RE: Migration and Outlook
Do a search on Technet for PROFGEN. -Original Message- From: Gonzalez Gonzalez, Jose J [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 27 June 2002 08:08 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Migration and Outlook Hello everyone, We're migrating from a Exchange5.5 organization to a new Exchange2000 organization. We are moving mailboxes with the Exch.SP2 Exchange Migration Wizard. The problem is that, with this procedure, client reconfiguration is necessary, (server name). ( Clients are Outlook98/2000 ). Do you know how can we change each Outlook profile configuration in an automated way? Thanks in advance Javier Gonzalez Madrid (Spain) _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/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: Drive M missing
Leo, What error messages do you see in the event log ? -Original Message- From: Leo [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 24 June 2002 11:03 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Drive M missing Thanks for the response but this is not it. I am aware of that error. The red error is cleared when I restart the services. Until I click on the public folder web folder I do not see an error. It shows the path as drive M:\domainname\public folders but as I can't see a drive M on the computer I decided to click on it to see what happend. I get could not enumerate the ... path not found. But when I right click and browse I get through? Leo Leo, When you see a virtual directory in iis manager in red and says path not found all that means is that iis initialised that directory before all exchange services were initialed completely. If you stop your www services and restart them that directory should no longer be in red and wont get the path not found or cannot enumarate errors in iis. Hope this helps... -Original Message- From: Leo [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]=20 Sent: Sunday, June 23, 2002 5:01 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Drive M missing Folks, all the services start and yes there is an M: drive (EXIFS provides it). All the stores mount and everything appears to be ok. Actually I have not had chance to stop and restart the EXIFS service (that may do it). But somehow when you see the website defined in Internet services manager and you click on it and it says it can't find the path you start to gather that something is wrong. All the other servers do not exhibit this problem and I would appreciate some options (whilst joking is a great way to communicate it may not be the way to solve this but hey whadda I know?) Leo Drive M appears when the exchange system attendant service starts, In=20 services start Exchange System Attendant service. =20 Bashir Malekzada AOptix Technologies , Inc. (408) 583 1130 [EMAIL PROTECTED] =20 -Original Message- From: Andrey Fyodorov [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]=3D20 Sent: Friday, June 21, 2002 7:18 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject:RE: Drive M missing =20 Are the stores mounting? =20 Is OWA working? =20 if yes, forget about drive M: =20 =20 Actually *what do you mean drive M:? there is no such thing*. It is a=20 figment of your imagination. =20 -Original Message- From: Leo [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, June 21, 2002 8:12 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Drive M missing =20 =20 We had to delete first storage group on one of our exchange servers=20 and when we created a new storage group and added a public and private information store all seemed well. =20 Unfortunately there appears to be no drive M? =20 Also in Internet Services manager the exchange subwebs appear and have paths to drive m. =20 When I click on them they report location can not be found but when I=20 do =3D a right click browse they open up fine? =20 We are running exchange 2000 enterprise with Sp2. =20 =20 Any ideas how to get the drive M back? =20 =20 Regards Leo =20 _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] =20 _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/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: ports
If it's a Windows 2000/XP client and it doesn't require WINS or NetBIOS then you can disable it from the Advanced|WINS tab of the TCP/IP properties sheet of Control Panel. If it's an NT4 machine... tough luck :) -Original Message- From: Kim Schotanus [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 14 June 2002 12:40 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: ports when I do that I see: nbname 137/udp what is nbname? -Original Message- From: Bendall, Paul [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 14 June, 2002 12:22 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: ports Have a look on your machine for a file called services, usually under c:\winnt\system32\drivers\etc it lists all the most commonly used ports. Regards, Paul -Original Message- From: Kim Schotanus [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 14 June 2002 11:30 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: ports what does port 137 do? It is blocked, but it is constantly trying to communicate from one of our workstations... Kim _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] -- If you have received this e-mail in error or wish to read our e-mail disclaimer statement and monitoring policy, please refer to http://www.drkw.com/disc/email/ or contact the sender. -- _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/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: Exchange Administrator Customisation
If you're not already tied into a product you might consider using eDirectory as your metadirectory and then use DirXML driver sets to link into AD, Exchange 5.5/Exchange 2000. Hmmm... Novell solutions in an MS forum. Must be Friday. Regards, Damian -Original Message- From: Bendall, Paul [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 14 June 2002 15:49 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Exchange Administrator Customisation Thanks for all the input. I intend to do a one off bulk import of employee numbers but want a better way of administrators creating mailboxes in the future so I think it will be a case of writing either a webpage or program to enter all the mailbox details. The larger picture of this project is to try and coordinate various directory service using Microsoft's Meta Services program, but initially we need to update all 10,000 employees from data in one directory store into Exchange DS then we have an attribute that links both directory services together. All in all it is a large project that I am just finding ideas for at the moment. However, it does demonstrate to me something that I have known for some time I need to acquire scripting skills. Thanks, Paul -Original Message- From: Blunt, James H (Jim) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 14 June 2002 14:38 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Exchange Administrator Customisation Depending on the number of mailboxes you need to change this attribute for, I would go with Mark's suggestion below. Then from that point on, start your ExAdmin console with the /r switch every time and after you've created the mailbox, simply highlight it hit Shift+Enter which opens up the schema, find the field and enter it. It takes me about 30 seconds to create a mailbox and add the Emp. Number to that attribute. This works for me, but then again, I only create 5-10 mailboxes a day. Jim Blunt -Original Message- From: Mark Harford [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, June 14, 2002 4:11 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Exchange Administrator Customisation Alternatively you could just import them in once a week using a directory import csv. -Original Message- From: Bendall, Paul [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 14 June 2002 11:20 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Exchange Administrator Customisation I guessed that might be another option, but as my scripting skills are limited to basic VBA only I guess I should skill up in some other areas, recommend any good books? Paul -Original Message- From: Baker, Jennifer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 14 June 2002 11:18 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Exchange Administrator Customisation We had the same issue here. We use asp to create mailboxes so helpdesk can view, set and search on that attribute. There could be an easier way, but I don't know of one. -Original Message- From: Bendall, Paul [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, June 14, 2002 3:06 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Exchange Administrator Customisation I did think of doing that Jennifer, but it seemed to me a bit of a waste to use a custom attribute when an existing attribute already exists but it is just not visible in the Exchange Admin program. Thanks for the input though Paul -Original Message- From: Baker, Jennifer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 14 June 2002 10:53 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Exchange Administrator Customisation Use a custom attribute. Change the name of one of the custom attributes to employee number under the config ds site config custom attribute tab. -Original Message- From: Bendall, Paul [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, June 14, 2002 2:48 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Exchange Administrator Customisation I have got a feeling the answer to this question is quite complicated, but here goes anyway. I have found in the directory store of Exchange 5.5 is an attribute called Employee Number, we would like to use this field for recording employee numbers. However, in the creation of a new mailbox this attribute is not displayed unless you look at the raw properties. Is there a way to customise the Exchange Admin program for making other attributes visible or does anyone have another suggestion on how when creating a mailbox the employee number is visible. TIA Paul -- If you have received this e-mail in error or wish to read our e-mail disclaimer statement and monitoring policy, please refer to http://www.drkw.com/disc/email/ or contact the sender. -- _ List posting FAQ: http://www.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: Haiku Friday
Not quite!! England play Denmark tomorrow. Positive well-wishers and bonhomie are welcome from our American cousins. C'mon England. -Original Message- From: Ali Wilkes (IT) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 14 June 2002 16:04 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Haiku Friday The Wings won last night Stanley is home in Detroit Now I can get sleep. _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: lesser of the evils - ssl or smtp
This forum has a higher turnover rate than McDonalds. -Original Message- From: Jon Butler [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 08 June 2002 00:53 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: lesser of the evils - ssl or smtp Yeah, you're right. Even though I posted just my Exchange experience, I probably don't know a thing about other enterprise-level technologies. And I did miss your sarcasm -- sorry for mistaking you for someone that can post without slamming someone. Don't worry dude, they've got operations now that can fix your shortcomings. I'm off this list. I need to find one with less egos and more professionalism ... someplace where ideas are shared, not trampled and pissed on. Maybe I'm just naive. -Original Message- From: Slinger, Gary [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, June 07, 2002 6:35 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: lesser of the evils - ssl or smtp Um, Jon? You posted your experience the other day. I don't think you get to comment on large enterprises and 4 or 5 nine's with only 1 to 3 servers in a site... You missed it, but I was being sarcastic when I asked for your experience with storage management. Your response kinda proved my point. You're wrong in your statements below - absolutely necessary and non-negotiable FFS! There are SEVERAL people on this list with REAL deployments that do that and that ARE large enterprises. Do you every check where people work or what their experience is before you post? You might find it enlightening... G. -Original Message- From: Jon Butler [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, June 07, 2002 21:34 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: lesser of the evils - ssl or smtp Here's what's so sacred: your users' ability to generate revenue. It's all a matter of perspective -- to someone in a small office with a handful of users, intrustion detection and DMZs sound ridiculous, and in a lot of cases probably are. To someone in a large enterprise envrionment with uptime requirements of 4 or 5 nine's, it's absolutely necessary and non-negotiable, and in those situations the notion of having internet traffic talking directly to an internal server is about as likely as a CEO forgiving you when 3000 of your users can't work because you thought all that extra work was tiresome. -Original Message- From: Cook, Jason [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, June 07, 2002 4:21 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: lesser of the evils - ssl or smtp What is it that's so sacred you're protecting. OWA with SSL through a firewall is adequate for most places. The mail is secure and that's it. Gotta have credentials to get in...so that's it. DMZ is a waste of time to me. Constantly monitoring and patching/fixing dmz boxes gets to be tiresome. I mean, they're gonna get blasted for sure and if they get taken out, so does whatever service you're running...unless they're redundant. So what's the point? Besides, you've opened up 80 to get to the backend Exchange box anyway. Jason Cook J.H. Ellwood and Associates Network Administrator [EMAIL PROTECTED] -Original Message- From: Ragar, Russell [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, June 07, 2002 3:02 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: lesser of the evils - ssl or smtp Regarding Outlook Web Access deployments, particularly with Exchange 2000, I can see a large benefit to deploying a front end server in the DMZ which communicates to the Internet client using SSL and the backend mailbox servers over HTTP. Not only is there off-loading of the encryption processing, but it provides you a location for containing external attacks. Yes, in a sense, all servers in the DMZ are sacrificial victims. The theory is that you keep your sacrificial victims in a contained area so they can be monitored carefully and you fall back and reformat them as soon as they are compromised. Obviously you need both intrusion detection and host-based firewalling with the DMZ (to prevent compromise of the DMZ from host to host). If there were no front-end server (direct OWA access on the mailbox server) you couldn't possibly monitor it as well since it is performing many more functions. Also, you certainly couldn't scrub it easily if it were compromised. If you were running a front-end server internally (no-DMZ), if that box were compromised it could be used as a staging area for an attack on all your internal systems. So, yes, the assumption is that all machines in your DMZ will eventually be compromised and they are suspect. Okay, given my recommended configuration, the essential problem is that the front-end server has to have access to some key internal services in order to function. The trick would appear to be to lock down those
RE: lesser of the evils - ssl or smtp
Always read the label. -Original Message- From: Andy David [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 10 June 2002 13:35 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: lesser of the evils - ssl or smtp Caution: Filling is hot. -Original Message- From: Myles, Damian [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, June 10, 2002 4:02 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: lesser of the evils - ssl or smtp This forum has a higher turnover rate than McDonalds. -Original Message- From: Jon Butler [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 08 June 2002 00:53 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: lesser of the evils - ssl or smtp Yeah, you're right. Even though I posted just my Exchange experience, I probably don't know a thing about other enterprise-level technologies. And I did miss your sarcasm -- sorry for mistaking you for someone that can post without slamming someone. Don't worry dude, they've got operations now that can fix your shortcomings. I'm off this list. I need to find one with less egos and more professionalism ... someplace where ideas are shared, not trampled and pissed on. Maybe I'm just naive. -Original Message- From: Slinger, Gary [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, June 07, 2002 6:35 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: lesser of the evils - ssl or smtp Um, Jon? You posted your experience the other day. I don't think you get to comment on large enterprises and 4 or 5 nine's with only 1 to 3 servers in a site... You missed it, but I was being sarcastic when I asked for your experience with storage management. Your response kinda proved my point. You're wrong in your statements below - absolutely necessary and non-negotiable FFS! There are SEVERAL people on this list with REAL deployments that do that and that ARE large enterprises. Do you every check where people work or what their experience is before you post? You might find it enlightening... G. -Original Message- From: Jon Butler [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, June 07, 2002 21:34 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: lesser of the evils - ssl or smtp Here's what's so sacred: your users' ability to generate revenue. It's all a matter of perspective -- to someone in a small office with a handful of users, intrustion detection and DMZs sound ridiculous, and in a lot of cases probably are. To someone in a large enterprise envrionment with uptime requirements of 4 or 5 nine's, it's absolutely necessary and non-negotiable, and in those situations the notion of having internet traffic talking directly to an internal server is about as likely as a CEO forgiving you when 3000 of your users can't work because you thought all that extra work was tiresome. -Original Message- From: Cook, Jason [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, June 07, 2002 4:21 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: lesser of the evils - ssl or smtp What is it that's so sacred you're protecting. OWA with SSL through a firewall is adequate for most places. The mail is secure and that's it. Gotta have credentials to get in...so that's it. DMZ is a waste of time to me. Constantly monitoring and patching/fixing dmz boxes gets to be tiresome. I mean, they're gonna get blasted for sure and if they get taken out, so does whatever service you're running...unless they're redundant. So what's the point? Besides, you've opened up 80 to get to the backend Exchange box anyway. Jason Cook J.H. Ellwood and Associates Network Administrator [EMAIL PROTECTED] -Original Message- From: Ragar, Russell [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, June 07, 2002 3:02 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: lesser of the evils - ssl or smtp Regarding Outlook Web Access deployments, particularly with Exchange 2000, I can see a large benefit to deploying a front end server in the DMZ which communicates to the Internet client using SSL and the backend mailbox servers over HTTP. Not only is there off-loading of the encryption processing, but it provides you a location for containing external attacks. Yes, in a sense, all servers in the DMZ are sacrificial victims. The theory is that you keep your sacrificial victims in a contained area so they can be monitored carefully and you fall back and reformat them as soon as they are compromised. Obviously you need both intrusion detection and host-based firewalling with the DMZ (to prevent compromise of the DMZ from host to host). If there were no front-end server (direct OWA access on the mailbox server) you couldn't possibly monitor it as well since it is performing many more functions. Also, you certainly couldn't scrub it easily if it were compromised. If you were running a front-end server internally (no-DMZ), if that box were compromised it could be used
RE: lesser of the evils - ssl or smtp
