RE: Unlimited Quotas

[James Liddil]

But then they talk about how the IT guy is a dick etc.  Already had that
happen.

 -Original Message-
 From: Woodrick, Ed [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
 Sent: Monday, July 08, 2002 9:18 PM
 To: Exchange Discussions
 Subject: RE: Unlimited Quotas
 
 
 And then when the users come yelling, just point the finger 
 to the direction where blame goes. It's rather amazing how 
 people won't go complaining to a CEO or other decision maker 
 level person. 
 
 
 
 
 -Original Message-
 From: Ed Crowley [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
 Posted At: Monday, July 08, 2002 3:14 PM
 Posted To: Microsoft Exchange
 Conversation: Unlimited Quotas
 Subject: RE: Unlimited Quotas
 
 
 It is possible that your best option is to do as I suggest 
 and give them the options well in advance of a crisis and 
 then let the crisis happen. You can even warn them along the 
 way if you want.
 
 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 James Liddil
 Sent: Monday, July 08, 2002 12:12 PM
 To: Exchange Discussions
 Subject: RE: Unlimited Quotas
 
 
 I am finally getting management to make some decisions.  But 
 they have a habit of putting things off until we are in a 
 crisis situation.  I hate to have to wait until all hell 
 breaks loose and then both management AND the users are 
 throwing a fit.
 
 Jim 
 
  -Original Message-
  From: Ed Crowley [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
  Sent: Monday, July 08, 2002 3:06 PM
  To: Exchange Discussions
  Subject: RE: Unlimited Quotas
  
  
  Like the other Ed is telling you, it shouldn't be your job to make
  their business decisions.  You explain the ramifications of 
 having no 
  quotas currently, what it will mean in the future, and the costs to 
  change things.  That is, you present options to management.
  
  You should be positioning your job as a service provider, a helper.
  Do your best to leave the policeman role to those best equipped to 
  handle it, i.e., management.  Your customers, the users, 
 will love you
 
  more in the morning that way.
  
  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 
 James Liddil
  Sent: Monday, July 08, 2002 5:27 AM
  To: Exchange Discussions
  Subject: RE: Unlimited Quotas
  
  
   And the whole idea is that as a support shop, your job is
  to support.
   Has management told you to put limits? When the email or
  file system
   was presented to them, did you say that there were going to
  be limits.
  
  No.  But I had no idea things would get the way they have.  
 I do have
  mailbox management set to delete mail from the deleted 
 items every 
  seven days. Looking at the recent run shows a few users who 
 had over 
  10 megs of stuff in there.  So users need more training.  
 Easier said 
  than done.  So I had a discussion with the CFO about this.  His 
  analogy is that never emptying the trash is like letting junk mail 
  build up on your table until it breaks.  Do people do this?  And if
  they want to then the decision will be made to not spend the 
  money on raises but on more computer hardware/software.
  
  
   
   Your job is to keep people from doing really stupid (not what you 
   think is stupid, I mean really stupid) things that impact
  IT and then
   to respond to, or be proactive in creating solutions to business 
   problems. You have presented no cases that justify any
  limits. You've
   actually presented some pretty good cases for not having
  limits. Your
   company is small, probably to get away from the large
  staffs and stay
   innovative. This means that you really shouldn't be stifling 
   innovation, don't get in people's way, HELP them do their job. If 
   you see something that they are doing and there is a better way, 
   help them learn a better way. If they need to store 2 GB 
 in the mail 
   server, let them. If they are keeping a backup of their 
 disk, then 
   advise them that there are better ways, but more 
 importantly, make 
   those better ways available and very easy for them to use.
  
  In a perfect world.  I only wish I had the time, resources 
 and energy 
  to do what you say.  You are right that we want to stay innovative, 
  but let me tell you that there is as much stagnation as in a big 
  company.  I am a scientist
  (pharmacologist) by training and spent many years doing drug
  development research.  Now I am a computer geek and I 
  understand the importance of computers as a tool for doing 
  research.  I have been on both sides and still am.  But 
  computers like any scientific instrument require a certain 
  amount of maintenance etc.  Too often users feel computers 
  are not like other tools and need no maintenance/tuning.  As 

RE: Unlimited Quotas

[James Liddil]

And then I can call you and pay you to fix the mess. :-)

Jim

 -Original Message-
 From: Ed Crowley [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
 Sent: Monday, July 08, 2002 3:14 PM
 To: Exchange Discussions
 Subject: RE: Unlimited Quotas
 
 
 It is possible that your best option is to do as I suggest 
 and give them the options well in advance of a crisis and 
 then let the crisis happen. You can even warn them along the 
 way if you want.
 
 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 James Liddil
 Sent: Monday, July 08, 2002 12:12 PM
 To: Exchange Discussions
 Subject: RE: Unlimited Quotas
 
 
 I am finally getting management to make some decisions.  But 
 they have a habit of putting things off until we are in a 
 crisis situation.  I hate to have to wait until all hell 
 breaks loose and then both management AND the users are 
 throwing a fit.
 
 Jim 
 
  -Original Message-
  From: Ed Crowley [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
  Sent: Monday, July 08, 2002 3:06 PM
  To: Exchange Discussions
  Subject: RE: Unlimited Quotas
  
  
  Like the other Ed is telling you, it shouldn't be your job to make 
  their business decisions.  You explain the ramifications of 
 having no 
  quotas currently, what it will mean in the future, and the costs to 
  change things.  That is, you present options to management.
  
  You should be positioning your job as a service provider, a 
 helper.  
  Do your best to leave the policeman role to those best equipped to 
  handle it, i.e., management.  Your customers, the users, 
 will love you 
  more in the morning that way.
  
  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 
 James Liddil
  Sent: Monday, July 08, 2002 5:27 AM
  To: Exchange Discussions
  Subject: RE: Unlimited Quotas
  
  
   And the whole idea is that as a support shop, your job is
  to support.
   Has management told you to put limits? When the email or
  file system
   was presented to them, did you say that there were going to
  be limits.
  
  No.  But I had no idea things would get the way they have.  
 I do have 
  mailbox management set to delete mail from the deleted 
 items every 
  seven days. Looking at the recent run shows a few users who 
 had over 
  10 megs of stuff in there.  So users need more training.  
 Easier said 
  than done.  So I had a discussion with the CFO about this.  His 
  analogy is that never emptying the trash is like letting junk mail 
  build up on your table until it breaks.  Do people do this?  And if
  they want to then the decision will be made to not spend the 
  money on raises but on more computer hardware/software.
  
  
   
   Your job is to keep people from doing really stupid (not what you
   think is stupid, I mean really stupid) things that impact 
  IT and then
   to respond to, or be proactive in creating solutions to business
   problems. You have presented no cases that justify any 
  limits. You've
   actually presented some pretty good cases for not having
  limits. Your
   company is small, probably to get away from the large
  staffs and stay
   innovative. This means that you really shouldn't be stifling
   innovation, don't get in people's way, HELP them do their 
   job. If you see something that they are doing and there is a 
   better way, help them learn a better way. If they need to 
   store 2 GB in the mail server, let them. If they are keeping 
   a backup of their disk, then advise them that there are 
   better ways, but more importantly, make those better ways 
   available and very easy for them to use.
  
  In a perfect world.  I only wish I had the time, resources
  and energy to do what you say.  You are right that we want to 
  stay innovative, but let me tell you that there is as much 
  stagnation as in a big company.  I am a scientist
  (pharmacologist) by training and spent many years doing drug 
  development research.  Now I am a computer geek and I 
  understand the importance of computers as a tool for doing 
  research.  I have been on both sides and still am.  But 
  computers like any scientific instrument require a certain 
  amount of maintenance etc.  Too often users feel computers 
  are not like other tools and need no maintenance/tuning.  As 
  much as I try to make a case to management to pay for more 
  training, tools etc. they decide to spend money on other 
  things, even though we are a bioinformatics driven business.  
  So I have to do things that help me maintain my sanity/life.  
  Sure I can tell management that I told you so when things 
  break but all they want to hear is how soon will it be fixed. 
   So maybe I am just whining, and should just get over it.  So 
 

One Folder (was Unlimited Quotas)

[James Liddil]

OK now that that has been beaten to death, I now want to try and understand
the aspects that effect performance (or perceived performance) for users.  So
the policy will be set at a certain large number for storage. Now will
exchange run better if users use folders or does it not matter and I should
just let them use the inbox for everything?  And along those same lines is
keeping all their attachments in exchange a bad thing from a performance
standpoint. Again I only want to consider this from the view point of
performance and what is best to keep exchange running well.  If using only
an inbox has a negative impact then and only then is it justified to spend
money for training on the use of folders. Never mind making folks more
productive (the one box vs. a well organized file cabinet).  

Jim Liddil

_
List posting FAQ:   http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
Archives:   http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp
To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]

RE: Unlimited Quotas

[Andy Grafton]

James writes;

 But then they talk about how the IT guy is a dick etc.  
 Already had that happen.

If anyone finds a surefire way to avoid this happening, then they could be Very Rich 
Very Quick (put me on the DL)...

All the best,

Andéjà vudy

 
  -Original Message-
  From: Woodrick, Ed [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
  Sent: Monday, July 08, 2002 9:18 PM
  To: Exchange Discussions
  Subject: RE: Unlimited Quotas
  
  
  And then when the users come yelling, just point the finger
  to the direction where blame goes. It's rather amazing how 
  people won't go complaining to a CEO or other decision maker 
  level person. 

snip

_
List posting FAQ:   http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
Archives:   http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp
To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]

RE: One Folder (was Unlimited Quotas)

[Andy Grafton]

James I guess it depends on your situation as well as best practices.

I've noticed no particular performance degredation with people having 1+ messages 
in their inbox, or another folder [a là my Exchange List Archive folder...] when they 
are running on a fast (LAN/10Mbit+) link.  

Users connecting via slow links (=128Kbit) wait for large folders to appear in 
Outlook, and it can be unfeasible for them to stack too many messages into one folder. 
 Obviously, attachments are a problem in this situation.

Same rule but with lower numbers goes for items in the normal file system when viewed 
over slow links.

Presumably if I got enough users on the end of a 10 or 100Mbit link to the server the 
performance would degrade if they all have mailboxes with large numbers of items or 
regularly move big attachments to and from the server.

I keep attachments out of individuals mailboxes if possible because with our policies 
they a) they are not available to others and b) we would hit the 16Gb limit on the 
mail store in Ex2K std. version PDQ.

One reason for us setting a low(ish) limit on mailbox sizes to to encourage people to 
shift mails into public places, or act upon them and file them for reference.

Some of our other sites use the public folder store as a file system with no 
significant performance degradation outside the increased traffic to and from the 
server, and the obvious requirement for an Enterprise edition of Exchange and 
increased disk space.  Our servers are pretty capable for the users we have - if you 
were running a PII 233 with 256Mb of RAM it would obviously croak under any kind of 
load and you'd have to set some more facist policies.

An OWA front end server seems to read the messages on a per-page basis from the back 
end server which that user is hosted on.  Thus if your front server is separated from 
the back end by a slow link, the performance hit with folders which have large numbers 
of messages does not appear as great to be as great as when using the full Outlook 
client over a slow link.

All the best,

Andy

Creuna Danmark A/S
Snaregade 10
1205 København K
Denmark

Tel : +45 22 68 58 23
Fax : +45 70 20 72 42




 -Original Message-
 From: James Liddil [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
 Sent: 9. juli 2002 14:10
 To: Exchange Discussions
 Subject: One Folder (was Unlimited Quotas)
 
 
 OK now that that has been beaten to death, I now want to try 
 and understand the aspects that effect performance (or 
 perceived performance) for users.  So the policy will be set 
 at a certain large number for storage. Now will exchange run 
 better if users use folders or does it not matter and I 
 should just let them use the inbox for everything?  And along 
 those same lines is keeping all their attachments in exchange 
 a bad thing from a performance standpoint. Again I only want 
 to consider this from the view point of performance and what 
 is best to keep exchange running well.  If using only an 
 inbox has a negative impact then and only then is it 
 justified to spend money for training on the use of folders. 
 Never mind making folks more productive (the one box vs. a 
 well organized file cabinet).  
 
 Jim Liddil
 
 _
 List posting FAQ:   http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
 Archives:   http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp
 To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
 Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
 

_
List posting FAQ:   http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
Archives:   http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp
To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]

RE: One Folder (was Unlimited Quotas)

[Greg Heywood]

I mentioned this before, but I am pretty sure there is a limit on the each
folder of around 16k messages and 2gb (or 1.8)? Pretty sure about the
messages, and fairly sure about the folder size.

Cheers
Greg


-Original Message-
From: Andy Grafton [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: 09 July 2002 14:25
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: One Folder (was Unlimited Quotas)

James I guess it depends on your situation as well as best practices.

I've noticed no particular performance degredation with people having 1+
messages in their inbox, or another folder [a là my Exchange List Archive
folder...] when they are running on a fast (LAN/10Mbit+) link.  

Users connecting via slow links (=128Kbit) wait for large folders to appear
in Outlook, and it can be unfeasible for them to stack too many messages
into one folder.  Obviously, attachments are a problem in this situation.

Same rule but with lower numbers goes for items in the normal file system
when viewed over slow links.

Presumably if I got enough users on the end of a 10 or 100Mbit link to the
server the performance would degrade if they all have mailboxes with large
numbers of items or regularly move big attachments to and from the server.

I keep attachments out of individuals mailboxes if possible because with our
policies they a) they are not available to others and b) we would hit the
16Gb limit on the mail store in Ex2K std. version PDQ.

One reason for us setting a low(ish) limit on mailbox sizes to to encourage
people to shift mails into public places, or act upon them and file them for
reference.

Some of our other sites use the public folder store as a file system with no
significant performance degradation outside the increased traffic to and
from the server, and the obvious requirement for an Enterprise edition of
Exchange and increased disk space.  Our servers are pretty capable for the
users we have - if you were running a PII 233 with 256Mb of RAM it would
obviously croak under any kind of load and you'd have to set some more
facist policies.

An OWA front end server seems to read the messages on a per-page basis from
the back end server which that user is hosted on.  Thus if your front server
is separated from the back end by a slow link, the performance hit with
folders which have large numbers of messages does not appear as great to be
as great as when using the full Outlook client over a slow link.

All the best,

Andy

Creuna Danmark A/S
Snaregade 10
1205 København K
Denmark

Tel : +45 22 68 58 23
Fax : +45 70 20 72 42




 -Original Message-
 From: James Liddil [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
 Sent: 9. juli 2002 14:10
 To: Exchange Discussions
 Subject: One Folder (was Unlimited Quotas)
 
 
 OK now that that has been beaten to death, I now want to try 
 and understand the aspects that effect performance (or 
 perceived performance) for users.  So the policy will be set 
 at a certain large number for storage. Now will exchange run 
 better if users use folders or does it not matter and I 
 should just let them use the inbox for everything?  And along 
 those same lines is keeping all their attachments in exchange 
 a bad thing from a performance standpoint. Again I only want 
 to consider this from the view point of performance and what 
 is best to keep exchange running well.  If using only an 
 inbox has a negative impact then and only then is it 
 justified to spend money for training on the use of folders. 
 Never mind making folks more productive (the one box vs. a 
 well organized file cabinet).  
 
 Jim Liddil
 
 _
 List posting FAQ:   http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
 Archives:   http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp
 To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
 Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
 

_
List posting FAQ:   http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
Archives:   http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp
To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]


***
Please note that neither International Power plc nor the sender accepts any
responsibility for any viruses that may be contained in this e-mail or its
attachments.  It is therefore your responsibility to ensure that your
systems have adequate protection against virus infection.

The information contained in this e-mail is intended only for the use of the
intended recipient at the e-mail address to which it has been addressed.  If
the reader of this message is not an intended recipient, you are hereby
notified that you have received this document in error and that any review,
dissemination or copying of the message or associated attachments is
strictly prohibited. 

If you have received this e-mail in error please contact the sender 

RE: Unlimited Quotas

[Hurst, Paul]

On your comment about

Oh, and by the way, how much is that actually taking up on your server? 1GB?
Not with single instance storage!
---
I think you might not quite understand the problem with SIS, it is only good
for when the email is being sent in transit because as soon as it arrives
and the person replies to it with Outlook, bingo no more SIS for that
message. My last place of work and current we get roughly 1.3 ratio.

Cheers

Paul

Standards are like toothbrushes,
everybody agrees you should have one,
but no one wants to use yours



-Original Message-
From: Woodrick, Ed [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: Monday, July 08, 2002 6:22 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Unlimited Quotas



Yes I've worked in small companies. And I've sold to small companies. I dare
say that I understand the dynamics fairly well.  Disk space, tape space, and
backup time are all simple issues, present them to the purse strings and let
them make the decision.

1GB of saved email? You aren't even in the big leagues here. I'd say that
well over 50% of the users on this list have one ore more mailboxes with 1GB
storage.  Oh, and by the way, how much is that actually taking up on your
server? 1GB? Not with single instance storage! And as I said, the 90%-10%
rule goes to work.

No, my regards of a TB as small doesn't mean that I don't know the small
business environment, it only means that I work with a large range of
customers. But I also know that 1TB isn't that expensive anymore. That's
only seven 160GB drives. I've known many small companies with seven drive
servers. When 4GB drives were common, it wasn't that odd to have that many
drives. 

Yes, I know that you often have to beg and plead with a customer to get a
tape backup. So? That's what I'm saying. The customer (aka business
drivers) get to make the decisions. Don't assume that they always want
everything. Don't assume that they want nothing. I've seen too many
situations where IT people say that management doesn't want to do something
and then someone puts together a quick business case and it goes through
unhampered. 



