nuclear blasts, customer adjustments that are not covered in this Email message, and incidents owing to motor vehicle accidents, airplane crash, ship sinking, leaky roof, falling rocks, mud slides, forest fire, broken glass, flying projectiles, or dropping the item; other restrictions may apply. AND MOST IMPORTANTLY... If something offends you, lighten up, get a life and move on. -Original Message- From: Tim Tullis [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, June 10, 2002 9:56 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: stupid disclaimers I think the following disclaimer says it all: DISCLAIMER: The information and opinions expressed on this site are not necessarily the opinions of the author and may be denied or disregarded at a later date. Reading of this paragraph constitutes an agreement on the part of the reader not to hold author responsible for any damaging effects resulting from reading and agreeing with anything printed on this site; furthermore reader waives all future claims resulting from changes in law which may render this disclaimer null and void. This disclaimer is valid in all states with the exception of those states which have laws forbidding the existence of this disclaimer, and in states where such laws exist the reader agrees to read this disclaimer in a state where this disclaimer is binding. -Original Message- From: Darcy Adams [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, June 10, 2002 12:35 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: stupid disclaimers Absolutely nothing. . . I still think that disclaimers are a totally useless annoyance. -Original Message- From: Slinger, Gary [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, June 07, 2002 3:41 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: stupid disclaimers Of course it is - what's to stop me removing your disclaimer before I send it onwards to someone else, and then challenging you to PROVE that the disclaimer was on the SPECIFIC message that I received ? -Original Message- From: Darcy Adams
RE: OWA
Hey!!! I'm the author of the how to move Exchange servers to a different domain [1]. Sheesh . . Ed gets all the credit around here mutter -Original Message- From: Tony McCarthy [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Sunday, June 09, 2002 5:32 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: OWA Hi Ed, Thanks very much for the tip. I tried using his SMTP address and can now access his inbox via OWA. The strange thing is, there doesn't seem to be an alias even remotely like this guys one. I'll go through my mailboxes and check though because there must be a similar alias, as you suggested. By the way, thanks a lot for all your highly informative info on the swinc site. I've learned heaps about changing first servers, Exchange service accounts and moving Exchange servers between domains. This stuff just isn't covered in any Exchange 5.5 book I've read and without your articles I would have been lost. Regards Tony See if the user can get to the mailbox with his SMTP address instead of the alias. That would suggest that this user's alias is a substring of another alias. For example, his alias is joe and you have a joel already. 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 Tony McCarthy Sent: Sunday, June 09, 2002 3:56 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: OWA Hi Everyone, I have a problem with a mailbox that, for some reason cannot be found with OWA. The user gets the following error message OWA was unable to get to your inbox. There is nothing overtly unusual about this particular user's setup. I have tried pointing his mailbox to both servers in the site in his mailboxes Advanced Properties. I've also tried leaving this field blank with no success. Apart from the OWA problem his mailbox works fine. I've just about reached a point where I'm going to delete his mailbox and recreate it. No one else in the site has this problem. Does anyone know what could be causing this? Regards Tony Tony McCarthy Systems Engineer OSI Software Auckland New Zealand Ph: 64 09 522 5909 (Auckland) Fax: 64 09 522 5901 (Auckland) Mob: 021 703035 (NZ) _ 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]
Recovering Deleted Messages
Fortunately I have not had many restore problems so I am not up to speed on the abilities of exchange to restore specific data. A customer has Exchange Server. A user has deleted (and emptied from his deleted items) a whole series of e-mails which were very important. Is there any way to recover those items. They do not message journal and I am unaware of of any other backups other than a full nightly backup of the exchange database. Can I restore that information from Last Nights backup? is there another mechanism in exchange that has a record of those messages. Thanks Dave _ 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: Recovering Deleted Messages
In outlook, tools recover deleted items, assuming you have a deleted item retention period on the server that is greater than zero days. -Original Message- From: David Stafford [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, June 10, 2002 10:08 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Recovering Deleted Messages Fortunately I have not had many restore problems so I am not up to speed on the abilities of exchange to restore specific data. A customer has Exchange Server. A user has deleted (and emptied from his deleted items) a whole series of e-mails which were very important. Is there any way to recover those items. They do not message journal and I am unaware of of any other backups other than a full nightly backup of the exchange database. Can I restore that information from Last Nights backup? is there another mechanism in exchange that has a record of those messages. Thanks Dave _ 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: Recovering Deleted Messages
Is Deleted Items Retention turned on? You can recover them easily from Deleted Items for that period. For those older than that, you'll have to do a restore to a recovery server. Lots of info about this in the archives for this list. David -Original Message- From: David Stafford [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, June 10, 2002 10:08 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Recovering Deleted Messages Fortunately I have not had many restore problems so I am not up to speed on the abilities of exchange to restore specific data. A customer has Exchange Server. A user has deleted (and emptied from his deleted items) a whole series of e-mails which were very important. Is there any way to recover those items. They do not message journal and I am unaware of of any other backups other than a full nightly backup of the exchange database. Can I restore that information from Last Nights backup? is there another mechanism in exchange that has a record of those messages. Thanks Dave _ 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: stupid disclaimers
