RE: somewhat OT
This presumes that the function of e-mail remains stagnant. If it doesn't, the pure hardware box has to chase a moving target, which is not an easy thing to do. Doesn't just about every company that has a hardware firewall also have a firewall administrator? Not that any of your forecasts scare me. I'm retiring within 20 years. 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:bounce-exchange-94760;ls.swynk.com] On Behalf Of Dupler, Craig Sent: Friday, November 08, 2002 11:30 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: somewhat OT So Roger, does this mean that you are getting ready for the sobering messages? First, let me say that I am not privy to any advanced product planning in what I am about to say, and am only speculating. I fully expect to see a pure hardware version of an entry level Exchange Server within ten years. The design goal would have to be such that a professional sys admin is not required. My guess is that initially it would be targeted at that same mid-tier that you identify, but perhaps a bit lower (25-100 seats) at first. It has to go that way. If you look at what is happening in networking as a whole, you have companies like LinkSys and D-Link that are almost totally focused on idiot proof boxes for basic functionality. Intel, Nortel and more recently Microsoft have all gone chasing after this space as well. It only makes sense that this space will grow up to include a line of mini-blade or little box headless servers that do all of the basics (mail, telephony, web hosting, etc.). General purpose storage and print servicing is already happening. As we all know, little machines grow up to become big machines. 20 years from now, it is not unreasonable to project that even quite large systems will be simple hardware modules that you add to your pile of network pieces. -Original Message- From: Roger Seielstad [mailto:roger.seielstad;inovis.com] Sent: Friday, November 08, 2002 11:15 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: somewhat OT Simple. Its not cost effective to outsourse at the levels they target. They missed the boat from day one. There is a relative break even point for having your own IT staff, generally in the 25-75 user range, depending on what your company actually does. More than 100 or so, and you really need someone. Once you've got someone inhouse, they tend to have to be a jack-of-all-trades type, and do a lot of fumbling through. But the job gets done. Traditionally, an NT box with Exchange 5.5 Standard wasn't really that expensive - you could probably do that for $10k. Win2k with E2k has raised the prices a bit, but not exhorbinantly such. With leasing options, that server could be a few hundred a month. Like any service provider, the good fruit is in the middle of the tree, not the low hanging stuff. SO they tended to target 500 person plus orgs. This 600-ish person company has 8 sysadmins - we have enough time to manage Exchange. Without it, maybe we'd have one less headcount, but I'd bet that the headcount loss isn't drastically different than the cost of 600 users' outsourced mail needs. Now, the other side of this equation is that email is a core business need for most companies, and isn't that hard to at least get running[1]. More specialized things, like e-commerce and line of business apps make more sense in a managed environment. Email never did. -- Roger D. Seielstad - MCSE Sr. Systems Administrator Inovis - Formerly Harbinger and Extricity Atlanta, GA [1] Running well is a different question, but running and running well aren't the issue here. -Original Message- From: Greg Deckler [mailto:greg;infonition.com] Sent: Friday, November 08, 2002 12:25 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Re: somewhat OT You've hit the major players. The entire email hosting business has pretty much flopped and consolidated. Critical Path handed over its hosted corporate messaging services to HP. United Messaging was acquired by Agilera. Commtouch sold its hosted Exchange business to TeleComputing. USA.NET and Mi8 are still hanging in there, for now. But this entire market space has just been decimated of late. I still think that the business case is there for outsourced messaging, but apparently not enough people have the same attitude that I do. Anyone else care to comment on why they think that this market space has flopped? One would think that in a time of economic hardship, companies would really be looking to outsource anything and everything they can in order to lower costs. If outsourced corporate messaging can't make it in today's economy, I have serious doubts that it will ever make it. But the question is why? Outsourced messaging holds the promise of lower costs, flexibility and the ability to focus on one's
RE: Server Recovery: Win2k / Exchange 5.5