But the most important thing here is to make believable and knowledgeable
recommendations to the business drivers. Make sure that your recommendations
are prudent. Understand what levels of spending the business drivers are
making. Know what to recommend and when to recommend it. It's a big deal
making sure that you are forecasting your needs correctly and getting them
into the budget cycle. Make longer term, comprehensive plans. Do you have
your email storage charted out for the next 5 years? Do you have growth
projections and timelines that new servers or disks will have to come
online?



-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Posted At: Monday, July 08, 2002 10:11 AM
Posted To: Microsoft Exchange
Conversation: Unlimited Quotas
Subject: RE: Unlimited Quotas


On Fri, 5 Jul 2002, at 10:47pm, Woodrick, Ed wrote:
 And as to disk drives, I can speak pretty knowledgeably in this
 situation, there is virtually no storage limitations within Exchange 
 that impacts the per user storage.

  Yah, and what about when you run out of physical disk space, or tape
space, or backup time?  Buy more/better equipment, you say, but have you
ever worked in small company environment, where investing money in IT can
sometimes require something close to an act of Congress?

 And as to users keeping things forever, that's pretty much hogwash.

  You don't have our customers, then.  We've got several people in several
different organizations that have over one *gigabyte* of saved mail data.  
And we are by no means a large company.

 That means that even something as small as a TB requires well over
 1,000 users.

  The fact that your regard one terabyte as small indicates that you don't
really understand the small business situation, where we often have to beg
and plead with the customer to buy a 20 GB tape backup drive.

  Quote policy is something that should be done on a case-by-case basis.

Blanket statements about what is applicable are bogus.  However, not having
any policy at all is almost sure to cause headaches down the road.

-- 
Ben Scott [EMAIL PROTECTED]
| The opinions expressed in this message are those of the author and do
| not | necessarily represent the views or policy of any other person, 
| entity or  | organization.  All information is provided without 
| warranty of any kind.  |



_
List posting FAQ:   http://www.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: Unlimited Quotas

[Erik Sojka]

Don't question the Ed.

The original message is still stored using SIS.  Each reply is also stored
using SIS.  

 -Original Message-
 From: Hurst, Paul [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
 Sent: Tuesday, July 09, 2002 9:39 AM
 To: Exchange Discussions
 Subject: RE: Unlimited Quotas
 
 
 On your comment about
 
 Oh, and by the way, how much is that actually taking up on 
 your server? 1GB?
 Not with single instance storage!
 ---
 I think you might not quite understand the problem with SIS, 
 it is only good
 for when the email is being sent in transit because as soon 
 as it arrives
 and the person replies to it with Outlook, bingo no more SIS for that
 message. My last place of work and current we get roughly 1.3 ratio.
 
 Cheers
 
 Paul
 
 Standards are like toothbrushes,
 everybody agrees you should have one,
 but no one wants to use yours
 
 
 
 -Original Message-
 From: Woodrick, Ed [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
 Sent: Monday, July 08, 2002 6:22 PM
 To: Exchange Discussions
 Subject: RE: Unlimited Quotas
 
 
 
 Yes I've worked in small companies. And I've sold to small 
 companies. I dare
 say that I understand the dynamics fairly well.  Disk space, 
 tape space, and
 backup time are all simple issues, present them to the purse 
 strings and let
 them make the decision.
 
 1GB of saved email? You aren't even in the big leagues here. 
 I'd say that
 well over 50% of the users on this list have one ore more 
 mailboxes with 1GB
 storage.  Oh, and by the way, how much is that actually 
 taking up on your
 server? 1GB? Not with single instance storage! And as I said, 
 the 90%-10%
 rule goes to work.
 
 No, my regards of a TB as small doesn't mean that I don't 
 know the small
 business environment, it only means that I work with a large range of
 customers. But I also know that 1TB isn't that expensive 
 anymore. That's
 only seven 160GB drives. I've known many small companies with 
 seven drive
 servers. When 4GB drives were common, it wasn't that odd to 
 have that many
 drives. 
 
 Yes, I know that you often have to beg and plead with a 
 customer to get a
 tape backup. So? That's what I'm saying. The customer (aka business
 drivers) get to make the decisions. Don't assume that they 
 always want
 everything. Don't assume that they want nothing. I've seen too many
 situations where IT people say that management doesn't want 
 to do something
 and then someone puts together a quick business case and it 
 goes through
 unhampered. 
 
 
 
 But the most important thing here is to make believable and 
 knowledgeable
 recommendations to the business drivers. Make sure that your 
 recommendations
 are prudent. Understand what levels of spending the business 
 drivers are
 making. Know what to recommend and when to recommend it. It's 
 a big deal
 making sure that you are forecasting your needs correctly and 
 getting them
 into the budget cycle. Make longer term, comprehensive plans. 
 Do you have
 your email storage charted out for the next 5 years? Do you 
 have growth
 projections and timelines that new servers or disks will have to come
 online?
 
 
 
 -Original Message-
 From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
 Posted At: Monday, July 08, 2002 10:11 AM
 Posted To: Microsoft Exchange
 Conversation: Unlimited Quotas
 Subject: RE: Unlimited Quotas
 
 
 On Fri, 5 Jul 2002, at 10:47pm, Woodrick, Ed wrote:
  And as to disk drives, I can speak pretty knowledgeably in this
  situation, there is virtually no storage limitations within 
 Exchange 
  that impacts the per user storage.
 
   Yah, and what about when you run out of physical disk space, or tape
 space, or backup time?  Buy more/better equipment, you say, 
 but have you
 ever worked in small company environment, where investing 
 money in IT can
 sometimes require something close to an act of Congress?
 
  And as to users keeping things forever, that's pretty much hogwash.
 
   You don't have our customers, then.  We've got several 
 people in several
 different organizations that have over one *gigabyte* of 
 saved mail data.  
 And we are by no means a large company.
 
  That means that even something as small as a TB requires well over
  1,000 users.
 
   The fact that your regard one terabyte as small indicates 
 that you don't
 really understand the small business situation, where we 
 often have to beg
 and plead with the customer to buy a 20 GB tape backup drive.
 
   Quote policy is something that should be done on a 
 case-by-case basis.
 
 Blanket statements about what is applicable are bogus.  
 However, not having
 any policy at all is almost sure to cause headaches down the road.
 
 -- 
 Ben Scott [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 | The opinions expressed in this message are those of the 
 author and do
 | not | necessarily represent the views or policy of any 
 other person, 
 | entity or  | organization.  All information is provided without 
 | warranty of any kind.  |
 
 
 
 

RE: Unlimited Quotas

[Erik Vesneski]

Hi,

I would like to add some questions or thoughts here.

As an IT professional, business managers have to be educated and 'yes' they
must be tuned into ramifications, etc but most of the time business decision
makers don't give time to IT until something is broken.  Seen strictly as a
service based org, which IT is, there has to be some dynamics from both ends
of the spectrum, IT and the business managers.

A proactive IT manager has to have credibility and trust from the management
to present options, etc and carry them out.  It is a hard role one finds
themself in and the fight always comes down to the CFO and IT manager in the
end.

This thread is definitely a good one and I might add true.  The limitations
and work with managers can become a 'burden' IT managers will experience if
they are willing to push the envelope and do the proactive technology and
work.

For the email issue, I allowed no quotas in order to keep Engineering happy
detailing the ramifications and hazards.  Not only did the store finally
take down the volume space but the engineers finally gave up control and
realized they were not sys admins nor networking professionals.  This not
only happened with Email but also with source control.

Anyway, that is what I find the largest burden to be overall.  It is a
constant process of education.

Erik L. Vesneski
Director - Information Technology
www.epicentric.com


-Original Message-
From: Ed Crowley [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Monday, July 08, 2002 12:06 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Unlimited Quotas


Like the other Ed is telling you, it shouldn't be your job to make their
business decisions.  You explain the ramifications of having no quotas
currently, what it will mean in the future, and the costs to change
things.  That is, you present options to management.

You should be positioning your job as a service provider, a helper.  Do
your best to leave the policeman role to those best equipped to handle
it, i.e., management.  Your customers, the users, will love you more in
the morning that way.

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 James Liddil
Sent: Monday, July 08, 2002 5:27 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Unlimited Quotas


 And the whole idea is that as a support shop, your job is to
 support. Has management told you to put limits? When the 
 email or file system was presented to them, did you say that 
 there were going to be limits.

No.  But I had no idea things would get the way they have.  I do have
mailbox management set to delete mail from the deleted items every
seven days. Looking at the recent run shows a few users who had over 10
megs of stuff in there.  So users need more training.  Easier said than
done.  So I had a discussion with the CFO about this.  His analogy is
that never emptying the trash is like letting junk mail build up on your
table until it breaks.  Do people do this?  And if they want to then the
decision will be made to not spend the money on raises but on more
computer hardware/software.


 
 Your job is to keep people from doing really stupid (not what
 you think is stupid, I mean really stupid) things that impact 
 IT and then to respond to, or be proactive in creating 
 solutions to business problems. You have presented no cases 
 that justify any limits. You've actually presented some 
 pretty good cases for not having limits. Your company is 
 small, probably to get away from the large staffs and stay 
 innovative. This means that you really shouldn't be stifling 
 innovation, don't get in people's way, HELP them do their 
 job. If you see something that they are doing and there is a 
 better way, help them learn a better way. If they need to 
 store 2 GB in the mail server, let them. If they are keeping 
 a backup of their disk, then advise them that there are 
 better ways, but more importantly, make those better ways 
 available and very easy for them to use.

In a perfect world.  I only wish I had the time, resources and energy to
do what you say.  You are right that we want to stay innovative, but let
me tell you that there is as much stagnation as in a big company.  I am
a scientist
(pharmacologist) by training and spent many years doing drug development
research.  Now I am a computer geek and I understand the importance of
computers as a tool for doing research.  I have been on both sides and
still am.  But computers like any scientific instrument require a
certain amount of maintenance etc.  Too often users feel computers are
not like other tools and need no maintenance/tuning.  As much as I try
to make a case to management to pay for more training, tools etc. they
decide to spend money on other things, even though we are a
bioinformatics driven business.  So I have to do things that help me
maintain my sanity/life.  Sure I can tell 

Upgrading my NT4 exchange 5.5 box to Win2000

[Jesse Rink]

My Windows NT4 sp6a server running Exchange 5.5 SP4 box is finally going
to be upgraded to Windows 2000. Shortly after I'll be upgrading to
Exchange 2000.

Are there any gotchas I need to worry about wiht the OS upgrade? Should
I set all Exchange services to manual before the upgrade process? I have
the hardware drivers and all that junk accounted for already. Just have
never done an upgrade on a Exchange box... 

Also, I'm taking a full offline backup of the server and setting the NAV
service to manual so it wont interfere with any upgrade either.  What am I
missing?  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]

GAL empty

[Laurentiu Bogdan]

I have Exchange 2000 Server with SP2.
In Outlook my Global Address List is empty. All client have the same
problem. The client can send and recive e-mail but can not see the GAL.
If I try to create another Outlook profile I recive the following message:
The name could not be resolved. The name could not be matched to a name
in the address list.
I read this articol: Error Message Occurs When Attempting to Resolve Names
(Q274668)...no help.

Any idea ??

Laurentiu

_
List posting FAQ:   http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
Archives:   http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp
To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Removing site connectors

[Pennell, Ronald B.]

In my exchange 5.5 / ex2000 site, I have a site connector to a sister server
that is no longer in-use.   
What is the best way to remove the connector?Is there more to it than
just hitting delete on the
edit menu?  

Ron

_
List posting FAQ:   http://www.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: Can't open attachments

[Thomason, Shaun]

Are you sure the attachment enters the Exchange system?

-Original Message-
From: Tony McCarthy [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: 09 July 2002 02:26
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: Can't open attachments




Hi Everyone,

I have a problem with a user (using Outlook 2000) who can't open
attachments. When she opens new e-mails there is no attachment icon
displayed even though

the message contains an attachment. She can open e-mail that was sent to her
yesterday but not today's. This isn't an Outlook blocking .exe file type
issue. It seems to be server side problem because she has the same trouble
regardless of the PC she uses.

The Exchange server is running W2K (SP2) and Exchange 5.5 (SP4). No other
users are affected. There are no limits placed on her mailboxe. Several
weeks ago I migrated her mailbox from an old mail server to the current one.
I don't know if this is relevant though because she's bee fine until now.
Any ideas?

Regards
Tony

_
List posting FAQ:   http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
Archives:   http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp
To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]


Confidentiality Notice
The content of this e-mail is intended only for the confidential use 
of the person(s) to whom it is addressed.  If the reader of this 
message is not such a person, you are hereby notified that you have 
received this communication in error and that reading it, copying it, or 
in any way disseminating its content to any other person, is strictly 
prohibited.  If you have received this message in error, please notify 
the author by replying to this e-mail immediately.
  
Skandinaviska Enskilda Banken AB - A Public Company (publ) - is 
incorporated in Stockholm Sweden with limited liability and is 
regulated by The Financial Services Authority for the conduct of 
designated investment business in the United Kingdom.  It is 
registered in England and Wales under Number BR000979.


_
List posting FAQ:   http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
Archives:   http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp
To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]

unknown users e-mails entering environment

[Jon]

exchange 5.5, sp4,  nt4, sp6a
I am seeing a rash of e-mails being delivered to users where the FROM and
TO addresses are ex-employees of the company.  The users who are getting
the e-mails are not on the FROM, TO, or BCC lines.

if I send an e-mail to any of the addresses in the e-mail, I will get an
undeliverable message stating user not in address book.

any sugestions??
thanks
Jon

_
List posting FAQ:   http://www.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: unknown users e-mails entering environment

[Bennett, Joshua]

Could be Klez...

-Original Message-
From: Jon [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: Tuesday, July 09, 2002 8:21 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: unknown users e-mails entering environment

exchange 5.5, sp4,  nt4, sp6a
I am seeing a rash of e-mails being delivered to users where the FROM and
TO addresses are ex-employees of the company.  The users who are getting
the e-mails are not on the FROM, TO, or BCC lines.

if I send an e-mail to any of the addresses in the e-mail, I will get an
undeliverable message stating user not in address book.

any sugestions??
thanks
Jon

_
List posting FAQ:   http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
Archives:   http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp
To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]

_
List posting FAQ:   http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
Archives:   http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp
To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]

RE: M Drive

[Andy Grafton]

You are trolling, right?

Read this

http://www.swinc.com/resource/e2kfaq_sec5.htm

..any other questions, see the archives...

Leave it there, guys?  Please?

Andy

 -Original Message-
 From: Jeffery Caudill 
 [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
 Sent: 8. juli 2002 23:05
 To: Exchange Discussions
 Subject: M Drive
 
 
 What program can I use to Back-up the M drive and, will this 
 make my server have any problems by doing so
 
 _
 List posting FAQ:   http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
 Archives:   http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp
 To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
 Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
 

_
List posting FAQ:   http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
Archives:   http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp
To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]

RE: Can't open attachments

[Dale Geoffrey Edwards]

Blow away profile and recreate (I know you probably did it, but try it
again).  If no luck, I would still uninstall Outlook and reinstall Outlook
(don't just install Outlook over the version on the machine).  If that
doesn't work, try ExMerging her mailbox and recreating it.  It sounds like
there is some type of corruption in the mailbox/profile.

Geoff...


-Original Message-
From: Tony McCarthy [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: Monday, July 08, 2002 9:26 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: Can't open attachments




Hi Everyone,

I have a problem with a user (using Outlook 2000) who can't open
attachments. When she opens new e-mails there is no attachment icon
displayed even though

the message contains an attachment. She can open e-mail that was sent to her
yesterday but not today's. This isn't an Outlook blocking .exe file type
issue. It seems to be server side problem because she has the same trouble
regardless of the PC she uses.

The Exchange server is running W2K (SP2) and Exchange 5.5 (SP4). No other
users are affected. There are no limits placed on her mailboxe. Several
weeks ago I migrated her mailbox from an old mail server to the current one.
I don't know if this is relevant though because she's bee fine until now.
Any ideas?

Regards
Tony

_
List posting FAQ:   http://www.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: unknown users e-mails entering environment

[John Steniger]

What do the emails look like (subject, body) - are they similar?  

John J. Steniger



 -Original Message-
 From: Jon [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
 Sent: Tuesday, July 09, 2002 8:21 AM
 To: Exchange Discussions
 Subject: unknown users e-mails entering environment
 
 
 exchange 5.5, sp4,  nt4, sp6a
 I am seeing a rash of e-mails being delivered to users where 
 the FROM and
 TO addresses are ex-employees of the company.  The users who 
 are getting
 the e-mails are not on the FROM, TO, or BCC lines.
 
 if I send an e-mail to any of the addresses in the e-mail, I 
 will get an
 undeliverable message stating user not in address book.
 
 any sugestions??
 thanks
 Jon
 
 _
 List posting FAQ:   http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
 Archives:   http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp
 To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
 Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
 

_
List posting FAQ:   http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
Archives:   http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp
To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]

RE: M Drive

[Mike Scott]

Jeffrey,

You can you any backup software you like to backup your M: drive, but it
is highly un-recommended. The M: drive is a virtual drive looking at the
Exchange IS. For any other purpose it is best to leave alone, at the
risk of causing database corruption or at least confusion. To backup the
Exchange IS you can use the Exchange aware version of NTBACKUP that you
get with Exchange installed on Windows, or any number of Exchange aware
products specifically designed to backup the Exchange information store,
eg: Arcserve, BackupExec etc.

You may see an M: drive there, but do your best to ignore it.

Regards,
Mike



-Original Message-
From: Jeffery Caudill [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: 08 July 2002 22:05
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: M Drive


What program can I use to Back-up the M drive and, will this make my
server have any problems by doing so

_
List posting FAQ:   http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
Archives:   http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp
To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]


This e-mail has been scanned for all viruses by Star Internet. The
service is powered by MessageLabs. For more information on a proactive
anti-virus service working around the clock, around the globe, visit:
http://www.star.net.uk


_
List posting FAQ:   http://www.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: Upgrading my NT4 exchange 5.5 box to Win2000

[Pennell, Ronald B.]