welcome :) -Original Message- From: Christopher Hummert [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, June 10, 2002 1:06 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: stupid disclaimers Oh shit I'm putting that one on mine from now onComedy Gold Sir -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Tim Tullis Sent: Monday, June 10, 2002 9:56 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: stupid disclaimers I think the following disclaimer says it all: DISCLAIMER: The information and opinions expressed on this site are not necessarily the opinions of the author and may be denied or disregarded at a later date. Reading of this paragraph constitutes an agreement on the part of the reader not to hold author responsible for any damaging effects resulting from reading and agreeing with anything printed on this site; furthermore reader waives all future claims resulting from changes in law which may render this disclaimer null and void. This disclaimer is valid in all states with the exception of those states which have laws forbidding the existence of this disclaimer, and in states where such laws exist the reader agrees to read this disclaimer in a state where this disclaimer is binding. -Original Message- From: Darcy Adams [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, June 10, 2002 12:35 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: stupid disclaimers Absolutely nothing. . . I still think that disclaimers are a totally useless annoyance. -Original Message- From: Slinger, Gary [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, June 07, 2002 3:41 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: stupid disclaimers Of course it is - what's to stop me removing your disclaimer before I send it onwards to someone else, and then challenging you to PROVE that the disclaimer was on the SPECIFIC message that I received ? -Original Message- From: Darcy Adams [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, June 07, 2002 23:20 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: stupid disclaimers There is another reason for disclaimers that include things like if you are not the intended recipient. Forwarding. I questioned the head of our legal department on the need for a disclaimer, and he said that it is primarily to protect us *after* the message has left our control. That is, it's there to provide a level of protection in the event a message is forwarded to someone it shouldn't be. I know, I know. . . it's still a bunch of hooey. Darcy -Original Message- From: Charles Carerros [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, June 07, 2002 10:28 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: stupid disclaimers I wasn't clear..sorry palm pilot has taken up two days because I cant get it to sync..and I'm way beyond being frustrated bye it.. But to clarify. Adding a disclaimer to an e-mail is like adding a citation to item under copywrite. You show, very plainly, that you understand the sensitivity of the information and because you have to manually enter the e-mail address you show that you are aware of who you send it to. To add to that you can go into contract law and pull out court cases that argue wither online click Ok to agree type of contracts are not legal. You only need to argue that if digital contracts are not always legal, how can you claim that a disclaimer that is placed on the end of an e-mail (and you can argue that as a standard practice that you stop reading the e-mail if you get to one) can some how hold a legal suit against you. They can't, because disclaimer are not law (where being ignorant of law does not protect you from punishment) you cannot legal enter a contract (such as is implied with a disclaimer) without some proof of knowledge of it. So, if you add the disclaimer to your e-mail, you are stating, Yea, I _know_ that this is sensitive stuff but if I send it out no one can use it in anyway or I can sue them. I'm not sure, but I bet a good lawyer could use that type of angle to destroy all legal ramifications that would favor a disclaimer. -Original Message- From: Ed Crowley [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, June 07, 2002 9:47 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: stupid disclaimers I don't understand how this relates to disclaimers one way or another. 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 Charles Carerros Sent: Friday, June 07, 2002 5:58 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: stupid disclaimers If you get a lawyer out of the office and talking like a human being, (I did this once) you get really interesting information. Like one told me once that if you create a website with all borrowed copywrited materials you should NEVER site the source of the materials in thinking that if you site the source all obligations go away. What you are really
RE: stupid disclaimers
Excellnetconsider it stolen g... -Original Message- From: Darcy Adams [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, June 10, 2002 1:11 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: stupid disclaimers Sent to me by a co-worker: DISCLAIMER: This Email message does not reflect the thoughts or opinions of either myself, my company, my friends or my cat; don't quote me on that; don't quote me on anything; you may distribute this posting and all its associated parts freely but you may not make a profit from it or include the posting in commercial publications without written permission; further redistributions of this document or its parts are allowed; humor is subject to change without notice; humor has been slightly been enlarged to show detail; any resemblance to actual persons, living or dead, is unintentional and purely coincidental; hand wash only, tumble dry on low heat; do not bend, fold, mutilate or spindle; your mileage may vary; no substitutions allowed; for a limited time only; this offer is void where prohibited, taxed or otherwise restricted; humor is provided as is without warranties expressed or implied; user assumes full liabilities; not liable for damages due to use or misuse; no shoes, no shirt, no humor; quantities are limited while supplies last; caveat emptor; read at your own risk; parental advisory - explicit humor; text may contain material some readers may find objectionable, parental guidance is advised; keep away from sunlight, pets, and small children; limit one-per-family please; no money down; no purchase necessary; you need not be present to win; some assembly required; batteries are not included; action figures sold separately; objects may be larger than they appear in the mirror; no preservatives added; safety goggles may be required during use; sealed for your protection, do not use if the safety seal is broken; call before you dig; for external use only; if a rash, redness, irritation or swelling develops, discontinue use; use only with proper ventilation; avoid extreme temperatures and store in a cool, dry place; keep away from open flames and avoid inhaling fumes; avoid contact with mucous membranes; do not puncture, incinerate, or store above 120 degrees Fahrenheit; do not place near flammable or magnetic source; reading this Email message may be hazardous to your health; the best safeguard, second only to abstinence, is the use of a good laugh; text used in this email message is made from 100% recycled electrons and magnetic particles; no animals were used to test the hilarity of this message; no salt, MSG, artificial color or flavor added; if ingested, do not induce vomiting, if symptoms persist consult a humorologist; slippery when wet; must be 18 to enter; possible penalties for early withdrawal; allow four to six weeks for delivery; disclaimer does not cover hurricane, lightening, tornado, tsunami, volcanic eruption, earthquake, flood, and other Acts of God, misuse neglect, unauthorized repair, damage from improper installation, typos, misspelled words, incorrect line voltage, missing or altered serial numbers, sonic boom vibrations, electromagnetic radiation from nuclear blasts, customer adjustments that are not covered in this Email message, and incidents owing to motor vehicle accidents, airplane crash, ship sinking, leaky roof, falling rocks, mud slides, forest fire, broken glass, flying projectiles, or dropping the item; other restrictions may apply. AND MOST IMPORTANTLY... If something offends you, lighten up, get a life and move on. -Original Message- From: Tim Tullis [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, June 10, 2002 9:56 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: stupid disclaimers I think the following disclaimer says it all: DISCLAIMER: The information and opinions expressed on this site are not necessarily the opinions of the author and may be denied or disregarded at a later date. Reading of this paragraph constitutes an agreement on the part of the reader not to hold author responsible for any damaging effects resulting from reading and agreeing with anything printed on this site; furthermore reader waives all future claims resulting from changes in law which may render this disclaimer null and void. This disclaimer is valid in all states with the exception of those states which have laws forbidding the existence of this disclaimer, and in states where such laws exist the reader agrees to read this disclaimer in a state where this disclaimer is binding. -Original Message- From: Darcy Adams [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, June 10, 2002 12:35 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: stupid disclaimers Absolutely nothing. . . I still think that disclaimers are a totally useless annoyance. -Original Message- From: Slinger, Gary [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, June 07, 2002 3:41 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: stupid disclaimers Of course it is - what's to stop me removing your
RE: Recovering Deleted Messages
Do they have Deleted Item Retention in place? If so, how far back? If it is in place and the customer is running Outlook 98 or better then you are all set. Just select Deleted Items Folder, then go to Tools - Recover Deleted Items - select the ones you want to recover and voila - you are a hero? If not then, begin your recovery on another server. Use the Disaster Recovery white paper from MS for this. It lines things out step-by-step. Nate Couch EDS Messaging -- From: David Stafford Reply To: Exchange Discussions Sent: Monday, June 10, 2002 12:08 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Recovering Deleted Messages Fortunately I have not had many restore problems so I am not up to speed on the abilities of exchange to restore specific data. A customer has Exchange Server. A user has deleted (and emptied from his deleted items) a whole series of e-mails which were very important. Is there any way to recover those items. They do not message journal and I am unaware of of any other backups other than a full nightly backup of the exchange database. Can I restore that information from Last Nights backup? is there another mechanism in exchange that has a record of those messages. Thanks Dave _ 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: Recovering Deleted Messages
Greater than Day0? -Original Message- From: Baker, Jennifer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, June 10, 2002 10:26 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Recovering Deleted Messages In outlook, tools recover deleted items, assuming you have a deleted item retention period on the server that is greater than zero days. -Original Message- From: David Stafford [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, June 10, 2002 10:08 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Recovering Deleted Messages Fortunately I have not had many restore problems so I am not up to speed on the abilities of exchange to restore specific data. A customer has Exchange Server. A user has deleted (and emptied from his deleted items) a whole series of e-mails which were very important. Is there any way to recover those items. They do not message journal and I am unaware of of any other backups other than a full nightly backup of the exchange database. Can I restore that information from Last Nights backup? is there another mechanism in exchange that has a record of those messages. Thanks Dave _ 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: IIS Authentication changes at reboot
I didn't say you change the IIS properties on ESM. Checkout Q290341. Andrew MCSE (W2K NT4) + CCNA -Original Message- From: Andrey Fyodorov [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Posted At: Monday, June 10, 2002 9:02 AM Posted To: ExchangeDiscussion Conversation: IIS Authentication changes at reboot Subject: RE: IIS Authentication changes at reboot You cannot change the default HTTP Virtual Server settings in ESM. It refers you to IIS Admin for that. -Original Message- From: Andrew Chan [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, June 10, 2002 11:06 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: IIS Authentication changes at reboot Then, that is your problem... You don't change that in IIS admin, because the settings will be overwritten. Change it in the ESM. (Exchange System Manager) Andrew MCSE (W2K NT4) + CCNA -Original Message- From: Tony Hlabse [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Posted At: Sunday, June 09, 2002 8:03 PM Posted To: ExchangeDiscussion Conversation: IIS Authentication changes at reboot Subject: Re: IIS Authentication changes at reboot Yes and clearing Integrated NT Authentication option so just the name and password fields are visible. - Original Message - From: Martin Blackstone [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, June 10, 2002 10:59 AM Subject: RE: IIS Authentication changes at reboot Just for clarification, are you saying that when you (e.i. got rid of domain field prompt) that you did this by setting the default domain in IIS? -Original Message- From: Tony Hlabse [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Sunday, June 09, 2002 7:49 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: IIS Authentication changes at reboot Single Site one server, Windows 2000 Server as a GC and running IIS5 and E2K with SP2 for MS200 and E2K. We changed the Authentication requirements so when a user logs into the Exchange server to access email via OWA, he doesn't have to enter the domain name. (e.i. got rid of domain field prompt). Everything is fine until the customer had to reboot his server. For some reason the Authentication method went back to the default, asking for the domain name. Has anyone else run into this. It happened more than once. My guess is maybe stoppping and starting IIS first before reboot. _ 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] _ 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
He's a suck-up. We all know who really wrote it. -Original Message- From: Darcy Adams [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, June 10, 2002 10:14 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: OWA Hey!!! I'm the author of the how to move Exchange servers to a different domain [1]. Sheesh . . Ed gets all the credit around here mutter -Original Message- From: Tony McCarthy [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Sunday, June 09, 2002 5:32 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: OWA Hi Ed, Thanks very much for the tip. I tried using his SMTP address and can now access his inbox via OWA. The strange thing is, there doesn't seem to be an alias even remotely like this guys one. I'll go through my mailboxes and check though because there must be a similar alias, as you suggested. By the way, thanks a lot for all your highly informative info on the swinc site. I've learned heaps about changing first servers, Exchange service accounts and moving Exchange servers between domains. This stuff just isn't covered in any Exchange 5.5 book I've read and without your articles I would have been lost. Regards Tony See if the user can get to the mailbox with his SMTP address instead of the alias. That would suggest that this user's alias is a substring of another alias. For example, his alias is joe and you have a joel already. 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 Tony McCarthy Sent: Sunday, June 09, 2002 3:56 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: OWA Hi Everyone, I have a problem with a mailbox that, for some reason cannot be found with OWA. The user gets the following error message OWA was unable to get to your inbox. There is nothing overtly unusual about this particular user's setup. I have tried pointing his mailbox to both servers in the site in his mailboxes Advanced Properties. I've also tried leaving this field blank with no success. Apart from the OWA problem his mailbox works fine. I've just about reached a point where I'm going to delete his mailbox and recreate it. No one else in the site has this problem. Does anyone know what could be causing this? Regards Tony Tony McCarthy Systems Engineer OSI Software Auckland New Zealand Ph: 64 09 522 5909 (Auckland) Fax: 64 09 522 5901 (Auckland) Mob: 021 703035 (NZ) _ 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] _ 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: Recovering Deleted Messages