S 80 TCP (HTTP) 389 TCP/UDP (LDAP) 88 TCP/UDP (Kerberos) 53 TCP/UDP (DNS) 135 TCP (RPC Endpoint) 3268 TCP (GC LDAP) 445 TCP (NETLOGON) Plus a static port for RPC 1024 Plus Registry change on DC's for lookups OR 443 TCP (SSL) H.. choices choices. -Original Message- From: Roger Seielstad [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 10 June 2002 13:36 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: lesser of the evils - ssl or smtp The point, which you're missing, is for OWA (or a FE server) to work in the DMZ, you're punching a few dozen holes in the firewall to begin with, so you've already given that box significant internal reign, in addition to having opened a few dozen ports on the firewall that potentially give other access as well. Or you open on port for ssl only. -- Roger D. Seielstad - MCSE Sr. Systems Administrator Peregrine Systems Atlanta, GA -Original Message- From: Ragar, Russell [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, June 07, 2002 6:21 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: lesser of the evils - ssl or smtp Okay, your specific point is that having a FE server in the internal network is as good as having one in the DMZ? Well, if the FE server in the internal network is compromised it has open access to all of your internal network. So, there would be be no difference if all of the hosts and workstations within your internal network were hardened to the security level provided by the firewall between the DMZ and your internal network. But, practically, I've never found that to be a possibility. I suppose if I personally created every internal system I could achieve this, but I'd be swamped trying to do this with more than a few dozen machines. Minimally, you'd need a software firewall on all your internal hosts and workstations (which admittedly is where technology seems to be heading). I suppose you could put a router access-control list between your FE server and the rest of your internal network, but really that would just be a way of recreating a DMZ. But this path will become more elaborate than deploying the DMZ. What is your fear of implementing a DMZ? It's no more complicated than the initial firewall deployment and often can be done with the same hardware/software used for that firewall. My assumption is that you have an internal network. I suppose if there wasn't one, then my arguments might be tenuous. Regarding costs, you can't really design without attention to costs (hardware, software, technician time, user disruption/training). Yes, you can build rather than buy to some extent (open source firewalls, intrusion detection scripts you design yourself, etc) but that would just push up the technician time and expertise requirements to save hardware and software costs. It might be entertaining to totally disregard costs in an engineering solution, but it has almost no practical value. Ultimately, resource allocation is the primary limiting factor in all engineering designs, so I can't ignore costs in proposing any solution. Russell Ragar, MCSE+I, CNE, CCNA Senior Network Engineer PowerTV, Inc. -Original Message- From: Chris Scharff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, June 07, 2002 2:37 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: lesser of the evils - ssl or smtp -Original Message- Regarding Outlook Web Access deployments, particularly with Exchange 2000, I can see a large benefit to deploying a front end server in the DMZ which communicates to the Internet client using SSL and the backend mailbox servers over HTTP. CS: Specifically over a FE server on the internal network? Not only is there off-loading of the encryption processing, CS: Apparently not over a FE server on the internal network. I too can compare apples and pears and claim an apple is a woefully inadequate pear. but it provides you a location for containing external attacks. CS: How specifically are they contained when between my FE server and my other E2K servers/AD/DNS servers there are a host of ports open, including quite possibly the ports which you used to run your original exploit. Yes, in a sense, all servers in the DMZ are sacrificial victims. The theory is that you keep your sacrificial victims in a contained area so they can be monitored carefully and you fall back and reformat them as soon as they are compromised. CS: What are we using to monitor this box specifically and what exploit did we use to access the box in the first place (any Exchange version 443 based exploit) that our IDS is going to detect the behavior and alert us? Obviously you need both intrusion detection and host-based firewalling with the DMZ (to prevent compromise of the DMZ from host to host). If there were no front-end server (direct OWA access on the mailbox server) you couldn't
RE: Re Outlook2K
Well... I'd check Appendix D out before you start shooting. http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq_appxd.htm This is a friendly reminder that the odds of a sarcastic response or outright flaming go up significantly if the answer to your question is easily found in the index or table of contents of these resources e.g. Microsoft KB and Technet. And a gentle search through Technet might find a solution to your original question (Q157961). Better luck next time. -Original Message- From: Mustafa Ibrahim [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 10 June 2002 14:22 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Re Outlook2K Not only did I think you were gibbering idiot when I read your initial msg, but I now have a much lower opinion of you. So do us a favour and if you have something to say shutup. If I want any shit out of you I'll be sure to squeeze your head little man. Besides, I got better things to do than lower myself to your level of intelligence or lack of it. I have posted this msg because this is a discussion list. In where I come from we have a saying; ...discussion is an exchange of knowledge, argument however, is an exchange of ignorance.. I suggest you sit alone in that dark basement of yours with your conscience and that alone should be judgement enough for you. -Original Message- From: Slinger, Gary [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 10 June 2002 12:53 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Re Outlook2K I felt so, yes. Was it really necessary for you to post to several thousand admins about (a) an Outlook issue which doesn't belong on this list, and (b) is a trivial piece of information that was readily available in the help files, or any number of other places such as Technet. Did you read the FAQ? Particularly the bit about what to do before you post? If you don't like the heat, get out of the kitchen, and don't let the door hit you on the ass on the way out. -Original Message- From: Mustafa Ibrahim [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, June 10, 2002 12:38 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Re Outlook2K Is this really necessary? -Original Message- From: Slinger, Gary [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 10 June 2002 11:36 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Re Outlook2K Great... not even noon on Monday and we've got a winner already for I can't read the manual or the help files... -Original Message- From: Mustafa Ibrahim [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, June 10, 2002 11:16 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Re Outlook2K Hi all, I noticed on my laptop if I have Out of Office feature turned on and someone sends me a message they will get a notification as expected. However, any subsequent msgs sent by that user do not seem to generate Out of Office notification/replies. Is this the way Outlook 2000 is meant to behave or am I missing something. My system is using Windows ME with Office 2000 Premium. Any ideas? Many thanks. Mustafa Ibrahim _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Failure To Mount Store
You can check integrity of your log and header files using ESEUTIl.. /ML I think for the logs.. -Original Message- From: Bowles, John L. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 06 June 2002 20:12 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Failure To Mount Store The reason I think that file is corrupt cause I would get an error saying that Exchange cannot read the header of the E00.log. So that's why I'm assuming that it might be corrupt. I could be wrong. But nothing has changed on my E2K server since I've had it up. I mean nothing. The SG is local on the server to answer your other question. Thanks for the post Jennifer! ___ John Bowles Exchange Administrator Enterprise Support Engineering Celera Genomics [EMAIL PROTECTED] -Original Message- From: Baker, Jennifer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, June 06, 2002 2:01 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Failure To Mount Store John, I have done this on my test box. You may want to delete the directory associated with the storage group that was created initially before you create a new storage group with the same name, although it will work if you leave the old directory intact. I'd be curious to know why you can't mount the store though. Did you create the storage group and store remotely? Why do you think the e00.log is corrupt? -Original Message- From: Bowles, John L. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, June 06, 2002 7:57 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Failure To Mount Store But what I suggested, is that doable? Cause I don't want to spend time troubleshooting it if I can just get a quick fix like that. Thanks, ___ John Bowles Exchange Administrator Enterprise Support Engineering Celera Genomics [EMAIL PROTECTED] -Original Message- From: Myles, Damian [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, June 06, 2002 10:56 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Failure To Mount Store John, Read the Exchange 2000 Server Database Recovery document on the MS website.. that should get you going. -Original Message- From: Bowles, John L. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 06 June 2002 16:43 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Failure To Mount Store All, Server in question: E2K server SP2 2 Storage Groups (2 mail stores) Ok, currently I'm unable to mount the store of my second storage group (which has nothing on it) It keeps giving me the error: The Database Files on this store are inconsistent. Now all the transaction logs are all present. We haven't added that storage group to our backups yet. So that's why the logs are still present. I think the E00. log it's trying to access is corrupted. Now since there is nothing on this SG can I just deleted it and re-add it to save me some time? Or if I delete this SG will there be some adverse effects? Cause If I deleted it I planned on renaming it the same name as I have it now. Will there be a problem with that? I'd like to hear what you guys/gals think. 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] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/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]
It's OT time
Sweden 2 - Nigeria 1 12.30pm (GMT) England v Argentina C'MON ENGLAND! _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: slightly OT: ExchangeServer stops every 10 minutes (Active Direct ory issue?)
I believe it's a special built-in group like Authenticated Users. It may well not be present in a single domain... I'll see if I can find out more about that one. To check your DOMAINPREP ran ok... run POLICYTEST on the domain controller from the \Support\Utils\Platform folder on the Exchange 2000 Ent. Edition CD-ROM to make sure all domain controllers have the Manage Auditing and Security logs privilege. You'll need to be a domain admin to run this all domain controllers will report their settings. You'll also find this tool under the \SUPPORT folder in SP2, so preferably run this version. What does it say ? -Original Message- From: Elmer Stöwer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 05 June 2002 19:47 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: slightly OT: ExchangeServer stops every 10 minutes (Active Direct ory issue?) Enterprise Domain Controllers (built-in group) should have Is this something I schould worry about? The group does not exist in our domain. We do have the domain controller group, but not Enterprise Domain Controller... regards Elmer -Original Message- From: Myles, Damian [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, June 05, 2002 11:29 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: slightly OT: ExchangeServer stops every 10 minutes (Active Direct ory issue?) Ouch.. what a mess.. Check through your event logs... the symptoms you are describing suggest an underlying problem, e.g. DNS... the enviable situation you're in, I suspect, is a byproduct of that (machine account/kerberos/security problems etc), together with some new ones you may have introduced trying to fix the problem. This little chestnut was interesting.. Error NT-AUTORITÄT\DOMÄNENCONTROLLER DER ORGANISATION doesn't have Replicating Directory Changes Replication Syncronization Manage Replication Topology Have you been changed any AD/OU security or turned off AD inheritance within your domain tree Click on Advanced in ADUC, go to the root of your domain and click on the Security tab.. what do you see ? Enterprise Domain Controllers (built-in group) should have Manage Replication Topology, Replicating directory changes and Replication Synchronization Allow permissions. Exchange Enterprise Servers (built-in) should have Manage Replication Topology. How are you applying group policy within your organisation ? If you're using some of the Microsoft GPO Templates (e.g. SECUREDC.INF)and applying those on your Exchange Server, you may experience *ahem* some loss of functionality, killing Exchange in the process. For problems with machine accounts, have a look at Technet Q260575.. this deals with machine account 'Access Denied' errors. Also, if you've moved the machine accounts for your DC's out of the built-in domain controllers OU and not re-linked in the default domain controllers group policy back to the new OU, you'll get lots of SceCli messages in the event log (although you're event id does not suggest this). Leave SYSVOL alone... the SYSVOL\SYSVOL path/junction is normal... don't touch! Use GPOTOOL on the Reskit and NTFRSUTL to troubleshoot general GPO/SYSVOL/FRS issues. In short, don't go making big changes to things which are unlikely to be the cause of the problem. Make sure DNS is working.. and check out that security problem mentioned earlier. Seeing as it's rather hard to see what chain of events have occurred to get you into this situation, if you're still in the mire, get out your wallet and give Micrsoft PSS a call. Regards Mylo -Original Message- From: Elmer Stöwer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 04 June 2002 20:14 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: slightly OT: ExchangeServer stops every 10 minutes (Active Direct ory issue?) Single local domain, single site two servers (einstein DC fileserver, platon DC exchangeserver). no event log failures, but the seems to stand for almost a minute at the same time as SceCli applies security policy on the exchange server (event 1704). netdiag is not very helpful. DCdiag was a good hint. I put the output of both servers here, cause I don't know what to do anymore (maybe 12h work is to much for one day) output of DCdiag on einstein: -- Doing primary tests Testing server: Alt-Moabit\EINSTEIN Starting test: Replications [Replications Check,EINSTEIN] A recent replication attempt failed: From PLATON to EINSTEIN Naming Context: DC=cyberconsult,DC=lan The replication generated an error (8453): Der Replikationszugriff wurde verweigert. The failure occurred at 2002-06-04 19:48.21. The last success occurred at 2002-05-23 17:02.11. 3115 failures have occurred since the last success. The machine account
RE: MEC 2002
I saw one launched on CNN last night. -Original Message- From: Woodruff, Michael [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 05 June 2002 21:21 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: MEC 2002 Are shuttles available from hotels around the conference? I don't think I will be able to get a car. Michael Woodruff System Administrator http://www.inchord.com/ inChord Communications Inc. A group of communications companies providing clients unlimited visibility 614.543.6405 mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] [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: Delegation Wizard
Use the SHOWGRPS tool off the Win2K Resource Kit to establish what Security groups they're members of. Syntax: SHOWGRPS Domain\User -Original Message- From: Webb, Andy [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 06 June 2002 01:27 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Delegation Wizard They probably added themselves to the Exchange Domain Servers security group. Once there, they can pretty much do anything to the org. -Original Message- From: Bowles, John L. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Posted At: Wednesday, June 05, 2002 3:59 PM Posted To: Microsoft Exchange Conversation: Delegation Wizard Subject: RE: Delegation Wizard Basically what is going on is this. We have 2 admins on the West Coast that have an exchange server out there. But since I manage the server here on the east coast it's in our Admin Group. Ok the only one that has Full Admin rights to the Org and AG is me. No one else. But all of a sudden these guys are running this Delegation Wizard and placing themselves inside the Org and AG. With no prior account in there to do this with. Now I have 2 extra accounts w/Full Admin rights in the Org and AG. I asked them how they did that and they said they just ran the Delegation Wizard. Does that clear things up? ___ John Bowles Exchange Administrator Enterprise Support Engineering Celera Genomics [EMAIL PROTECTED] -Original Message- From: Leo [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, June 05, 2002 4:56 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Delegation Wizard John, to understand you correctly lets use some examples. Fred Bloggs has not delegated rights within the exchange organisation whatsoever Then Fred just runs the Exchange system manager program and adds himself as an Exchange Full administrator at the organisation level. Please confirm this is what is happening. He is a member of what security groups? Do these groups have any delegated rights in the exchange organisation? Leo I think you are missing the question I'm asking. They are adding themselves without already having an account in org or admin group. See what I'm saying? They are basically adding anything at any time. Usually you would have to have an account already present. But there isn't one. ___ John Bowles Exchange Administrator Enterprise Support Engineering Celera Genomics [EMAIL PROTECTED]=20 -Original Message- From: Ed Crowley [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]=20 Sent: Wednesday, June 05, 2002 4:00 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Delegation Wizard They're in the Delegation of Administration Wizard! Don't give Exchange Full Admin rights to those whom you don't want to allow to change permissions. 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 Bowles, John L. Sent: Wednesday, June 05, 2002 12:55 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Delegation Wizard Ed, What permissions are you talking about? Cause as of now. They don't have any permissions on the Org or the administrative group. Thanks, ___ John Bowles Exchange Administrator Enterprise Support Engineering Celera Genomics [EMAIL PROTECTED]=20 -Original Message- From: Ed Crowley [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]=20 Sent: Wednesday, June 05, 2002 3:48 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Delegation Wizard Change their permissions so they can't do that. Security by obfuscation is of little value. What's to stop them from asking the opposite question and reversing what you've done? 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 Bowles, John L. Sent: Wednesday, June 05, 2002 11:49 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Delegation Wizard All, Is there anyway to remove the Delegation wizard that comes along with the install of Exchange 2000? Currently we have admins that think that it's fun to add themselves as Full Admins on our site. Can I take care of this somehow? And what privileges do you need to add yourself? I can't think of it off the top of my head. TIA, ___ John Bowles Exchange Administrator Enterprise Support Engineering Celera Genomics [EMAIL PROTECTED]=20 _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ:
RE: MEC 2002
A streetcar named Endeavour. -Original Message- From: William Lefkovics [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 06 June 2002 10:45 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: MEC 2002 Why would CNN show launching of cars? -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Myles, Damian Sent: Thursday, June 06, 2002 1:29 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: MEC 2002 I saw one launched on CNN last night. -Original Message- From: Woodruff, Michael [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 05 June 2002 21:21 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: MEC 2002 Are shuttles available from hotels around the conference? I don't think I will be able to get a car. Michael Woodruff System Administrator http://www.inchord.com/ inChord Communications Inc. A group of communications companies providing clients unlimited visibility 614.543.6405 mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] [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] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: slightly OT: ExchangeServer stops every 10 minutes (Active Direct ory issue?)