Shouldn't have any problems with the upgrade.  Is it a domain controller?


-Original Message-
From: Jesse Rink [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Tuesday, July 09, 2002 9:52 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: Upgrading my NT4 exchange 5.5 box to Win2000


My Windows NT4 sp6a server running Exchange 5.5 SP4 box is finally going
to be upgraded to Windows 2000. Shortly after I'll be upgrading to
Exchange 2000.

Are there any gotchas I need to worry about wiht the OS upgrade? Should
I set all Exchange services to manual before the upgrade process? I have
the hardware drivers and all that junk accounted for already. Just have
never done an upgrade on a Exchange box... 

Also, I'm taking a full offline backup of the server and setting the NAV
service to manual so it wont interfere with any upgrade either.  What am I
missing?  Thanks

_
List posting FAQ:   http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
Archives:   http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp
To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]

_
List posting FAQ:   http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
Archives:   http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp
To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]

RE: Upgrading my NT4 exchange 5.5 box to Win2000

[Jesse Rink]

No.  It's just a member server.

 Shouldn't have any problems with the upgrade.  Is it a domain controller?
 
 
 -Original Message-
 From: Jesse Rink [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
 Sent: Tuesday, July 09, 2002 9:52 AM
 To: Exchange Discussions
 Subject: Upgrading my NT4 exchange 5.5 box to Win2000
 
 
 My Windows NT4 sp6a server running Exchange 5.5 SP4 box is finally going
 to be upgraded to Windows 2000. Shortly after I'll be upgrading to
 Exchange 2000.
 
 Are there any gotchas I need to worry about wiht the OS upgrade? Should
 I set all Exchange services to manual before the upgrade process? I have
 the hardware drivers and all that junk accounted for already. Just have
 never done an upgrade on a Exchange box... 
 
 Also, I'm taking a full offline backup of the server and setting the NAV
 service to manual so it wont interfere with any upgrade either.  What am I
 missing?  Thanks
 
 _
 List posting FAQ:   http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
 Archives:   http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp
 To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
 Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]

_
List posting FAQ:   http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
Archives:   http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp
To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]

RE: unknown users e-mails entering environment

[Jeremy I. Shannon]

This seems to be a new practice for spammers, we just spoke about it yesterday.  They 
fake their headers just like the klez, but the only payload is the annoying email.  
Figure out the sending server from the header and see if it is a domain that you can 
block.

-Original Message-
From: Bennett, Joshua [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Tuesday, July 09, 2002 10:12 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: unknown users e-mails entering environment


Could be Klez...

-Original Message-
From: Jon [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: Tuesday, July 09, 2002 8:21 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: unknown users e-mails entering environment

exchange 5.5, sp4,  nt4, sp6a
I am seeing a rash of e-mails being delivered to users where the FROM and
TO addresses are ex-employees of the company.  The users who are getting
the e-mails are not on the FROM, TO, or BCC lines.

if I send an e-mail to any of the addresses in the e-mail, I will get an
undeliverable message stating user not in address book.

any sugestions??
thanks
Jon

_
List posting FAQ:   http://www.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: M Drive

[Bob Sadler]

Let's be a bit more clear on this subject.  IF you mess around with your
M drive, anti-virus, backing up, etc., expect to be doing some fixing.
M drive is a virtual drive and NOT to be touched by anything.  If you
do, you take a great chance of corrupting your M Drive and then the next
question you will be asking is, How do I restore my E2K server?



hth

Bob Sadler
City of Leawood, KS, USA
Internet/WAN Specialist
913-339-6700 x194
[EMAIL PROTECTED]


-Original Message-
From: Mike Scott [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: Tuesday, July 09, 2002 9:23 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: M Drive


Jeffrey,

You can you any backup software you like to backup your M: drive, but it
is highly un-recommended. The M: drive is a virtual drive looking at the
Exchange IS. For any other purpose it is best to leave alone, at the
risk of causing database corruption or at least confusion. To backup the
Exchange IS you can use the Exchange aware version of NTBACKUP that you
get with Exchange installed on Windows, or any number of Exchange aware
products specifically designed to backup the Exchange information store,
eg: Arcserve, BackupExec etc.

You may see an M: drive there, but do your best to ignore it.

Regards,
Mike



-Original Message-
From: Jeffery Caudill [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: 08 July 2002 22:05
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: M Drive


What program can I use to Back-up the M drive and, will this make my
server have any problems by doing so

_
List posting FAQ:   http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
Archives:   http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp
To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]


This e-mail has been scanned for all viruses by Star Internet. The
service is powered by MessageLabs. For more information on a proactive
anti-virus service working around the clock, around the globe, visit:
http://www.star.net.uk


_
List posting FAQ:   http://www.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: GAL empty

[Jeffrey A. Beckham]

Fix the RUS

-Original Message-
From: Laurentiu Bogdan [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Posted At: Tuesday, July 09, 2002 8:59 AM
Posted To: Exchange Discussion List
Conversation: GAL empty
Subject: GAL empty

I have Exchange 2000 Server with SP2.
In Outlook my Global Address List is empty. All client have the same
problem. The client can send and recive e-mail but can not see the GAL.
If I try to create another Outlook profile I recive the following
message:
The name could not be resolved. The name could not be matched to a name
in the address list.
I read this articol: Error Message Occurs When Attempting to Resolve
Names
(Q274668)...no help.

Any idea ??

Laurentiu

_
List posting FAQ:   http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
Archives:   http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp
To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]

_
List posting FAQ:   http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
Archives:   http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp
To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]

RE: M Drive

[Erik Sojka]

Ignore the M: Drive.  Do not back up the M: Drive.  There is no M: Drive.  

 -Original Message-
 From: Jeffery Caudill 
 [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
 Sent: Monday, July 08, 2002 5:05 PM
 To: Exchange Discussions
 Subject: M Drive
 
 
 What program can I use to Back-up the M drive and, will this make my
 server have any problems by doing so
 
 _
 List posting FAQ:   http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
 Archives:   http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp
 To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
 Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
 

_
List posting FAQ:   http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
Archives:   http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp
To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]

RE: M Drive

[Jeffery Caudill]

My intent is to find out how to backup my public folders, I can only find them on the 
m drive,  is there a way to backup this information, or is it also in the information 
store.
thanks,
Jeffery Caudill


-Original Message-
From: Mike Scott [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Tuesday, July 09, 2002 10:23 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Cc: Jeffery Caudill
Subject: RE: M Drive


Jeffrey,

You can you any backup software you like to backup your M: drive, but it
is highly un-recommended. The M: drive is a virtual drive looking at the
Exchange IS. For any other purpose it is best to leave alone, at the
risk of causing database corruption or at least confusion. To backup the
Exchange IS you can use the Exchange aware version of NTBACKUP that you
get with Exchange installed on Windows, or any number of Exchange aware
products specifically designed to backup the Exchange information store,
eg: Arcserve, BackupExec etc.

You may see an M: drive there, but do your best to ignore it.

Regards,
Mike



-Original Message-
From: Jeffery Caudill [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: 08 July 2002 22:05
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: M Drive


What program can I use to Back-up the M drive and, will this make my
server have any problems by doing so

_
List posting FAQ:   http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
Archives:   http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp
To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]


This e-mail has been scanned for all viruses by Star Internet. The
service is powered by MessageLabs. For more information on a proactive
anti-virus service working around the clock, around the globe, visit:
http://www.star.net.uk


_
List posting FAQ:   http://www.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: GAL empty

[Stevens, Dave]

try creating another outlook profileBUT use a different name than
before..we have done this in the past and it fixed it..
dave

-Original Message-
From: Laurentiu Bogdan [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: Tuesday, July 09, 2002 9:59 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: GAL empty


I have Exchange 2000 Server with SP2.
In Outlook my Global Address List is empty. All client have the same
problem. The client can send and recive e-mail but can not see the GAL. If I
try to create another Outlook profile I recive the following message: The
name could not be resolved. The name could not be matched to a name in the
address list. I read this articol: Error Message Occurs When Attempting to
Resolve Names (Q274668)...no help.

Any idea ??

Laurentiu

_
List posting FAQ:   http://www.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: Archiving old email to tape silos

[Chris Scharff]

www.mail-resources.com lists several archival products in the web links
section.

 -Original Message-
 From: malcolm taylor [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
 Sent: Tuesday, July 09, 2002 8:57 AM
 To: Exchange Discussions
 Subject: Archiving old email to tape silos
 
 I have been asked by management to drastically reduce
 our usage of EMC disk space by archiving old email to
 tape silos.
 I have read about Veritas Netbackup Storage Migrator
 for Exchange.
 Two questions:-
 1  Has anybody any comments good or bad re the Veritas
 product?
 2   Are there any other products which will archive to
 tape ?
 
 __
 Do You Yahoo!?
 Everything you'll ever need on one web page
 from News and Sport to Email and Music Charts
 http://uk.my.yahoo.com
 
 _
 List posting FAQ:   http://www.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: GAL empty

[Chris Scharff]

Sounds like the search permissions have been restricted inappropriately.
What changes were made prior to this?

 -Original Message-
 From: Laurentiu Bogdan [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
 Sent: Tuesday, July 09, 2002 8:59 AM
 To: Exchange Discussions
 Subject: GAL empty
 
 I have Exchange 2000 Server with SP2.
 In Outlook my Global Address List is empty. All client have the same
 problem. The client can send and recive e-mail but can not see the GAL.
 If I try to create another Outlook profile I recive the following message:
 The name could not be resolved. The name could not be matched to a name
 in the address list.
 I read this articol: Error Message Occurs When Attempting to Resolve Names
 (Q274668)...no help.
 
 Any idea ??
 
 Laurentiu
 
 _
 List posting FAQ:   http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
 Archives:   http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp
 To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
 Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]

_
List posting FAQ:   http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
Archives:   http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp
To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]

RE: Unlimited Quotas

[Chris Scharff]

I think Ed understands SIS quite well.

 -Original Message-
 From: Hurst, Paul [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
 Sent: Tuesday, July 09, 2002 8:39 AM
 To: Exchange Discussions
 Subject: RE: Unlimited Quotas
 
 On your comment about
 
 Oh, and by the way, how much is that actually taking up on your server?
 1GB?
 Not with single instance storage!
 ---
 I think you might not quite understand the problem with SIS, it is only
 good
 for when the email is being sent in transit because as soon as it arrives
 and the person replies to it with Outlook, bingo no more SIS for that
 message. My last place of work and current we get roughly 1.3 ratio.
 
 Cheers
 
 Paul
 
 Standards are like toothbrushes,
 everybody agrees you should have one,
 but no one wants to use yours
 
 
 
 -Original Message-
 From: Woodrick, Ed [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
 Sent: Monday, July 08, 2002 6:22 PM
 To: Exchange Discussions
 Subject: RE: Unlimited Quotas
 
 
 
 Yes I've worked in small companies. And I've sold to small companies. I
 dare
 say that I understand the dynamics fairly well.  Disk space, tape space,
 and
 backup time are all simple issues, present them to the purse strings and
 let
 them make the decision.
 
 1GB of saved email? You aren't even in the big leagues here. I'd say that
 well over 50% of the users on this list have one ore more mailboxes with
 1GB
 storage.  Oh, and by the way, how much is that actually taking up on your
 server? 1GB? Not with single instance storage! And as I said, the 90%-10%
 rule goes to work.
 
 No, my regards of a TB as small doesn't mean that I don't know the small
 business environment, it only means that I work with a large range of
 customers. But I also know that 1TB isn't that expensive anymore. That's
 only seven 160GB drives. I've known many small companies with seven drive
 servers. When 4GB drives were common, it wasn't that odd to have that many
 drives.
 
 Yes, I know that you often have to beg and plead with a customer to get a
 tape backup. So? That's what I'm saying. The customer (aka business
 drivers) get to make the decisions. Don't assume that they always want
 everything. Don't assume that they want nothing. I've seen too many
 situations where IT people say that management doesn't want to do
 something
 and then someone puts together a quick business case and it goes through
 unhampered.
 
 
 
 But the most important thing here is to make believable and knowledgeable
 recommendations to the business drivers. Make sure that your
 recommendations
 are prudent. Understand what levels of spending the business drivers are
 making. Know what to recommend and when to recommend it. It's a big deal
 making sure that you are forecasting your needs correctly and getting them
 into the budget cycle. Make longer term, comprehensive plans. Do you have
 your email storage charted out for the next 5 years? Do you have growth
 projections and timelines that new servers or disks will have to come
 online?
 
 
 
 -Original Message-
 From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
 Posted At: Monday, July 08, 2002 10:11 AM
 Posted To: Microsoft Exchange
 Conversation: Unlimited Quotas
 Subject: RE: Unlimited Quotas
 
 
 On Fri, 5 Jul 2002, at 10:47pm, Woodrick, Ed wrote:
  And as to disk drives, I can speak pretty knowledgeably in this
  situation, there is virtually no storage limitations within Exchange
  that impacts the per user storage.
 
   Yah, and what about when you run out of physical disk space, or tape
 space, or backup time?  Buy more/better equipment, you say, but have you
 ever worked in small company environment, where investing money in IT can
 sometimes require something close to an act of Congress?
 
  And as to users keeping things forever, that's pretty much hogwash.
 
   You don't have our customers, then.  We've got several people in several
 different organizations that have over one *gigabyte* of saved mail data.
 And we are by no means a large company.
 
  That means that even something as small as a TB requires well over
  1,000 users.
 
   The fact that your regard one terabyte as small indicates that you
 don't
 really understand the small business situation, where we often have to beg
 and plead with the customer to buy a 20 GB tape backup drive.
 
   Quote policy is something that should be done on a case-by-case basis.
 
 Blanket statements about what is applicable are bogus.  However, not
 having
 any policy at all is almost sure to cause headaches down the road.
 
 --
 Ben Scott [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 | The opinions expressed in this message are those of the author and do
 | not | necessarily represent the views or policy of any other person,
 | entity or  | organization.  All information is provided without
 | warranty of any kind.  |
 
 
 
 _
 List posting FAQ:   http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
 Archives:   

RE: E2K Developer Edition

[Chris Scharff]

There's an E2K developer edition?

 -Original Message-
 From: Jim Underwood [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
 Sent: Tuesday, July 09, 2002 12:44 AM
 To: Exchange Discussions
 Subject: E2K Developer Edition
 
 Can anyone tell me or provide a ref to the differences between Exchange
 2000
 Developer Edition and Exchange 2000 standard edition?
 
 I've searched the entire MS site, including KB, TechNet, and MSDN, and
 cannot find any info on this.
 
 TIA.
 
 Best Regards,
 JMU
 
 
 Jim Underwood


_
List posting FAQ:   http://www.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: Upgrading my NT4 exchange 5.5 box to Win2000

[Pennell, Ronald B.]

Shouldn't have a problem..
-Original Message-
From: Jesse Rink [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Tuesday, July 09, 2002 10:26 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Upgrading my NT4 exchange 5.5 box to Win2000


No.  It's just a member server.

 Shouldn't have any problems with the upgrade.  Is it a domain controller?
 
 
 -Original Message-
 From: Jesse Rink [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
 Sent: Tuesday, July 09, 2002 9:52 AM
 To: Exchange Discussions
 Subject: Upgrading my NT4 exchange 5.5 box to Win2000
 
 
 My Windows NT4 sp6a server running Exchange 5.5 SP4 box is finally going
 to be upgraded to Windows 2000. Shortly after I'll be upgrading to
 Exchange 2000.
 
 Are there any gotchas I need to worry about wiht the OS upgrade? Should
 I set all Exchange services to manual before the upgrade process? I have
 the hardware drivers and all that junk accounted for already. Just have
 never done an upgrade on a Exchange box... 
 
 Also, I'm taking a full offline backup of the server and setting the NAV
 service to manual so it wont interfere with any upgrade either.  What am I
 missing?  Thanks
 
 _
 List posting FAQ:   http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
 Archives:   http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp
 To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
 Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]

_
List posting FAQ:   http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
Archives:   http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp
To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]

_
List posting FAQ:   http://www.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: Can't open attachments

[Chris Scharff]

Sounds like it might be an AV issue...

 -Original Message-
 From: Tony McCarthy [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
 Sent: Monday, July 08, 2002 8:26 PM
 To: Exchange Discussions
 Subject: Can't open attachments
 
 
 
 Hi Everyone,
 
 I have a problem with a user (using Outlook 2000) who can't open
 attachments.
 When she opens new e-mails there is no attachment icon displayed even
 though
 
 the message contains an attachment. She can open e-mail that was sent to
 her
 yesterday but not today's. This isn't an Outlook blocking .exe file type
 issue. It seems to be server side problem because she has the same trouble
 regardless of the PC she uses.
 
 The Exchange server is running W2K (SP2) and Exchange 5.5 (SP4). No other
 users are affected. There are no limits placed on her mailboxe. Several
 weeks ago I migrated her mailbox from an old mail server to the current
 one.
 I don't know if this is relevant though because she's bee fine until now.
 Any ideas?
 
 Regards
 Tony


_
List posting FAQ:   http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
Archives:   http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp
To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]

RE: M Drive

[Bob Sadler]

It's in the Information Store.  Chant with us allThere is no M
drive...There is no M driveThere is no M Drive



Bob Sadler
City of Leawood, KS, USA
Internet/WAN Specialist
913-339-6700 x194
[EMAIL PROTECTED]


-Original Message-
From: Jeffery Caudill [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: Tuesday, July 09, 2002 9:30 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: M Drive


My intent is to find out how to backup my public folders, I can only
find them on the m drive,  is there a way to backup this information, or
is it also in the information store. thanks, Jeffery Caudill


-Original Message-
From: Mike Scott [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Tuesday, July 09, 2002 10:23 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Cc: Jeffery Caudill
Subject: RE: M Drive


Jeffrey,

You can you any backup software you like to backup your M: drive, but it
is highly un-recommended. The M: drive is a virtual drive looking at the
Exchange IS. For any other purpose it is best to leave alone, at the
risk of causing database corruption or at least confusion. To backup the
Exchange IS you can use the Exchange aware version of NTBACKUP that you
get with Exchange installed on Windows, or any number of Exchange aware
products specifically designed to backup the Exchange information store,
eg: Arcserve, BackupExec etc.