If it's on your shoulders to perform restores, then it is you who should be practicing them. 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:bounce-exchange-94760;ls.swynk.com] On Behalf Of Leonard Lee Sent: Friday, November 08, 2002 6:04 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Server Recovery: Win2k / Exchange 5.5 Yes, I agree. But I'm a consultant Engineer: only get to troubleshoot in a blue moon now-a-days...oh...the good old days. Well, the school marm in me says you should be testing your DR procedures at least once a month. Oh, and dont forget to apply the same Exchange SPs and hotfixes as the production server. :) -Original Message- From: Leonard Lee [mailto:llee;binaryinc.com] Sent: Friday, November 08, 2002 8:53 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Server Recovery: Win2k / Exchange 5.5 Thank you. Yes. I'm sleepy too :) I was confusing the process with Full Server restore... You are correct. Install, create new site, etc...that's outlined in the MS Exchange Disaster Recovery Part 1 article. My excuse, it's been a while since I had to do a server restore. How long? It's been so long I even forgot how to install E5.5 from a Select CD (ie. servermax.exe or servermin.exe, I'll bet some of you forgot that too)...took me 10 minutes to remember that one. Thanks, Leonard Lee If we are going after mailboxes only, why not just install 5.5 to a member server on the existing network, create a new site and org with the same names as the existing Exch Server, restore an online backup of the info store only to that server, run the Consistency Adjuster, assign an user account to the mailbox in question and open it up from Outlook? -Original Message- From: Chris Scharff [mailto:chris_scharff;messageone.com] Sent: Friday, November 08, 2002 5:32 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Server Recovery: Win2k / Exchange 5.5 I don't have my disaster recovery notes in front of me. But if we're just going after the mailboxes shouldn't you just be able to bring up a new server (with the same name as the old Exchange server) on a new network, run dcpromo and then install Exchange with the same site and org names. Stop the services, replace the pub and priv and then restart the stores? It's Friday and I'm a little sleepy, so forgive me if I missed something. -Original Message- From: Leonard Lee [mailto:llee;binaryinc.com] Sent: Friday, November 08, 2002 3:46 PM To: Exchange Discussions Thanks Chris, The information I have found supports your comment. I am glad to hear it verified. So, I imagine it goes something like this: 1. Bring up a W2K DC. Sync. 2. Bring offline. This will act as W2K AD (call this w2kdc). 3. Bring up another Server (call this w2kmail). 4. Restore the system state from the Exchange 5.5 production server to w2kmail. 5. Install exchange binaries with setup/r...etc (follow part 1 / 2 process from hereetc) Does this sound correct? NT would have been easier...because all I needed to do was to bring up BDC, go offline, promote, rename, install, and restore. I don't think I can apply this to a W2K environment? Thanks, Leonard Lee _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:leave-exchange;ls.swynk.com Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:leave-exchange;ls.swynk.com Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] -- -- -- The information contained in this email message is privileged and confidential information intended only for the use of the individual or entity to whom it is addressed. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copy of this message is strictly prohibited. If you have received this email in error, please immediately notify Veronis Suhler Stevenson by telephone (212)935-4990, fax (212)381-8168, or email ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) and delete the message. Thank you. == == == _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives:
RE: Using a PST for 'overflow'
Reason number 7,531 why the EU is doomed. 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:bounce-exchange-94760;ls.swynk.com] On Behalf Of Hurst, Paul Sent: Friday, November 08, 2002 3:38 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Using a PST for 'overflow' Ed, JFYI It would seem in the EU that soon it might be a legal requirement for companies to retain email forever, to stop the old 'well we have a policy that says deleted old emails so you can't sue us for a dodgy email' excuse. A whole new meaning to point 2 for us. Cheers Paul Standards are like toothbrushes, everyone wants one but not yours -Original Message- From: Ed Crowley [mailto:curspice;pacbell.net] Sent: 07 November 2002 19:09 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Using a PST for 'overflow' I have a few reasons that an archival system might not be appropriate. 1. Cost. 2. Retention policies. These systems are in opposition to many companies' legal departments' opinions that all e-mail older than a certain age must be destroyed. I'm not arguing that these policies are valid (I think they almost always are wrong-headed) but that they exist and have to be followed when so dictated by corporate management. 3. Need. Plenty of organizations simply don't need them. Enlightened database sizing and retention policies can obviate such a requirement in many cases. Myself, I would prefer spending funds on improved backup systems rather than an archival system if each achieves the same end goal of allowing users to store more data. 