Elmer, When you say 'stands' do you mean the server is hanging what is it doing ? Can you check your DNS and Directory Service event logs on both DC's for me ? -Original Message- From: Elmer Stöwer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 06 June 2002 12:18 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: slightly OT: ExchangeServer stops every 10 minutes (Active Direct ory issue?) OK... I fixed some issues and now things are more distinct. I found the group Enterprise Domain Controllers while assigning access rights (I just can not find it in ADUC BuiltIn?) I reaplied the basicdc.inf and granted the mentioned access right to Enterprise Domain Controllers. AD Replication is now working and I don't get any errors with dcdiag. The Exchangeserver still stands every 8 min. While the Server stands I get an application log information entry from SceCli with 1704, that the security policy was successfully applied (something similar in german). I will now perform the policytest and then let you know what happend. Regards Elmer -Original Message- From: Myles, Damian [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, June 06, 2002 10:22 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: slightly OT: ExchangeServer stops every 10 minutes (Active Direct ory issue?) I believe it's a special built-in group like Authenticated Users. It may well not be present in a single domain... I'll see if I can find out more about that one. To check your DOMAINPREP ran ok... run POLICYTEST on the domain controller from the \Support\Utils\Platform folder on the Exchange 2000 Ent. Edition CD-ROM to make sure all domain controllers have the Manage Auditing and Security logs privilege. You'll need to be a domain admin to run this all domain controllers will report their settings. You'll also find this tool under the \SUPPORT folder in SP2, so preferably run this version. What does it say ? -Original Message- From: Elmer Stöwer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 05 June 2002 19:47 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: slightly OT: ExchangeServer stops every 10 minutes (Active Direct ory issue?) Enterprise Domain Controllers (built-in group) should have Is this something I schould worry about? The group does not exist in our domain. We do have the domain controller group, but not Enterprise Domain Controller... regards Elmer -Original Message- From: Myles, Damian [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, June 05, 2002 11:29 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: slightly OT: ExchangeServer stops every 10 minutes (Active Direct ory issue?) Ouch.. what a mess.. Check through your event logs... the symptoms you are describing suggest an underlying problem, e.g. DNS... the enviable situation you're in, I suspect, is a byproduct of that (machine account/kerberos/security problems etc), together with some new ones you may have introduced trying to fix the problem. This little chestnut was interesting.. Error NT-AUTORITÄT\DOMÄNENCONTROLLER DER ORGANISATION doesn't have Replicating Directory Changes Replication Syncronization Manage Replication Topology Have you been changed any AD/OU security or turned off AD inheritance within your domain tree Click on Advanced in ADUC, go to the root of your domain and click on the Security tab.. what do you see ? Enterprise Domain Controllers (built-in group) should have Manage Replication Topology, Replicating directory changes and Replication Synchronization Allow permissions. Exchange Enterprise Servers (built-in) should have Manage Replication Topology. How are you applying group policy within your organisation ? If you're using some of the Microsoft GPO Templates (e.g. SECUREDC.INF)and applying those on your Exchange Server, you may experience *ahem* some loss of functionality, killing Exchange in the process. For problems with machine accounts, have a look at Technet Q260575.. this deals with machine account 'Access Denied' errors. Also, if you've moved the machine accounts for your DC's out of the built-in domain controllers OU and not re-linked in the default domain controllers group policy back to the new OU, you'll get lots of SceCli messages in the event log (although you're event id does not suggest this). Leave SYSVOL alone... the SYSVOL\SYSVOL path/junction is normal... don't touch! Use GPOTOOL on the Reskit and NTFRSUTL to troubleshoot general GPO/SYSVOL/FRS issues. In short, don't go making big changes to things which are unlikely to be the cause of the problem. Make sure DNS is working.. and check out that security problem mentioned earlier. Seeing as it's rather hard to see what chain of events have occurred to get you into this situation, if you're still in the mire, get out your wallet
RE: MBR Recovery?
/mbr won't work because it's not the boot sector that's the problem. - Check the BOOT.INI on your working floppy and compare it with the one on the server. If you can't check the NTFS partition then download NTFSDOS from www.wininternals.com... What's the value for the rdisk(x)partition(x) in boot.ini, i.e. the one you boot from on the floppy ? - Check NTLDR is there - Check NTDETECT.COM is there - Check attributes are set correctly on the files (particularly SYSTEM) Can't remember but it's down to one of these three... particularly if you can boot from flop... Still... you COULD always post this to the MCSE forums. I'm sure this used to be an exam question on the NT4 exams... give our budding paper-based experts something real to get their teeth into :) PS: Have you done the emergency repair as suggested earlier yet ? -Original Message- From: BW Brandt Ward (5320) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 06 June 2002 14:51 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: MBR Recovery? well, i ran the format /mbr like you suggested and now all my data is gone! just kidding my partition is an NT 4.0 NTFS and it is hardware mirrored. The microsoft Q article mentions fdisk /mbr which i tried and it didnt work...I will try doing the re-install to a different directory on my recovery server and see what happens...or maybe i'll trash the boot record of the recovery server and try the repair process... knowledge is power Thanks, b -Original Message- From: Charles Carerros [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, June 06, 2002 8:31 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: MBR Recovery? I have had this issue on a workstation, the only solution I found was to run format /mbr from a Windows 98 bootdisk. What this does is completely wipe out the MBR. Then when you try to boot, the BIOS should realise there there isnt one assignt the correct drive letter (I believe it defaults to C) and they it should find your ntldr and other boot files. I did it on my Directors machine. I know there is a Q reference to this, but I don't know what one. Oh, and it worked like a charm. chuck -Original Message- From: BW Brandt Ward (5320) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, June 05, 2002 4:07 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: OT: MBR Recovery? My exchange server's boot record is toast...only boots with floppy...without..give the missing or bad ntloader message... anyone have any luck copying the backup boot record over the corrupt one? If so, using diskedit or something else? Thanks, B _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: slightly OT: ExchangeServer stops every 10 minutes (Active Direct ory issue?)
Did you encounter any errors when you did your initial Exchange server install ? Check back through the logs.. if you're getting POLICYTEST errors then it looks like DOMAINPREP didn't run right... you did the run the SP2 version of policytest btw? -Original Message- From: Elmer Stöwer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 06 June 2002 12:48 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: slightly OT: ExchangeServer stops every 10 minutes (Active Direct ory issue?) Running POLICYTEST says !!! right NOT found !!! for all DCs. regards Elmer -Original Message- From: Myles, Damian [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, June 06, 2002 10:22 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: slightly OT: ExchangeServer stops every 10 minutes (Active Direct ory issue?) I believe it's a special built-in group like Authenticated Users. It may well not be present in a single domain... I'll see if I can find out more about that one. To check your DOMAINPREP ran ok... run POLICYTEST on the domain controller from the \Support\Utils\Platform folder on the Exchange 2000 Ent. Edition CD-ROM to make sure all domain controllers have the Manage Auditing and Security logs privilege. You'll need to be a domain admin to run this all domain controllers will report their settings. You'll also find this tool under the \SUPPORT folder in SP2, so preferably run this version. What does it say ? -Original Message- From: Elmer Stöwer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 05 June 2002 19:47 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: slightly OT: ExchangeServer stops every 10 minutes (Active Direct ory issue?) Enterprise Domain Controllers (built-in group) should have Is this something I schould worry about? The group does not exist in our domain. We do have the domain controller group, but not Enterprise Domain Controller... regards Elmer -Original Message- From: Myles, Damian [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, June 05, 2002 11:29 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: slightly OT: ExchangeServer stops every 10 minutes (Active Direct ory issue?) Ouch.. what a mess.. Check through your event logs... the symptoms you are describing suggest an underlying problem, e.g. DNS... the enviable situation you're in, I suspect, is a byproduct of that (machine account/kerberos/security problems etc), together with some new ones you may have introduced trying to fix the problem. This little chestnut was interesting.. Error NT-AUTORITÄT\DOMÄNENCONTROLLER DER ORGANISATION doesn't have Replicating Directory Changes Replication Syncronization Manage Replication Topology Have you been changed any AD/OU security or turned off AD inheritance within your domain tree Click on Advanced in ADUC, go to the root of your domain and click on the Security tab.. what do you see ? Enterprise Domain Controllers (built-in group) should have Manage Replication Topology, Replicating directory changes and Replication Synchronization Allow permissions. Exchange Enterprise Servers (built-in) should have Manage Replication Topology. How are you applying group policy within your organisation ? If you're using some of the Microsoft GPO Templates (e.g. SECUREDC.INF)and applying those on your Exchange Server, you may experience *ahem* some loss of functionality, killing Exchange in the process. For problems with machine accounts, have a look at Technet Q260575.. this deals with machine account 'Access Denied' errors. Also, if you've moved the machine accounts for your DC's out of the built-in domain controllers OU and not re-linked in the default domain controllers group policy back to the new OU, you'll get lots of SceCli messages in the event log (although you're event id does not suggest this). Leave SYSVOL alone... the SYSVOL\SYSVOL path/junction is normal... don't touch! Use GPOTOOL on the Reskit and NTFRSUTL to troubleshoot general GPO/SYSVOL/FRS issues. In short, don't go making big changes to things which are unlikely to be the cause of the problem. Make sure DNS is working.. and check out that security problem mentioned earlier. Seeing as it's rather hard to see what chain of events have occurred to get you into this situation, if you're still in the mire, get out your wallet and give Micrsoft PSS a call. Regards Mylo -Original Message- From: Elmer Stöwer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 04 June 2002 20:14 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: slightly OT: ExchangeServer stops every 10 minutes (Active Direct ory issue?) Single local domain, single site two servers (einstein DC fileserver, platon DC exchangeserver). no event log failures, but the seems to stand for almost a minute at the same time as SceCli applies
RE: MBR Recovery?
Is your system partition marked as Active ? -Original Message- From: BW Brandt Ward (5320) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 06 June 2002 15:55 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: MBR Recovery? i copied the boot.ini from my c drive to the floppy so i know that they are looking in the same places. I havent yet tried the emergency repair as this is my production exchange box...would have to wait till the weekend...so i am getting my backup server setup for me to try things...havent had the time yet thismorningbut soon...very soon. b -Original Message- From: Myles, Damian [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, June 06, 2002 9:41 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: MBR Recovery? /mbr won't work because it's not the boot sector that's the problem. - Check the BOOT.INI on your working floppy and compare it with the one on the server. If you can't check the NTFS partition then download NTFSDOS from www.wininternals.com... What's the value for the rdisk(x)partition(x) in boot.ini, i.e. the one you boot from on the floppy ? - Check NTLDR is there - Check NTDETECT.COM is there - Check attributes are set correctly on the files (particularly SYSTEM) Can't remember but it's down to one of these three... particularly if you can boot from flop... Still... you COULD always post this to the MCSE forums. I'm sure this used to be an exam question on the NT4 exams... give our budding paper-based experts something real to get their teeth into :) PS: Have you done the emergency repair as suggested earlier yet ? -Original Message- From: BW Brandt Ward (5320) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 06 June 2002 14:51 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: MBR Recovery? well, i ran the format /mbr like you suggested and now all my data is gone! just kidding my partition is an NT 4.0 NTFS and it is hardware mirrored. The microsoft Q article mentions fdisk /mbr which i tried and it didnt work...I will try doing the re-install to a different directory on my recovery server and see what happens...or maybe i'll trash the boot record of the recovery server and try the repair process... knowledge is power Thanks, b -Original Message- From: Charles Carerros [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, June 06, 2002 8:31 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: MBR Recovery? I have had this issue on a workstation, the only solution I found was to run format /mbr from a Windows 98 bootdisk. What this does is completely wipe out the MBR. Then when you try to boot, the BIOS should realise there there isnt one assignt the correct drive letter (I believe it defaults to C) and they it should find your ntldr and other boot files. I did it on my Directors machine. I know there is a Q reference to this, but I don't know what one. Oh, and it worked like a charm. chuck -Original Message- From: BW Brandt Ward (5320) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, June 05, 2002 4:07 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: OT: MBR Recovery? My exchange server's boot record is toast...only boots with floppy...without..give the missing or bad ntloader message... anyone have any luck copying the backup boot record over the corrupt one? If so, using diskedit or something else? Thanks, B _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/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
RE: Failure To Mount Store
John, Read the Exchange 2000 Server Database Recovery document on the MS website.. that should get you going. -Original Message- From: Bowles, John L. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 06 June 2002 16:43 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Failure To Mount Store All, Server in question: E2K server SP2 2 Storage Groups (2 mail stores) Ok, currently I'm unable to mount the store of my second storage group (which has nothing on it) It keeps giving me the error: The Database Files on this store are inconsistent. Now all the transaction logs are all present. We haven't added that storage group to our backups yet. So that's why the logs are still present. I think the E00. log it's trying to access is corrupted. Now since there is nothing on this SG can I just deleted it and re-add it to save me some time? Or if I delete this SG will there be some adverse effects? Cause If I deleted it I planned on renaming it the same name as I have it now. Will there be a problem with that? I'd like to hear what you guys/gals think. 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] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: slightly OT: ExchangeServer stops every 10 minutes (Active Direct ory issue?)
You can run GPOTOOL and GPRESULT straight away.. they're non-destructive :) -Original Message- From: Elmer Stöwer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 06 June 2002 17:03 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: slightly OT: ExchangeServer stops every 10 minutes (Active Direct ory issue?) All right... Good luck sounds like weekend fun. I will do all this on Saturday after running the weekend backup on our servers. I will probably run GPResult and GPOTool again tomorrow on _all_ DCs. Thank you very much so far... All the best Elmer -Original Message- From: Myles, Damian [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, June 06, 2002 4:52 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: slightly OT: ExchangeServer stops every 10 minutes (Active Direct ory issue?) OK... seeing as it's seeming to hang during application of group policy, try the following: 1. Run GPRESULT on each domain controller and compare the output 2. Run GPOTOOL on the errant domain controller and check for errors If there are no errors, you could do a number of additional things, although there is some risk involved ... I trust you have backups... check out Point 3 first before doing any of the others ... maybe I should have made that point one :) 1. Move the Exchange Server out of the built-in Domain Controllers OU into a fresh OU. Don't link the Default Domain Controllers Policy to the GPO yet... wait for the next SceCli cycle and see if you still get the hanging problem. 2. If you're not getting any replication errors on the two DC's and there are NO dns errors, consider running DCPROMO on the Exchange server and removing it as a domain controller.. this is risky if you do have any outstanding replication issues, so I'd do this as a last resort...! 3. Try this one first... POLICYTEST is saying that the Exchange Enterprise Servers group does not have the SeSecurity Privilege .. there is a caveat in the POLICYTEST help that says you shouldn't apply any policy changes on your DC's until this change has been replicated, so I suspect this is creating problems for you. Run SETUP /DOMAINPREP again .. it's not unheard of for SP2 to trash domainprep permissions (seem to recall a previous post here to that effect)... Good luck. -Original Message- From: Elmer Stöwer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 06 June 2002 16:25 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: slightly OT: ExchangeServer stops every 10 minutes (Active Direct ory issue?) Exchane is running for about 6 month now on the new server and I can hardly find log-files. We had an 5.5 Server which had some problems. I upgraded the old NT PDC to W2K and set up a new 2K Server for E2K. Then I used the Ed Crowley method do move the content from the 5.5 Server to E2K. I encountered a _lot_ of problems during that 'upgrade'. But after that Exchange 'worked fine' for some month. Later I found SceCli and UserEnv Errors every 5 minutes in the event log. I tried to fix that following the according ms docs. I think since then we have the Exchange Problems. Btw. I also installed a new dat streamer about the time we ran into the Exchange problems, but I never considered this as the cause. So far, thank you very much for you help. I was able to fix some issues and learned a lot. regards Elmer -Original Message- From: Myles, Damian [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, June 06, 2002 3:44 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: slightly OT: ExchangeServer stops every 10 minutes (Active Direct ory issue?) Did you encounter any errors when you did your initial Exchange server install ? Check back through the logs.. if you're getting POLICYTEST errors then it looks like DOMAINPREP didn't run right... you did the run the SP2 version of policytest btw? -Original Message- From: Elmer Stöwer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 06 June 2002 12:48 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: slightly OT: ExchangeServer stops every 10 minutes (Active Direct ory issue?) Running POLICYTEST says !!! right NOT found !!! for all DCs. regards Elmer -Original Message- From: Myles, Damian [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, June 06, 2002 10:22 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: slightly OT: ExchangeServer stops every 10 minutes (Active Direct ory issue?) I believe it's a special built-in group like Authenticated Users. It may well not be present in a single domain... I'll see if I can find out more about that one. To check your DOMAINPREP ran ok... run POLICYTEST on the domain controller from the \Support\Utils\Platform folder on the Exchange 2000 Ent. Edition CD-ROM to make sure all domain controllers have the Manage Auditing and Security logs privilege. You'll need to be a domain admin to run this all domain
RE: Attempting to use MAPI over the internet
Turn off your firewall. -Original Message- From: Keith Lein [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 04 June 2002 22:05 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Attempting to use MAPI over the internet I know it isnt secure but is there a way to do it? If so can someone show me a white paper of give me some help in the right direction 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: slightly OT: ExchangeServer stops every 10 minutes (Active Direct ory issue?)