You may see an M: drive there, but do your best to ignore it.

Regards,
Mike



-Original Message-
From: Jeffery Caudill [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: 08 July 2002 22:05
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: M Drive


What program can I use to Back-up the M drive and, will this make my
server have any problems by doing so

_
List posting FAQ:   http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
Archives:   http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp
To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]


This e-mail has been scanned for all viruses by Star Internet. The
service is powered by MessageLabs. For more information on a proactive
anti-virus service working around the clock, around the globe, visit:
http://www.star.net.uk


_
List posting FAQ:   http://www.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: M Drive

[Mike Scott]

Jeffrey,

Find the server that the public folders are homed on and backup the
Public Folder store there, using an Exchange aware product.

Mike

-Original Message-
From: Jeffery Caudill [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: 09 July 2002 15:30
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: M Drive


My intent is to find out how to backup my public folders, I can only
find them on the m drive,  is there a way to backup this information, or
is it also in the information store. thanks, Jeffery Caudill


-Original Message-
From: Mike Scott [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Tuesday, July 09, 2002 10:23 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Cc: Jeffery Caudill
Subject: RE: M Drive


Jeffrey,

You can you any backup software you like to backup your M: drive, but it
is highly un-recommended. The M: drive is a virtual drive looking at the
Exchange IS. For any other purpose it is best to leave alone, at the
risk of causing database corruption or at least confusion. To backup the
Exchange IS you can use the Exchange aware version of NTBACKUP that you
get with Exchange installed on Windows, or any number of Exchange aware
products specifically designed to backup the Exchange information store,
eg: Arcserve, BackupExec etc.

You may see an M: drive there, but do your best to ignore it.

Regards,
Mike



-Original Message-
From: Jeffery Caudill [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: 08 July 2002 22:05
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: M Drive


What program can I use to Back-up the M drive and, will this make my
server have any problems by doing so

_
List posting FAQ:   http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
Archives:   http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp
To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]


This e-mail has been scanned for all viruses by Star Internet. The
service is powered by MessageLabs. For more information on a proactive
anti-virus service working around the clock, around the globe, visit:
http://www.star.net.uk


_
List posting FAQ:   http://www.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]


This e-mail has been scanned for all viruses by Star Internet. The
service is powered by MessageLabs. For more information on a proactive
anti-virus service working around the clock, around the globe, visit:
http://www.star.net.uk


_
List posting FAQ:   http://www.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 with OWA

[Chris Scharff]

Since OWA is running by default on all E2K servers... what are you hoping to
test on the FE server that can't be tested on the E2K server directly?

 -Original Message-
 From: Pennell, Ronald B. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
 Sent: Monday, July 08, 2002 1:02 PM
 To: Exchange Discussions
 Subject: Exchange 2000 with OWA
 
 Currently running E2K/Ex.5.5 in mixed mode.  Want to install a front-end
 server (e2k) to go along with the OWA for ex5.5
 mailboxes.  That way I can test e2k OWA before removing my last ex5.5
 server.  OWA for 5.5 can access both 5.5  e2k
 mailboxes.  E2k OWA can only access E2k mailboxes.  Can they co-exist?
 Or,
 once I tell the back-end servers the virtual
 server name for the front-end will it remove 5.5 OWA access to the
 mailboxes?  Has anyone tied the Network Load
 Balancing - ie 2 front-end servers with multiple back-ends.?
 
 Ron
 
 
 
 _
 List posting FAQ:   http://www.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: E2K Developer Edition

[Kevin Miller]

Yes there is, it is for developing software for exchange. My guess would
be he means this SDK
http://msdn.microsoft.com/downloads/default.asp?url=/downloads/sample.as
p?url=/MSDN-FILES/027/001/833/msdncompositedoc.xml or the 5.5 dev thing
you could buy It has some neat little bits and bobs in it. 

--Kevinm KMAP-SR, M, WLKMMAS, UCC+WCA, And Beyond
http://www.daughtry.ca/ For Graphics and WebDesign, GO here!


-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Chris Scharff
Sent: Tuesday, July 09, 2002 7:37 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: E2K Developer Edition


There's an E2K developer edition?

 -Original Message-
 From: Jim Underwood [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
 Sent: Tuesday, July 09, 2002 12:44 AM
 To: Exchange Discussions
 Subject: E2K Developer Edition
 
 Can anyone tell me or provide a ref to the differences between 
 Exchange 2000 Developer Edition and Exchange 2000 standard edition?
 
 I've searched the entire MS site, including KB, TechNet, and MSDN, and

 cannot find any info on this.
 
 TIA.
 
 Best Regards,
 JMU
 
 
 Jim Underwood


_
List posting FAQ:   http://www.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: Calendar issue

[Chris Scharff]

All users? Some users?

 -Original Message-
 From: Pillai, Raj [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
 Sent: Monday, July 08, 2002 9:41 AM
 To: Exchange Discussions
 Subject: Calendar issue
 
 Good day All,
 
 Exchange 2000 SP2/OLXP;
 
 Cannot see another user's calendar(no information/no free/busy information
 could be retrieved), looks like a permissions issue.A meeting can be
 scheduled with the user though.
 Any ideas on where to start looking to correct this problem.
 
 TIA
 


_
List posting FAQ:   http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
Archives:   http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp
To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]

RE: M Drive

[Chris Scharff]

It's in the public information store. Check the swinc.com Exchange FAQ for a
link to the disaster recovery whitepapers. I was just rereading them last
week... quite helpful.

 -Original Message-
 From: Jeffery Caudill [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
 Sent: Tuesday, July 09, 2002 9:30 AM
 To: Exchange Discussions
 Subject: RE: M Drive
 
 My intent is to find out how to backup my public folders, I can only find
 them on the m drive,  is there a way to backup this information, or is it
 also in the information store.
 thanks,
 Jeffery Caudill
 
 
 -Original Message-
 From: Mike Scott [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
 Sent: Tuesday, July 09, 2002 10:23 AM
 To: Exchange Discussions
 Cc: Jeffery Caudill
 Subject: RE: M Drive
 
 
 Jeffrey,
 
 You can you any backup software you like to backup your M: drive, but it
 is highly un-recommended. The M: drive is a virtual drive looking at the
 Exchange IS. For any other purpose it is best to leave alone, at the
 risk of causing database corruption or at least confusion. To backup the
 Exchange IS you can use the Exchange aware version of NTBACKUP that you
 get with Exchange installed on Windows, or any number of Exchange aware
 products specifically designed to backup the Exchange information store,
 eg: Arcserve, BackupExec etc.
 
 You may see an M: drive there, but do your best to ignore it.
 
 Regards,
 Mike
 
 
 
 -Original Message-
 From: Jeffery Caudill [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
 Sent: 08 July 2002 22:05
 To: Exchange Discussions
 Subject: M Drive
 
 
 What program can I use to Back-up the M drive and, will this make my
 server have any problems by doing so
 
 _
 List posting FAQ:   http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
 Archives:   http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp
 To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
 Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
 
 
 This e-mail has been scanned for all viruses by Star Internet. The
 service is powered by MessageLabs. For more information on a proactive
 anti-virus service working around the clock, around the globe, visit:
 http://www.star.net.uk
 
 
 _
 List posting FAQ:   http://www.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: M Drive

[Jeffery Caudill]

thank you for the information,

jeff

-Original Message-
From: Mike Scott [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Tuesday, July 09, 2002 10:42 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: M Drive


Jeffrey,

Find the server that the public folders are homed on and backup the
Public Folder store there, using an Exchange aware product.

Mike

-Original Message-
From: Jeffery Caudill [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: 09 July 2002 15:30
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: M Drive


My intent is to find out how to backup my public folders, I can only
find them on the m drive,  is there a way to backup this information, or
is it also in the information store. thanks, Jeffery Caudill


-Original Message-
From: Mike Scott [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Tuesday, July 09, 2002 10:23 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Cc: Jeffery Caudill
Subject: RE: M Drive


Jeffrey,

You can you any backup software you like to backup your M: drive, but it
is highly un-recommended. The M: drive is a virtual drive looking at the
Exchange IS. For any other purpose it is best to leave alone, at the
risk of causing database corruption or at least confusion. To backup the
Exchange IS you can use the Exchange aware version of NTBACKUP that you
get with Exchange installed on Windows, or any number of Exchange aware
products specifically designed to backup the Exchange information store,
eg: Arcserve, BackupExec etc.

You may see an M: drive there, but do your best to ignore it.

Regards,
Mike



-Original Message-
From: Jeffery Caudill [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: 08 July 2002 22:05
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: M Drive


What program can I use to Back-up the M drive and, will this make my
server have any problems by doing so

_
List posting FAQ:   http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
Archives:   http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp
To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]


This e-mail has been scanned for all viruses by Star Internet. The
service is powered by MessageLabs. For more information on a proactive
anti-virus service working around the clock, around the globe, visit:
http://www.star.net.uk


_
List posting FAQ:   http://www.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]


This e-mail has been scanned for all viruses by Star Internet. The
service is powered by MessageLabs. For more information on a proactive
anti-virus service working around the clock, around the globe, visit:
http://www.star.net.uk


_
List posting FAQ:   http://www.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: One Folder (was Unlimited Quotas)

[Chris Scharff]

Only applies to PST files.

 -Original Message-
 From: Greg Heywood [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
 Sent: Tuesday, July 09, 2002 8:33 AM
 To: Exchange Discussions
 Subject: RE: One Folder (was Unlimited Quotas)
 
 I mentioned this before, but I am pretty sure there is a limit on the each
 folder of around 16k messages and 2gb (or 1.8)? Pretty sure about the
 messages, and fairly sure about the folder size.
 
 Cheers
 Greg
 
 
 -Original Message-
 From: Andy Grafton [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
 Sent: 09 July 2002 14:25
 To: Exchange Discussions
 Subject: RE: One Folder (was Unlimited Quotas)
 
 James I guess it depends on your situation as well as best practices.
 
 I've noticed no particular performance degredation with people having
 1+
 messages in their inbox, or another folder [a là my Exchange List Archive
 folder...] when they are running on a fast (LAN/10Mbit+) link.
 
 Users connecting via slow links (=128Kbit) wait for large folders to
 appear
 in Outlook, and it can be unfeasible for them to stack too many messages
 into one folder.  Obviously, attachments are a problem in this situation.
 
 Same rule but with lower numbers goes for items in the normal file system
 when viewed over slow links.
 
 Presumably if I got enough users on the end of a 10 or 100Mbit link to the
 server the performance would degrade if they all have mailboxes with large
 numbers of items or regularly move big attachments to and from the server.
 
 I keep attachments out of individuals mailboxes if possible because with
 our
 policies they a) they are not available to others and b) we would hit the
 16Gb limit on the mail store in Ex2K std. version PDQ.
 
 One reason for us setting a low(ish) limit on mailbox sizes to to
 encourage
 people to shift mails into public places, or act upon them and file them
 for
 reference.
 
 Some of our other sites use the public folder store as a file system with
 no
 significant performance degradation outside the increased traffic to and
 from the server, and the obvious requirement for an Enterprise edition of
 Exchange and increased disk space.  Our servers are pretty capable for the
 users we have - if you were running a PII 233 with 256Mb of RAM it would
 obviously croak under any kind of load and you'd have to set some more
 facist policies.
 
 An OWA front end server seems to read the messages on a per-page basis
 from
 the back end server which that user is hosted on.  Thus if your front
 server
 is separated from the back end by a slow link, the performance hit with
 folders which have large numbers of messages does not appear as great to
 be
 as great as when using the full Outlook client over a slow link.
 
 All the best,
 
 Andy
 
 Creuna Danmark A/S
 Snaregade 10
 1205 København K
 Denmark
 
 Tel : +45 22 68 58 23
 Fax : +45 70 20 72 42
 
 
 
 
  -Original Message-
  From: James Liddil [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
  Sent: 9. juli 2002 14:10
  To: Exchange Discussions
  Subject: One Folder (was Unlimited Quotas)
 
 
  OK now that that has been beaten to death, I now want to try
  and understand the aspects that effect performance (or
  perceived performance) for users.  So the policy will be set
  at a certain large number for storage. Now will exchange run
  better if users use folders or does it not matter and I
  should just let them use the inbox for everything?  And along
  those same lines is keeping all their attachments in exchange
  a bad thing from a performance standpoint. Again I only want
  to consider this from the view point of performance and what
  is best to keep exchange running well.  If using only an
  inbox has a negative impact then and only then is it
  justified to spend money for training on the use of folders.
  Never mind making folks more productive (the one box vs. a
  well organized file cabinet).
 
  Jim Liddil
 
  _
  List posting FAQ:   http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
  Archives:   http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp
  To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
  Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
 
 
 _
 List posting FAQ:   http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
 Archives:   http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp
 To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
 Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
 
 
 **
 *
 Please note that neither International Power plc nor the sender accepts
 any
 responsibility for any viruses that may be contained in this e-mail or its
 attachments.  It is therefore your responsibility to ensure that your
 systems have adequate protection against virus infection.
 
 The information contained in this e-mail is intended only for the use of
 the
 intended recipient at the e-mail address to which it has been 

RE: One Folder (was Unlimited Quotas)

[Chris Scharff]

Set quotas and allow users to manage their mailboxes however they'd like
within those quotas. For the most part you're over thinking the rest. It
would be nice if users sent shortcuts to files located on network drives,
but since I haven't had occasion to do that in 2+ years, I tend not to harp
on the idea. 

 -Original Message-
 From: James Liddil [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
 Sent: Tuesday, July 09, 2002 7:10 AM
 To: Exchange Discussions
 Subject: One Folder (was Unlimited Quotas)
 
 OK now that that has been beaten to death, I now want to try and
 understand
 the aspects that effect performance (or perceived performance) for users.
 So
 the policy will be set at a certain large number for storage. Now will
 exchange run better if users use folders or does it not matter and I
 should
 just let them use the inbox for everything?  And along those same lines is
 keeping all their attachments in exchange a bad thing from a performance
 standpoint. Again I only want to consider this from the view point of
 performance and what is best to keep exchange running well.  If using
 only
 an inbox has a negative impact then and only then is it justified to spend
 money for training on the use of folders. Never mind making folks more
 productive (the one box vs. a well organized file cabinet).


_
List posting FAQ:   http://www.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 with OWA

[Pennell, Ronald B.]

Just the functionality of front-end/back-end servers!!  Organization
management want the
functions seperated - so I seperate them

-Original Message-
From: Chris Scharff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Tuesday, July 09, 2002 10:45 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Exchange 2000 with OWA


Since OWA is running by default on all E2K servers... what are you hoping to
test on the FE server that can't be tested on the E2K server directly?

 -Original Message-
 From: Pennell, Ronald B. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
 Sent: Monday, July 08, 2002 1:02 PM
 To: Exchange Discussions
 Subject: Exchange 2000 with OWA
 
 Currently running E2K/Ex.5.5 in mixed mode.  Want to install a front-end
 server (e2k) to go along with the OWA for ex5.5
 mailboxes.  That way I can test e2k OWA before removing my last ex5.5
 server.  OWA for 5.5 can access both 5.5  e2k
 mailboxes.  E2k OWA can only access E2k mailboxes.  Can they co-exist?
 Or,
 once I tell the back-end servers the virtual
 server name for the front-end will it remove 5.5 OWA access to the
 mailboxes?  Has anyone tied the Network Load
 Balancing - ie 2 front-end servers with multiple back-ends.?
 
 Ron
 
 
 
 _
 List posting FAQ:   http://www.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: Removing site connectors

[Bowles, John L.]

Ronald,

Check out Q article Q184535  That should be what you are looking for.

___
John Bowles
Exchange Administrator
Enterprise Support  Engineering
Celera Genomics
[EMAIL PROTECTED] 


-Original Message-
From: Pennell, Ronald B. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: Tuesday, July 09, 2002 9:59 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: Removing site connectors


In my exchange 5.5 / ex2000 site, I have a site connector to a sister
server
that is no longer in-use.   
What is the best way to remove the connector?Is there more to it
than
just hitting delete on the
edit menu?  

Ron

_
List posting FAQ:   http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
Archives:   http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp
To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]

_
List posting FAQ:   http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
Archives:   http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp
To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]

RE: M Drive

[Kevin Miller]

You NEED to read this strait away before you touch anything on this
server. They use an exchange aware back like NTbackup on the server
itself. Then you need to forget you EVERY saw that M drive until you
read up on it, and TEST  USING your Test lab MANY Times before you put
it in production.


2k DR white paper
http://www.microsoft.com/Exchange/techinfo/deployment/2000/e2krecovery.a
sp



--Kevinm KMAP-SR, M, WLKMMAS, UCC+WCA, And Beyond
http://www.daughtry.ca/ For Graphics and WebDesign, GO here!


-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Jeffery Caudill
Sent: Tuesday, July 09, 2002 7:30 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: M Drive


My intent is to find out how to backup my public folders, I can only
find them on the m drive,  is there a way to backup this information, or
is it also in the information store. thanks, Jeffery Caudill


-Original Message-
From: Mike Scott [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Tuesday, July 09, 2002 10:23 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Cc: Jeffery Caudill
Subject: RE: M Drive


Jeffrey,

You can you any backup software you like to backup your M: drive, but it
is highly un-recommended. The M: drive is a virtual drive looking at the
Exchange IS. For any other purpose it is best to leave alone, at the
risk of causing database corruption or at least confusion. To backup the
Exchange IS you can use the Exchange aware version of NTBACKUP that you
get with Exchange installed on Windows, or any number of Exchange aware
products specifically designed to backup the Exchange information store,
eg: Arcserve, BackupExec etc.