I do not believe they have retention on. By the way it is a Exchange 2K box. I realized I neglected to specify in my original posting. -Original Message- From: David Florea [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, June 10, 2002 1:27 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Recovering Deleted Messages Is Deleted Items Retention turned on? You can recover them easily from Deleted Items for that period. For those older than that, you'll have to do a restore to a recovery server. Lots of info about this in the archives for this list. David -Original Message- From: David Stafford [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, June 10, 2002 10:08 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Recovering Deleted Messages Fortunately I have not had many restore problems so I am not up to speed on the abilities of exchange to restore specific data. A customer has Exchange Server. A user has deleted (and emptied from his deleted items) a whole series of e-mails which were very important. Is there any way to recover those items. They do not message journal and I am unaware of of any other backups other than a full nightly backup of the exchange database. Can I restore that information from Last Nights backup? is there another mechanism in exchange that has a record of those messages. Thanks Dave _ 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: Recovering Deleted Messages
I thought there *was* nothing greater than Day 0. -Original Message- From: Martin Blackstone [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, June 10, 2002 10:30 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Recovering Deleted Messages Greater than Day0? -Original Message- From: Baker, Jennifer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, June 10, 2002 10:26 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Recovering Deleted Messages In outlook, tools recover deleted items, assuming you have a deleted item retention period on the server that is greater than zero days. -Original Message- From: David Stafford [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, June 10, 2002 10:08 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Recovering Deleted Messages Fortunately I have not had many restore problems so I am not up to speed on the abilities of exchange to restore specific data. A customer has Exchange Server. A user has deleted (and emptied from his deleted items) a whole series of e-mails which were very important. Is there any way to recover those items. They do not message journal and I am unaware of of any other backups other than a full nightly backup of the exchange database. Can I restore that information from Last Nights backup? is there another mechanism in exchange that has a record of those messages. Thanks Dave _ 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: Recovering Deleted Messages
No. Looks like they left the defaults when they loaded Exchange. My only option to restore to another machine? -Original Message- From: Martin Blackstone [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, June 10, 2002 1:30 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Recovering Deleted Messages Greater than Day0? -Original Message- From: Baker, Jennifer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, June 10, 2002 10:26 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Recovering Deleted Messages In outlook, tools recover deleted items, assuming you have a deleted item retention period on the server that is greater than zero days. -Original Message- From: David Stafford [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, June 10, 2002 10:08 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Recovering Deleted Messages Fortunately I have not had many restore problems so I am not up to speed on the abilities of exchange to restore specific data. A customer has Exchange Server. A user has deleted (and emptied from his deleted items) a whole series of e-mails which were very important. Is there any way to recover those items. They do not message journal and I am unaware of of any other backups other than a full nightly backup of the exchange database. Can I restore that information from Last Nights backup? is there another mechanism in exchange that has a record of those messages. Thanks Dave _ 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: Recovering Deleted Messages
That's your only option as I see it. However, I would talk to them about implementing the Deleted Item Retention after this event (all of our customers typically run about 14 days DIR). This will save you and your customer future hassles. -- From: David Stafford Reply To: Exchange Discussions Sent: Monday, June 10, 2002 13:10 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Recovering Deleted Messages No. Looks like they left the defaults when they loaded Exchange. My only option to restore to another machine? -Original Message- From: Martin Blackstone [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, June 10, 2002 1:30 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Recovering Deleted Messages Greater than Day0? -Original Message- From: Baker, Jennifer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, June 10, 2002 10:26 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Recovering Deleted Messages In outlook, tools recover deleted items, assuming you have a deleted item retention period on the server that is greater than zero days. -Original Message- From: David Stafford [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, June 10, 2002 10:08 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Recovering Deleted Messages Fortunately I have not had many restore problems so I am not up to speed on the abilities of exchange to restore specific data. A customer has Exchange Server. A user has deleted (and emptied from his deleted items) a whole series of e-mails which were very important. Is there any way to recover those items. They do not message journal and I am unaware of of any other backups other than a full nightly backup of the exchange database. Can I restore that information from Last Nights backup? is there another mechanism in exchange that has a record of those messages. Thanks Dave _ 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] _ 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: Recovering Deleted Messages