Ouch.. what a mess.. Check through your event logs... the symptoms you are describing suggest an underlying problem, e.g. DNS... the enviable situation you're in, I suspect, is a byproduct of that (machine account/kerberos/security problems etc), together with some new ones you may have introduced trying to fix the problem. This little chestnut was interesting.. Error NT-AUTORITÄT\DOMÄNENCONTROLLER DER ORGANISATION doesn't have Replicating Directory Changes Replication Syncronization Manage Replication Topology Have you been changed any AD/OU security or turned off AD inheritance within your domain tree Click on Advanced in ADUC, go to the root of your domain and click on the Security tab.. what do you see ? Enterprise Domain Controllers (built-in group) should have Manage Replication Topology, Replicating directory changes and Replication Synchronization Allow permissions. Exchange Enterprise Servers (built-in) should have Manage Replication Topology. How are you applying group policy within your organisation ? If you're using some of the Microsoft GPO Templates (e.g. SECUREDC.INF)and applying those on your Exchange Server, you may experience *ahem* some loss of functionality, killing Exchange in the process. For problems with machine accounts, have a look at Technet Q260575.. this deals with machine account 'Access Denied' errors. Also, if you've moved the machine accounts for your DC's out of the built-in domain controllers OU and not re-linked in the default domain controllers group policy back to the new OU, you'll get lots of SceCli messages in the event log (although you're event id does not suggest this). Leave SYSVOL alone... the SYSVOL\SYSVOL path/junction is normal... don't touch! Use GPOTOOL on the Reskit and NTFRSUTL to troubleshoot general GPO/SYSVOL/FRS issues. In short, don't go making big changes to things which are unlikely to be the cause of the problem. Make sure DNS is working.. and check out that security problem mentioned earlier. Seeing as it's rather hard to see what chain of events have occurred to get you into this situation, if you're still in the mire, get out your wallet and give Micrsoft PSS a call. Regards Mylo -Original Message- From: Elmer Stöwer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 04 June 2002 20:14 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: slightly OT: ExchangeServer stops every 10 minutes (Active Direct ory issue?) Single local domain, single site two servers (einstein DC fileserver, platon DC exchangeserver). no event log failures, but the seems to stand for almost a minute at the same time as SceCli applies security policy on the exchange server (event 1704). netdiag is not very helpful. DCdiag was a good hint. I put the output of both servers here, cause I don't know what to do anymore (maybe 12h work is to much for one day) output of DCdiag on einstein: -- Doing primary tests Testing server: Alt-Moabit\EINSTEIN Starting test: Replications [Replications Check,EINSTEIN] A recent replication attempt failed: From PLATON to EINSTEIN Naming Context: DC=cyberconsult,DC=lan The replication generated an error (8453): Der Replikationszugriff wurde verweigert. The failure occurred at 2002-06-04 19:48.21. The last success occurred at 2002-05-23 17:02.11. 3115 failures have occurred since the last success. The machine account for the destination EINSTEIN. is not configured properly. Check the userAccountControl field. Kerberos Error. The machine account is not present, or does not match on the. destination, source or KDC servers. Verify domain partition of KDC is in sync with rest of enterprise. The tool repadmin/syncall can be used for this purpose. . EINSTEIN passed test Replications Starting test: NCSecDesc - output of DCdiag on platon: Doing primary tests Testing server: Alt-Moabit\PLATON Starting test: Replications . PLATON passed test Replications Starting test: NCSecDesc Error NT-AUTORITÄT\DOMÄNENCONTROLLER DER ORGANISATION doesn't have Replicating Directory Changes Replication Syncronization Manage Replication Topology access rights for the naming context: DC=cyberconsult,DC=lan . PLATON failed test NCSecDesc - Using replmon.exe to determine the status of replication I get the following: - Directory Partition: DC=cyberconsult,DC=lan Partner Name: Alt-Moabit\PLATON Partner GUID: FFF5003A-7832-48CD-A5E0-9D8227C95EC0 Last Attempted Replication: 6/4/2002 4:31:46
RE: Messages building in queue
I've seen this problem occur if users reply to mail addresses that are no longer valid AD objects... For example User: JSmith has Delivery Options enabled to point to a AD Contact for his [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailbox. Let's say JSmith changes his mail to yahoo.com and the original Windows Contact is deleted in AD, a new one created for [EMAIL PROTECTED] Other users who reply to John's e-mails will have the old AD information embedded within the message, referencing a dead object that no longer exists. These messages sit in the SMTP queue and cannot be delivered (you can see this in the properties of the message because the reference to the alias of the old object is within). Not sure about a solution on this one unfortunately... maybe someone else does. Regards, Mylo -Original Message- From: MS Exchange List [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 05 June 2002 01:07 To: Exchange Discussions Cc: John Q Jr. Subject: RE: Messages building in queue Hello, OS: Win2K, SP2, IIS Roll-up E2K: Native, SP2, Admin patch, Trend 6.0, Scan engine Post SP2 I noticed that our Queue for Yahoo.com would get up to the thousands sometimes. Deleting the top four or five problem messages and then a FORCE CONNECTION would rapidly clear them all out. It doesn't appear Email to other outbound hosts are effected. The problem messages (a red bulls-eye on the envelope icon) would have a 'Detail status' of retry, and the entire Yahoo.com queue would have a status of Retry. Remote Delivery. The connection was dropped by the remote host. The problem messages are usually just SPAM destined for some of our users who are setup with Forwards to their Yahoo email accounts. Doesn't appear to be related to size of the message, etc... I haven't turned up logging etc as I'm hoping someone else will make the PSS call and go through the hassles of getting a Hotfix out. Thanks. :-) Brent -Original Message- From: John Q Jr. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Posted At: Tuesday, June 04, 2002 3:47 PM Posted To: MS Exchange List Conversation: Messages building in queue Subject: Re: Messages building in queue Has anyone else had issues with mail queuing for a week, then sending when forced. Should I be forcing mail to send from the queue on a regular basis, that seems odd. = When I installed HotFix Q287678 on my Exchange 2000 server that already had SP2 the system stopped all the Exchange services, as expected, but a few odd things happened. 1) The queue was cleared, does this occur everytime you shutdown the E2K services? 2) Duplicate messages were re-sent to users, dating back to May 22nd. I found no significance of that date (i.e. the last time the services were stopped started, or system was rebooted occurred more recently). Not all messages just a few dozen. Anyone have any idea what caused this? 3) When the queue was cleared, about 60 messages had been sitting in the queue finally sent. The oldest message I could track dated back to May 14th. I am at fault for not checking the queue more often, but it appears that these 60 messages were stuck in the queue for what ever reason. What I don't understand is why most of these messages, a few thousand a day were sent w/o issue, some to some of the same domains as some of the stuck messages, sent fine and others did not. Finally, why did user not get NDR's, they are set to send after 5 days of attempts have failed. Thank you, - John Q P.S. Any input appreciated. - Original Message - _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/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: Outlook 97 Notification
And we know Webster is an authority on the use of English :-P -Original Message- From: Setmajer, Jerzy [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 05 June 2002 16:39 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Outlook 97 Notification Not according to Webster Dictionary One entry found for authorise. British variant of AUTHORIZE As opposed to authorize - which does not refer to authorise at all. Must be some sort of British slang or something :=) Jerzy -Original Message- From: Ward, Stuart [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, June 05, 2002 9:20 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Outlook 97 Notification Surely 'authorize' is the variant and the true English spelling is 'authorise' Stu -Original Message- From: Setmajer, Jerzy [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, June 05, 2002 10:06 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Outlook 97 Notification Boy this list is educational. Now I know that authorise is a British variant of AUTHORIZE. Very cool. -Original Message- From: Chris Scharff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, June 05, 2002 8:34 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Outlook 97 Notification Sure. What's your budget? -Original Message- From: Darren Ash [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, June 05, 2002 3:57 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Outlook 97 Notification I have users that look at 2 mailboxes. They have ol set up to display a message when new mail arrives however, this does not work on the secondary mailbox ??? I guess this is the way it is supposed to work but does anyone know how to make it work on both NT4 Sp6a, Ex 5.5 SP4, OL97 Coolchain LtdCoolchain Ltd London Road Henley Road Teynham Paddock Wood Kent Kent ME9 9PR TN12 6DN Tel: 01795 523200Tel: 01892 831400 Fax: 01795 523241Fax: 01892 831451 All business is conducted in accordance with the company's terms and conditions, a copy of which is available on request. For the avoidance of doubt, all orders initiated by ourselves must be signed by an authorised signatory of this company. _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/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: Outlook 97 Notification
Of course Ed.. this is a caring forum :-) -Original Message- From: Ed Crowley [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 05 June 2002 17:02 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Outlook 97 Notification That should be, Because there..., if anyone cares. Ed Crowley MCSE+Internet MVP kcCC+I Tech Consultant hp Services Protecting the world from PSTs and Bricked Backups! -Original Message- From: Ed Crowley [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, June 05, 2002 7:57 AM To: 'Exchange Discussions' Subject: RE: Outlook 97 Notification Because here was no standardized spelling until after the settlement of the Americas, and because standardization developed separately, neither side of the pond can claim their spelling is correct or the other side's is wrong. It's just different. 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 Ward, Stuart Sent: Wednesday, June 05, 2002 7:20 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Outlook 97 Notification Surely 'authorize' is the variant and the true English spelling is 'authorise' Stu -Original Message- From: Setmajer, Jerzy [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, June 05, 2002 10:06 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Outlook 97 Notification Boy this list is educational. Now I know that authorise is a British variant of AUTHORIZE. Very cool. -Original Message- From: Chris Scharff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, June 05, 2002 8:34 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Outlook 97 Notification Sure. What's your budget? -Original Message- From: Darren Ash [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, June 05, 2002 3:57 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Outlook 97 Notification I have users that look at 2 mailboxes. They have ol set up to display a message when new mail arrives however, this does not work on the secondary mailbox ??? I guess this is the way it is supposed to work but does anyone know how to make it work on both NT4 Sp6a, Ex 5.5 SP4, OL97 Coolchain LtdCoolchain Ltd London Road Henley Road Teynham Paddock Wood Kent Kent ME9 9PR TN12 6DN Tel: 01795 523200Tel: 01892 831400 Fax: 01795 523241Fax: 01892 831451 All business is conducted in accordance with the company's terms and conditions, a copy of which is available on request. For the avoidance of doubt, all orders initiated by ourselves must be signed by an authorised signatory of this company. _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/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: Outlook for Mac
That WAS a deliberate ploy to get him to do a NetBIOS name cache refresh wasn't it (NBTSTAT -RR) ? :-P -Original Message- From: Felicity Smith [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 04 June 2002 15:40 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Outlook for Mac I don't use the MAC, but I can see your problem. Change the X's to the valid ip address of your Exchange Server. You may need to reboot, or if the MAC supports NBTSTAT do a NBTSTAT -RR HTH --Felicity Hello Mac supporters, I have a couple Mac clients connecting to Exchange 5.5 using a Mac HOSTS file. My HOSTS file is formatted a bit differently than the one you posted. Mine looks like this: ServreName CNAME blah.blah.blah.edu blah.blah.blab.edu A XXX.XXX.XXX.XXX There is no IN in the HOSTS file. See if this helps. Will Grever -Original Message- From: Couch, Nate [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, June 04, 2002 7:11 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Outlook for Mac Andrey, When setting up the profile in Outlook try using the IP address for the Exchange 2000 server (if you haven't already). Then run the Test Settings to see if the user will resolve then. Nate -- From: Andrey Fyodorov Reply To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, June 3, 2002 17:12 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject:RE: Outlook for Mac Thanks. Interesting question about WINS, but I don't know if Macs know what it is. The customers do not get to the point where their name would get underlined. That's exactly where it fails - resolving their name against their GAL. the hosts file is something like this: exchserver IN CNAME exchserver.domain.com. exchserver.domain.com. IN A ip_address I don't think the problem is with HOSTS since they are getting the connection to the Exchange server. If they were not getting connection the error message would say can't find the Exchange server. -Original Message- From: Couch, Nate [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, June 03, 2002 7:49 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Outlook for Mac Andrey, I do know that Macs do not use WINS (at least through Mac OS 9.2). They can use DNS, however, I must admit to not having triedmy Outlook 2001 against and Exchange 2000 server. You say that they can ping the server so that means their TCPIP is setup correctly. When you setup the Outlook profile did their name get underlined when you did the Test Settings? How is the hosts file setup? Do you have the listings for the DNS server(s) in the file? Do you have the correct FQDN for the Exchange server? That's all I have for now. If I think of anything else I will let you know. Nate Couch EDS Messaging -- From: Tony Hlabse Reply To: Exchange Discussions Sent: Saturday, June 1, 2002 10:38 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Re: Outlook for Mac Did you check WINS? -- Original Message - From: Andrey Fyodorov [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, June 01, 2002 10:30 PM Subject: Outlook for Mac Hi all. I have a couple of customers who cannot connect to our Exchange 2000 servers with Outlook for Mac (versions 8.2 and 2001) They have set up their HOSTS file correctly. They can ping the Exchange server. When they launch Outlook, it seems to find the server as it prompts them to enter their username, windows domain name, and password. After they supply their credentials, Outlook comes back with an error message saying that their name could not be resolved against a global address list. When they try to log onto the same mailbox from a PC, everything works. Each customer has their own GAL with correct permissions and filter. Does anyone here have experience with Outlook for Mac and Exchange 2000? I have already checked all the articles on MS KB and searched through the newsgroups. Found some tips but they did not help. Thanks in advance! Andrey Fyodorov Senior Exchange Administrator iNNERHOST http://www.innerhost.com P.S. I can't believe I actually used to love Macs 10 years ago. _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/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
RE: Active Directory Connectors
Mark, I've seen the above document before .. and stuck with one-way CA's after having problems with two-way connections where processing/updating of a large number of objects is involved. In addition to your comment concerning separate CA's, I'd also add that mapping sites/recipients across to OU's on a one-to-one basis CA wise can be beneficial, particularly if you're dealing with a large number of foreign recipients within the 5.5 org. Regards, Mylo -Original Message- From: Mark Harford [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 14 May 2002 18:46 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Active Directory Connectors Except that 2 one-way agreements are specifically advised against by MS. As you've obviously seen you can get away with them sometimes (and we have in the past) but I wouldn't actively recommend it especially as it comes up in the MS top ten list of directory service support calls. See http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;EN-US;q303180 Go for one-way initially by all means but then turn it into a two-way by checking the appropriate box on the CA. We used separate CAs for MBXs, DLs, CRs to divert them into separate containers. Regarding your original question you will eventually want to repoint your other 55 Site and Directory Replication Connectors at the first sites E2K SRS server, so there's no harm in doing this asap rather than wait for the last server to go. Mark -Original Message- From: Myles, Damian [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 14 May 2002 16:14 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Active Directory Connectors You could replace the single connector with a two-way one but I'd just have separate connection agreements for each way. It's not the most robust (ADC) piece of software in the world and does make troubleshooting a little easier. -Original Message- From: Pennell, Ronald B. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 14 May 2002 17:09 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Active Directory Connectors OK, initial one-way from exchange to AD.. Then replace with a two way agreement. This means that all updates to exchange accounts must be done via the ex.5.5? Correct? Ron -Original Message- From: Myles, Damian [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, May 14, 2002 10:45 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Active Directory Connectors Just a suggestion... Set up one way connectors .. you'll likely save yourself a bit of pain in the process. Perform the synch out of 5.5 into AD first and once happy with the results, create another connection agreement back into the 5.5 environment. -Original Message- From: Pennell, Ronald B. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 14 May 2002 16:04 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Active Directory Connectors Have a 5.5 site with two domains (sites) connected via site connector. Getting ready to install the ADC in my site. I will be setting up the two way connection agreement for my site to the Active Directory. I will replace the 1st server in my site after all other servers have been upgraded/replaced. The site connector between both sites should stay intact until I remove the 1st server!! Hopefully!!! At a later date, I plan on upgrading the other site and move them into my domain. We share the GAL so we can see all users. Question: Will I have to do anything with the other site until I get them ready to join my domain? 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] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.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 (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
RE: Active Directory Connectors