You may see an M: drive there, but do your best to ignore it.

Regards,
Mike



-Original Message-
From: Jeffery Caudill [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: 08 July 2002 22:05
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: M Drive


What program can I use to Back-up the M drive and, will this make my
server have any problems by doing so

_
List posting FAQ:   http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
Archives:   http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp
To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]


This e-mail has been scanned for all viruses by Star Internet. The
service is powered by MessageLabs. For more information on a proactive
anti-virus service working around the clock, around the globe, visit:
http://www.star.net.uk


_
List posting FAQ:   http://www.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: E2K Developer Edition

[Chris Scharff]

I know there's an SDK for Exchange, but I've never heard of a developer
edition of Exchange the MSDN version (for example) is the enterprise
version of Exchange.

 -Original Message-
 From: Kevin Miller [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
 Sent: Tuesday, July 09, 2002 9:46 AM
 To: Exchange Discussions
 Subject: RE: E2K Developer Edition
 
 Yes there is, it is for developing software for exchange. My guess would
 be he means this SDK
 http://msdn.microsoft.com/downloads/default.asp?url=/downloads/sample.as
 p?url=/MSDN-FILES/027/001/833/msdncompositedoc.xml or the 5.5 dev thing
 you could buy It has some neat little bits and bobs in it.
 
 --Kevinm KMAP-SR, M, WLKMMAS, UCC+WCA, And Beyond
 http://www.daughtry.ca/ For Graphics and WebDesign, GO here!
 
 
 -Original Message-
 From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Chris Scharff
 Sent: Tuesday, July 09, 2002 7:37 AM
 To: Exchange Discussions
 Subject: RE: E2K Developer Edition
 
 
 There's an E2K developer edition?
 
  -Original Message-
  From: Jim Underwood [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
  Sent: Tuesday, July 09, 2002 12:44 AM
  To: Exchange Discussions
  Subject: E2K Developer Edition
 
  Can anyone tell me or provide a ref to the differences between
  Exchange 2000 Developer Edition and Exchange 2000 standard edition?
 
  I've searched the entire MS site, including KB, TechNet, and MSDN, and
 
  cannot find any info on this.
 
  TIA.
 
  Best Regards,
  JMU
 
 
  Jim Underwood
 
 
 _
 List posting FAQ:   http://www.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: Restoring IS

[Ed Crowley]

File sizes as shown in the directory do not change until the file is
closed, so what you're observing is hardly unusual.  Look at free space
on the drive as an indicator instead.

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 Chris H
Sent: Monday, July 08, 2002 7:02 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: Restoring IS


I am restoring the Information Store to a recovery server that was
backed up with NT Backup. I have been restoring for about 4 hours now
and I am beginning to wonder if I am just spinning my wheels. Does
anyone know if a restore throws the data right back to
d:\exchsrvr\mdbdata\pub.edb | priv.edb or to a temp file first and then
to the file? The size of the .edb's has not changed in the four hours .
. .priv.edb is 18 gb and pub is 4 gb. And I am sure there is no way to
say Just give me the Pub.edb?


_
List posting FAQ:   http://www.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: One Folder (was Unlimited Quotas)

[Ed Crowley]

Having lots of messages in one folder will cause noticeably sluggish
response when users do things like search, change views or click on
column headings to change sort orders.

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 Andy Grafton
Sent: Tuesday, July 09, 2002 6:25 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: One Folder (was Unlimited Quotas)


James I guess it depends on your situation as well as best practices.

I've noticed no particular performance degredation with people having
1+ messages in their inbox, or another folder [a là my Exchange List
Archive folder...] when they are running on a fast (LAN/10Mbit+) link.  

Users connecting via slow links (=128Kbit) wait for large folders to
appear in Outlook, and it can be unfeasible for them to stack too many
messages into one folder.  Obviously, attachments are a problem in this
situation.

Same rule but with lower numbers goes for items in the normal file
system when viewed over slow links.

Presumably if I got enough users on the end of a 10 or 100Mbit link to
the server the performance would degrade if they all have mailboxes with
large numbers of items or regularly move big attachments to and from the
server.

I keep attachments out of individuals mailboxes if possible because with
our policies they a) they are not available to others and b) we would
hit the 16Gb limit on the mail store in Ex2K std. version PDQ.

One reason for us setting a low(ish) limit on mailbox sizes to to
encourage people to shift mails into public places, or act upon them and
file them for reference.

Some of our other sites use the public folder store as a file system
with no significant performance degradation outside the increased
traffic to and from the server, and the obvious requirement for an
Enterprise edition of Exchange and increased disk space.  Our servers
are pretty capable for the users we have - if you were running a PII 233
with 256Mb of RAM it would obviously croak under any kind of load and
you'd have to set some more facist policies.

An OWA front end server seems to read the messages on a per-page basis
from the back end server which that user is hosted on.  Thus if your
front server is separated from the back end by a slow link, the
performance hit with folders which have large numbers of messages does
not appear as great to be as great as when using the full Outlook client
over a slow link.

All the best,

Andy

Creuna Danmark A/S
Snaregade 10
1205 København K
Denmark

Tel : +45 22 68 58 23
Fax : +45 70 20 72 42




 -Original Message-
 From: James Liddil [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
 Sent: 9. juli 2002 14:10
 To: Exchange Discussions
 Subject: One Folder (was Unlimited Quotas)
 
 
 OK now that that has been beaten to death, I now want to try
 and understand the aspects that effect performance (or 
 perceived performance) for users.  So the policy will be set 
 at a certain large number for storage. Now will exchange run 
 better if users use folders or does it not matter and I 
 should just let them use the inbox for everything?  And along 
 those same lines is keeping all their attachments in exchange 
 a bad thing from a performance standpoint. Again I only want 
 to consider this from the view point of performance and what 
 is best to keep exchange running well.  If using only an 
 inbox has a negative impact then and only then is it 
 justified to spend money for training on the use of folders. 
 Never mind making folks more productive (the one box vs. a 
 well organized file cabinet).  
 
 Jim Liddil
 
 _
 List posting FAQ:   http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
 Archives:   http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp
 To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
 Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
 

_
List posting FAQ:   http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
Archives:   http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp
To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]


_
List posting FAQ:   http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
Archives:   http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp
To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]

RE: Unlimited Quotas

[Ed Crowley]

That is not entirely accurate.  While it is true that the reply is a
different message, the reply also uses SIS in that one copy of the reply
is maintained for the sender and all recipients in the same information
store database.

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 Hurst, Paul
Sent: Tuesday, July 09, 2002 6:39 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Unlimited Quotas


On your comment about

Oh, and by the way, how much is that actually taking up on your server?
1GB? Not with single instance storage!
---
I think you might not quite understand the problem with SIS, it is only
good for when the email is being sent in transit because as soon as it
arrives and the person replies to it with Outlook, bingo no more SIS for
that message. My last place of work and current we get roughly 1.3
ratio.

Cheers

Paul

Standards are like toothbrushes,
everybody agrees you should have one,
but no one wants to use yours



-Original Message-
From: Woodrick, Ed [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: Monday, July 08, 2002 6:22 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Unlimited Quotas



Yes I've worked in small companies. And I've sold to small companies. I
dare say that I understand the dynamics fairly well.  Disk space, tape
space, and backup time are all simple issues, present them to the purse
strings and let them make the decision.

1GB of saved email? You aren't even in the big leagues here. I'd say
that well over 50% of the users on this list have one ore more mailboxes
with 1GB storage.  Oh, and by the way, how much is that actually taking
up on your server? 1GB? Not with single instance storage! And as I said,
the 90%-10% rule goes to work.

No, my regards of a TB as small doesn't mean that I don't know the small
business environment, it only means that I work with a large range of
customers. But I also know that 1TB isn't that expensive anymore. That's
only seven 160GB drives. I've known many small companies with seven
drive servers. When 4GB drives were common, it wasn't that odd to have
that many drives. 

Yes, I know that you often have to beg and plead with a customer to get
a tape backup. So? That's what I'm saying. The customer (aka business
drivers) get to make the decisions. Don't assume that they always want
everything. Don't assume that they want nothing. I've seen too many
situations where IT people say that management doesn't want to do
something and then someone puts together a quick business case and it
goes through unhampered. 



But the most important thing here is to make believable and
knowledgeable recommendations to the business drivers. Make sure that
your recommendations are prudent. Understand what levels of spending the
business drivers are making. Know what to recommend and when to
recommend it. It's a big deal making sure that you are forecasting your
needs correctly and getting them into the budget cycle. Make longer
term, comprehensive plans. Do you have your email storage charted out
for the next 5 years? Do you have growth projections and timelines that
new servers or disks will have to come online?



-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Posted At: Monday, July 08, 2002 10:11 AM
Posted To: Microsoft Exchange
Conversation: Unlimited Quotas
Subject: RE: Unlimited Quotas


On Fri, 5 Jul 2002, at 10:47pm, Woodrick, Ed wrote:
 And as to disk drives, I can speak pretty knowledgeably in this 
 situation, there is virtually no storage limitations within Exchange 
 that impacts the per user storage.

  Yah, and what about when you run out of physical disk space, or tape
space, or backup time?  Buy more/better equipment, you say, but have
you ever worked in small company environment, where investing money in
IT can sometimes require something close to an act of Congress?

 And as to users keeping things forever, that's pretty much hogwash.

  You don't have our customers, then.  We've got several people in
several different organizations that have over one *gigabyte* of saved
mail data.  
And we are by no means a large company.

 That means that even something as small as a TB requires well over 
 1,000 users.

  The fact that your regard one terabyte as small indicates that you
don't really understand the small business situation, where we often
have to beg and plead with the customer to buy a 20 GB tape backup
drive.

  Quote policy is something that should be done on a case-by-case basis.

Blanket statements about what is applicable are bogus.  However, not
having any policy at all is almost sure to cause headaches down the
road.

-- 
Ben Scott [EMAIL PROTECTED]
| The opinions expressed in this message are those of the author and do 
| not | necessarily represent the views or policy of any other person, 
| entity or  | organization.  

Rolling upgrade with a twist

[Parker Race]

We've just moved our Exchange 5.5 Cluster on Windows NT 4.0, SP6a from
fiber based storage to scsi based storage. I evicted a node and rebuilt it
and restored from Backup. This allowed us to keep Exchange running up till
the point we werer ready to restore on the new storage.

We're ready to add the second node to the new cluster. We're wondering if
it's possible to build the second node as a Windows 2000 server and join
it to the 4.0 based cluster. It seems like this might be possible based on
reading the MS roling upgrade white paper.
The idea is to add the 2000 server to the cluster, move Exchange to it and
then evict and rebuild the first node with Windows 2000. This way we would
avoid doing an OS upgrade, we'd be working with clean installs of 2000
which has always been preferable in my experience.

Thanks for any suggestions, or experiences you can share.


_
List posting FAQ:   http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
Archives:   http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp
To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Public Folders

[Williams Scott CTR]

 
Is there a utility that will document the hierarchical structure of Public
Folders?  Such as a Visio document or word document?
 
TIA!

_
List posting FAQ:   http://www.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: Public Folders

[Mellott, Bill]

try Ecora

-Original Message-
From: Williams Scott CTR [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Tuesday, July 09, 2002 11:56 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: Public Folders


 
Is there a utility that will document the hierarchical structure of Public
Folders?  Such as a Visio document or word document?
 
TIA!

_
List posting FAQ:   http://www.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]

Unable to restore mailbox no physical memory available

[Karon Miller]

I've got Exchange 5.5, SP4 on a decent sized server with 1GB of RAM but
the STORE.EXE is taking up so much of the physial memory that we are
unable now to restore a mailbox using Backup Exec.  We backup all
mailboxes nightly.

Total memory 1047968
The store.exe is using 915,420

What can be done in the way of maintenace?  Indexing?  Other than
rebooting obviously.  Also, how often should an Exchange sever on NT 4 be
rebooted?  Once a month?

Thanks,
Karon


_
List posting FAQ:   http://www.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 filtering

[RBHATIA]

We're being hit big time by the KLEZ virus. Here is one of the messages that
was sent. I've checked everyone's machines and everyone seems clear. So I'm
guessing it's someone who works closely with our company as we have emails
floating back and forth between staff who claim they never sent each other
email.
What if I set up the message filtering option on the Internet Mail Connector
to block the domain smtp02.vsnl.net and smtp03.vsnl.net since those seem to
be the 2 main sources from where the emails are originating.
Also, how do I insert the entry ? Do I enter it as @smtp02.vsnl.net ?


Received: from smtp02.vsnl.net ([203.197.12.8]) by myserver.mycompany.com
with SMTP (Microsoft Exchange )
id 31VYJYRC; Mon, 8 Jul 2002 04:14:50 -0400
Received: from Qrvlyi ([203.199.81.81]) by smtp02.vsnl.net
(Netscape Messaging Server 4.15) with SMTP id GYX8GJ00.Z9D for
[EMAIL PROTECTED]; Mon, 8 Jul 2002 13:49:31 +0530 
From: staff [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: .

_
List posting FAQ:   http://www.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: Cisco Discussion list

[John Allhiser]

www.groupstudy.com

Several lists there, and few questions are about certification.

(It's also the 5th entry listed on Google when you search on Cisco discussion
lists)

-Original Message-
From: A. Al [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Sunday, July 07, 2002 7:46 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: Cisco Discussion list



H there,

Can someone tell me a Cisco Discussion list?

Thanks,

Al
-Original Message-
From: Siegfried Weber [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: Sunday, July 07, 2002 3:12 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: CDOLive: Bulletinboard, cannot open requested folder!!

No prob but that's weird. Just tried it on a dev/test machine here and
it works. Can you make sure the folder entry ID is correct? And you also
replaced logon.inc? The error might also point to a permission problem.
Is the particular folder enabled for anonymous access? Can you provide a
URL I could try from here?

Cheers:Siegfried runat=server /

 -Original Message-
 From: Nikolaj Friis Larsen [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
 Sent: Saturday, July 06, 2002 5:08 PM
 To: Exchange Discussions
 Subject: RE: CDOLive: Bulletinboard, cannot open requested folder!!
 
 Hi again, I still get the same error :( here is my global.inc file:
 
 ' Change this value if you want to connect to another Exchange
 Server/Site/Org that hosts the
 ' global address list.
 
 ' For Exchange 2000 Server use something like that:
 Const APP_ENTERPRISE = TechCorp
 Const APP_SITE = First Administrative Group
 Const APP_SERVER = W2KMGEXC1
 
 ' For Exchange 5.5 Server use something like that:
 ' Const APP_ENTERPRISE = YourExchangeOrganization
 ' Const APP_SITE = YourExchangeSite
 ' Const APP_SERVER = YourExchangeServer
 
 Hope your still interested in helping me.
 
 Regards,
 Nikolaj
 
 
 -Original Message-
 From: Siegfried Weber [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
 Sent: 4. juli 2002 01:13
 To: Exchange Discussions
 Subject: RE: CDOLive: Bulletinboard, cannot open requested folder!!
 
 
 Damn proxy server cache. That's not the file I uploaded :-( Get
 http://www.cdolive.net/download/bboardnew.zip to get the updated one.
It
 has changes in global.inc where you need to specify Exchange 2000
 Org/AG/Server plus changes in logon.inc to use those values.
 
 Cheers:Siegfried runat=server /
 
  -Original Message-
  From: Nikolaj Friis Larsen [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
  Sent: Thursday, July 04, 2002 12:49 AM
  To: Exchange Discussions
  Subject: RE: CDOLive: Bulletinboard, cannot open requested folder!!
 
  Hmm still can't get it to work, I get the same error.
  Where did you make a change? My global.inc has the content:
 
  %
  'THIS CODE AND INFORMATION IS PROVIDED AS IS WITHOUT 'WARRANTY OF
  ANY KIND, EITHER EXPRESSED OR IMPLIED, 'INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO
  THE IMPLIED WARRANTIES 'OF MERCHANTABILITY AND/OR FITNESS FOR A
  PARTICULAR 'PURPOSE
 
 

'---
  ---
  '
  ' NAME: Global.inc
  '
  ' FILE DESCRIPTION: Contains global application settings
  '
  ' Copyright (c) CdoLive 1999. All rights reserved.
  '   Http://www.cdolive.com
  '   Mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
  '
  ' Portions:
  ' Copyright (c) Microsoft Corporation 1993-1997. All rights
reserved.
  '
 

'---
  ---
 
  ' Folder ID of the folder which should be displayed
  ' Follow the installation description how to get this folder id for
a
  particular folder ' And change it here. Note that the  characters
at
  the start and end must be preserved
  const APP_FOLDER_ID =
 

1A447390AA6611CD9BC800AA002FC45A0300C94BB27963A79842BE6A687BEAF
  AE8970001E0B7
 
  ' Title of the application
  ' Is used to display a title in the browser title and application
 title
  and can be changed
  Const APP_TITLE = +++ Hot News +++
 
  ' Backround color of the main application window
  Const APP_BACKROUND_COLOR = 99
 
  ' Frameborder color of the main application window and the single
item
 
  window Const APP_FRAMEBORDER_COLOR = 99CCFF
 
  ' Frameborder shadow color of the main application window and the
 single
  item window
  Const APP_FRAMEBORDER_SHADOW = C0C0C0
 
  ' This sample display the last 10 entries of a folder, increase this
  number to display more items Const APP_ITEM_COUNT = 10
  %
 
  The only thing I changed where APP_Folder:ID
 
  -Original Message-
  From: Siegfried Weber [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
  Sent: 3. juli 2002 23:50
  To: Exchange Discussions
  Subject: RE: CDOLive: Bulletinboard, cannot open requested folder!!
 