And, if I may throw my 2 cents in... Be aware that if you do turn it on, it only works for those items that were originally in the Deleted Items folder. If a person hard-deletes a message, by keying shift-delete for example, it bypasses the Deleted Items folder. I got burned on this a while back. The user never just deleted an item, they always held the shift key down and then deleted it. They called and said they needed to retrieve an email message. No problem, I said, and told them how to recover a deleted message. Luckily, it wasn't a critical item. Check out Q178630 How to Recover Items That Don't Touch Deleted Items Folder for the procedure to recover hard-deleted items. Paul Chinnery Network Administrator Mem Med Ctr -Original Message- From: Couch, Nate [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, June 10, 2002 2:45 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Recovering Deleted Messages That's your only option as I see it. However, I would talk to them about implementing the Deleted Item Retention after this event (all of our customers typically run about 14 days DIR). This will save you and your customer future hassles. -- From: David Stafford Reply To: Exchange Discussions Sent: Monday, June 10, 2002 13:10 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Recovering Deleted Messages No. Looks like they left the defaults when they loaded Exchange. My only option to restore to another machine? -Original Message- From: Martin Blackstone [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, June 10, 2002 1:30 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Recovering Deleted Messages Greater than Day0? -Original Message- From: Baker, Jennifer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, June 10, 2002 10:26 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Recovering Deleted Messages In outlook, tools recover deleted items, assuming you have a deleted item retention period on the server that is greater than zero days. -Original Message- From: David Stafford [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, June 10, 2002 10:08 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Recovering Deleted Messages Fortunately I have not had many restore problems so I am not up to speed on the abilities of exchange to restore specific data. A customer has Exchange Server. A user has deleted (and emptied from his deleted items) a whole series of e-mails which were very important. Is there any way to recover those items. They do not message journal and I am unaware of of any other backups other than a full nightly backup of the exchange database. Can I restore that information from Last Nights backup? is there another mechanism in exchange that has a record of those messages. Thanks Dave _ 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] _ 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: Recovering Deleted Messages
Thanks everyone. I appreciate everyone's time. Dave -Original Message- From: Chinnery Paul [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, June 10, 2002 3:00 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Recovering Deleted Messages And, if I may throw my 2 cents in... Be aware that if you do turn it on, it only works for those items that were originally in the Deleted Items folder. If a person hard-deletes a message, by keying shift-delete for example, it bypasses the Deleted Items folder. I got burned on this a while back. The user never just deleted an item, they always held the shift key down and then deleted it. They called and said they needed to retrieve an email message. No problem, I said, and told them how to recover a deleted message. Luckily, it wasn't a critical item. Check out Q178630 How to Recover Items That Don't Touch Deleted Items Folder for the procedure to recover hard-deleted items. Paul Chinnery Network Administrator Mem Med Ctr -Original Message- From: Couch, Nate [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, June 10, 2002 2:45 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Recovering Deleted Messages That's your only option as I see it. However, I would talk to them about implementing the Deleted Item Retention after this event (all of our customers typically run about 14 days DIR). This will save you and your customer future hassles. -- From: David Stafford Reply To: Exchange Discussions Sent: Monday, June 10, 2002 13:10 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Recovering Deleted Messages No. Looks like they left the defaults when they loaded Exchange. My only option to restore to another machine? -Original Message- From: Martin Blackstone [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, June 10, 2002 1:30 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Recovering Deleted Messages Greater than Day0? -Original Message- From: Baker, Jennifer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, June 10, 2002 10:26 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Recovering Deleted Messages In outlook, tools recover deleted items, assuming you have a deleted item retention period on the server that is greater than zero days. -Original Message- From: David Stafford [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, June 10, 2002 10:08 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Recovering Deleted Messages Fortunately I have not had many restore problems so I am not up to speed on the abilities of exchange to restore specific data. A customer has Exchange Server. A user has deleted (and emptied from his deleted items) a whole series of e-mails which were very important. Is there any way to recover those items. They do not message journal and I am unaware of of any other backups other than a full nightly backup of the exchange database. Can I restore that information from Last Nights backup? is there another mechanism in exchange that has a record of those messages. Thanks Dave _ 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] _ 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:
Exchange 2000 Log Files
I'm not sure if this is the right list. If not, please point me to an appropriate place. environment We have an Exchange2000 server running with SP2. The Exchange Database is on one drive (G: - RAID 5) The Exchange Logs are on another drive (L: - RAID 0) Backup Exec 8.5 installed /environment problem user=new We are running out of space on the L: drive. The logs are not being flushed. We run a daily incremental backup and a weekly full backup. After the backup finishes, the logs are not being flushed. I have looked at the Backup Exec log and the backup runs successfully, but just doesn't flush the logs. /problem question Any ideas? Pointers? Places to start? /question Thanks. Matt Usher _ 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]
Replicating Exch. 2000 Public Folders
All- I'd like to set up public folder replication between two unrelated Exchange 2000 organizations. Each server is in a separate forest and separate domain without any trusts. Is this possible? I haven't been able to find any information related to replication between unrelated Exchange organizations. Thanks. Brian _ 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]
Irritating calendar problem
To all the Genii out there ..your assistance would be truly appreciated. I have a problem, experienced by a couple of users, that has so far defied all attempts at resolution. Running Exchange Server 5.5 SP4, incl. all hotfixes on Windows NT4 SP6a. Antivirus:Trend Micro Scanmail for Exchange. The problem is as follows: A couple of users are able to access mailbox and work normally in all folders, except for Calendar and Outlook Today. As soon as the user selects one of these options, utilization reaches 100% and remains at this level. Even after 15-20 minutes, machine remains frozen until Outlook is cancelled. The following actions have so far been taken: 1. Attempted to load Outlook using a variety of startup parameters; however problem remains. 2. Created new mailbox and exported contents of old mailbox to PST. Then imported PST to new mailbox, first with contents of calendar and then without the calendar. However each time calendar is accessed the same problem occurs. 3. Have attempted to access the mailbox from other PCs and loaded different versions of Outlook (97,98, 2000 and XP) however the problem remains. This problem does not affect any other users or any newly created mailboxes. As a temporary solution, both users are able to use Calendar under OWA. Any suggestions, recommendations .please. Regards Jonathan _ 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: Moving SMTP events