Yeah.. true.. particular if you're dealing with large numbers of CA's. Being able to map them out to individual OU's is a nice feature, instead of just fire and forget. Been thinking about having a naming convention for CA's so that I don't forget what they did =) Did you map across from Exchange--AD/Windows first in the two-way CA's and then back again (i.e. default)... ? Regards Mylo -Original Message- From: Mark Harford [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 15 May 2002 09:43 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Active Directory Connectors Fair point. We initially used ldap filters in our CAs to populate particular OUs and as a result had to use a complex mixture of Primary and Secondary one-way CAs. I've now reduced them to non-filtered two-way CAs now that the initial bulk of replication has all happened; largely for ease of support by my colleagues and future exchange/AD admins here. The most useful thing I found was to have a large whiteboard next to my desk with a diagram of all the CAs! This ensured I didn't set up duplicate paths and that all recipients would get replicated. Mark -Original Message- From: Myles, Damian [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 15 May 2002 08:30 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Active Directory Connectors Mark, I've seen the above document before .. and stuck with one-way CA's after having problems with two-way connections where processing/updating of a large number of objects is involved. In addition to your comment concerning separate CA's, I'd also add that mapping sites/recipients across to OU's on a one-to-one basis CA wise can be beneficial, particularly if you're dealing with a large number of foreign recipients within the 5.5 org. Regards, Mylo -Original Message- From: Mark Harford [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 14 May 2002 18:46 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Active Directory Connectors Except that 2 one-way agreements are specifically advised against by MS. As you've obviously seen you can get away with them sometimes (and we have in the past) but I wouldn't actively recommend it especially as it comes up in the MS top ten list of directory service support calls. See http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;EN-US;q303180 Go for one-way initially by all means but then turn it into a two-way by checking the appropriate box on the CA. We used separate CAs for MBXs, DLs, CRs to divert them into separate containers. Regarding your original question you will eventually want to repoint your other 55 Site and Directory Replication Connectors at the first sites E2K SRS server, so there's no harm in doing this asap rather than wait for the last server to go. Mark -Original Message- From: Myles, Damian [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 14 May 2002 16:14 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Active Directory Connectors You could replace the single connector with a two-way one but I'd just have separate connection agreements for each way. It's not the most robust (ADC) piece of software in the world and does make troubleshooting a little easier. -Original Message- From: Pennell, Ronald B. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 14 May 2002 17:09 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Active Directory Connectors OK, initial one-way from exchange to AD.. Then replace with a two way agreement. This means that all updates to exchange accounts must be done via the ex.5.5? Correct? Ron -Original Message- From: Myles, Damian [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, May 14, 2002 10:45 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Active Directory Connectors Just a suggestion... Set up one way connectors .. you'll likely save yourself a bit of pain in the process. Perform the synch out of 5.5 into AD first and once happy with the results, create another connection agreement back into the 5.5 environment. -Original Message- From: Pennell, Ronald B. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 14 May 2002 16:04 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Active Directory Connectors Have a 5.5 site with two domains (sites) connected via site connector. Getting ready to install the ADC in my site. I will be setting up the two way connection agreement for my site to the Active Directory. I will replace the 1st server in my site after all other servers have been upgraded/replaced. The site connector between both sites should stay intact until I remove the 1st server!! Hopefully!!! At a later date, I plan on upgrading the other site and move them into my domain. We share the GAL so we can see all users. Question: Will I have to do anything with the other site until I get them ready to join my domain? Ron _ List
RE: Arcserve 6.Junk
Kudos and commiserations. -Original Message- From: William Lefkovics [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 15 May 2002 10:32 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Arcserve 6.Junk That's true. I kept ours at 1GB. Anymore and it struggled. Raima crap... I used ArcServeIT 6.x for three years. William -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Andy David Sent: Tuesday, May 14, 2002 12:33 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Arcserve 6.Junk Back when I used to sniff glue and used CA products, I found that the only way to keep an Arkanserve database from corrupting was to keep it small - maybe a month of job logs. Otherwise, it always seemed to blow out after awhile. -Original Message- From: Bill Kuhl [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, May 14, 2002 3:27 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Arcserve 6.Junk Our Arcserve 6.Junk database hosed up also. The filenames have funny characters in them. We couldn't get it to repair. You can restore by bringing back an entire disk volume. Bill Kuhl -Original Message- From: Andy David [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, May 14, 2002 2:25 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Arcserve 6.Junk Can you simply restore it from tape? You've been backing it up yes? -Original Message- From: Woodruff, Michael [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, May 14, 2002 3:15 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Arcserve 6.Junk Anyone know how to create a new Arcserve 6.6 database. Mine has gone away. Thanks. I can't wait to replace this with Veritas BE which we are running everywhere 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] -- 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 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] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.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: Arcserve 6.Junk
May your rehab pass quickly... just sadistic curiousity..did anyone ever manage to restore via the Disaster Recovery bootdisk (including NTFS permissions) option ? -Original Message- From: Andy David [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 15 May 2002 13:27 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Arcserve 6.Junk William and I are recovering Arkanusers. -Original Message- From: Myles, Damian [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, May 15, 2002 4:41 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Arcserve 6.Junk Kudos and commiserations. -Original Message- From: William Lefkovics [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 15 May 2002 10:32 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Arcserve 6.Junk That's true. I kept ours at 1GB. Anymore and it struggled. Raima crap... I used ArcServeIT 6.x for three years. William -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Andy David Sent: Tuesday, May 14, 2002 12:33 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Arcserve 6.Junk Back when I used to sniff glue and used CA products, I found that the only way to keep an Arkanserve database from corrupting was to keep it small - maybe a month of job logs. Otherwise, it always seemed to blow out after awhile. -Original Message- From: Bill Kuhl [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, May 14, 2002 3:27 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Arcserve 6.Junk Our Arcserve 6.Junk database hosed up also. The filenames have funny characters in them. We couldn't get it to repair. You can restore by bringing back an entire disk volume. Bill Kuhl -Original Message- From: Andy David [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, May 14, 2002 2:25 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Arcserve 6.Junk Can you simply restore it from tape? You've been backing it up yes? -Original Message- From: Woodruff, Michael [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, May 14, 2002 3:15 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Arcserve 6.Junk Anyone know how to create a new Arcserve 6.6 database. Mine has gone away. Thanks. I can't wait to replace this with Veritas BE which we are running everywhere 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] -- 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 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
RE: Exchange 2000 Private Store Permissions
Sounds like a nice place to work though. -Original Message- From: Andy David [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 15 May 2002 13:33 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Exchange 2000 Private Store Permissions Perhaps. But that reg tweak only prevents the import/export of psts and hides the Open pst menu option. Users can still create the pst service so it may not accomplish his unstated goal regardless! -Original Message- From: Mark Harford [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, May 15, 2002 5:13 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Exchange 2000 Private Store Permissions Could Allen actually be thinking of banning PST creation but just got the phrasing/thought process slightly wrong -Original Message- From: Martin Blackstone [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 14 May 2002 13:49 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Exchange 2000 Private Store Permissions I cant help myself. I just have to ask. WHY??? -Original Message- From: Allen Davis [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, May 09, 2002 7:23 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Exchange 2000 Private Store Permissions I'm looking for a way to prevent users from creating new folders under their Exchange 2000 mailbox on my server. We'll be providing training that 'directs' them not to, but I want to keep them from doing it anyway. Which, of course, they will try to do. Is there a way to prevent the creation of new folders in addition to the default mailbox folders in Exchange 2000? _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/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 (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] -- 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: Arcserve 6.Junk
Agreed. In Arcserve's case...Obesa cantavit (the fat lady has sung) -Original Message- From: Andy David [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 15 May 2002 13:58 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Arcserve 6.Junk Never even attempted. A man has got to know his limitations! :0 -Original Message- From: Myles, Damian [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, May 15, 2002 7:46 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Arcserve 6.Junk May your rehab pass quickly... just sadistic curiousity..did anyone ever manage to restore via the Disaster Recovery bootdisk (including NTFS permissions) option ? -Original Message- From: Andy David [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 15 May 2002 13:27 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Arcserve 6.Junk William and I are recovering Arkanusers. -Original Message- From: Myles, Damian [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, May 15, 2002 4:41 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Arcserve 6.Junk Kudos and commiserations. -Original Message- From: William Lefkovics [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 15 May 2002 10:32 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Arcserve 6.Junk That's true. I kept ours at 1GB. Anymore and it struggled. Raima crap... I used ArcServeIT 6.x for three years. William -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Andy David Sent: Tuesday, May 14, 2002 12:33 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Arcserve 6.Junk Back when I used to sniff glue and used CA products, I found that the only way to keep an Arkanserve database from corrupting was to keep it small - maybe a month of job logs. Otherwise, it always seemed to blow out after awhile. -Original Message- From: Bill Kuhl [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, May 14, 2002 3:27 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Arcserve 6.Junk Our Arcserve 6.Junk database hosed up also. The filenames have funny characters in them. We couldn't get it to repair. You can restore by bringing back an entire disk volume. Bill Kuhl -Original Message- From: Andy David [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, May 14, 2002 2:25 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Arcserve 6.Junk Can you simply restore it from tape? You've been backing it up yes? -Original Message- From: Woodruff, Michael [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, May 14, 2002 3:15 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Arcserve 6.Junk Anyone know how to create a new Arcserve 6.6 database. Mine has gone away. Thanks. I can't wait to replace this with Veritas BE which we are running everywhere 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] -- 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 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
RE: Mail stuck in Categorizer
Can you do name resolution correctly from said 'next server inline'.. nslookup etc ? Was all external mail working before correctly ? What is this 'next' server ? Regards Mylo -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 14 May 2002 14:51 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Mail stuck in Categorizer Thanks everyone for the input, so it could have been the next server inline and now that server is up and running fine and the message is still not going anywhere. Any ideas on how to kick start it, I have re-started services and the server itself, the message just in limbo?? rick -Original Message- From: Bryon Barkley [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, May 13, 2002 10:42 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Mail stuck in Categorizer I've had this problem and it was because the mail couldn't go to the next server inline, in my case it was through our outbound gateway. If the mail can't reach its next destination it will stay in the categorizer. Check to see where you mail goes next and you might find your culprit. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of MS Exchange List Sent: Monday, May 13, 2002 10:45 AM To: Exchange Discussions Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: Mail stuck in Categorizer Hello, We had this problem with E2K and SP1, after an inplace upgrade from 5.5 . It only occurred to Email sent to Distribution Groups that had restrictions on who could send to the DGs. Once the restrictions were removed from the effected lists the stuck Email would flow out of the Categorizer queue. Worked with PSS for months and we never were able to solve it. Finally was resolved with the upgrade to E2K SP2. I remember other posts to this List in the past with a similar problem of Email getting stuck in the queue, so you might want to search the Archives as their culprit was something different from ours. Good Luck, Brent -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Posted At: Monday, May 13, 2002 8:25 AM Posted To: MS Exchange List Conversation: Mail stuck in Categorizer Subject: Mail stuck in Categorizer All, I have messages that users are calling me about that say they have been delayed. When I look in the Message Tracking System the last thing logged is: SMTP: Messages Submitted to Categorizer Does anyone know why or how this happens? How do I get them delivered? Rick _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/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: Active Directory Connectors
Just a suggestion... Set up one way connectors .. you'll likely save yourself a bit of pain in the process. Perform the synch out of 5.5 into AD first and once happy with the results, create another connection agreement back into the 5.5 environment. -Original Message- From: Pennell, Ronald B. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 14 May 2002 16:04 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Active Directory Connectors Have a 5.5 site with two domains (sites) connected via site connector. Getting ready to install the ADC in my site. I will be setting up the two way connection agreement for my site to the Active Directory. I will replace the 1st server in my site after all other servers have been upgraded/replaced. The site connector between both sites should stay intact until I remove the 1st server!! Hopefully!!! At a later date, I plan on upgrading the other site and move them into my domain. We share the GAL so we can see all users. Question: Will I have to do anything with the other site until I get them ready to join my domain? 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: Active Directory Connectors
You could replace the single connector with a two-way one but I'd just have separate connection agreements for each way. It's not the most robust (ADC) piece of software in the world and does make troubleshooting a little easier. -Original Message- From: Pennell, Ronald B. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 14 May 2002 17:09 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Active Directory Connectors OK, initial one-way from exchange to AD.. Then replace with a two way agreement. This means that all updates to exchange accounts must be done via the ex.5.5? Correct? Ron -Original Message- From: Myles, Damian [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, May 14, 2002 10:45 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Active Directory Connectors Just a suggestion... Set up one way connectors .. you'll likely save yourself a bit of pain in the process. Perform the synch out of 5.5 into AD first and once happy with the results, create another connection agreement back into the 5.5 environment. -Original Message- From: Pennell, Ronald B. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 14 May 2002 16:04 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Active Directory Connectors Have a 5.5 site with two domains (sites) connected via site connector. Getting ready to install the ADC in my site. I will be setting up the two way connection agreement for my site to the Active Directory. I will replace the 1st server in my site after all other servers have been upgraded/replaced. The site connector between both sites should stay intact until I remove the 1st server!! Hopefully!!! At a later date, I plan on upgrading the other site and move them into my domain. We share the GAL so we can see all users. Question: Will I have to do anything with the other site until I get them ready to join my domain? 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] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Exchange 5.5 Port 110 binding only to local host
What does a netstat -an -p TCP return for Port 110 ? No entry for 0.0.0.0:110 ? -Original Message- From: Fred Macondray [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 03 May 2002 00:31 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Exchange 5.5 Port 110 binding only to local host Hi All, I've got an exchange 5.5 server that has port 110 listening only on 127.0.0.1. How can I change the binding of the port to listen on the system's primary IP? Thanks in advance, Fred __ Do You Yahoo!? Yahoo! Health - your guide to health and wellness http://health.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: any news on sp3?
Or 'My GAL's mad at me' from Madness ? -Original Message- From: Andy David [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 06 May 2002 13:36 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: any news on sp3? singing I've been waiting, for a GAL like you, to come into my life. Yea, waiting, for SP2 to make me feel alive. -Original Message- From: William Lefkovics [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, May 01, 2002 12:47 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: any news on sp3? What year? Might it require Windows2000 sp3? -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Andrey Fyodorov Sent: Wednesday, May 01, 2002 9:44 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: any news on sp3? July is the target date -Original Message- From: Ali Wilkes (IT) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, April 29, 2002 5:05 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: any news on sp3? Ok... I lost my page a while back in the book known as waiting for the service pack. Anyone seen anything anywhere about ex2ksp3? info? target date? 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] -- 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: Sort of OT but!!!!