 
  Okie. Checked into that again. Turned out that the published version
  wasn't up to date (I really need to find some time to put all the
new
  and updated stuff).
 
  I've now uploaded a slightly modified version which includes three
new
 
  values you need to set if running against Exchange 2000 in the
  global.inc.
 
  Should do the trick now. Sorry!!
 
  

RE: Message filtering

[Couch, Nate]

Put it in as

@vsnl.net

That will chop everything from vsnl.net and any subdomains it might have.

Note: One thing I have found that appears to work like a champ is if you
want to kill all email from a country you can enter @ru and kill all email
from Russia.  Make sure that you don't have a real need for receiving email
from said country.

Nate Couch
EDS Messaging

 --
 From: RBHATIA
 Reply To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 Sent: Tuesday, July 9, 2002 11:28
 To:   [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 Subject:  Message filtering
 
 
 We're being hit big time by the KLEZ virus. Here is one of the messages
 that
 was sent. I've checked everyone's machines and everyone seems clear. So
 I'm
 guessing it's someone who works closely with our company as we have emails
 floating back and forth between staff who claim they never sent each other
 email.
 What if I set up the message filtering option on the Internet Mail
 Connector
 to block the domain smtp02.vsnl.net and smtp03.vsnl.net since those seem
 to
 be the 2 main sources from where the emails are originating.
 Also, how do I insert the entry ? Do I enter it as @smtp02.vsnl.net ?
 
 
 Received: from smtp02.vsnl.net ([203.197.12.8]) by myserver.mycompany.com
 with SMTP (Microsoft Exchange )
 id 31VYJYRC; Mon, 8 Jul 2002 04:14:50 -0400
 Received: from Qrvlyi ([203.199.81.81]) by smtp02.vsnl.net
 (Netscape Messaging Server 4.15) with SMTP id GYX8GJ00.Z9D for
 [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Mon, 8 Jul 2002 13:49:31 +0530 
 From: staff [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 Subject: .
 
 _
 List posting FAQ:   http://www.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: Unable to restore mailbox no physical memory available

[Chris Scharff]

I don't reboot my Exchange servers ever... nor do I restore individual
mailboxes. I'd contact your backup vendor to ask them why their product is
failing to work as you believe it should and check out 'never restore'
portion of the Exchange FAQ.

 -Original Message-
 From: Karon Miller [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
 Sent: Tuesday, July 09, 2002 11:31 AM
 To: Exchange Discussions
 Subject: Unable to restore mailbox no physical memory available
 
 I've got Exchange 5.5, SP4 on a decent sized server with 1GB of RAM but
 the STORE.EXE is taking up so much of the physial memory that we are
 unable now to restore a mailbox using Backup Exec.  We backup all
 mailboxes nightly.
 
 Total memory 1047968
 The store.exe is using 915,420
 
 What can be done in the way of maintenace?  Indexing?  Other than
 rebooting obviously.  Also, how often should an Exchange sever on NT 4 be
 rebooted?  Once a month?


_
List posting FAQ:   http://www.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 filtering

[Chris Scharff]

First I'd change my DL SMTP addresses to something non-obvious. Then I'd
implement an antivirus solution which could be configured to drop worms. 

 -Original Message-
 From: RBHATIA [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
 Sent: Tuesday, July 09, 2002 11:28 AM
 To: Exchange Discussions
 Subject: Message filtering
 
 
 We're being hit big time by the KLEZ virus. Here is one of the messages
 that
 was sent. I've checked everyone's machines and everyone seems clear. So
 I'm
 guessing it's someone who works closely with our company as we have emails
 floating back and forth between staff who claim they never sent each other
 email.
 What if I set up the message filtering option on the Internet Mail
 Connector
 to block the domain smtp02.vsnl.net and smtp03.vsnl.net since those seem
 to
 be the 2 main sources from where the emails are originating.
 Also, how do I insert the entry ? Do I enter it as @smtp02.vsnl.net ?
 
 
 Received: from smtp02.vsnl.net ([203.197.12.8]) by myserver.mycompany.com
 with SMTP (Microsoft Exchange )
 id 31VYJYRC; Mon, 8 Jul 2002 04:14:50 -0400
 Received: from Qrvlyi ([203.199.81.81]) by smtp02.vsnl.net
 (Netscape Messaging Server 4.15) with SMTP id GYX8GJ00.Z9D for
 [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Mon, 8 Jul 2002 13:49:31 +0530
 From: staff [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 Subject: .


_
List posting FAQ:   http://www.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 filtering

[RBHATIA]

I do have anti-virus software and it is trapping and quarantining the
messages. But that doesn't stop the spoofed email from coming in.
I would like to find out the source of the infection - who is the user who
has been infected. Can I tell from the message header attached below ? 


-Original Message-
From: Chris Scharff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Tuesday, July 09, 2002 1:25 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Message filtering


First I'd change my DL SMTP addresses to something non-obvious. Then I'd
implement an antivirus solution which could be configured to drop worms. 

 -Original Message-
 From: RBHATIA [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
 Sent: Tuesday, July 09, 2002 11:28 AM
 To: Exchange Discussions
 Subject: Message filtering
 
 
 We're being hit big time by the KLEZ virus. Here is one of the messages
 that
 was sent. I've checked everyone's machines and everyone seems clear. So
 I'm
 guessing it's someone who works closely with our company as we have emails
 floating back and forth between staff who claim they never sent each other
 email.
 What if I set up the message filtering option on the Internet Mail
 Connector
 to block the domain smtp02.vsnl.net and smtp03.vsnl.net since those seem
 to
 be the 2 main sources from where the emails are originating.
 Also, how do I insert the entry ? Do I enter it as @smtp02.vsnl.net ?
 
 
 Received: from smtp02.vsnl.net ([203.197.12.8]) by myserver.mycompany.com
 with SMTP (Microsoft Exchange )
 id 31VYJYRC; Mon, 8 Jul 2002 04:14:50 -0400
 Received: from Qrvlyi ([203.199.81.81]) by smtp02.vsnl.net
 (Netscape Messaging Server 4.15) with SMTP id GYX8GJ00.Z9D for
 [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Mon, 8 Jul 2002 13:49:31 +0530
 From: staff [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 Subject: .


_
List posting FAQ:   http://www.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: Message filtering

[Durkee, Peter]

Maybe I'm missing something here, but if there are people in that domain who work 
closely with your company, how can you possibly get away with blocking the entire 
domain? 

-Peter


-Original Message-
From: RBHATIA [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Tuesday, July 09, 2002 9:28
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: Message filtering



We're being hit big time by the KLEZ virus. Here is one of the messages that
was sent. I've checked everyone's machines and everyone seems clear. So I'm
guessing it's someone who works closely with our company as we have emails
floating back and forth between staff who claim they never sent each other
email.
What if I set up the message filtering option on the Internet Mail Connector
to block the domain smtp02.vsnl.net and smtp03.vsnl.net since those seem to
be the 2 main sources from where the emails are originating.
Also, how do I insert the entry ? Do I enter it as @smtp02.vsnl.net ?


Received: from smtp02.vsnl.net ([203.197.12.8]) by myserver.mycompany.com
with SMTP (Microsoft Exchange )
id 31VYJYRC; Mon, 8 Jul 2002 04:14:50 -0400
Received: from Qrvlyi ([203.199.81.81]) by smtp02.vsnl.net
(Netscape Messaging Server 4.15) with SMTP id GYX8GJ00.Z9D for
[EMAIL PROTECTED]; Mon, 8 Jul 2002 13:49:31 +0530 
From: staff [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: .

_
List posting FAQ:   http://www.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 message is private or privileged.  If you are not the
person for whom this message is intended, please delete it
and notify me immediately, and please do not copy or send
this message to anyone else. 



_
List posting FAQ:   http://www.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 filtering

[Durkee, Peter]

Which AV package are you using? Perhaps it can be persuaded to stop the entire 
message, rather than just the attachment.

-Peter


-Original Message-
From: RBHATIA [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Tuesday, July 09, 2002 10:28
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Message filtering



I do have anti-virus software and it is trapping and quarantining the
messages. But that doesn't stop the spoofed email from coming in.
I would like to find out the source of the infection - who is the user who
has been infected. Can I tell from the message header attached below ? 


-Original Message-
From: Chris Scharff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Tuesday, July 09, 2002 1:25 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Message filtering


First I'd change my DL SMTP addresses to something non-obvious. Then I'd
implement an antivirus solution which could be configured to drop worms. 

 -Original Message-
 From: RBHATIA [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
 Sent: Tuesday, July 09, 2002 11:28 AM
 To: Exchange Discussions
 Subject: Message filtering
 
 
 We're being hit big time by the KLEZ virus. Here is one of the messages
 that
 was sent. I've checked everyone's machines and everyone seems clear. So
 I'm
 guessing it's someone who works closely with our company as we have emails
 floating back and forth between staff who claim they never sent each other
 email.
 What if I set up the message filtering option on the Internet Mail
 Connector
 to block the domain smtp02.vsnl.net and smtp03.vsnl.net since those seem
 to
 be the 2 main sources from where the emails are originating.
 Also, how do I insert the entry ? Do I enter it as @smtp02.vsnl.net ?
 
 
 Received: from smtp02.vsnl.net ([203.197.12.8]) by myserver.mycompany.com
 with SMTP (Microsoft Exchange )
 id 31VYJYRC; Mon, 8 Jul 2002 04:14:50 -0400
 Received: from Qrvlyi ([203.199.81.81]) by smtp02.vsnl.net
 (Netscape Messaging Server 4.15) with SMTP id GYX8GJ00.Z9D for
 [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Mon, 8 Jul 2002 13:49:31 +0530
 From: staff [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 Subject: .


_
List posting FAQ:   http://www.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]

__
This message is private or privileged.  If you are not the
person for whom this message is intended, please delete it
and notify me immediately, and please do not copy or send
this message to anyone else. 



_
List posting FAQ:   http://www.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: E2K Developer Edition

[Jim Underwood]

Developer Edition is the version that comes with Office 2000/XP Developer
Version.  It also includes SQL Server 2000 Developer Edition.

Best Regards,
JMU


Jim Underwood


-Original Message-
From: Chris Scharff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Tuesday, July 09, 2002 10:00
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: E2K Developer Edition


I know there's an SDK for Exchange, but I've never heard of a developer
edition of Exchange the MSDN version (for example) is the enterprise
version of Exchange.

_
List posting FAQ:   http://www.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 filtering

[Chris Scharff]

203.199.81.81

 -Original Message-
 From: RBHATIA [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
 Sent: Tuesday, July 09, 2002 12:28 PM
 To: Exchange Discussions
 Subject: RE: Message filtering
 
 
 I do have anti-virus software and it is trapping and quarantining the
 messages. But that doesn't stop the spoofed email from coming in.
 I would like to find out the source of the infection - who is the user who
 has been infected. Can I tell from the message header attached below ?
 
 
 -Original Message-
 From: Chris Scharff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
 Sent: Tuesday, July 09, 2002 1:25 PM
 To: Exchange Discussions
 Subject: RE: Message filtering
 
 
 First I'd change my DL SMTP addresses to something non-obvious. Then I'd
 implement an antivirus solution which could be configured to drop worms.
 
  -Original Message-
  From: RBHATIA [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
  Sent: Tuesday, July 09, 2002 11:28 AM
  To: Exchange Discussions
  Subject: Message filtering
 
 
  We're being hit big time by the KLEZ virus. Here is one of the messages
  that
  was sent. I've checked everyone's machines and everyone seems clear. So
  I'm
  guessing it's someone who works closely with our company as we have
 emails
  floating back and forth between staff who claim they never sent each
 other
  email.
  What if I set up the message filtering option on the Internet Mail
  Connector
  to block the domain smtp02.vsnl.net and smtp03.vsnl.net since those seem
  to
  be the 2 main sources from where the emails are originating.
  Also, how do I insert the entry ? Do I enter it as @smtp02.vsnl.net ?
 
  
  Received: from smtp02.vsnl.net ([203.197.12.8]) by
 myserver.mycompany.com
  with SMTP (Microsoft Exchange )
  id 31VYJYRC; Mon, 8 Jul 2002 04:14:50 -0400
  Received: from Qrvlyi ([203.199.81.81]) by smtp02.vsnl.net
  (Netscape Messaging Server 4.15) with SMTP id GYX8GJ00.Z9D for
  [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Mon, 8 Jul 2002 13:49:31 +0530
  From: staff [EMAIL PROTECTED]
  To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
  Subject: .
 
 
 _
 List posting FAQ:   http://www.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: Message filtering

[Martin Blackstone]

42

-Original Message-
From: Chris Scharff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: Tuesday, July 09, 2002 11:13 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Message filtering


203.199.81.81

 -Original Message-
 From: RBHATIA [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
 Sent: Tuesday, July 09, 2002 12:28 PM
 To: Exchange Discussions
 Subject: RE: Message filtering
 
 
 I do have anti-virus software and it is trapping and quarantining the 
 messages. But that doesn't stop the spoofed email from coming in. I 
 would like to find out the source of the infection - who is the user 
 who has been infected. Can I tell from the message header attached 
 below ?
 
 
 -Original Message-
 From: Chris Scharff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
 Sent: Tuesday, July 09, 2002 1:25 PM
 To: Exchange Discussions
 Subject: RE: Message filtering
 
 
 First I'd change my DL SMTP addresses to something non-obvious. Then 
 I'd implement an antivirus solution which could be configured to drop 
 worms.
 
  -Original Message-
  From: RBHATIA [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
  Sent: Tuesday, July 09, 2002 11:28 AM
  To: Exchange Discussions
  Subject: Message filtering
 
 
  We're being hit big time by the KLEZ virus. Here is one of the 
  messages that was sent. I've checked everyone's machines and 
  everyone seems clear. So I'm
  guessing it's someone who works closely with our company as we have
 emails
  floating back and forth between staff who claim they never sent each
 other
  email.
  What if I set up the message filtering option on the Internet Mail 
  Connector to block the domain smtp02.vsnl.net and smtp03.vsnl.net 
  since those seem to
  be the 2 main sources from where the emails are originating.
  Also, how do I insert the entry ? Do I enter it as @smtp02.vsnl.net ?
 
  
  Received: from smtp02.vsnl.net ([203.197.12.8]) by
 myserver.mycompany.com
  with SMTP (Microsoft Exchange )
  id 31VYJYRC; Mon, 8 Jul 2002 04:14:50 -0400
  Received: from Qrvlyi ([203.199.81.81]) by smtp02.vsnl.net (Netscape 
  Messaging Server 4.15) with SMTP id GYX8GJ00.Z9D for 
  [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Mon, 8 Jul 2002 13:49:31 +0530
  From: staff [EMAIL PROTECTED]
  To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
  Subject: .
 
 
 _
 List posting FAQ:   http://www.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: Message filtering

[Mark Arnold]

That might be the answer, but what is the question

-Original Message-
From: Martin Blackstone [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: 09 July 2002 19:16
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Message filtering

42

-Original Message-
From: Chris Scharff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: Tuesday, July 09, 2002 11:13 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Message filtering


203.199.81.81

 -Original Message-
 From: RBHATIA [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
 Sent: Tuesday, July 09, 2002 12:28 PM
 To: Exchange Discussions
 Subject: RE: Message filtering
 
 
 I do have anti-virus software and it is trapping and quarantining the 
 messages. But that doesn't stop the spoofed email from coming in. I 
 would like to find out the source of the infection - who is the user 
 who has been infected. Can I tell from the message header attached 
 below ?
 
 
 -Original Message-
 From: Chris Scharff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
 Sent: Tuesday, July 09, 2002 1:25 PM
 To: Exchange Discussions
 Subject: RE: Message filtering
 
 
 First I'd change my DL SMTP addresses to something non-obvious. Then 
 I'd implement an antivirus solution which could be configured to drop 
 worms.
 
  -Original Message-
  From: RBHATIA [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
  Sent: Tuesday, July 09, 2002 11:28 AM
  To: Exchange Discussions
  Subject: Message filtering
 
 
  We're being hit big time by the KLEZ virus. Here is one of the 
  messages that was sent. I've checked everyone's machines and 
  everyone seems clear. So I'm
  guessing it's someone who works closely with our company as we have
 emails
  floating back and forth between staff who claim they never sent each
 other
  email.
  What if I set up the message filtering option on the Internet Mail 
  Connector to block the domain smtp02.vsnl.net and smtp03.vsnl.net 
  since those seem to
  be the 2 main sources from where the emails are originating.
  Also, how do I insert the entry ? Do I enter it as @smtp02.vsnl.net
?
 
  
  Received: from smtp02.vsnl.net ([203.197.12.8]) by
 myserver.mycompany.com
  with SMTP (Microsoft Exchange )
  id 31VYJYRC; Mon, 8 Jul 2002 04:14:50 -0400
  Received: from Qrvlyi ([203.199.81.81]) by smtp02.vsnl.net (Netscape

  Messaging Server 4.15) with SMTP id GYX8GJ00.Z9D for 
  [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Mon, 8 Jul 2002 13:49:31 +0530
  From: staff [EMAIL PROTECTED]
  To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
  Subject: .
 
 
 _
 List posting FAQ:   http://www.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]

Public Folders

[Bowles, John L.]

All,

I have a question concerning rehoming public folders from Exchange 5.5
to Exchange 2000.  I can rehome the folders just fine.  The one thing
that we have a problem with is that we have distribution lists that were
given permissions to certain public folders.  Now I'm trying to figure
out how I can give that list the same permissions on the E2K server
where the rehomed public folder resides.  Can this be accomplished and
how?

setup:
4- 5.5 servers (2 mailbox servers and 2 IMS servers)
2- E2K servers (1 server has ADC installed and mailbox server, 1 mailbox
server)
All DC's are upgraded to W2K

If i've left something out please let me know.

