RE: continuous prompt for NT domain credentials
We're seeing the same issue on a small handful of our desktops. I checked the same Q articles but no luck. Exchange 2000 w/SP3 rollup hotfix v1 Windows 2000 Outlook 2002 SP2 3 out of 4 times the workaround was to uninstall then re-install Office. This did not work for the 4th user. This 4th users password is not about to expire. Any suggestions appreciated. Thanks - Jason -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Nadine Sent: Thursday, September 11, 2003 2:18 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: continuous prompt for NT domain credentials I have users running Outlook 2000 on Windows 2000 desktops connected to an Exchange 2000 server on Windows 2000. Periodically the users will be prompted to provie a user name, password, and domain name. However, after you provide this informtion, Outlook still repeatedly prompts you to provide your credentials again. There is no error message. It does not matter if you cancle that prompt or enter your information the prompt will reappear 5 - 10 times. You cannot work until you clear this prompt. I have searched for Microsoft Articles ie - q312630, q218315, q321652 but at this point none of these have helped. Does anyone have any suggestions? Thank you, Nadine _ 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: Strange behaviour after running ISINTEG
It wasn't a premier article. I had pulled up the article when I sent the e-mail but now I can't find it either. It's not even on the list of bugs that the rollup hotfix addresses. Basically the mailbox size in ESM is different than what outlook tells the user and when you run an isinteg the mailbox size in ESM is larger, more accurate to what outlook says it is. Sorry I didn't send the full link initially Jason -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Glenn Corbett Sent: Sunday, September 07, 2003 2:51 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Re: Strange behaviour after running ISINTEG Is that a premier only article ? cant seem to find it on technet. G. - Original Message - From: Kelley, Jason [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, September 07, 2003 6:34 PM Subject: RE: Strange behaviour after running ISINTEG Check out Q article Q818830 We applied the single instance store hotfix before it was part of the Sept hotfix rollup. When we ran isinteg we had many mailboxes jump in size. Jason -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Glenn Corbett Sent: Saturday, September 06, 2003 9:54 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Strange behaviour after running ISINTEG All, Recently we have been having some strange behaviours with user mailboxes, such as users being denied access to folders in their mailboxes, rules disappearing etc. After running ISINTEG on all stores (approx 20), a number of errors were found and fixed...all good so far. After remounting the stores everything looked fineuntil the next morning when people came back to work. A number of mailboxes had suddenly a LOT more mail in their inboxes and deleted items folders, some users over 200mb worth, which threw a lot of the organisation over the store limits and stopped them sending and receiving mail. We temporarily increased the store limits to cope with the problem, however we are still at a loss to explain what happened. After speaking with PSS, they are also at a bit of a loss as well. I've also checked Technet and other online resources, but no mention is made of this sort of problem. - Some users had no effect on their mailboxes - Some users had lots of mail return to either their deleted items or inbox (we are surmising that the way the message was originally deleted has determined where it came back to - shift-delete - back to inbox, deleted via deleted items - back to delete items). - The restored messages don't seem to be from the previous days. In all of the cases we have confirmed, messages deleted the couple of days previous didn't come back, but messages deleted prior to that did come back. Has anyone seen this behaviour before and could possibly explain what happened ? As with all of these things, the people most affected were senior management, and they are screaming for a satisfactory response. Config: Windows 2000 SP2 with hotfixes Exchange 2000 SP2 - 6 Servers, 2 badly affected, 1 with minor effects, 3 not affected at all Trend Scanmail installed on all servers 1 Storage group on each server, between 2 and 4 databases per storage group On the servers that were affected, only one or two of the 4 stores was affected. As far as we can determine, either Exchange wasn't properly cleaning out deleted items from mailboxes (but was reducing the size of mailboxes as users were under the mailbox limit cap until the messages were restored), OR something happened and exchange replayed some of the transaction logs restoring old messages (but in that case all of the stores in the storage group should have been affected, but weren't) Thoughts ? TIA Glenn Corbett _ 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
RE: Strange behaviour after running ISINTEG