If you can I'd disable the external mail interface for the time being, until you've manage to cleanup internally... and avoid the wrath of your customers. Regards Mylo -Original Message- From: Les Bessant [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 03 May 2002 12:29 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Sort of OT but Yes. Tell the people who are complaining to read the headers. Les Bessant MCSE mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] IT Manager, Sanderson Townend Gilbert Acting in a personal capacity http://www.tiggercam.co.uk - New, improved and with more bounce! -Original Message- From: Roger Smith [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 30 April 2002 04:31 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Sort of OT but Hi all I have a client who is experiencing the following problem. He is receiving the virus messages for mail that he has not sent. What is happening is that someone has used his email address to proliferate the KLEZ virus and all the sites that have received it have emailed him saying that the mail that he has sent has the virus.I went through all the logs for both the exchange and the external mail interface and non of the mail was sent by him (come to that, from the site). Apart from changing his email address, dropping the old address and causing absolute bedlam is there any way of stopping this? Thanks 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] 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 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 Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/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 XP
Mark, Do you have Instant Messaging enabled ? Regards, Mylo -Original Message- From: Woodruff, Michael [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 03 May 2002 13:32 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Outlook XP Of course:-) -Original Message- From: Andy David [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, May 03, 2002 7:31 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Outlook XP Works fine here. Got Name Resolution? -Original Message- From: Woodruff, Michael [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, May 03, 2002 7:28 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Outlook XP Has any one noticed that Outlook XP is so damn slow when connecting to the exchange server? 5.5 and 2k. Whats the deal? _ List posting FAQ: http://www.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] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.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 XP
Oops ... should read ... Mike :) -Original Message- From: Myles, Damian Sent: 03 May 2002 14:30 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Outlook XP Mark, Do you have Instant Messaging enabled ? Regards, Mylo -Original Message- From: Woodruff, Michael [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 03 May 2002 13:32 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Outlook XP Of course:-) -Original Message- From: Andy David [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, May 03, 2002 7:31 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Outlook XP Works fine here. Got Name Resolution? -Original Message- From: Woodruff, Michael [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, May 03, 2002 7:28 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Outlook XP Has any one noticed that Outlook XP is so damn slow when connecting to the exchange server? 5.5 and 2k. Whats the deal? _ List posting FAQ: http://www.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] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/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 XP
Are you both running in native mode Win2k and Ex2K ? -Original Message- From: Woodruff, Michael [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 03 May 2002 14:38 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Outlook XP Yeah, we are running SP1. -Original Message- From: Andy David [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, May 03, 2002 8:38 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Outlook XP Office XP SP1, not Exchange! -Original Message- From: Crumbaker, Ron [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, May 03, 2002 8:36 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Outlook XP I'm running Exchange 2000 SP2 and have the issue. Thank you, Ron Crumbaker, MCP -Original Message- From: Andy David [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, May 03, 2002 7:36 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Outlook XP That issue was fixed in SP1, so hopefully he has already updated his install. -Original Message- From: Myles, Damian [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, May 03, 2002 8:31 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Outlook XP Oops ... should read ... Mike :) -Original Message- From: Myles, Damian Sent: 03 May 2002 14:30 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Outlook XP Mark, Do you have Instant Messaging enabled ? Regards, Mylo -Original Message- From: Woodruff, Michael [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 03 May 2002 13:32 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Outlook XP Of course:-) -Original Message- From: Andy David [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, May 03, 2002 7:31 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Outlook XP Works fine here. Got Name Resolution? -Original Message- From: Woodruff, Michael [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, May 03, 2002 7:28 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Outlook XP Has any one noticed that Outlook XP is so damn slow when connecting to the exchange server? 5.5 and 2k. Whats the deal? _ List posting FAQ: http://www.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] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] -- The information contained in this email message is privileged and confidential information intended only for the use of the individual or entity to whom it is addressed. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copy of this message is strictly prohibited. If you have received this email in error, please immediately notify Veronis Suhler Stevenson by telephone (212)935-4990, fax (212)381-8168, or email ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) and delete the message. Thank you. == _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http
RE: Outlook XP
There's a technet article on this but you might want to try and turn off AutoComplete and removing items from the Outlook name cache. This affects startup speed. -Original Message- From: Thomas Di Nardo [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 03 May 2002 16:47 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Outlook XP When you say slow connecting to the server, what do you mean? Is it slow connecting to the server on startup or is it slow opening attachments after OL is already up? If it's attachments, try Q300904. Tom. -Original Message- From: Woodruff, Michael [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, May 03, 2002 7:28 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Outlook XP Has any one noticed that Outlook XP is so damn slow when connecting to the exchange server? 5.5 and 2k. Whats the deal? _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/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: Routing multiple domain names internally
For the shaver in the bathroom next to the TCP/IP mouthwash on the shelf. -Original Message- From: Stephen Mynhier [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 02 May 2002 15:13 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Routing multiple domain names internally And why do we have SMTP connectors? -Original Message- From: Leo [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Posted At: Wednesday, May 01, 2002 5:32 AM Posted To: Exchange Discussion List Conversation: Routing multiple domain names internally Subject: Routing multiple domain names internally Do I need to tick the box on the addresses tab of the SMTP connector Allow messages to be relayed to these domains? I have one org and have multiple smtp addresses and they can come in at any of three of our worldwide smtp connectors (all e2k servers). The recipient policies for all smtp addresses are defined. The mailboxes have their respective smtp addresses defined and all the smtp connectors have all the smtp addresses listed with differeng costs. Is there anything else I need to do, and do I really need to Allow messages to be relayed to these domains? Regards Leo _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/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: Exchange System Manager and WINS
I think you're getting your wires crossed a little. The ESM issues you talk about a la WINS are 5.5 issues, not Win2K issues. The reason why you're not getting mailbox support is that the default AD Users and Computers snap-in (on the Win2K CD) does not contain the necessary support for Exchange mailbox manipulation. When you install the Ex2K tools (ESM and AD Users/Computers snapin) from the Ex2K CD, the appropriate .MSC files for these are installed under the \Exchsrvr\Bin folder. This is why you can do it from the Exchange Server itself. Install the tools off the Exchange CD onto the local machine where you wish to manage ex2k from and you'll get the supported snapins working. Regards, Mylo -Original Message- From: Roger Seielstad [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 02 May 2002 16:10 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Exchange System Manager and WINS How are you choosing what DC or Exchange server to connect to? If you are explicitly connecting to a server, are you using the host name or the FQDN? I'm guessing that you're just using the hostname (or NetBIOS name). Try using FQDN and seeing if that fixes it. Alternately, fix the domain suffix search order on your machine to include all necessary domains -- Roger D. Seielstad - MCSE Sr. Systems Administrator Peregrine Systems Atlanta, GA -Original Message- From: Bryon Barkley [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, May 01, 2002 5:58 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Exchange System Manager and WINS WIN2K SP1(navtive mode) and E2K (native mode) I know I have seen this in writing but am unable to locate it. For the ESM to function properly from a workstation, does that workstation have to point to a WINS server? From my experience, ESM will work when pointing to a WINS server and may or may not work if not. We are having a problem when trying to create mailbox enabled users, the option to create the mailbox does not appear. Even after the user is created and you go to the exchange task, the only option is to enable instant messaging, rendering the account unusable as far as mail is concerned. I know that WINS is not necessary in native mode, but I sure do remember reading that the ESM requires it. Others have told me that we might have a network browsing issue etc If anyone knows of any such literature about this please point me to it or any guidance to make it work without WINS would be great too. Thanks all! _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/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: Cerification question
Any anyone can get in a car and crash it. And anyone can get on a server .. H. -Original Message- From: Jerzy Setmajer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 02 May 2002 16:45 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Re: Cerification question I do not understand what is all the fuss about. I would like to point out that nobody here said that having a cert could hurt you. That means that it will be either ignored or it will help you. NO? Meaningless paper? Perhaps, but so is your driver's license. Does not mean you are a good driver, but you can't rent a car without it. Jerzy Setmajer From: King, John [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: 2002/05/02 Thu AM 10:41:39 EDT To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: Cerification question I have been conducting all my interviews wrong..!!! -Original Message- From: Soysal, Serdar [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, May 02, 2002 10:35 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Cerification question This may sound odd but there is one golden question that will tell you exactly if the candidate will fit the group or not: What are your three favorite movies? If the person likes similar movies as the general team and sounds smart, than he/she is a good buy. Serdar Soysal -Original Message- From: Stephen Mynhier [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, May 02, 2002 8:17 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Cerification question I deal with (new and different) people daily who have worked with Exchange for years but don't know their database from their check file. I wouldn't let them within 20 feet of any Exchange server that I worked on but they are the hired Exchange expert for their company. The fact is that people are people, and certified people are not inherently better than experienced people or vice versa. I think that the best bet is the person who realizes that, regardless of how much he knows, he does not know everything and is always willing and wanting to learn more than he currently knows. -Original Message- From: Ray Zorz [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Posted At: Wednesday, May 01, 2002 4:43 PM Posted To: Exchange Discussion List Conversation: Cerification question Subject: RE: Cerification question Very good points. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Tim Sent: Wednesday, May 01, 2002 2:22 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Cerification question You people talk like you can't have both. Sure there are some paper MCSEs out there but there are also many MCSEs that have mucho experience. Most hiring managers, all things being equal will look at experience first but... then certs. Additionally while experience is the best there are people that have worked in one environment for so long that they know NOTHING about any other capabilities of the hardware/software. They are nearly as bad as the paper MSCE because the scope of their knowledge is so very limited and because of their experience think the only way to run a network is the way they did it at their last job. At least the Paper boyz know they are limited, are willing to learn, cost half as much and don't cause half the drama the experience guy does. They piss me off so much more, that and they usually have no idea as to WHY their last network was set up that way but that it is just the best way. Experience is NOT always the best qualifier either _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/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:
RE: Dead Objects in Reply-To Messages hang SMTP Queue
Precisely, roughly in the neighbourhood of, give or take, *ahem* 3 (as far as I can tell) -Original Message- From: Tony Hlabse [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 25 April 2002 18:41 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Re: Dead Objects in Reply-To Messages hang SMTP Queue How many mistakes are we talking about. - Original Message - From: Myles, Damian [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, April 25, 2002 11:19 AM Subject: Dead Objects in Reply-To Messages hang SMTP Queue Fellow forumers, Has anyone else seen this particular problem under Ex2K SP2 ? I have a number of users who have Delivery Options enabled on their mailbox to forward mails to additional Internet e-mail accounts. Whilst this process is being slowly mothballed out in favour of OWA, I've experienced some issues with forwarding. These remote mail accounts are setup as Windows Contacts in AD and a couple of these objects in the past have been removed by mistake and then had to be recreated. However, and this is where it becomes a little strange, mails which are replied to referencing the details of the deleted object cannot be delivered (unsurprisingly) BUT stick in the SMTP queue flagged as Retry, causing all other mails meanwhile to queue up behind them in the SMTP queue. Only by freezing the undeliverable messages are those behind processed. Looking in the details of the message, I can see the reference to the dead object, e.g. Envelope Recipients: EX:/O=MY COMPANY/OU=MYADMIN GROUP/CN=RECIPIENTS/CN=User,Dead Aside from getting users to not to reply to mails which reference the dead object, is there any way I can prevent the queue from sticking ... I could reduce the number of retry attempts before dropping the mail on the SMTP VS but that seems like a poor option, particular where genuine connectivity problems occasionally do crop up =) Regards, Mylo _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/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: scheduling automatic rebooting of server
Roger, Do you need an ILS Server for that ? Regards Mylo -Original Message- From: Roger Seielstad [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 25 April 2002 14:16 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: scheduling automatic rebooting of server Try Netmeeting Remote Desktop. Its as good (if not better) than anything else out there. It really rocks. -- Roger D. Seielstad - MCSE Sr. Systems Administrator Peregrine Systems Atlanta, GA -Original Message- From: Ken Cornetet [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, April 24, 2002 5:38 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: scheduling automatic rebooting of server I agree about PCAnywhere. Things definitely improved when we upgraded from 8 to 9. I'd like to pull it off my servers altogether, but considering that my servers are all over the world, I can't really do that. On the other hand, some of my servers with PCAnywhere 8 are rock-solid, so I can't say for sure it's a problem. I tried to talk my boss into letting me switch to VNC, but freeware still scares management around here (But who will you call for support?). I'm really looking forward to win2k and terminal services - no more 3rd party remote control. -Original Message- From: Roger Seielstad [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, April 24, 2002 1:55 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: scheduling automatic rebooting of server Take PCAnywhere off the box and see if that improves your stability. And no, I'm not joking. I've never once seen a system that was more stable with that installed than without it. -- Roger D. Seielstad - MCSE Sr. Systems Administrator Peregrine Systems Atlanta, GA -Original Message- From: Ken Cornetet [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, April 24, 2002 12:47 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: scheduling automatic rebooting of server Because ASP gets senile quickly. If we don't reboot the OWA server weekly, we start seeing ASP errors on the OWA server. Likewise, we can count on the IMS servers to start flaking out after a month or two if we don't reboot them. Twice monthly is probably overkill, but since the reboots are free (ie: users never notice), we go for twice monthly. Mailbox servers tend to be a bit more stable, but prior to the reboots, we would occasionally start seeing errors, and when we tried to manually reboot, the exchange services would never go down cleanly. In honesty, we started these reboots in the NT SP5 MSX SP2 days. We've not tried reducing them since we went to 6a SP3. For the people on the list who insist that periodic reboots aren't needed: please save yourselves the effort of telling me how reboots aren't required if you have quality hardware and good admin practices. The boxes are HP netservers, lotsa RAM and CPU, and are running on EMC disk arrays. Likewise, our administration is VERY conservative. We do nothing to the servers unless we fully understand and test first on separate test systems. The only software on these boxes other than NT and Exchange is PCAnywhere and Legato networker client. I like Exchange. I like Exchange a lot. But it is not bug-free. I've found that periodic reboots tend to keep obscure bugs obscure. -Original Message- From: Andy David [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, April 24, 2002 11:21 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: scheduling automatic rebooting of server But why are the reboots required? -Original Message- From: Ken Cornetet [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, April 24, 2002 12:17 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: scheduling automatic rebooting of server If you are into Perl, I've got a script that I use to reboot our MSX55 servers (monthly for mailbox servers, twice monthly for IMS, weekly for OWA). It could undoubtedly be tweaked for what you want. It shuts down the MSX services before the reboot (and verifies that they do indeed stop). After the reboot is complete, it verifies that any service running at the time of reboot is running after the reboot. Sends email showing the results. -Original Message- From: James Cornett [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, April 24, 2002 10:34 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: scheduling automatic rebooting of server Does anyone know how to schedule the automatic rebooting of Windows 2000 Servers. I have looked on the their website and have found next to nothing about how to do this. What I am trying to do is on our Mail server I want to have the machine reboot say every Sunday night at a certain time. If anyone knows how to do this in Windows 2000 I would greatly appreciate the information.