eventcomb work good sometime for check log. Try http://www.microsoft.com/technet/treeview/default.asp?url=/TechNet/security/prodtech/windows/windows2000/staysecure/secops06.asp Chu Fu Hi Exch 5.5 sp54 Win2k sp2 I am wondering if there is a way to move the diagnostic logging events for IMS to a custom event viewer or preferably the security log. Here is why. I have a group of high paid *ahem* users that receive email from potential clients, sometimes these users will start a big problem with management claiming that certain people cant email them and we are losing TONS of money because of it. In a recent situation one of these users claimed this but it turned out the user didn't check their email for 15 days. All of these users are pop/smtp, so I would like a way to log their logon/logoff events but there is a catch. They logon to a invisible SMTP that sits on the mailbox server so the logon/logoff auditing gets mingled in with the other 1400 users and the security log that is currently 10 meg only stores for a few days. Id really like to only log logon/logoff events for pop3/smtp and not normal mail clients. Any ideas? Thanks e- _ 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 5.0/Mail to specific mailboxes rejected
Hi, New customer, Exchange 5.0 (upgrade now in works). They have trouble sending email to a few select outside mailboxes. (Just a couple, vast majority of outbound mail delivered flawlessly). I don't see any restrictions anywhere in IMS. They're using the IMS connector only, address space set at *,1, they're not on any of the relay-blocking lists, etc. I can successfully send to the mailboxes in question from home. They're getting the following response: Your message did not reach some or all of the intended recipients. Subject: email test Sent: 6/8/2002 9:28 PM The following recipient(s) could not be reached: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' on 6/8/2002 9:28 PM The recipient name is not recognized MSEXCH:IMS:CONNEMARA:NTSERVER:NTSERVER 3553 (000B0981) 553 This entry was last confirmed open on 5/26/2002 Any ideas? Thanks, Dale Mason _ 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]
Upgrade to Information store causing Synchronization woes
Last week we upgraded from Exchange 2000 server to Enterprise, users who are mobile using offline folders had to synchronize their whole mailbox after this, included items that were already synchronized. When they had finished that synchronization all seemed fine, untill this morning. They are all having to synchronize the whole mailbox (including already synchronized items) again. Obviously this is very time consuming for heavy users even on ISDN. Any ideas on why this happened in the first place, and why it has happened again. Obviously it is not ideal for this to happen on a regular basis. Thanks Chris _ 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: Re Outlook2K
But, Martin, that is NOT the way it worked in earlier versions of Outlook. You would get repeated OOO replies, depending on how many messages you sent to that individual. Geoff. . . . -Original Message- From: Martin Blackstone [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, June 10, 2002 8:59 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Re Outlook2K That's exactly how it is supposed to work. One reply for each sender, one time. I mean how many times does someone need to know you are out? -Original Message- From: Mustafa Ibrahim [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, June 10, 2002 3:16 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Re Outlook2K Hi all, I noticed on my laptop if I have Out of Office feature turned on and someone sends me a message they will get a notification as expected. However, any subsequent msgs sent by that user do not seem to generate Out of Office notification/replies. Is this the way Outlook 2000 is meant to behave or am I missing something. My system is using Windows ME with Office 2000 Premium. Any ideas? Many thanks. Mustafa Ibrahim _ 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]
Outlook synchronizes all messages since upgrade
last week users who are mobile using offline folders had to synchronise their whole mailbox after we upgraded from Exchange 2000 server to Enterprise, this included items that were already synchronised. When they had finished that synchronization all seemed fine, untill this morning. They are all having to synchronize the whole mailbox (including already synchronized items) again. Obviously this is very time consuming for heavy users even on ISDN. Have you any idea why this happend in the first place, and why it has happend again. Obviously it is not ideal for this to occur on a regular basis. Thanks Chris _ 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 5.0/IMS Outbound Question
Hi, Have a new customer who is having problems sending mail to a couple to outside mailboxes using the IMS (the address space is set to *,1 and I see no delivery restrictions anywhere). They are not listed on any relay-blocking lists. The messages appear not to be hanging anywhere internally. 99% of the outbound mail is being delivered correctly. They receive: Your message did not reach some or all of the intended recipients. Subject: email test Sent: 6/8/2002 9:28 PM The following recipient(s) could not be reached: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' on 6/8/2002 9:28 PM The recipient name is not recognized MSEXCH:IMS:XX:Y:Y 3553 (000B0981) 553 This entry was last confirmed open on 5/26/2002 Any ideas on what could be causing this? Thanks, Dale Mason _ 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: Hardware Question
Compaq has done extensive performance testing of Exchange 2000 on their line of Proliant servers...and have published them. In the Compaq Active Answer Microsoft Exchange 2000 Performance and Configuration on Compaq ProLiant Servers, they did a comparison test of the 1MB vs. 2MB L2 cache. The result of the test is published in the paper. ftp://ftp.compaq.com/pub/partners/microsoft/infolib/dbappsolutions/13JQ-1000A-WWEN.pdf My personal opinion. A dual PIII 1.8 GHz 1MB L2 is more than enought to handle 1000 users. As others have suggested, concentrate more on buying more RAM...or faster SCSI drives. Concentrate on getting the Transaction logs onto their own RAID1 15Krpm spindle. If you have left over cash...spend it on a RAID 0+1 for the database drive. Regards, Leonard All, Our company is buying a new Exchange server. At the start running 5.5 hopefully migrating to E2K sooner rather than later. I was hoping that someone may be able to help me decide whether or not to invest in 1MB or 2MB L2 processor cache rather than buying the 512K L2 cache. This server over the next 5 years may be supporting up to 1,000 users and if someone could give me their opinions on whether 1MB or 2MB of cache will be needed or if the performance gain will even be seen with a server supporting 1,000 users I'd greatly appreciate it. I've been looking to buy a server with dual 1.8 Ghz/512K processors. I have priced other servers that are far more expensive with 1MB or 2MB cache. Any help would be greatly appreciated. Thanks in advance, Brian _ 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 2000 Log Files