Check out Q article Q818830 We applied the single instance store hotfix before it was part of the Sept hotfix rollup. When we ran isinteg we had many mailboxes jump in size. Jason -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Glenn Corbett Sent: Saturday, September 06, 2003 9:54 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Strange behaviour after running ISINTEG All, Recently we have been having some strange behaviours with user mailboxes, such as users being denied access to folders in their mailboxes, rules disappearing etc. After running ISINTEG on all stores (approx 20), a number of errors were found and fixed...all good so far. After remounting the stores everything looked fineuntil the next morning when people came back to work. A number of mailboxes had suddenly a LOT more mail in their inboxes and deleted items folders, some users over 200mb worth, which threw a lot of the organisation over the store limits and stopped them sending and receiving mail. We temporarily increased the store limits to cope with the problem, however we are still at a loss to explain what happened. After speaking with PSS, they are also at a bit of a loss as well. I've also checked Technet and other online resources, but no mention is made of this sort of problem. - Some users had no effect on their mailboxes - Some users had lots of mail return to either their deleted items or inbox (we are surmising that the way the message was originally deleted has determined where it came back to - shift-delete - back to inbox, deleted via deleted items - back to delete items). - The restored messages don't seem to be from the previous days. In all of the cases we have confirmed, messages deleted the couple of days previous didn't come back, but messages deleted prior to that did come back. Has anyone seen this behaviour before and could possibly explain what happened ? As with all of these things, the people most affected were senior management, and they are screaming for a satisfactory response. Config: Windows 2000 SP2 with hotfixes Exchange 2000 SP2 - 6 Servers, 2 badly affected, 1 with minor effects, 3 not affected at all Trend Scanmail installed on all servers 1 Storage group on each server, between 2 and 4 databases per storage group On the servers that were affected, only one or two of the 4 stores was affected. As far as we can determine, either Exchange wasn't properly cleaning out deleted items from mailboxes (but was reducing the size of mailboxes as users were under the mailbox limit cap until the messages were restored), OR something happened and exchange replayed some of the transaction logs restoring old messages (but in that case all of the stores in the storage group should have been affected, but weren't) Thoughts ? TIA Glenn Corbett _ 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: Outlook, very slow opening new messages
We had a similar problem. I don't recall what version of Outlook and I don't have an outlook 2000 client to test with. I don't even recall if this option exists in OL2000 but if it does, turn it off. Look in Toolsoptionsother and see if the checkbox is checked that says Enable Instant Messaging in Microsoft Outlook If it is, uncheck it and see if that solves your problem. -Original Message- From: Hiatt, Jack (MARC) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, March 24, 2003 4:49 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Outlook, very slow opening new messages We are running Exchange 5.5 on NT4.0 with a mix of Outlook 97 Outlook 2000 clients, recently several of the client machines are experiencing very slow opening of new messages in the inbox. Once a message has been read it opens rapidly. Opening the mailbox from another user also results in slow opening of messages. Anyone have any ideas or hints on this one? Jack Hiatt Munich American Reassurance Co Atlanta Ga. _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Exchange 2000 Post SP3 - rollup
Released today - who wants to be the first to apply? :-) http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;EN-US;813840 _ List posting FAQ: http://www.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: Customizing the uncustomizable
We worked with MCS and they provided me with the RLQuickED utility. It was not intuitive to use and took me about 2 hours of playing with the utility to understand how it worked. Afterwards I was able to modify the dll change text and add additional paragraphs that made better sense and was customized for our environment. We have not had any problems, and this dll is used on all 4 of our exchange 2000 servers in production. Jason Qualcomm, Inc. -Original Message- From: Mark Harford [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, January 07, 2003 6:52 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Customizing the uncustomizable The nasty bit is where it then goes on and suggests moving items to your PST file which is something most of us are trying to avoid at all costs! I've tried out the RLQuikED tool to edit the dll which contains this message in the past following an old posting on this list (in a test lab), but it's not something I would ever consider using in production. MCS or someone like Chris Scharff are one solution to edit the actual message. However a simpler possibly cheaper solution might be to simply script some automatic message when your monitoring/reporting software detects a mailbox over a certain size. Mark -Original Message- From: John Matteson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 07 January 2003 14:34 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Customizing the uncustomizable What's so hard to understand about, you're over your limit, please reduce the size of your mailbox. John Matteson Geac Corporate ISS (404) 239 - 2981 Atlanta, Georgia, USA. -Original Message- From: Tim Ault [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Posted At: Monday, January 06, 2003 4:17 PM Posted To: Exchange Discussion List Conversation: Customizing the uncustomizable Subject: Customizing the uncustomizable Does the hard-coded 'mailbox limits warning' message (my description) unique to a specific file? If so, perhaps I could hex-edit the darn thing to say something more meaningful.. _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] BBCi at http://www.bbc.co.uk/ This e-mail (and any attachments) is confidential and may contain personal views which are not the views of the BBC unless specifically stated. If you have received it in error, please delete it from your system, do not use, copy or disclose the information in any way nor act in reliance on it and notify the sender immediately. Please note that the BBC monitors e-mails sent or received. Further communication will signify your consent to this. _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Quick SMTP cluster question
Can an exchange 2000 active/passive cluster host an SMTP connector or would the SMTP connector have to reside on a dedicated bridgehead server? Most of the articles I find say that SMTP protocol is supported on a cluster but I do not know if the SMTP connector is supported. Thanks - Jason _ 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]
Loadsim for exchange 5.5 - STG_E_FILENOTFOUND
I'm having some problems with loadsim for exchange 5.5 I am able to create the topology (creating the mailboxes on the exchange 5.5 server) but when I try to initialize the test (which populates the mailboxes with bogus e-mails and folders based on criteria I have specified) it returns the error OLE: STGOPENSTORAGE (Ups1k.msg): Error: STG_E_FILENOTFOUND . I found the Microsoft article that says to save the .sim file in the same directory as the .msg files. I tried that but I still have the same problem. Any suggestions? Thanks - Jason _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Organizing Public Folders
We are planning to deploy public folders in our local site but we also want to expand to our remote sites which include users who are overseas. I'm curious as to how people organize their public folder hierarchy and how they determine where a public folder is homed. By region then by functional group? Or strictly by functional group (even if that group spans sites) Thanks - Jason _ List posting FAQ: http://www.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: SMTP connector and smart hosts
Create multiple SMTP connectors (on the same machine) and give them the same cost and same address space. Jason -Original Message- From: Varghese, Wilson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, September 18, 2002 11:57 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: SMTP connector and smart hosts Is there a way to put multiple smart hosts in the General Tab on the SMTP connectors? I have two bridgehead servers I want to use to send messages to. One in CA, one in Indiana. Can I put both IP numbers in there enclosed in []? If so, what's the separator? Comma, semicolon, or space? Also would this work in a fail over situation? If this, can't be done.. How can I create something that would do this? Thanks in advance. Wilson _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Outlook 2000, outlook 2002 and e-mail address resolution ---slightly off topic
Slightly off topic... The outlook client configured for an exchange 5.5 server would perform address resolution after the address was typed in the TO or CC field. This could be seen because the address or username would be underlined by a solid black line. The outlook client configured against an exchange 2000 server appears to only perform address resolution when the message is sent. There is no underlining of the address or names by default. If you go to toolscheck names then the client will underline address's that are valid. Does anybody know how to configure the Outlook 2002 client to do address resolution by default without having to press the check names button?? Thanks - Jason _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Outlook 2000, outlook 2002 and e-mail address resolution---slightly off topic
As much as I have appreciated everybody's responses all the solutions offered do not solve the problem I am faced with. Suggestion: CNTRL-K - this does force name checking but I don't want the user to have to initiate this. Suggestion: Tools/Options/Email Options/Advanced Email Options/suggest names when completing TO CC's bla bla bla - This partially solves the problem and I was aware of this configuration option. However a message must have already been sent to the user previously, if that is the case then when I'm typing I the name outlook will autofill and complete the address. This is the closest solution to what I was looking for however our organization has some issues with enabling this option. I'll present then with the options and let them make the decision. Thanks for everybody's reply - Jason -Original Message- From: Andy David [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, August 29, 2002 12:09 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Outlook 2000, outlook 2002 and e-mail address resolution---s lightly off topic Is Automatic Name Checking Checked in Tools/Options/Email Options/Advanced Email Options ? -Original Message- From: Kelley, Jason [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, August 29, 2002 