RE: OWA Problem
Has IIS Lockdown been run on the Exchange servers ? -Original Message- From: Filipe Joel de Almeida [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 25 April 2002 15:16 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: OWA Problem It's Internet Explorer 6 gold, hfnetchk says I have all the required hot fixes applied, and I've tried setting security to low, but it didn't help. Any more suggestions? Filipe Joel de Almeida Network Consultant [EMAIL PROTECTED] Mobile: +351 967819600 -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Irfan Malik Sent: quinta-feira, 25 de Abril de 2002 14:59 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: OWA Problem Check your IE. -Original Message- From: Filipe Joel de Almeida [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, April 25, 2002 6:00 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject:OWA Problem Ok, let me see if I can phrase this out correctly: I'm taking over some Exchange 2K Servers. I have already applied SP2 and the latest patches in the ones that didn't have it yet, and now I'm checking to see if they are all stable. One of them returns me errors when I'm accessing through OWA. I can login, I see my folders, but when I click on inbox, for instance, I can't see the mails. It just says Loading... and I get a message on the bottom of IE, saying there were errors loading that page. Anyone has any thought on what may be causing this? Filipe Joel de Almeida Network Consultant [EMAIL PROTECTED] Mobile: +351 967819600 _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/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]
Dead Objects in Reply-To Messages hang SMTP Queue
Fellow forumers, Has anyone else seen this particular problem under Ex2K SP2 ? I have a number of users who have Delivery Options enabled on their mailbox to forward mails to additional Internet e-mail accounts. Whilst this process is being slowly mothballed out in favour of OWA, I've experienced some issues with forwarding. These remote mail accounts are setup as Windows Contacts in AD and a couple of these objects in the past have been removed by mistake and then had to be recreated. However, and this is where it becomes a little strange, mails which are replied to referencing the details of the deleted object cannot be delivered (unsurprisingly) BUT stick in the SMTP queue flagged as Retry, causing all other mails meanwhile to queue up behind them in the SMTP queue. Only by freezing the undeliverable messages are those behind processed. Looking in the details of the message, I can see the reference to the dead object, e.g. Envelope Recipients: EX:/O=MY COMPANY/OU=MYADMIN GROUP/CN=RECIPIENTS/CN=User,Dead Aside from getting users to not to reply to mails which reference the dead object, is there any way I can prevent the queue from sticking ... I could reduce the number of retry attempts before dropping the mail on the SMTP VS but that seems like a poor option, particular where genuine connectivity problems occasionally do crop up =) Regards, Mylo _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: iis 5
Let's hope they don't block 443 :) -Original Message- From: Mellott, Bill [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 24 April 2002 02:56 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: iis 5 Note: Due to the Code Red virus a great many ISP's suppling Internet access to the Home market have blocked port 80. In my case with Optonline they block port 80. So if I run a web server at home 1.) I can NOT see it from the internet due to the port blockage. 2.) Also if you read Optonlines access rules..etc they nix servers on their net, many ISP due this for non commercial accounts...etc... I got scolded pretty badly by a tech :o) bill -Original Message- From: Tener, Richard [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, April 23, 2002 5:32 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: iis 5 Im not in front of the computer now however I was basically giving all the rights possible and nothing worked yet. I dont have my router hooked up to the pc anymore. Also Im not sure if I binded the website to the ip address and will check the Anonymous-user permissions when i get home. Thanks for the input. Rich -Original Message- From: Ronny Pedersen [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, April 23, 2002 5:26 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: SV: iis 5 Hi ! Have You bind the Website to an IP-address ? You must. Anonymous-user must have read/execut on the website. User like IUSR_MACHINE. ROnny -Opprinnelig melding- Fra: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]Pa vegne av Tom Meunier Sendt: 23. april 2002 23:22 Til: Exchange Discussions Emne: RE: iis 5 The best website for immediate use is http://localhost/iisHelp In this case I'm gonna guess that it's NAT that's causing your problem. -Original Message- From: Tener, Richard [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Posted At: Tuesday, April 23, 2002 04:15 PM Posted To: MSExchange Mailing List Conversation: iis 5 Subject: iis 5 Does anyone know of a good website besides (Technet) that explains how to set permissions in iis 5 for outside users to see the web page. I was tryin to set up a web page on windows xp pro and for some reason it works at home but when you go outside the page cannot be displayed. sorry this is so off topic but it is killing me and I never set up iis before. Thanks Rich _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/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: Small business server
ISA is fine but in this case (SBS) your mail server is your ISA server is your file and print etc.. Not as secure as the PIX solution... I'd go with that. Mylo -Original Message- From: Thomas Di Nardo [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 24 April 2002 05:08 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Small business server ISA works fine as long as you know how to configure it. Tom. -Original Message- From: Ryan Finnesey [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, April 23, 2002 11:02 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Small business server Yes go with the PIX. I have had lots of problem is ISA. Ryan, -Original Message- From: Martin Blackstone [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, April 16, 2002 5:10 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Small business server But should they lose the idea as well? Don, what does your network admin think about this? -Original Message- From: Ely, Don [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, April 16, 2002 1:55 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Small business server Keep the PIX idea handy, lost the idea of ISA unless they want some Proxy filtering... Don Ely Network Engineer Tripath Imaging, Inc. (336) 290-8293 - Direct (336) 516-4519 - Mobile [EMAIL PROTECTED] - email http://www.tripathimaging.com -Original Message- From: Ken Cornetet [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, April 16, 2002 1:35 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: OT: Small business server A small company (15 people) is asking me about installing Exchange. I've been looking at Small Business Server and it looks almost too good to be true. The obvious limitations (50 workstations, no trusts) are not a problem for this company. Am I missing something here? Has anyone had any experience with SBS 2000? ISA server also looks interesting (the company originally wanted a PIX). Does it live up to it's promises? _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/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: Unable to bind over RPC
Tony, Sorry to answer questions with questions... Where are your WINS server(s) located ? When you ping the remote Exchange server, is DNS or WINS processing the request ? Does the server in question have multiple NIC's installed ? You could try creating an LMHOSTS file on your Exchange server with the following settings. EXCHSRVR 1.1.1.1 #PRE #DOM:MYDOMAIN This preloads the remote server information in the name cache. Do an NBTSTAT -R to refresh the cache. Jim mentioned the DNS side already, make sure you can NSLOOKUP the server in question. Incidentally, did you do an in-place upgrade on the NT4 PDC to Win2K or was this a separate server and a side-by-side migration ? Last but not least, you mentioned that both servers are on the same-side of the link .. where are you global catalog servers? Regards Mylo PS: If you can give us a broad idea of your network layout, that would also be useful. -Original Message- From: O'Conner, Jim [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 24 April 2002 13:32 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Unable to bind over RPC Tony, I would make sure that on the 2k box your FQDN matches exactly what you have defined in DNS (Double check for misspellings), make sure if WINS is involved there are no bad entries. You may also try a HOSTS file local to each machine. Are there any messages being logged on the other server? --jim -Original Message- From: Tony McCarthy [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, April 23, 2002 10:28 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Unable to bind over RPC Hi Jim, I'm running 2k Server with SP2. The box is a DC in a mixed mode domain. It's not the GC but is replacing an NT4 PDC to allow for logins etc over a slow link. I have only installed Exchange on the box a few days ago and added the server to the site. I can move mailboxes between servers OK and they seem to see each other. Both Exchange servers are on the same side of the slow link. It seems to work all the time but very slowly; i.e. when mail is sent to or from a mailbox on the new server it can take several hours to process. What do you reckon? Regards Tony -Original Message- From: O'Conner, Jim [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, 24 April 2002 12:40 a.m. To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Unable to bind over RPC What is the OS? Does it work sometimes and then stop, or did it ever work at all? --jim -Original Message- From: Tony McCarthy [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, April 23, 2002 12:32 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Unable to bind over RPC Hi Everyone, I've just added a new server to an Exchange 5.5 site and am getting the following error message (below). I've got Service pack 4 on both servers and everything looks OK at face value. Mind you I'm no Exchange guru. The server referred to in the message is the original Exchange server that holds all the site info. Any ideas??? Regards Tony Event Type: Warning Event Source: MSExchangeMTA Event Category: Interface Event ID: 9318 Date: 4/23/2002 Time: 2:14:30 PM User: N/A Computer: EXCHSERV Description: An RPC communications error occurred. Unable to bind over RPC. Locality Table (LTAB) index: 6, NT/MTA error code: 1722. Comms error 1722, Bind error 1722, Remote Server Name EXCHSERV [MAIN BASE 1 500 %10] (14) _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: iis 5
upgrade isp services.. is there a wizard for that ? :-} -Original Message- From: Byron Kennedy [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 24 April 2002 14:45 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: iis 5 if your isp blocks inbound access to port 80 run your web on a different port, or upgrade isp services. -Original Message- From: Tener, Richard [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, April 23, 2002 2:43 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: iis 5 No -Original Message- From: Martin Blackstone [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, April 23, 2002 5:32 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: iis 5 Can you telnet to port 80 on the machine from the outside? -Original Message- From: Tener, Richard [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, April 23, 2002 2:32 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: iis 5 Im not in front of the computer now however I was basically giving all the rights possible and nothing worked yet. I dont have my router hooked up to the pc anymore. Also Im not sure if I binded the website to the ip address and will check the Anonymous-user permissions when i get home. Thanks for the input. Rich -Original Message- From: Ronny Pedersen [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, April 23, 2002 5:26 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: SV: iis 5 Hi ! Have You bind the Website to an IP-address ? You must. Anonymous-user must have read/execut on the website. User like IUSR_MACHINE. ROnny -Opprinnelig melding- Fra: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]Pa vegne av Tom Meunier Sendt: 23. april 2002 23:22 Til: Exchange Discussions Emne: RE: iis 5 The best website for immediate use is http://localhost/iisHelp In this case I'm gonna guess that it's NAT that's causing your problem. -Original Message- From: Tener, Richard [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Posted At: Tuesday, April 23, 2002 04:15 PM Posted To: MSExchange Mailing List Conversation: iis 5 Subject: iis 5 Does anyone know of a good website besides (Technet) that explains how to set permissions in iis 5 for outside users to see the web page. I was tryin to set up a web page on windows xp pro and for some reason it works at home but when you go outside the page cannot be displayed. sorry this is so off topic but it is killing me and I never set up iis before. Thanks Rich _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: iis 5
web hosting ... if the ISP is nice enough to block 80 in the interests of security, they're bound to be nice enough to host it for free. -Original Message- From: Martin Blackstone [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 24 April 2002 15:09 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: iis 5 I want to know who to upgrade to. If your DSL and Cable folks both block 80 inbound, who else is there that you could afford? -Original Message- From: Myles, Damian [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, April 24, 2002 6:06 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: iis 5 upgrade isp services.. is there a wizard for that ? :-} -Original Message- From: Byron Kennedy [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 24 April 2002 14:45 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: iis 5 if your isp blocks inbound access to port 80 run your web on a different port, or upgrade isp services. -Original Message- From: Tener, Richard [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, April 23, 2002 2:43 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: iis 5 No -Original Message- From: Martin Blackstone [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, April 23, 2002 5:32 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: iis 5 Can you telnet to port 80 on the machine from the outside? -Original Message- From: Tener, Richard [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, April 23, 2002 2:32 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: iis 5 Im not in front of the computer now however I was basically giving all the rights possible and nothing worked yet. I dont have my router hooked up to the pc anymore. Also Im not sure if I binded the website to the ip address and will check the Anonymous-user permissions when i get home. Thanks for the input. Rich -Original Message- From: Ronny Pedersen [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, April 23, 2002 5:26 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: SV: iis 5 Hi ! Have You bind the Website to an IP-address ? You must. Anonymous-user must have read/execut on the website. User like IUSR_MACHINE. ROnny -Opprinnelig melding- Fra: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]Pa vegne av Tom Meunier Sendt: 23. april 2002 23:22 Til: Exchange Discussions Emne: RE: iis 5 The best website for immediate use is http://localhost/iisHelp In this case I'm gonna guess that it's NAT that's causing your problem. -Original Message- From: Tener, Richard [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Posted At: Tuesday, April 23, 2002 04:15 PM Posted To: MSExchange Mailing List Conversation: iis 5 Subject: iis 5 Does anyone know of a good website besides (Technet) that explains how to set permissions in iis 5 for outside users to see the web page. I was tryin to set up a web page on windows xp pro and for some reason it works at home but when you go outside the page cannot be displayed. sorry this is so off topic but it is killing me and I never set up iis before. Thanks Rich _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED
Ex2K SMTP Settings
Hi, Can anyone clarify whether the 'Allow all computers which successfully authenticate to relay, regardless of the list above' checkbox on an SMTP Virtual Server would define a logged-on user (AD), telnetting to Port 25 of the Exchange Server as being 'authenticated'. Our test environment is down at the moment so I can't test this out. Essentially, we're looking to secure our servers internally from mail spoofing, by using the tying down Connection Control and Relay Restrictions on the SMTP service to grant access to 'Only the list below', i.e. Exchange Servers only. Just need to know what 'authenticated' means in this context. TIA Regards Mylo _ List posting FAQ: http://www.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: Ex2K SMTP Settings
Just as a follow up.. my (mis) understanding (delete as applicable) 'Allow all computers which successfully authenticate to relay, regardless of the list above' Allows computers that meet authentication requirements set in the Authentication dialog box to relay messages to the SMTP virtual server. Which would mean a virtual server enabled for anonymous authentication can be potentially used as a relay server because it is 'authenticated' ??? Cheers Mylo -Original Message- From: Myles, Damian Sent: 23 April 2002 11:58 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Ex2K SMTP Settings Hi, Can anyone clarify whether the 'Allow all computers which successfully authenticate to relay, regardless of the list above' checkbox on an SMTP Virtual Server would define a logged-on user (AD), telnetting to Port 25 of the Exchange Server as being 'authenticated'. Our test environment is down at the moment so I can't test this out. Essentially, we're looking to secure our servers internally from mail spoofing, by using the tying down Connection Control and Relay Restrictions on the SMTP service to grant access to 'Only the list below', i.e. Exchange Servers only. Just need to know what 'authenticated' means in this context. TIA Regards Mylo _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/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: WORM_KLEZ.G Sever Impact
Substitute the word virus for user, and voila ... proliferation :) -Original Message- From: Tener, Richard [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 23 April 2002 14:31 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: WORM_KLEZ.G Sever Impact This virus has its own email system the reason why your admins are recieving messages from you is probable cause someone you know has the virus on their machine. The virus will then use the infected users address book and send as those contacts. -Original Message- From: Sander Van Butzelaar [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, April 23, 2002 8:04 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: WORM_KLEZ.G Sever Impact Hi All This virus, although being detected and stripped off, still causes an enormous amount of email traffic. I currently receive about 50 to 60 warnings per hour. Is there anything one can do proactively here, no, I don't mean pull out the network cable:-) or should I just sit out the storm until other administrator have patched their servers. I'm also getting calls from other administrator saying I'm sending the virus to them, but the user accounts they say send these emails have nothing in there send items, nor do I have and records in my logs, which leads me to believe this little virus is spoofing email addresses. Sander _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/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: Public Folders
William, I'm convinced CA did something bad to you in a former life, not just this one :-) Perhaps if they took themselves less seriously ... e.g rename BAOF to ROTFL Agent etc. Regards Mylo -Original Message- From: William Lefkovics [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 18 April 2002 00:17 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Public Folders Actually, they wrote a lot of this stuff: http://www3.ca.com/Solutions/ProductsAZ.asp They also ammended a lot of code purchased from other software producers. Lest we forget: www.clarksupport.com/whynotca.htm William -Original Message- From: Myles, Damian [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, April 17, 2002 8:47 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Public Folders I don't know what CA do but it certainly isn't writing software. NTBackup. -Original Message- From: Mark Condron [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 17 April 2002 17:13 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Public Folders Andy, BAOF is the backup agent for open files, and yes I am using it. CA say that the Exchange agent wouldn't work without the BAOF! What is your reasoning? MArk -Original Message- From: Andy David [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 17 April 2002 12:56 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Public Folders Well, since you are using Arkanserve, I think we can safely throw out the words best/only. IMO, A DR server is the best way to go. BTW, What is BAOF? You arent using the Open File Agent on your Exchange Server are you? -Original Message- From: Mark Condron [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, April 17, 2002 6:46 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Public Folders All, What is the best disaster recovery procedure for recovering public folders? How can you get public folders back that have been accidentally deleted. Is having a spare disaster recovery server the best/only option (I don't want to do BLB's). EX5.5 SP4, NT4.0 SP5, Arcserve 6.61, Exch agent, BAOF. TIA Mark Condron -- CONFIDENTIALITY: This e-mail and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the recipient(s) only. Any review, retransmission, dissemination or other use of, or taking any action in reliance upon this information by persons or entities other than the intended recipient(s) is prohibited. If you have received this e-mail in error please notify the sender immediately and destroy the material whether stored on a computer or otherwise. -- DISCLAIMER: Any views or opinions presented within this e-mail are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of Wales Council for Voluntary Action, unless otherwise specifically stated. -- Wales Council for Voluntary Action, Baltic House, Mount Stuart Square, Cardiff , UK, CF10 5FH Telephone: 029 2043 1700 Fax: 029 2043 1701 Minicom: 029 2043 1702 Email:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Web: www.wcva.org.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] -- 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] -- CONFIDENTIALITY: This e-mail and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the recipient(s) only. Any review, retransmission, dissemination or other use of, or taking any action in reliance upon this information by persons or entities other than the intended recipient(s) is prohibited. If you have received this e-mail in error please notify the sender immediately and destroy the material whether stored on a computer
RE: Public Folders
The last good thing they wrote was Clipper. -Original Message- From: William Lefkovics [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 18 April 2002 10:44 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Public Folders I love CA. -Original Message- From: Myles, Damian [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, April 18, 2002 1:42 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Public Folders William, I'm convinced CA did something bad to you in a former life, not just this one :-) Perhaps if they took themselves less seriously ... e.g rename BAOF to ROTFL Agent etc. Regards Mylo -Original Message- From: William Lefkovics [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 18 April 2002 00:17 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Public Folders Actually, they wrote a lot of this stuff: http://www3.ca.com/Solutions/ProductsAZ.asp They also ammended a lot of code purchased from other software producers. Lest we forget: www.clarksupport.com/whynotca.htm William -Original Message- From: Myles, Damian [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, April 17, 2002 8:47 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Public Folders I don't know what CA do but it certainly isn't writing software. NTBackup. -Original Message- From: Mark Condron [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 17 April 2002 17:13 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Public Folders Andy, BAOF is the backup agent for open files, and yes I am using it. CA say that the Exchange agent wouldn't work without the BAOF! What is your reasoning? MArk -Original Message- From: Andy David [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 17 April 2002 12:56 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Public Folders Well, since you are using Arkanserve, I think we can safely throw out the words best/only. IMO, A DR server is the best way to go. BTW, What is BAOF? You arent using the Open File Agent on your Exchange Server are you? -Original Message- From: Mark Condron [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, April 17, 2002 6:46 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Public Folders All, What is the best disaster recovery procedure for recovering public folders? How can you get public folders back that have been accidentally deleted. Is having a spare disaster recovery server the best/only option (I don't want to do BLB's). EX5.5 SP4, NT4.0 SP5, Arcserve 6.61, Exch agent, BAOF. TIA Mark Condron -- CONFIDENTIALITY: This e-mail and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the recipient(s) only. Any review, retransmission, dissemination or other use of, or taking any action in reliance upon this information by persons or entities other than the intended recipient(s) is prohibited. If you have received this e-mail in error please notify the sender immediately and destroy the material whether stored on a computer or otherwise. -- DISCLAIMER: Any views or opinions presented within this e-mail are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of Wales Council for Voluntary Action, unless otherwise specifically stated. -- Wales Council for Voluntary Action, Baltic House, Mount Stuart Square, Cardiff , UK, CF10 5FH Telephone: 029 2043 1700 Fax: 029 2043 1701 Minicom: 029 2043 1702 Email:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Web: www.wcva.org.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] -- 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] -- CONFIDENTIALITY: This e-mail and any files transmitted with it are confidential
OWA Access
Hi, Anyone know of a way to globally disable OWA access for Ex2K users. Deleting the user is not really an option :) I don't relish the prospect of going into Protocol Settings on every mailbox and disabling the HTTP right for every user. Is there a quicker way ? Regards Mylo _ List posting FAQ: http://www.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
Does the S in SWYNK stand for sarcasm ? :-) -Original Message- From: Chris Scharff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 15 April 2002 17:16 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: OWA Buy a $0.99 notebook and write down things you learn. [1] Are the users aliases unique and unambiguous? Have you tried any of the troubleshooting steps related to this error message described in TechNet? If, so.. Which ones and what was the result? What version of Exchange are you running? What service pack and OS? Asking a properly phrased technical question[2] will get you[3] much better answers. [1] Or invest in a help desk solution with a knowledgebase utility. [2] Appendix D of the Exchange FAQ. [3] The collective you. -Original Message- From: Tener, Richard [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, April 15, 2002 9:46 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: OWA Hello, I created two new users and both cannot access their mailbox on OWA. When I try to log in with their correct info I get unable to get you inbox. Everyone elses works in my company it just doesnt work for the two new profiles that i set up. I have had this problem in the past but forgot how to fix it. _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/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
Granted. -Original Message- From: Kevin Miller [Ed] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 15 April 2002 17:28 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: OWA No, but it does stand for. Read the faq first, listen to the list, chances are your question has been asked a few hundred times already. --Kevinm TSSSBE, 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 Myles, Damian Sent: Monday, April 15, 2002 8:19 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: OWA Does the S in SWYNK stand for sarcasm ? :-) -Original Message- From: Chris Scharff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 15 April 2002 17:16 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: OWA Buy a $0.99 notebook and write down things you learn. [1] Are the users aliases unique and unambiguous? Have you tried any of the troubleshooting steps related to this error message described in TechNet? If, so.. Which ones and what was the result? What version of Exchange are you running? What service pack and OS? Asking a properly phrased technical question[2] will get you[3] much better answers. [1] Or invest in a help desk solution with a knowledgebase utility. [2] Appendix D of the Exchange FAQ. [3] The collective you. -Original Message- From: Tener, Richard [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, April 15, 2002 9:46 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: OWA Hello, I created two new users and both cannot access their mailbox on OWA. When I try to log in with their correct info I get unable to get you inbox. Everyone elses works in my company it just doesnt work for the two new profiles that i set up. I have had this problem in the past but forgot how to fix it. _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/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: rm files
RealMovie/RealAudio www.real.com -Original Message- From: Kim Schotanus [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 12 April 2002 11:26 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: rm files what's a .rm file? Scanmail is going ballistic blocking those extensions... Kim _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/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: Movemailbox or Exmerge?
