RE: Outlook 11
yes. you would do it, then deny it. :P -Original Message- From: Les Bessant [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 13 June 2003 11:32 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Outlook 11 Me? Les Bessant [EMAIL PROTECTED] IT Manager Sanderson Townend Gilbert 22-24 Grey Street Newcastle upon Tyne NE1 6AD Direct dial: 0191 269 0110 Mobile: 07976 234165 -Original Message- From: John Etie [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 13 June 2003 04:40 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Outlook 11 Who wouldn't? -Original Message- From: William Lefkovics [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, June 12, 2003 7:45 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Outlook 11 They skip 13. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of John Etie Sent: Thursday, June 12, 2003 8:11 PM To: Exchange Discussions That's one long outlook. -Original Message- From: William Lefkovics [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, June 09, 2003 10:27 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Re: Outlook 11 One and the same. Outlook10 = Outlook2002. Outlook9=Outlook2000 Outlook12=Outlook2006 - Original Message - From: Pham, Tuan [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, June 09, 2003 11:15 AM Subject: Outlook 11 Sorry I have to ask, what is Outlook 11? Is that outlook 2003? Thnx! _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang =english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] This e-mail has been scanned for all viruses by Star Internet. The information in this communication and any attachments is confidential and may be legally privileged. It is intended solely for the addressee. If you are not the intended recipient any use, review, dissemination, distribution or copying of this information is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error please notify us immediately on 0191 261 2681 and delete the original message and any copies of it. Any opinions, conclusions or other information in this message that do not relate to the official business of Sanderson Townend Gilbert are neither given nor endorsed by the firm. 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 Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Sync Folders - Small Bandwith
what is the right end of a 256MB pipe? :) -Original Message- From: Roger Seielstad [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 09 June 2003 12:47 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Sync Folders - Small Bandwith Technically, I guess they use more, but I'm not 100% sure. Keep in mind that PST's store mail in 2 formats (so 1 message stored twice), but I think that conversion is done on the client side. I have a number of users using Outlook in offline mode on the wrong end of a 256MB pipe that gets shared with lots of other traffic. Outlook, especially the newer versions, are fairly stingy with network traffic. -- Roger D. Seielstad - MTS MCSE MS-MVP Sr. Systems Administrator Inovis Inc. -Original Message- From: Neil Doody [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, June 09, 2003 4:34 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Sync Folders - Small Bandwith Recent conversations have caused me to re-think the entire Exchange strategy that is in place here. The biggest bulk of that strategy includes Backups. The new idea is to go with Item Retention, this highlights the issue that most of the people round here have Personal Folders containing there email, which in turn means that there is no way they are getting backed up. The problem im faced with is that a lot of our sites have only a 64k ISDN link which may be linking 10 people or more! Okay you can scrutinise me for having such a small link for such an amount of users, but hey im not going to pay out of my wages for a larger link ;p Anyway, this problem means that working directly from the Mail Box is out of the question, the next best thing I guess is Offline-Folders. Offline-Folders appear to be the perfect the solution, running a small test over a dial up connection you would think they were the ideal candidate for this situation. However, a colleague informs me that it completely kills the network when you have a few people synchronising folders over an 64k link. Do synchronise folders use more bandwidth than your average Personal Folder? Are there any other issues to consider when using offline folders as apposed to personal folders? Im also informed that when you make a new folder in your mail box it is not automatically synchronised with the server? Please can you give me all your experience and all your info on working with synchronise folders within a working enterprise. No matter how irrelevant you think it may seem, I would like to know exactly what im in for if I move to this solution. _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchanget ext_mode=lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: **NOT SPAM (ME)** Re: ** SPAM (5.50/5.00) ** RE: ** SPAM (6.00/5.00) ** RE: Change FQDN in Ex55
100:1? (we all know how often they happen) -Original Message- From: William Lefkovics [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 09 June 2003 15:49 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: **NOT SPAM (ME)** Re: ** SPAM (5.50/5.00) ** RE: ** SPAM (6.00/5.00) ** RE: Change FQDN in Ex55 What are the odds? -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Andy David Sent: Monday, June 09, 2003 7:29 AM To: Exchange Discussions Best practices recommend otherwise: http://www.microsoft.com/technet/treeview/default.asp?url=/technet/prodtechn ol/ad/windows2000/plan/bpaddsgn.asp As a best practice use DNS names registered with an Internet authority in the Active Directory namespace. Only registered names are guaranteed to be globally unique. If another organization later registers the same DNS domain name, or if your organization merges with, acquires, or is acquired by other company that uses the same DNS names then the two infrastructures can never interact with one another. - Original Message - From: David McSpadden [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, June 09, 2003 10:19 AM Subject: ** SPAM (5.50/5.00) ** RE: ** SPAM (6.00/5.00) ** RE: Change FQDN in Ex55 They won't authenicate through the real domain name servers. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Andy David Sent: Monday, June 09, 2003 9:16 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Re: ** SPAM (6.00/5.00) ** RE: Change FQDN in Ex55 What prevents them from doing that with any real domain name? - Original Message - From: David McSpadden [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, June 09, 2003 10:10 AM Subject: ** SPAM (6.00/5.00) ** RE: Change FQDN in Ex55 It looks good on paper to avoid someone stealing your email domain and spoofing your address. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Andy David Sent: Monday, June 09, 2003 8:03 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Change FQDN in Ex55 I don't see the point of a .loc domain myself. I think MS was recommending that in the early days, but generally, most recommendations now are to use a real domain name for your internal network. -Original Message- From: Dave Vantine [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, June 09, 2003 8:58 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Change FQDN in Ex55 It is not the email address that I want change. Our current addressing is [EMAIL PROTECTED]. What I am looking to change is the SMTP header that Exchange is writing. It is now writing this based upon the internal DNS information on the Exchange Server. -Original Message- From: Sander Van Butzelaar [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, June 09, 2003 8:34 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Change FQDN in Ex55 Do you want to have both .com and .loc as an email address, or only .loc? One way would be with a smart host that could rewrite your .loc to .com on outgoing mail. Sander _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Why would I want to go to Exchange 2003/Outlook 2003
Exchange won't be the expensive bit - AD will. :) -Original Message- From: Mitchell Mike [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 09 June 2003 15:52 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Why would I want to go to Exchange 2003/Outlook 2003 Good morning, Surely you are laughing by now. But my management team wants to know why I want to spend all of this money for Exchange 2003/Outlook 2003. I mean we are currently on Outlook 98 and Exchange 5.5. How do I justify the expense and get it in the budget for 2004. Help!!! Have a great week. Mike Mitchell Systems email Administrator Alverno Information Services * [EMAIL PROTECTED] *:(317) 783-9341 EXT. 6211 Life is not measured by the number of breaths we take but by the moments that take our breath away. _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Priv1.edb and stm
1) Probably due to the log files filling up if the virus was trying to send lots of mail. check to see where your log files are held, and the time stamps on them. These should clear on the next full, exchange aware, backup. 2) edb stm files hold copies of the same data in different formats (simplified version), so will added up to be more than the individual users mailboxes. -Original Message- From: Rob Hackney [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 09 June 2003 17:10 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Priv1.edb and stm Hi, Exch 2k on sbs2k - all SP'd up I had a little scare earlier on with a simultaneous virus alert on one user and a disk space warning from my server which turned out to be totally unconnected however while I was trouble shooting a noticed a couple of odd things: 1) disk space on the server was decreasing rapidly from 8gb 7.5 6.5 gb in the space of about 5 mins - anyone experienced this before? 2) my priv1.edb is @ 7.2 gb while the stm file was at 2.9gb. I looked at my users mailboxes and the total size of their mailboxes was under 6gb. Why would the the two priv files be more than my users mailboxes if the edb + stm = information store? I'm probably missing something here as I'm still pretty new to exch2k? TIA Rob Support Analyst TKC Group Ltd Unit 5 Ashmead Ind Est Keynsham BS31 1TZ UK 0117 916 1320 This email is confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual(s) to whom it is addressed. It should not be deemed to constitute a binding contract between TKC Group and the recipient(s) unless a purchase order number is quoted. Any views or opinions presented are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of TKC Group Ltd. If you are not the intended recipient(s), please do not copy or disclose its contents. Please return it to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] then delete the email. intY has scanned this email for all known viruses (www.inty.com) _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Microsoft Metadirectory Services 2003
yes - the new version (3.0) will be a 'product' available in two flavours: std allows connectivity between 2 AD infrastructures; adv allows connectivity between different directory/database environments. MCS are no longer required to provide this I got this info from a TechNet briefing, so can't confirm/deny the accuracy, although have no reason to doubt it. :) -Original Message- From: Ryan Finnesey [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 05 June 2003 19:37 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Microsoft Metadirectory Services 2003 But when it is out it will be available to the public? I do not need to get it from Microsoft Consulting Services? Ryan -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, June 05, 2003 4:09 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Microsoft Metadirectory Services 2003 Last I heard it wasn't avilable to end of summer -Original Message- From: Evensen, Sam [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 04 June 2003 15:04 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Microsoft Metadirectory Services 2003 I am trying to find MMS 2003, specifically the GAL sync tool. I understand MS has a standard version and an enterprise version. I am looking for the standard version. Have not been able to find information on where to acquire the tools. We are in the process of setting up a test environment with 2 forests, each with their own Exchange organization. We will need to replicate address lists between the organizations. Hoping the GAL sync tool will allow this replication. Any help is appreciated. Thanks, Sam Evensen Systems Engineer, Systems Services Sunbeam _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=; lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=; lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Microsoft Metadirectory Services 2003
Last I heard it wasn't avilable to end of summer -Original Message- From: Evensen, Sam [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 04 June 2003 15:04 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Microsoft Metadirectory Services 2003 I am trying to find MMS 2003, specifically the GAL sync tool. I understand MS has a standard version and an enterprise version. I am looking for the standard version. Have not been able to find information on where to acquire the tools. We are in the process of setting up a test environment with 2 forests, each with their own Exchange organization. We will need to replicate address lists between the organizations. Hoping the GAL sync tool will allow this replication. Any help is appreciated. Thanks, Sam Evensen Systems Engineer, Systems Services Sunbeam _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