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:bounce-exchange-94760;ls.swynk.com] On Behalf Of Greg Deckler Sent: Wednesday, November 06, 2002 3:00 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Using a PST for 'overflow' I have ony found one solution to this type of problem and it is called an Email Archival system. I have no idea why this type of a solution is not more popular. It gets the information out of the Exchange stores and off user's hard drives and onto permanent storage on CD's or DVD's. The systems they have now integrate quite well with Exchange, provide advanced security capabilities and include full-text searching capabilities. And users can access the systems via a web browser. Why more people do not use these systems is anyone's guess. Apparently most email admins out there are content with draconian storage policies or catering to users like poor Russell who is personally buring CD's. It can all be automated and you can have the best of all worlds. Email Archival systems folks, they have been around for a long time and work quite well. I recommend them to nearly every client that I work for because there is so much business knowledge in email that it is almost criminal the way some companies blast it from their systems after only a week or two. If they actually understood and appreciated the amount of knowledge and business process information that they were losing, they would never do such an incredibly stupid thing. And Craig, I have to disagree with you about user provided storage. Individuals have consistently proven that they simply cannot store, organize and process large amounts of data. If I received as much snail mail as email, my entire house would be full of unorganized stacks of crap. Proper storage of business information should reside on business systems, not on personally provided storage. Centralization and automation of storage is incredibly more efficient and productive than individual users storing their own information. Tongue out of cheek - this is a product design problem of course. Give me one good reason for Exchange being in the storage or data management business. How it ought to work in a world with Active Directories and Distributed File System overlays to NTFS is that a mailbox should be a pointer to user provided storage. Who provides your snail mail box? It's not the post office, unless you are renting a PO Box. Normal delivery is to storage that you provide, structure and manage. Why does Exchange deliver primarily to message stores? Because of a lack of sufficient protocols and customer demand to do it right. If your customer thinks your service is inadequate, your customer is not wrong. As someone earlier in this thread said so eloquently (if misguidedly) duh! -Original Message- From: Etts, Russell [mailto:retts;harman.com] Sent: Wednesday, November 06, 2002 8:35 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Using a PST for 'overflow' Hi there I have the same issue here. People have PST files that are well over a gig, and we had one person go over the 2 gig limit. No matter what we tell them, they insist that they need a mailbox over a
RE: Exchange importing fields
Optionally, instead of using overwrite, you can import two records, the first with ~DEL (without the quotes) in the field, and the second with everything you want in the field. 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:bounce-exchange-94760;ls.swynk.com] On Behalf Of Roger Seielstad Sent: Friday, November 08, 2002 8:10 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Exchange importing fields Its not easy. I believe the easiest way to do it is to export the data, massage it to remove what you don't want, then reimport it with the option to overwrite rather than append for multivalued fields -- Roger D. Seielstad - MCSE Sr. Systems Administrator Inovis - Formerly Harbinger and Extricity Atlanta, GA -Original Message- From: Watkins V [mailto:V.Watkins;rhul.ac.uk] Sent: Friday, November 08, 2002 10:01 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Exchange importing fields Dear all, How, using Exchange command-line import, can we set values in the Permissions and Delivery Restrictions fields, and how can a single value be removed from a multi-value field (such as Permissions or Members) ? Exchange 5.5, NT4 sp6 etc. Many thanks Vanessa Watkins Royal Holloway, University of london _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:leave-exchange;ls.swynk.com Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:leave-exchange;ls.swynk.com Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:leave-exchange;ls.swynk.com Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: scan Ex2000 for phrases or certain words in emails