Nope you wanna try the Linux list. If they don't answer your question come back and we will figure something out. ___ John Bowles Exchange Administrator Enterprise Support Engineering Celera Genomics [EMAIL PROTECTED] -Original Message- From: Matt Usher [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, June 07, 2002 4:15 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Exchange 2000 Log Files I'm not sure if this is the right list. If not, please point me to an appropriate place. environment We have an Exchange2000 server running with SP2. The Exchange Database is on one drive (G: - RAID 5) The Exchange Logs are on another drive (L: - RAID 0) Backup Exec 8.5 installed /environment problem user=new We are running out of space on the L: drive. The logs are not being flushed. We run a daily incremental backup and a weekly full backup. After the backup finishes, the logs are not being flushed. I have looked at the Backup Exec log and the backup runs successfully, but just doesn't flush the logs. /problem question Any ideas? Pointers? Places to start? /question Thanks. Matt Usher _ 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]
FW: Exchange 2k SMTP
What could I be doing wrong? A lot, I know. I'm trying to send internet e-mail through my Exchange server with Outlook clients. I thought I had a SMTP virtual server and a SMTP connector configured correctly, but obviously, I'm mistaken. Specs: Server running Win2k, Exchange 2k, ISA. Connected to internet via dial-up, non-static IP. Trying to send e-mail results in outgoing mail sitting in a queue, until finally it gets returned as undeliverable. Daniel Miller _ 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]
Looking for something like MIS 2002
Hello! Can anyone recommend a software to allow wireless PDAs to access Exchange mailbox? I know there is MIS 2002, but it requires a AD which I don't have. I also looked at the Infowave software, but it's taking a over week to talk to Pre sales people. I am looking for a software that will work with Pocket PC, Palm, etc. Thank you in advance, Brian _ 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 2000 Log Files
I'm not sure if this is the right list. If not, please point me to an appropriate place. environment We have an Exchange2000 server running with SP2. The Exchange Database is on one drive (G: - RAID 5) The Exchange Logs are on another drive (L: - RAID 0) Backup Exec 8.5 installed /environment problem user=new We are running out of space on the L: drive. The logs are not being flushed. We run a daily incremental backup and a weekly full backup. After the backup finishes, the logs are not being flushed. I have looked at the Backup Exec log and the backup runs successfully, but just doesn't flush the logs. /problem question Any ideas? Pointers? Places to start? /question Matt Usher _ 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]
OOA to the Internet
We made a conscious decision to Disable out of office responses and replies to the Internet on our SMTP connector. We still think that we have valid reasons for doing this but we are getting a lot of pressure from our users to reverse this decision. The biggest pressure is coming from those in sales, and in our newsroom. I would appreciate hearing from others regarding the pros/cons. Thanx in advance. Fran Garrett Union-Tribune Publishing Co. _ 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: Recovering Deleted Messages
That's not entirely accurate. A hard delete simply marks it as deleted, without moving it to the Deleted Items folder. Exchange doesn't care how its deleted, it simply marks it as deleted and moves on, cleaning it up later. You do, however, have to enable the DumpsterAlwaysOn reghack as outlined in Technet to be able to recover it. -- Roger D. Seielstad - MCSE Sr. Systems Administrator Peregrine Systems Atlanta, GA -Original Message- From: Chinnery Paul [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, June 10, 2002 3:00 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Recovering Deleted Messages And, if I may throw my 2 cents in... Be aware that if you do turn it on, it only works for those items that were originally in the Deleted Items folder. If a person hard-deletes a message, by keying shift-delete for example, it bypasses the Deleted Items folder. I got burned on this a while back. The user never just deleted an item, they always held the shift key down and then deleted it. They called and said they needed to retrieve an email message. No problem, I said, and told them how to recover a deleted message. Luckily, it wasn't a critical item. Check out Q178630 How to Recover Items That Don't Touch Deleted Items Folder for the procedure to recover hard-deleted items. Paul Chinnery Network Administrator Mem Med Ctr -Original Message- From: Couch, Nate [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, June 10, 2002 2:45 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Recovering Deleted Messages That's your only option as I see it. However, I would talk to them about implementing the Deleted Item Retention after this event (all of our customers typically run about 14 days DIR). This will save you and your customer future hassles. -- From: David Stafford Reply To: Exchange Discussions Sent: Monday, June 10, 2002 13:10 To: Exchange Discussions Subject:RE: Recovering Deleted Messages No. Looks like they left the defaults when they loaded Exchange. My only option to restore to another machine? -Original Message- From: Martin Blackstone [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, June 10, 2002 1:30 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Recovering Deleted Messages Greater than Day0? -Original Message- From: Baker, Jennifer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, June 10, 2002 10:26 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Recovering Deleted Messages In outlook, tools recover deleted items, assuming you have a deleted item retention period on the server that is greater than zero days. -Original Message- From: David Stafford [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, June 10, 2002 10:08 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Recovering Deleted Messages Fortunately I have not had many restore problems so I am not up to speed on the abilities of exchange to restore specific data. A customer has Exchange Server. A user has deleted (and emptied from his deleted items) a whole series of e-mails which were very important. Is there any way to recover those items. They do not message journal and I am unaware of of any other backups other than a full nightly backup of the exchange database. Can I restore that information from Last Nights backup? is there another mechanism in exchange that has a record of those messages. Thanks Dave _ 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] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives:
RE: Exchange 2k SMTP
Can you send to anyone or just a select few domains. I'm having a problem withy only a few domains. -Original Message-From: Daniel L. Miller [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]Sent: Monday, June 10, 2002 11:32 AMTo: Exchange DiscussionsSubject: FW: Exchange 2k SMTP What could I be doing wrong? A lot, I know. I'm trying to send internet e-mail through my Exchange server with Outlook clients. I thought I had a SMTP virtual server and a SMTP connector configured correctly, but obviously, I'm mistaken. Specs: Server running Win2k, Exchange 2k, ISA. Connected to internet via dial-up, non-static IP. Trying to send e-mail results in outgoing mail sitting in a queue, until finally it gets returned as undeliverable. Daniel Miller _ 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 5.0/Mail to specific mailboxes rejected