2:42 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Outlook 2000, outlook 2002 and e-mail address resolution ---slightly off topic Slightly off topic... The outlook client configured for an exchange 5.5 server would perform address resolution after the address was typed in the TO or CC field. This could be seen because the address or username would be underlined by a solid black line. The outlook client configured against an exchange 2000 server appears to only perform address resolution when the message is sent. There is no underlining of the address or names by default. If you go to toolscheck names then the client will underline address's that are valid. Does anybody know how to configure the Outlook 2002 client to do address resolution by default without having to press the check names button?? Thanks - Jason _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] -- The information contained in this email message is privileged and confidential information intended only for the use of the individual or entity to whom it is addressed. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copy of this message is strictly prohibited. If you have received this email in error, please immediately notify Veronis Suhler Stevenson by telephone (212)935-4990, fax (212)381-8168, or email ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) and delete the message. Thank you. == _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Outlook 2000, outlook 2002 and e-mail addressresolution---sl ightly off topic
The automatic name checking box has been checked all this time. Let me look into this smore and I'll get back to everybody when I find out more info. Thanks again for your replies Jason -Original Message- From: Andy David [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, August 29, 2002 2:17 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Outlook 2000, outlook 2002 and e-mail addressresolution---sl ightly off topic However a message must have already been sent to the user previously, if that is the case then when I'm typing I the name outlook will autofill and complete the address. Yes, that is how the Suggest Names feature works. The Automatic Name Checking feature however will underline with an exact match whether the name has been used before or not, do a wavy red thingy if they are multiple matches, and a green checky underline thing to remind you which name you used before if there are multiple matches- -Original Message- From: Kelley, Jason [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, August 29, 2002 4:38 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Outlook 2000, outlook 2002 and e-mail address resolution---slightly off topic As much as I have appreciated everybody's responses all the solutions offered do not solve the problem I am faced with. Suggestion: CNTRL-K - this does force name checking but I don't want the user to have to initiate this. Suggestion: Tools/Options/Email Options/Advanced Email Options/suggest names when completing TO CC's bla bla bla - This partially solves the problem and I was aware of this configuration option. However a message must have already been sent to the user previously, if that is the case then when I'm typing I the name outlook will autofill and complete the address. This is the closest solution to what I was looking for however our organization has some issues with enabling this option. I'll present then with the options and let them make the decision. Thanks for everybody's reply - Jason -Original Message- From: Andy David [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, August 29, 2002 12:09 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Outlook 2000, outlook 2002 and e-mail address resolution---s lightly off topic Is Automatic Name Checking Checked in Tools/Options/Email Options/Advanced Email Options ? -Original Message- From: Kelley, Jason [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, August 29, 2002 2:42 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Outlook 2000, outlook 2002 and e-mail address resolution ---slightly off topic Slightly off topic... The outlook client configured for an exchange 5.5 server would perform address resolution after the address was typed in the TO or CC field. This could be seen because the address or username would be underlined by a solid black line. The outlook client configured against an exchange 2000 server appears to only perform address resolution when the message is sent. There is no underlining of the address or names by default. If you go to toolscheck names then the client will underline address's that are valid. Does anybody know how to configure the Outlook 2002 client to do address resolution by default without having to press the check names button?? Thanks - Jason _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] -- The information contained in this email message is privileged and confidential information intended only for the use of the individual or entity to whom it is addressed. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copy of this message is strictly prohibited. If you have received this email in error, please immediately notify Veronis Suhler Stevenson by telephone (212)935-4990, fax (212)381-8168, or email ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) and delete the message. Thank you. == _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] -- The information contained in this email message is privileged and confidential