TIA,


___
John Bowles
Exchange Administrator
Enterprise Support  Engineering
Celera Genomics
[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: Public Folders

[Woodruff, Michael]

Are you running Native Mode in Active Directory?

-Original Message-
From: Bowles, John L. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: Tuesday, July 09, 2002 2:43 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: Public Folders


All,

I have a question concerning rehoming public folders from Exchange 5.5 to
Exchange 2000.  I can rehome the folders just fine.  The one thing that we
have a problem with is that we have distribution lists that were given
permissions to certain public folders.  Now I'm trying to figure out how I
can give that list the same permissions on the E2K server where the rehomed
public folder resides.  Can this be accomplished and how?

setup:
4- 5.5 servers (2 mailbox servers and 2 IMS servers)
2- E2K servers (1 server has ADC installed and mailbox server, 1 mailbox
server)
All DC's are upgraded to W2K

If i've left something out please let me know.

TIA,


___
John Bowles
Exchange Administrator
Enterprise Support  Engineering
Celera Genomics
[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
personalmail

_
List posting FAQ:   http://www.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: Public Folders

[Bowles, John L.]

No, we are still in Mixed mode.

___
John Bowles
Exchange Administrator
Enterprise Support  Engineering
Celera Genomics
[EMAIL PROTECTED] 


-Original Message-
From: Woodruff, Michael [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: Tuesday, July 09, 2002 2:46 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Public Folders


Are you running Native Mode in Active Directory?

-Original Message-
From: Bowles, John L. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: Tuesday, July 09, 2002 2:43 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: Public Folders


All,

I have a question concerning rehoming public folders from Exchange 5.5
to Exchange 2000.  I can rehome the folders just fine.  The one thing
that we have a problem with is that we have distribution lists that were
given permissions to certain public folders.  Now I'm trying to figure
out how I can give that list the same permissions on the E2K server
where the rehomed public folder resides.  Can this be accomplished and
how?

setup:
4- 5.5 servers (2 mailbox servers and 2 IMS servers)
2- E2K servers (1 server has ADC installed and mailbox server, 1 mailbox
server)
All DC's are upgraded to W2K

If i've left something out please let me know.

TIA,


___
John Bowles
Exchange Administrator
Enterprise Support  Engineering
Celera Genomics
[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
personalmail

_
List posting FAQ:   http://www.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: Message filtering

[Tim Tullis]

Very Good! Martini's @ Milliways after work?



-Original Message-
From: Martin Blackstone [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Tuesday, July 09, 2002 2:16 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Message filtering


42

-Original Message-
From: Chris Scharff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: Tuesday, July 09, 2002 11:13 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Message filtering


203.199.81.81

 -Original Message-
 From: RBHATIA [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
 Sent: Tuesday, July 09, 2002 12:28 PM
 To: Exchange Discussions
 Subject: RE: Message filtering
 
 
 I do have anti-virus software and it is trapping and quarantining the 
 messages. But that doesn't stop the spoofed email from coming in. I 
 would like to find out the source of the infection - who is the user 
 who has been infected. Can I tell from the message header attached 
 below ?
 
 
 -Original Message-
 From: Chris Scharff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
 Sent: Tuesday, July 09, 2002 1:25 PM
 To: Exchange Discussions
 Subject: RE: Message filtering
 
 
 First I'd change my DL SMTP addresses to something non-obvious. Then 
 I'd implement an antivirus solution which could be configured to drop 
 worms.
 
  -Original Message-
  From: RBHATIA [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
  Sent: Tuesday, July 09, 2002 11:28 AM
  To: Exchange Discussions
  Subject: Message filtering
 
 
  We're being hit big time by the KLEZ virus. Here is one of the 
  messages that was sent. I've checked everyone's machines and 
  everyone seems clear. So I'm
  guessing it's someone who works closely with our company as we have
 emails
  floating back and forth between staff who claim they never sent each
 other
  email.
  What if I set up the message filtering option on the Internet Mail 
  Connector to block the domain smtp02.vsnl.net and smtp03.vsnl.net 
  since those seem to
  be the 2 main sources from where the emails are originating.
  Also, how do I insert the entry ? Do I enter it as @smtp02.vsnl.net ?
 
  
  Received: from smtp02.vsnl.net ([203.197.12.8]) by
 myserver.mycompany.com
  with SMTP (Microsoft Exchange )
  id 31VYJYRC; Mon, 8 Jul 2002 04:14:50 -0400
  Received: from Qrvlyi ([203.199.81.81]) by smtp02.vsnl.net (Netscape 
  Messaging Server 4.15) with SMTP id GYX8GJ00.Z9D for 
  [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Mon, 8 Jul 2002 13:49:31 +0530
  From: staff [EMAIL PROTECTED]
  To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
  Subject: .
 
 
 _
 List posting FAQ:   http://www.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]

---
Incoming mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.373 / Virus Database: 208 - Release Date: 7/1/2002
 

---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.373 / Virus Database: 208 - Release Date: 7/1/2002
 

_
List posting FAQ:   http://www.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 filtering

[Avi Smith-Rapaport]

Bombay sapphire anyone?



-Original Message-
From: Tim Tullis [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Tuesday, July 09, 2002 3:17 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Message filtering


Very Good! Martini's @ Milliways after work?



-Original Message-
From: Martin Blackstone [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Tuesday, July 09, 2002 2:16 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Message filtering


42

-Original Message-
From: Chris Scharff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: Tuesday, July 09, 2002 11:13 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Message filtering


203.199.81.81

 -Original Message-
 From: RBHATIA [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
 Sent: Tuesday, July 09, 2002 12:28 PM
 To: Exchange Discussions
 Subject: RE: Message filtering
 
 
 I do have anti-virus software and it is trapping and quarantining the 
 messages. But that doesn't stop the spoofed email from coming in. I 
 would like to find out the source of the infection - who is the user 
 who has been infected. Can I tell from the message header attached 
 below ?
 
 
 -Original Message-
 From: Chris Scharff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
 Sent: Tuesday, July 09, 2002 1:25 PM
 To: Exchange Discussions
 Subject: RE: Message filtering
 
 
 First I'd change my DL SMTP addresses to something non-obvious. Then 
 I'd implement an antivirus solution which could be configured to drop 
 worms.
 
  -Original Message-
  From: RBHATIA [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
  Sent: Tuesday, July 09, 2002 11:28 AM
  To: Exchange Discussions
  Subject: Message filtering
 
 
  We're being hit big time by the KLEZ virus. Here is one of the 
  messages that was sent. I've checked everyone's machines and 
  everyone seems clear. So I'm
  guessing it's someone who works closely with our company as we have
 emails
  floating back and forth between staff who claim they never sent each
 other
  email.
  What if I set up the message filtering option on the Internet Mail 
  Connector to block the domain smtp02.vsnl.net and smtp03.vsnl.net 
  since those seem to
  be the 2 main sources from where the emails are originating.
  Also, how do I insert the entry ? Do I enter it as @smtp02.vsnl.net ?
 
  
  Received: from smtp02.vsnl.net ([203.197.12.8]) by
 myserver.mycompany.com
  with SMTP (Microsoft Exchange )
  id 31VYJYRC; Mon, 8 Jul 2002 04:14:50 -0400
  Received: from Qrvlyi ([203.199.81.81]) by smtp02.vsnl.net (Netscape 
  Messaging Server 4.15) with SMTP id GYX8GJ00.Z9D for 
  [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Mon, 8 Jul 2002 13:49:31 +0530
  From: staff [EMAIL PROTECTED]
  To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
  Subject: .
 
 
 _
 List posting FAQ:   http://www.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]

---
Incoming mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.373 / Virus Database: 208 - Release Date: 7/1/2002
 

---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.373 / Virus Database: 208 - Release Date: 7/1/2002
 

_
List posting FAQ:   http://www.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]

System Mailbox E2K

[James Liddil]

Maybe this is along the line of the M drive.  Can someone point me to source
that describes the functions and management (if any) of the System Mailbox.
I guess it must be a do not touch thing based what it says in Q253784.

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]

RE: Simple question

[Dale Geoffrey Edwards]

MX records.

Geoff...


-Original Message-
From: Bennett, Joshua [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: Tuesday, July 09, 2002 3:47 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: Simple question


I have an Exchange 5.5 SP4 server running as a BDC that I would like to
change the IP address on. I will be making a similar change to the PDC,
also. Other then making the appropriate changes to the X.400 connectors, is
there any issues that I may be overlooking here.

It sounds almost too simple. Any help is greatly appreciated.

Thanks

Josh Bennett
Exchange Admin\Systems Engineer
Cotelligent, Inc.
401 Parkway Drive
Broomall, PA. 19008
610-359-5929
www.cotelligent.com
 
 


_
List posting FAQ:   http://www.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: Simple question

[Bennett, Joshua]

There is no IMS involved here. It connects to a hub server that has the IMS
on it. There are no internal MX records, either. I should have clarified
that in my original post. Thanks anyway.

Any other thoughts

-Original Message-
From: Dale Geoffrey Edwards [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: Tuesday, July 09, 2002 4:01 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Simple question

MX records.

Geoff...


-Original Message-
From: Bennett, Joshua [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: Tuesday, July 09, 2002 3:47 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: Simple question


I have an Exchange 5.5 SP4 server running as a BDC that I would like to
change the IP address on. I will be making a similar change to the PDC,
also. Other then making the appropriate changes to the X.400 connectors, is
there any issues that I may be overlooking here.

It sounds almost too simple. Any help is greatly appreciated.

Thanks

Josh Bennett
Exchange Admin\Systems Engineer
Cotelligent, Inc.
401 Parkway Drive
Broomall, PA. 19008
610-359-5929
www.cotelligent.com
 
 


_
List posting FAQ:   http://www.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: Simple question

[Ed Crowley]

If your WINS is working properly, all you should have to change is the
DNS entry if you don't have dynamic update.

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 Bennett, Joshua
Sent: Tuesday, July 09, 2002 1:10 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Simple question


There is no IMS involved here. It connects to a hub server that has the
IMS on it. There are no internal MX records, either. I should have
clarified that in my original post. Thanks anyway.

Any other thoughts

-Original Message-
From: Dale Geoffrey Edwards [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: Tuesday, July 09, 2002 4:01 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Simple question

MX records.

Geoff...


-Original Message-
From: Bennett, Joshua [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: Tuesday, July 09, 2002 3:47 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: Simple question


I have an Exchange 5.5 SP4 server running as a BDC that I would like to
change the IP address on. I will be making a similar change to the PDC,
also. Other then making the appropriate changes to the X.400 connectors,
is there any issues that I may be overlooking here.

It sounds almost too simple. Any help is greatly appreciated.

Thanks

Josh Bennett
Exchange Admin\Systems Engineer
Cotelligent, Inc.
401 Parkway Drive
Broomall, PA. 19008
610-359-5929
www.cotelligent.com
 
 


_
List posting FAQ:   http://www.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: Simple question

[Bennett, Joshua]

Sweet, that is exactly what I was hoping to hear.

Thanks much.

-Original Message-
From: Ed Crowley [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: Tuesday, July 09, 2002 4:46 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Simple question

If your WINS is working properly, all you should have to change is the
DNS entry if you don't have dynamic update.

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 Bennett, Joshua
Sent: Tuesday, July 09, 2002 1:10 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Simple question


There is no IMS involved here. It connects to a hub server that has the
IMS on it. There are no internal MX records, either. I should have
clarified that in my original post. Thanks anyway.

Any other thoughts

-Original Message-
From: Dale Geoffrey Edwards [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: Tuesday, July 09, 2002 4:01 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Simple question

MX records.

Geoff...


-Original Message-
From: Bennett, Joshua [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: Tuesday, July 09, 2002 3:47 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: Simple question


I have an Exchange 5.5 SP4 server running as a BDC that I would like to
change the IP address on. I will be making a similar change to the PDC,
also. Other then making the appropriate changes to the X.400 connectors,
is there any issues that I may be overlooking here.

It sounds almost too simple. Any help is greatly appreciated.

Thanks

Josh Bennett
Exchange Admin\Systems Engineer
Cotelligent, Inc.
401 Parkway Drive
Broomall, PA. 19008
610-359-5929
www.cotelligent.com
 
 


_
List posting FAQ:   http://www.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: Can't open attachments

[Tony McCarthy]

The attachment does enter the Exchange system but the problem turned out to
be Groupshield. Groupshield had gone belly up and seemed to be regarding
every attachment as a potential virus so wouldn't open them. The confusing
part was that there was no useful error message other than something like: -
Outlook was unable to open attachment. I'm not a great fan of Groupshield
however it's generally reasonably reliable. I ran a repair on it which seems
to have fixed the problem.

Regards
Tony

Are you sure the attachment enters the Exchange system?

-Original Message-
From: Tony McCarthy [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: 09 July 2002 02:26
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: Can't open attachments




Hi Everyone,

I have a problem with a user (using Outlook 2000) who can't open
attachments. When she opens new e-mails there is no attachment icon
displayed even though

the message contains an attachment. She can open e-mail that was sent to her
yesterday but not today's. This isn't an Outlook blocking .exe file type
issue. It seems to be server side problem because she has the same trouble
regardless of the PC she uses.

The Exchange server is running W2K (SP2) and Exchange 5.5 (SP4). No other
users are affected. There are no limits placed on her mailboxe. Several
weeks ago I migrated her mailbox from an old mail server to the current one.
I don't know if this is relevant though because she's bee fine until now.
Any ideas?

Regards
Tony

_
List posting FAQ:   http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
Archives:   http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp
To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]


Confidentiality Notice
The content of this e-mail is intended only for the confidential use 
of the person(s) to whom it is addressed.  If the reader of this 
message is not such a person, you are hereby notified that you have 
received this communication in error and that reading it, copying it, or 
in any way disseminating its content to any other person, is strictly 
prohibited.  If you have received this message in error, please notify 
the author by replying to this e-mail immediately.
  
Skandinaviska Enskilda Banken AB - A Public Company (publ) - is 
incorporated in Stockholm Sweden with limited liability and is 
regulated by The Financial Services Authority for the conduct of 
designated investment business in the United Kingdom.  It is 
registered in England and Wales under Number BR000979.


_
List posting FAQ:   http://www.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: Can't open attachments

[Baker, Jennifer]

Groupshield is generally reasonably reliable?  Have they threatened you?  If
you testify against them we can provide you with generally reasonably
reliable protection.

-Original Message-
From: Tony McCarthy [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: Tuesday, July 09, 2002 2:51 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Can't open attachments


The attachment does enter the Exchange system but the problem turned out to
be Groupshield. Groupshield had gone belly up and seemed to be regarding
every attachment as a potential virus so wouldn't open them. The confusing
part was that there was no useful error message other than something like: -
Outlook was unable to open attachment. I'm not a great fan of Groupshield
however it's generally reasonably reliable. I ran a repair on it which seems
to have fixed the problem.

Regards
Tony

Are you sure the attachment enters the Exchange system?

-Original Message-
From: Tony McCarthy [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: 09 July 2002 02:26
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: Can't open attachments




Hi Everyone,

I have a problem with a user (using Outlook 2000) who can't open
attachments. When she opens new e-mails there is no attachment icon
displayed even though

the message contains an attachment. She can open e-mail that was sent to her
yesterday but not today's. This isn't an Outlook blocking .exe file type
issue. It seems to be server side problem because she has the same trouble
regardless of the PC she uses.

The Exchange server is running W2K (SP2) and Exchange 5.5 (SP4). No other
users are affected. There are no limits placed on her mailboxe. Several
weeks ago I migrated her mailbox from an old mail server to the current one.
I don't know if this is relevant though because she's bee fine until now.
Any ideas?

Regards
Tony

_
List posting FAQ:   http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
Archives:   http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp
To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]


Confidentiality Notice
The content of this e-mail is intended only for the confidential use 
of the person(s) to whom it is addressed.  If the reader of this 
message is not such a person, you are hereby notified that you have 
received this communication in error and that reading it, copying it, or 
in any way disseminating its content to any other person, is strictly 
prohibited.  If you have received this message in error, please notify 
the author by replying to this e-mail immediately.
  
Skandinaviska Enskilda Banken AB - A Public Company (publ) - is 
incorporated in Stockholm Sweden with limited liability and is 
regulated by The Financial Services Authority for the conduct of 
designated investment business in the United Kingdom.  It is 
registered in England and Wales under Number BR000979.


_
List posting FAQ:   http://www.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: Can't open attachments

[Durkee, Peter]

Prolonged exposure to Groupshield alters one's perception of reliability.

-Peter


-Original Message-
From: Baker, Jennifer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Tuesday, July 09, 2002 15:51
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Can't open attachments


Groupshield is generally reasonably reliable?  Have they threatened you?  If
you testify against them we can provide you with generally reasonably
reliable protection.

-Original Message-
From: Tony McCarthy [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: Tuesday, July 09, 2002 2:51 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Can't open attachments


The attachment does enter the Exchange system but the problem turned out to
be Groupshield. Groupshield had gone belly up and seemed to be regarding
every attachment as a potential virus so wouldn't open them. The confusing
part was that there was no useful error message other than something like: -
Outlook was unable to open attachment. I'm not a great fan of Groupshield
however it's generally reasonably reliable. I ran a repair on it which seems
to have fixed the problem.

Regards
Tony

Are you sure the attachment enters the Exchange system?

-Original Message-
From: Tony McCarthy [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: 09 July 2002 02:26
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: Can't open attachments




Hi Everyone,

I have a problem with a user (using Outlook 2000) who can't open
attachments. When she opens new e-mails there is no attachment icon
displayed even though

the message contains an attachment. She can open e-mail that was sent to her
yesterday but not today's. This isn't an Outlook blocking .exe file type
issue. It seems to be server side problem because she has the same trouble
regardless of the PC she uses.