Nemx is sort of a combination of RBL, content filtering, and antivirus. 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:bounce-exchange-94760;ls.swynk.com] On Behalf Of Finch Brett Sent: Friday, November 08, 2002 7:43 AM To: Exchange Discussions Cc: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' Subject: RE: scan Ex2000 for phrases or certain words in emails Go look at Power Tools from www.nemX.com . There are many more like Scan mail from trend Micro, it's like AV, everyone will like or hate some brand. I like Nemx because if didn't really have to change any DLL's or anything, went in very smooth and slick. -Original Message- From: Kleciak, Clint D N21 [mailto:Clint.Kleciak;CIGNA.COM] Sent: Tuesday, November 05, 2002 9:02 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: scan Ex2000 for phrases or certain words in emails Any such functionality or third product tool? thanks Clint -- CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: If you have received this e-mail in error, please immediately notify the sender by e-mail at the address shown. This e-mail transmission may contain confidential information. This information is intended only for the use of the individual(s) or entity to whom it is intended even if addressed incorrectly. Please delete it from your files if you are not the intended recipient. Thank you for your compliance. Copyright (c) 2002 CIGNA _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:leave-exchange;ls.swynk.com Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:leave-exchange;ls.swynk.com Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:leave-exchange;ls.swynk.com Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Moving E2k storage group to new Server
To the contrary, local competition in the telephone service has probably facilitated availability of DSL much faster than we would have seen otherwise. I really don't think Pacific Bell would be advertising its availability if it were a tarriffed product whose pricing and availability were mandated by the California Public Utilities Commission. 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:bounce-exchange-94760;ls.swynk.com] On Behalf Of Roger Seielstad Sent: Friday, November 08, 2002 4:27 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Moving E2k storage group to new Server get into. Regardless you can argue the fact that more competition only creates better products That's not a hard and fast economics law, Hummert. All one has to do is look at local utility (telephone, gas, electricity) deregulation to see that compettion isn't always what its cracked up to be. Quite often, competition hurts products, not helps. For instance, Exchange's traditional competitors are Notes and Groupwise. Each of the three have a long and relatively distinguished implementation record. Now we have OpenExchange. At this point, its probably 3-5 years away from getting to the current state of any of the Big 3 in functionality, stability and scalability. That's 3-5 years the big players will continue on their own paths, most likely considering OpenExchange as nothing more than yet another wannabe. You see, competition isn't beneficial if the competitors aren't on a relatively level playing field to start. Roger -- Roger D. Seielstad - MCSE Sr. Systems Administrator Inovis - Formerly Harbinger and Extricity Atlanta, GA -Original Message- From: Christopher Hummert [mailto:hummertc;noghri.net] Sent: Thursday, November 07, 2002 5:43 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Moving E2k storage group to new Server You can argue yes and no to that. But that's something I'm not going to get into. Regardless you can argue the fact that more competition only creates better products -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:bounce-exchange-97309;ls.swynk.com] On Behalf Of Chris Scharff Sent: Thursday, November 07, 2002 10:47 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Moving E2k storage group to new Server There's plenty of competition today to Exchange which provides significantly more groupware functionality than openexchange. Some of it even runs on *nix. -Original Message- From: Christopher Hummert [mailto:hummertc;noghri.net] Sent: Wednesday, November 06, 2002 10:40 PM To: Exchange Discussions But is competition. Hopefully someday it will become good competition and finally Microsoft will have someone to try to one up again with each release instead of providing new functions and features when they get around to it -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:bounce-exchange-97309;ls.swynk.com] On Behalf Of Chris Scharff Sent: Wednesday, November 06, 2002 12:04 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Moving E2k storage group to new Server It's not open and it's certainly not Exchange. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:tony.mccullough;hcs.state.or.us] Sent: Wednesday, November 06, 2002 10:21 AM To: Exchange Discussions You mentioned that there is nothing in the Linux world like Exchange. I haven't looked at this but I received this Open Exchange link from a friend of mine the other day. I can't vouch for it, but thought I'd throw it out. http://www.suse.com/us/business/products/suse_business/openexchange/ in dex. ht ml Tony McCullough -Original Message- From: Ken Cornetet [mailto:Ken.Cornetet;kimball.com] Sent: Wednesday, November 06, 2002 7:09 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Moving E2k storage group to new Server Here's my take: A quick peek a CDW shows SBS at $1277 http://www.cdw.com/shop/products/default.asp?EDC=274287. Microsoft is offering a $500 rebate if you can read the SBS sales literature and answer 20 some-odd questions. That puts the price at $777. I'm not familiar with the MCSP program, so I cannot comment on that. You are also forgetting about Exchange CALS at $70 each. You are correct in that growing past SBS is somewhat painful (I might argue with the 10-20 times more expensive. Exmerging 50 mailboxes is not that painful...), but I would maintain that if a company finds themselves outgrowing SBS, then it should not have been put in in the first place. Yes, Linux is a viable option for small companies (big ones, too). It does have some drawbacks, though. 1. Support. Finding a local consultant
RE: MEC - photos from mailing list happy hour
I hope not! 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:bounce-exchange-94760;ls.swynk.com] On Behalf Of Luck, Sönke Sent: Thursday, November 07, 2002 11:30 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: MEC - photos from mailing list happy hour Has anybody published photos taken at the mailing list happy hour yet? Sönke Luck KPMG Germany - Messaging Team -- Die Information in dieser eMail ist vertraulich und kann dem Berufsgeheimnis unterliegen. Sie ist ausschliesslich fuer den Adressaten bestimmt. Jeglicher Zugriff auf diese eMail durch andere Personen als den Adressaten ist untersagt. Sollten Sie nicht der fuer diese eMail bestimmte Adressat sein, ist Ihnen jede Veroeffentlichung, Vervielfaeltigung oder Weitergabe wie auch das Ergreifen oder Unterlassen von Massnahmen im Vertrauen auf erlangte Information untersagt. In dieser eMail enthaltene Meinungen oder Empfehlungen unterliegen den Bedingungen des jeweiligen Mandatsverhaeltnisses mit dem Adressaten. The information in this email is confidential and may be legally privileged. It is intended solely for the addressee. Access to this email by anyone else is unauthorized. If you are not the intended recipient, any disclosure, copying, distribution or any action taken or omitted to be taken in reliance on it, is prohibited and may be unlawful. Any opinions or advice contained in this email are subject to the terms and conditions expressed in the governing KPMG client engagement letter. _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:leave-exchange;ls.swynk.com Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:leave-exchange;ls.swynk.com Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
MTA Growing
One of our offices is Win NT 4.0, Exchange 5.5 Sp4 Even though mail is flowing fine and everyone is getting/sending mail with no problem but there are 32000 items since yesterday in the MTA folder. I have tried to look up old discussion on MTA in this group but I have not been able to find the answer to this question. What is the safest way to delete these items? I did run a full backup this morning. Thanks _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:leave-exchange;ls.swynk.com Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: AutoDL
Solution 1: 1. Open the SQL Enterprise Manager 2. Expand Microsoft SQL Servers\SQL Server Group\servername\Databases\AutoDL\Tables 3. Right click DSDomains and select Open Table\Return all rows 4. Under the Name column, make sure that he NetBIOS name is specified and not the FQDN. Solution 2: 1. Click Start\Programs\Administrative Tools\Component Services 2. Expand Component Services\Computers\My Computer\COM+ Applications\ 3. Right click AutoDL and select Properties. 4. Click Identity. 5. Change This application will run under the following account. from Interactive user-the current logged on user to This user: and specify the Administrator account. 6. Stop and restart the AutoDL COM+ Object Solution 3: 1. Click Start\Programs\Administrative Tools\Component Services 2. Expand Component Services\Computers\My Computer\COM+ Applications\AutoDL\Components and ensure that APSMisc.DataEngine.1 is present. 3. Right click and select Properties\Security. Under Roles explicitly set for selected item(s): Make sure that AutoDL_Everyone and AutoDL_Admins are both selected. 4. Stop and restart the AutoDL COM+ Object You may also have to remove and add APSMisc.DataEngine.1(APSMisc.dll) back. HTH Jeff -Original Message- From: MS Exchange Mailing List [mailto:MSExchangeMailingList;seniortech.com] Posted At: Friday, November 08, 2002 4:20 PM Posted To: Exchange Discussion List Conversation: AutoDL Subject: AutoDL I am having a heck of a time configuring AutoDL to work. I can't seem to locate much help besides the install.txt with the Resource Kit. I have followed the instrcutions to the best of my ability and when I login to the AutoDL main page I get an error DOMAIN\UserName is not recognized by the AutoDL system. Has anyone got this up and running that could lend me some knowledge? Or other ideas to allow DL management. Marty _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:leave-exchange;ls.swynk.com Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:leave-exchange;ls.swynk.com Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