Congratulations. Your customer is an open relay. -Original Message- From: Dale Mason [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Sunday, June 09, 2002 9:03 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Exchange 5.0/Mail to specific mailboxes rejected Hi, New customer, Exchange 5.0 (upgrade now in works). They have trouble sending email to a few select outside mailboxes. (Just a couple, vast majority of outbound mail delivered flawlessly). I don't see any restrictions anywhere in IMS. They're using the IMS connector only, address space set at *,1, they're not on any of the relay-blocking lists, etc. I can successfully send to the mailboxes in question from home. They're getting the following response: Your message did not reach some or all of the intended recipients. Subject: email test Sent: 6/8/2002 9:28 PM The following recipient(s) could not be reached: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' on 6/8/2002 9:28 PM The recipient name is not recognized MSEXCH:IMS:CONNEMARA:NTSERVER:NTSERVER 3553 (000B0981) 553 This entry was last confirmed open on 5/26/2002 Any ideas? Thanks, Dale Mason _ 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: Re Outlook2K
That is incorrect. -Original Message- From: Dale Geoffrey Edwards [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, June 10, 2002 9:56 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Re Outlook2K But, Martin, that is NOT the way it worked in earlier versions of Outlook. You would get repeated OOO replies, depending on how many messages you sent to that individual. Geoff. . . . -Original Message- From: Martin Blackstone [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, June 10, 2002 8:59 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Re Outlook2K That's exactly how it is supposed to work. One reply for each sender, one time. I mean how many times does someone need to know you are out? -Original Message- From: Mustafa Ibrahim [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, June 10, 2002 3:16 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Re Outlook2K Hi all, I noticed on my laptop if I have Out of Office feature turned on and someone sends me a message they will get a notification as expected. However, any subsequent msgs sent by that user do not seem to generate Out of Office notification/replies. Is this the way Outlook 2000 is meant to behave or am I missing something. My system is using Windows ME with Office 2000 Premium. Any ideas? Many thanks. Mustafa Ibrahim _ 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 2000 Log Files
First you should upgrade to 8.6 + the latest build. Is the Exchange job part of another backup job or separate backup job of only the Exchange Server? -Original Message- From: Matt Usher [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, June 07, 2002 4:15 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Exchange 2000 Log Files I'm not sure if this is the right list. If not, please point me to an appropriate place. environment We have an Exchange2000 server running with SP2. The Exchange Database is on one drive (G: - RAID 5) The Exchange Logs are on another drive (L: - RAID 0) Backup Exec 8.5 installed /environment problem user=new We are running out of space on the L: drive. The logs are not being flushed. We run a daily incremental backup and a weekly full backup. After the backup finishes, the logs are not being flushed. I have looked at the Backup Exec log and the backup runs successfully, but just doesn't flush the logs. /problem question Any ideas? Pointers? Places to start? /question Thanks. Matt Usher _ 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] -- The information contained in this email message is privileged and confidential information intended only for the use of the individual or entity to whom it is addressed. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copy of this message is strictly prohibited. If you have received this email in error, please immediately notify Veronis Suhler Stevenson by telephone (212)935-4990, fax (212)381-8168, or email ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) and delete the message. Thank you. == _ 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 2000 Log Files
The logs are not being flushed after the incremental or the full backup? -Original Message- From: Matt Usher [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, June 07, 2002 3:15 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Exchange 2000 Log Files I'm not sure if this is the right list. If not, please point me to an appropriate place. environment We have an Exchange2000 server running with SP2. The Exchange Database is on one drive (G: - RAID 5) The Exchange Logs are on another drive (L: - RAID 0) Backup Exec 8.5 installed /environment problem user=new We are running out of space on the L: drive. The logs are not being flushed. We run a daily incremental backup and a weekly full backup. After the backup finishes, the logs are not being flushed. I have looked at the Backup Exec log and the backup runs successfully, but just doesn't flush the logs. /problem question Any ideas? Pointers? Places to start? /question 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]
RE: Exchange 2000 Log Files
Try upgrade your BE8.5 to the latest. Andrew MCSE (W2K NT4) + CCNA -Original Message- From: Matt Usher [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Posted At: Friday, June 07, 2002 1:15 PM Posted To: ExchangeDiscussion Conversation: Exchange 2000 Log Files Subject: Exchange 2000 Log Files I'm not sure if this is the right list. If not, please point me to an appropriate place. environment We have an Exchange2000 server running with SP2. The Exchange Database is on one drive (G: - RAID 5) The Exchange Logs are on another drive (L: - RAID 0) Backup Exec 8.5 installed /environment problem user=new We are running out of space on the L: drive. The logs are not being flushed. We run a daily incremental backup and a weekly full backup. After the backup finishes, the logs are not being flushed. I have looked at the Backup Exec log and the backup runs successfully, but just doesn't flush the logs. /problem question Any ideas? Pointers? Places to start? /question Thanks. Matt Usher _ 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 2k SMTP
Judas Priest. Please send using Plain text. -Original Message- From: Darrin J. Carter [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, June 10, 2002 3:12 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Exchange 2k SMTP Can you send to anyone or just a select few domains. I'm having a problem withy only a few domains. -Original Message- From: Daniel L. Miller [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, June 10, 2002 11:32 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: FW: Exchange 2k SMTP What could I be doing wrong? A lot, I know. I'm trying to send internet e-mail through my Exchange server with Outlook clients. I thought I had a SMTP virtual server and a SMTP connector configured correctly, but obviously, I'm mistaken. Specs: Server running Win2k, Exchange 2k, ISA. Connected to internet via dial-up, non-static IP. Trying to send e-mail results in outgoing mail sitting in a queue, until finally it gets returned as undeliverable. Daniel Miller _ 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] -- The information contained in this email message is privileged and confidential information intended only for the use of the individual or entity to whom it is addressed. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copy of this message is strictly prohibited. If you have received this email in error, please immediately notify Veronis Suhler Stevenson by telephone (212)935-4990, fax (212)381-8168, or email ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) and delete the message. Thank you. == _ 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]