The Exchange server is running W2K (SP2) and Exchange 5.5 (SP4). No other
users are affected. There are no limits placed on her mailboxe. Several
weeks ago I migrated her mailbox from an old mail server to the current one.
I don't know if this is relevant though because she's bee fine until now.
Any ideas?

Regards
Tony

_
List posting FAQ:   http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
Archives:   http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp
To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]


Confidentiality Notice
The content of this e-mail is intended only for the confidential use 
of the person(s) to whom it is addressed.  If the reader of this 
message is not such a person, you are hereby notified that you have 
received this communication in error and that reading it, copying it, or 
in any way disseminating its content to any other person, is strictly 
prohibited.  If you have received this message in error, please notify 
the author by replying to this e-mail immediately.
  
Skandinaviska Enskilda Banken AB - A Public Company (publ) - is 
incorporated in Stockholm Sweden with limited liability and is 
regulated by The Financial Services Authority for the conduct of 
designated investment business in the United Kingdom.  It is 
registered in England and Wales under Number BR000979.


_
List posting FAQ:   http://www.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]

__
This message is private or privileged.  If you are not the
person for whom this message is intended, please delete it
and notify me immediately, and please do not copy or send
this message to anyone else. 



_
List posting FAQ:   http://www.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: Size of mail being transferred across the internet

[William Lefkovics]

There's a limit?

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Roger Smith
Sent: Tuesday, July 09, 2002 4:36 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: Size of mail being transferred across the internet


Hi All
This will seem a silly question but what is the default size of
attachments that can be transferred across the internet and also what is
the largest file size that can be attached?

Roger Smith  MCSE, MCP+I, CCNA
Technical Support Manager
OfficePCs
10 Cape Street
Dickson
Phone : 62579111
Fax:  62579004
[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: Size of mail being transferred across the internet

[Martin Blackstone]

There is no set limit.
Exchange by default has none. I once had a guy try to email a 500MB SQL
dump.
Most ISP's have approx a 3-5 MB limit. I think Hotmail has 1 MB.
I have my IMS set at 15MB

-Original Message-
From: Roger Smith [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: Tuesday, July 09, 2002 4:36 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: Size of mail being transferred across the internet


Hi All
This will seem a silly question but what is the default size of attachments
that can be transferred across the internet and also what is the largest
file size that can be attached?

Roger Smith  MCSE, MCP+I, CCNA
Technical Support Manager
OfficePCs
10 Cape Street
Dickson
Phone : 62579111
Fax:  62579004
[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: Size of mail being transferred across the internet

[John Strongosky]

I've mine set at 10mb

john


-Original Message-
From: Martin Blackstone [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Tuesday, July 09, 2002 4:44 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Size of mail being transferred across the internet


There is no set limit.
Exchange by default has none. I once had a guy try to email a 500MB SQL
dump.
Most ISP's have approx a 3-5 MB limit. I think Hotmail has 1 MB.
I have my IMS set at 15MB

-Original Message-
From: Roger Smith [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: Tuesday, July 09, 2002 4:36 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: Size of mail being transferred across the internet


Hi All
This will seem a silly question but what is the default size of attachments
that can be transferred across the internet and also what is the largest
file size that can be attached?

Roger Smith  MCSE, MCP+I, CCNA
Technical Support Manager
OfficePCs
10 Cape Street
Dickson
Phone : 62579111
Fax:  62579004
[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: Size of mail being transferred across the internet

[Ely, Don]

That's nothing, I've seen users zip up their HDD and try to email that home
for a backup!

-Original Message-
From: Martin Blackstone [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: Tuesday, July 09, 2002 7:44 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Size of mail being transferred across the internet


There is no set limit.
Exchange by default has none. I once had a guy try to email a 500MB SQL
dump. Most ISP's have approx a 3-5 MB limit. I think Hotmail has 1 MB. I
have my IMS set at 15MB

-Original Message-
From: Roger Smith [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: Tuesday, July 09, 2002 4:36 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: Size of mail being transferred across the internet


Hi All
This will seem a silly question but what is the default size of attachments
that can be transferred across the internet and also what is the largest
file size that can be attached?

Roger Smith  MCSE, MCP+I, CCNA
Technical Support Manager
OfficePCs
10 Cape Street
Dickson
Phone : 62579111
Fax:  62579004
[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: Size of mail being transferred across the internet

[Martin Blackstone]

The sad thing was that after @Home rejected it, it sent the whole thing back
in the NDR.

-Original Message-
From: Ely, Don [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: Tuesday, July 09, 2002 6:07 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Size of mail being transferred across the internet


That's nothing, I've seen users zip up their HDD and try to email that home
for a backup!

-Original Message-
From: Martin Blackstone [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: Tuesday, July 09, 2002 7:44 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Size of mail being transferred across the internet


There is no set limit.
Exchange by default has none. I once had a guy try to email a 500MB SQL
dump. Most ISP's have approx a 3-5 MB limit. I think Hotmail has 1 MB. I
have my IMS set at 15MB

-Original Message-
From: Roger Smith [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: Tuesday, July 09, 2002 4:36 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: Size of mail being transferred across the internet


Hi All
This will seem a silly question but what is the default size of attachments
that can be transferred across the internet and also what is the largest
file size that can be attached?

Roger Smith  MCSE, MCP+I, CCNA
Technical Support Manager
OfficePCs
10 Cape Street
Dickson
Phone : 62579111
Fax:  62579004
[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: Size of mail being transferred across the internet

[Kevin Miller]

I just downloaded a 4 gig ISO image this morning? There is no limit.

--Kevinm KMAP-SR, M, WLKMMAS, UCC+WCA, And Beyond
http://www.daughtry.ca/ For Graphics and WebDesign, GO here!


-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Roger Smith
Sent: Tuesday, July 09, 2002 4:36 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: Size of mail being transferred across the internet


Hi All
This will seem a silly question but what is the default size of
attachments that can be transferred across the internet and also what is
the largest file size that can be attached?

Roger Smith  MCSE, MCP+I, CCNA
Technical Support Manager
OfficePCs
10 Cape Street
Dickson
Phone : 62579111
Fax:  62579004
[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: Size of mail being transferred across the internet

[Kevin Miller]

Hahahahaha..!!

--Kevinm KMAP-SR, M, WLKMMAS, UCC+WCA, And Beyond
http://www.daughtry.ca/ For Graphics and WebDesign, GO here!


-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Martin
Blackstone
Sent: Tuesday, July 09, 2002 6:32 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Size of mail being transferred across the internet


The sad thing was that after @Home rejected it, it sent the whole thing
back in the NDR.

-Original Message-
From: Ely, Don [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: Tuesday, July 09, 2002 6:07 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Size of mail being transferred across the internet


That's nothing, I've seen users zip up their HDD and try to email that
home for a backup!

-Original Message-
From: Martin Blackstone [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: Tuesday, July 09, 2002 7:44 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Size of mail being transferred across the internet


There is no set limit.
Exchange by default has none. I once had a guy try to email a 500MB SQL
dump. Most ISP's have approx a 3-5 MB limit. I think Hotmail has 1 MB. I
have my IMS set at 15MB

-Original Message-
From: Roger Smith [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: Tuesday, July 09, 2002 4:36 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: Size of mail being transferred across the internet


Hi All
This will seem a silly question but what is the default size of
attachments that can be transferred across the internet and also what is
the largest file size that can be attached?

Roger Smith  MCSE, MCP+I, CCNA
Technical Support Manager
OfficePCs
10 Cape Street
Dickson
Phone : 62579111
Fax:  62579004
[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: Size of mail being transferred across the internet

[Martin Blackstone]

The guy came so close to getting canned I cant even measure it.

-Original Message-
From: Kevin Miller [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: Tuesday, July 09, 2002 7:45 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Size of mail being transferred across the internet


Hahahahaha..!!

--Kevinm KMAP-SR, M, WLKMMAS, UCC+WCA, And Beyond http://www.daughtry.ca/
For Graphics and WebDesign, GO here!


-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Martin Blackstone
Sent: Tuesday, July 09, 2002 6:32 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Size of mail being transferred across the internet


The sad thing was that after @Home rejected it, it sent the whole thing back
in the NDR.

-Original Message-
From: Ely, Don [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: Tuesday, July 09, 2002 6:07 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Size of mail being transferred across the internet


That's nothing, I've seen users zip up their HDD and try to email that home
for a backup!

-Original Message-
From: Martin Blackstone [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: Tuesday, July 09, 2002 7:44 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Size of mail being transferred across the internet


There is no set limit.
Exchange by default has none. I once had a guy try to email a 500MB SQL
dump. Most ISP's have approx a 3-5 MB limit. I think Hotmail has 1 MB. I
have my IMS set at 15MB

-Original Message-
From: Roger Smith [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: Tuesday, July 09, 2002 4:36 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: Size of mail being transferred across the internet


Hi All
This will seem a silly question but what is the default size of attachments
that can be transferred across the internet and also what is the largest
file size that can be attached?

Roger Smith  MCSE, MCP+I, CCNA
Technical Support Manager
OfficePCs
10 Cape Street
Dickson
Phone : 62579111
Fax:  62579004
[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:   http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp
To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]

RE: Size of mail being transferred across the internet

[William Lefkovics]

Could you email that to my hotmail account?


-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Kevin Miller
Sent: Tuesday, July 09, 2002 7:44 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Size of mail being transferred across the internet


I just downloaded a 4 gig ISO image this morning? There is no limit.

--Kevinm KMAP-SR, M, WLKMMAS, UCC+WCA, And Beyond
http://www.daughtry.ca/ For Graphics and WebDesign, GO here!


-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Roger Smith
Sent: Tuesday, July 09, 2002 4:36 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: Size of mail being transferred across the internet


Hi All
This will seem a silly question but what is the default size of
attachments that can be transferred across the internet and also what is
the largest file size that can be attached?

Roger Smith  MCSE, MCP+I, CCNA
Technical Support Manager
OfficePCs
10 Cape Street
Dickson
Phone : 62579111
Fax:  62579004
[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: Size of mail being transferred across the internet

[Martin Tuip]

And the NDR is even bigger :P

--
Martin Tuip
MVP Exchange
Exchange2000 List owner
www.exchange-mail.org
www.sharepointserver.com
--
- Original Message -
From: Martin Blackstone [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, July 10, 2002 3:31 AM
Subject: RE: Size of mail being transferred across the internet


 The sad thing was that after @Home rejected it, it sent the whole thing
back
 in the NDR.

 -Original Message-
 From: Ely, Don [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
 Sent: Tuesday, July 09, 2002 6:07 PM
 To: Exchange Discussions
 Subject: RE: Size of mail being transferred across the internet


 That's nothing, I've seen users zip up their HDD and try to email that
home
 for a backup!

 -Original Message-
 From: Martin Blackstone [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
 Sent: Tuesday, July 09, 2002 7:44 PM
 To: Exchange Discussions
 Subject: RE: Size of mail being transferred across the internet


 There is no set limit.
 Exchange by default has none. I once had a guy try to email a 500MB SQL
 dump. Most ISP's have approx a 3-5 MB limit. I think Hotmail has 1 MB. I
 have my IMS set at 15MB

 -Original Message-
 From: Roger Smith [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
 Sent: Tuesday, July 09, 2002 4:36 PM
 To: Exchange Discussions
 Subject: Size of mail being transferred across the internet


 Hi All
 This will seem a silly question but what is the default size of
attachments
 that can be transferred across the internet and also what is the largest
 file size that can be attached?

 Roger Smith  MCSE, MCP+I, CCNA
 Technical Support Manager
 OfficePCs
 10 Cape Street
 Dickson
 Phone : 62579111
 Fax:  62579004
 [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: From nirvana to hell in one upgrade - the tail of direct book ing in Outlook 2k+

[DWYER Brian (Powerlink)]

Had a lot of problems getting AutoAccept from ExchangeCode.com to work with
E2K and found the problem (with some help from this list) was with
permissions.  Had to give the eventconfig send as and receive as permissions
on the resource mailboxes to make it work. 

-Original Message-
From: Moore, David K [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Thursday, 20 June 2002 5:07 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: From nirvana to hell in one upgrade - the tail of direct
booking in Outlook 2k+
Importance: High


Here's the story -

Running Exchange 5.5 and users booking appointments using the AutoAccept
script from ExchangeCode.com - and my life is great (except for those
darn reoccurring meetings from time to time).  Now we make the big move
to E2K and since the autoaccecpt script doesn't (some reports say it
does, some it doesn't - my testing says it doesn't) work on E2K... so I
need to come up with a new method.  The two methods are using the really
old method of leaving an Outlook97 machine logged in with all the
resource accounts setup to delegate their appointments to the one
dedicated Outlook97 account -or- use the new fangled Outlook 2000/2002
direct booking feature (Direct Booking of Resource Without a Delegate
Acct. [Q196534]) where in the client directly books their own meetings
using Outlook.

Ok, I test it (the new direct book method) and all seems ok.  But...
when I roll it out into production I have random users (dozens out of
4,000 users) that can not book onto a room because Outlook first
declines the meeting because it says it is busy and then follows that
up with an error of Unable to save Free/Busy.  So, in trouble shooting
I have narrowed it down to the client by:

* Happens even if the user logs into another machine with their account
(without roaming profiles)
* Deleting the free/busy file of the calendar (using the GW-Client) and
then re-setting it up fixes it from time to time
* Granting Owner rights also sometimes fixes the problem but not
always

Is there anyone out there that is using the new OL2000+ direct booking
method and has it working correctly?  Is there some way to get the
exchangecode.com script working on E2K?

david moore
Chevron Phillips Chemical
Messaging Group

_
List posting FAQ:   http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
Archives:   http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp
To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Important Message:

[This transmission or any part of it is intended solely for the named addressee.  It 
is confidential.  The copying or distribution of this transmission or any information 
it contains, by anyone other than the addressee, is prohibited.

 If you have received this transmission in error, please let us know by telephone 61 7 
3860 2111 or by reply email to the sender.  If you are not the named addressee, you 
must destroy the original transmission and its contents.

 You may not rely on electronically transmitted material unless the transmission is 
subsequently confirmed by fax or letter.  Material transmitted to you should also be 
checked by reference to a hard copy of that material printed directly from our word 
processing system.]

_
List posting FAQ:   http://www.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: Size of mail being transferred across the internet

[Roger Smith]

That's nice if I tried that 4 Gig x 56K = long time (coupla months)

-Original Message-
From: William Lefkovics [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Wednesday, 10 July 2002 2:13 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Size of mail being transferred across the internet


Could you email that to my hotmail account?


-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Kevin Miller
Sent: Tuesday, July 09, 2002 7:44 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Size of mail being transferred across the internet


I just downloaded a 4 gig ISO image this morning? There is no limit.

--Kevinm KMAP-SR, M, WLKMMAS, UCC+WCA, And Beyond
http://www.daughtry.ca/ For Graphics and WebDesign, GO here!


-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Roger Smith
Sent: Tuesday, July 09, 2002 4:36 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: Size of mail being transferred across the internet


Hi All
This will seem a silly question but what is the default size of
attachments that can be transferred across the internet and also what is
the largest file size that can be attached?

Roger Smith  MCSE, MCP+I, CCNA
Technical Support Manager
OfficePCs
10 Cape Street
Dickson
Phone : 62579111
Fax:  62579004
[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 and IIS Security

[Fioon]

1.The lockdown tool can't lock down the *.htr files that keeps the most
important thing (username  password). Lockdown tool can lock down the whole
IIS lope holes.(If I do this, user cant log in)

If I use lockdown tool to unblocked the *.htr files, I've tried the url
scan, there are lope holes that gave hacker chance to hack in. 

Any suggestion?

Thanks
Rgds
Fioon

-Original Message-
From: Byron Kennedy [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Tuesday, July 09, 2002 5:10 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: OWA and IIS Security


1. What about using the iis lockdown tool and url scan?  Check technet for
how to get this to work nicely w/ owa.

2. yeah, but you'll still need to allow an rpc/mapi session between owa and
the mailbox server(s), so you'll need to have the dmz configured for the
necessary ports.  So the idea here is that now a hack will have to
compromise the web with http/s (because that's all that's open on the public
side of the firewall), gain root, then discover and compromise the mailbox
servers using the limited number of ports available between them and the
then compromised owa host (dmz).  Or, alternatively you could leave it on
the internal lan whereby a hack would need to compromise the web with
http/s, gain root, then easily discover everything and have full socket
access to your other systems (subject to your application layer security
model).  I guess there are many ways to look at it.  I've done it either way
w/ 5.5.

Good luck-byron

-Original Message-
From: Tony McCarthy [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: Monday, July 08, 2002 1:30 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: OWA and IIS Security


Hi Everyone,

Lately I've been noticing a number of attempts to hack one of our Exchange
Servers. Our network is behind a Pix firewall and I've closed all
unnecessary ports and have it fairly tightly locked down.  However I have
Port 80, 25 and 110 open for Exchange. My main concern is IIS. I am
considering the possibility of disabling IIS and OWA on the Exchange server
to minimize attacks. I have all the latest NT4 security patches (that I know
of) but the hackers are still attempting to do mischief. There are two
things I'd like to know: -

1. Is there a means of making IIS bullet proof with a patch or 3rd party
tool?

2. Is it possible to install the OWA component on a server that is running
IIS but not Exchange? The reason I ask this is because we have a web server
that's running IIS. I thought it may reduce the risk of attack if I remove
IIS from the Exchange server and use our web server for OWA? I know this is
probably a dumb question but I thought I'd ask it anyway. I've checked out
the FAQ but couldn't find anything on this particular scenario. The Exchange
server in question is running Exchange 5.5 and Nt4 (SP6). The web server is
running W2K (SP2).

I'd greatly appreciate feedback re this.

Regards
Tony

Tony McCarthy
Systems Engineer
OSI Software Ltd
Auckland
New Zealand
Ph:64 09 522 5909 
Fax:64 09 522 5901 
Mob: 021 703035 



_
List posting FAQ:   http://www.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]