Use the Migration Wizard provided with SP2 to move mailboxes between a 5.5 organization and Ex2K. I'd use that to create the user accounts in the Win2K environment as well, rather than using the ADC. Regards Mylo -Original Message- From: Leo [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 11 April 2002 12:27 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Movemailbox or Exmerge? If we have two domains and two exchange orgs NT4 domain with Exchange 5.5 Sp3 Win2k Domain with Exchange 2000 Sp2 we connect connect them via the ADC the Interorg tool so they are effectively part of the same organisation, what would be the best tool to migrate users mailbox data? Movemailbox from Exchange 2000 Sp1 or Exmerge? And do any of these keep the single instance of a message when it is transferred? Regards Leo _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/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 access
Mark, Sorry about the delay.. busy evening :) The comments you made with regard FE/BE are true.. but the statement from Technet is valid where you don't provide default domain credentials on the directory security tab of your web site... go to basic authentication, check it and the click on the edit button...you can enter a default domain name. In the case of UPN's, this would need to be a backslash '\' on all Exchange servers (FE/BE) where the HTTP service is running (and you require OWA access to). You'll also want to setup a redirection rule on the homedirectory tab of the IIS web site, redirecting to another url (with the a directory below this one checkbox ticked), i.e. https://xyz.com/exchange ... this helps implicit logon work :) As the above URL suggests, always wrap external OWA access with SSL. Cheers Mylo -Original Message- From: Mark Harford [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 26 March 2002 16:55 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: OWA access Re-reading the Exchange 2000 Front-end and Back-end Topology document on the Technet CD, I found the following line: - When authenticating against a front-end server, the user name must be entered in the format domain/user name. Are you proxying through the authentication to the back-end server? Mark -Original Message- From: Myles, Damian [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 26 March 2002 14:51 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: OWA access Like you, we don't use it where I work, but UPN testing was part of FE/BE testing before our Ex2K rollout and I don't recall any problems. You would, in principle, need to enable basic authentication on all front-end and back-end servers a \ as the default domain name. Cheers Mylo -Original Message- From: Mark Harford [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 26 March 2002 12:49 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: OWA access I wish I knew! Haven't investigated that hard just yet as people are still used to down-level logon names so it's not been an issue. All suggestions welcome. Cheers Mark -Original Message- From: Myles, Damian [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 26 March 2002 09:34 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: OWA access Mark, What's preventing you from using UPN's in a FE/BE topology ? Regards Mylo -Original Message- From: Tony Hlabse [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 25 March 2002 17:59 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: OWA access I don't think it is possible but sure one someone will figure some workaround. I'll withdraw that last para! Just found that I can not use UPN in a frontend/backend OWA situation (basic authentication turned on only). I too would be interested to know if we can circumvent this. Rgrds Mark -Original Message- From: Mark Harford Sent: 25 March 2002 14:54 To: 'Exchange Discussions' Subject: RE: OWA access Not sure I follow. The user account is in the child domain whilst the mailbox data belonging to that account is on a server in the parent domain? When they access the mailbox via OWA are they using the UPN-style logon or domain\username style log on when they get this error? Doesn't sound right to me. My own account/mailbox data is in precisely this situation and I have no issues accessing OWA. Don't remember having to configure anything to achieve this either. Cheers Mark -Original Message- From: Tony Hlabse [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 25 March 2002 13:42 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Re: OWA access What about applying this to a AD 2000 environment. Say a user account is on child domain while the email account resides in the parent domain (where the email server lives). What I have learned is the users needs to login into the child.parent.com domain as opposed to just the parent domain. Wish there was a work around. - Original Message - From: Soysal, Serdar [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, March 25, 2002 8:41 AM Subject: RE: OWA access Since there is a two way trust in place, all you need to do is to give Log on Locally rights on the web server where OWA is to the users from your domain. Same setup here, no problems. There is absolutely no need to create directory redundancy. Serdar Soysal PS: I have pasted the rest of the thread you had snipped off. Please don't do this in future, it makes it quite hard for everbody else to follow what's going on. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, March 22, 2002 5:14 PM
RE: OWA access
Mark, What's preventing you from using UPN's in a FE/BE topology ? Regards Mylo -Original Message- From: Tony Hlabse [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 25 March 2002 17:59 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: OWA access I don't think it is possible but sure one someone will figure some workaround. I'll withdraw that last para! Just found that I can not use UPN in a frontend/backend OWA situation (basic authentication turned on only). I too would be interested to know if we can circumvent this. Rgrds Mark -Original Message- From: Mark Harford Sent: 25 March 2002 14:54 To: 'Exchange Discussions' Subject: RE: OWA access Not sure I follow. The user account is in the child domain whilst the mailbox data belonging to that account is on a server in the parent domain? When they access the mailbox via OWA are they using the UPN-style logon or domain\username style log on when they get this error? Doesn't sound right to me. My own account/mailbox data is in precisely this situation and I have no issues accessing OWA. Don't remember having to configure anything to achieve this either. Cheers Mark -Original Message- From: Tony Hlabse [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 25 March 2002 13:42 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Re: OWA access What about applying this to a AD 2000 environment. Say a user account is on child domain while the email account resides in the parent domain (where the email server lives). What I have learned is the users needs to login into the child.parent.com domain as opposed to just the parent domain. Wish there was a work around. - Original Message - From: Soysal, Serdar [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, March 25, 2002 8:41 AM Subject: RE: OWA access Since there is a two way trust in place, all you need to do is to give Log on Locally rights on the web server where OWA is to the users from your domain. Same setup here, no problems. There is absolutely no need to create directory redundancy. Serdar Soysal PS: I have pasted the rest of the thread you had snipped off. Please don't do this in future, it makes it quite hard for everbody else to follow what's going on. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, March 22, 2002 5:14 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Re: OWA access Yes, there is a two way trust in place. -Original Message- From: Steven A. Christensen [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, March 22, 2002 1:46 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Re: OWA access I assume there a trust relationship between the domains? - Original Message - From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, March 22, 2002 12:40 PM Subject: OWA access I have users who are trying to use OWA to get to their inboxes. The OWA webserver resides in another domain. The administrator of the other domain says that my users need to have a user account in their domain and I need to use the exchange admin account and add the user account in their domain to the permission on my user email accounts. When my users access their mail using OWA, they would use the other domain account when the login screen pops up. Is this the only way for users in one domain to access mail using OWA when the web mail server is in another domain? We are using Exchange 5.5 SP4, NT server 4.0 SP6a. The clients are NT2000 Pro SP1, Outlook 2000 SR1. Any help would be appreciated. _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/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 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
RE: OWA access
Like you, we don't use it where I work, but UPN testing was part of FE/BE testing before our Ex2K rollout and I don't recall any problems. You would, in principle, need to enable basic authentication on all front-end and back-end servers a \ as the default domain name. Cheers Mylo -Original Message- From: Mark Harford [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 26 March 2002 12:49 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: OWA access I wish I knew! Haven't investigated that hard just yet as people are still used to down-level logon names so it's not been an issue. All suggestions welcome. Cheers Mark -Original Message- From: Myles, Damian [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 26 March 2002 09:34 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: OWA access Mark, What's preventing you from using UPN's in a FE/BE topology ? Regards Mylo -Original Message- From: Tony Hlabse [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 25 March 2002 17:59 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: OWA access I don't think it is possible but sure one someone will figure some workaround. I'll withdraw that last para! Just found that I can not use UPN in a frontend/backend OWA situation (basic authentication turned on only). I too would be interested to know if we can circumvent this. Rgrds Mark -Original Message- From: Mark Harford Sent: 25 March 2002 14:54 To: 'Exchange Discussions' Subject: RE: OWA access Not sure I follow. The user account is in the child domain whilst the mailbox data belonging to that account is on a server in the parent domain? When they access the mailbox via OWA are they using the UPN-style logon or domain\username style log on when they get this error? Doesn't sound right to me. My own account/mailbox data is in precisely this situation and I have no issues accessing OWA. Don't remember having to configure anything to achieve this either. Cheers Mark -Original Message- From: Tony Hlabse [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 25 March 2002 13:42 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Re: OWA access What about applying this to a AD 2000 environment. Say a user account is on child domain while the email account resides in the parent domain (where the email server lives). What I have learned is the users needs to login into the child.parent.com domain as opposed to just the parent domain. Wish there was a work around. - Original Message - From: Soysal, Serdar [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, March 25, 2002 8:41 AM Subject: RE: OWA access Since there is a two way trust in place, all you need to do is to give Log on Locally rights on the web server where OWA is to the users from your domain. Same setup here, no problems. There is absolutely no need to create directory redundancy. Serdar Soysal PS: I have pasted the rest of the thread you had snipped off. Please don't do this in future, it makes it quite hard for everbody else to follow what's going on. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, March 22, 2002 5:14 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Re: OWA access Yes, there is a two way trust in place. -Original Message- From: Steven A. Christensen [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, March 22, 2002 1:46 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Re: OWA access I assume there a trust relationship between the domains? - Original Message - From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, March 22, 2002 12:40 PM Subject: OWA access I have users who are trying to use OWA to get to their inboxes. The OWA webserver resides in another domain. The administrator of the other domain says that my users need to have a user account in their domain and I need to use the exchange admin account and add the user account in their domain to the permission on my user email accounts. When my users access their mail using OWA, they would use the other domain account when the login screen pops up. Is this the only way for users in one domain to access mail using OWA when the web mail server is in another domain? We are using Exchange 5.5 SP4, NT server 4.0 SP6a. The clients are NT2000 Pro SP1, Outlook 2000 SR1. Any help would be appreciated. _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http
RE: HELP.. I need to import 1000 contacts
If you're exporting out of an existing 5.5 environment into Ex2K.. look at using the Active Directory Connector. Mylo -Original Message- From: Bob Razler [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 24 March 2002 23:25 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: HELP.. I need to import 1000 contacts -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Hello: I know it sounds odd, but you could try using a palm device or your cell phone (mine holds my outlook contacts). Sync one, then sync into the other. Bob - -Original Message- From: Tom Meunier [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Sunday, March 24, 2002 3:35 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: HELP.. I need to import 1000 contacts Or csvde.exe if you want to use a comma-delimited file as your source. http://www.microsoft.com/windows2000/en/server/help/sag_ad_ldif_csv.ht m - -Original Message- From: Julian Stone [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Posted At: Sunday, March 24, 2002 2:26 PM Posted To: MSExchange Mailing List Conversation: HELP.. I need to import 1000 contacts Subject: RE: HELP.. I need to import 1000 contacts Ldifde.exe Yours, Julian Stone - -Original Message- From: Varghese, Wilson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 24 March 2002 20:15 pm To: Exchange Discussions Subject: HELP.. I need to import 1000 contacts In exchange 5.5 this was easy, but how do I do it in Exchange 2000? I tried to create a different OU in AD but there are no options to import. There isn't anything I can see in Exchange System Manager either. If you can point me in the right direction, that would be great. Thanks 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] - -- - -- This e-mail and any attachments may be confidential and/or legally privileged. If you have received this e-mail and you are not a named addressee, please inform the Netstore Technical Support Desk on +44 1344 444342 and then delete the e-mail from your system. If you are not a named addressee you must not use, disclose, distribute, copy, print or rely on this e-mail. Although Netstore routinely screens for viruses, addressees should scan this e-mail and any attachments for viruses. This mail has been processed with the Netstore Content Filtering Service. Visit our website at www.netstore.net - -- - -- _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/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] -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: PGPfreeware 6.5.8 for non-commercial use http://www.pgp.com iQA/AwUBPJ5SR2wjiy2yaukAEQJx5wCdGNVSXGF4GsS0ZcdEJxuHbdGEXZMAoIAv qvZk0aw8/kdp5fOHmEHPQjTa =zMM1 -END PGP SIGNATURE- _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/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: SSL/E2K Migration
1. Create a stand-alone root CA... only use an Enterprise CA if you plan on using a large number of servers or you stand to benefit from other PKI related services/AD integration. 2. Follow these instructions ... Q299525... Set Up SSL Using IIS 5.0 and Certificate Server 2.0. Bear in mind these are not trusted certificates as far as trusted 3rd parties are concerned (i.e. you're essentially self-signing) Regards Mylo -Original Message- From: Bowles, John L. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 25 March 2002 16:01 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: SSL/E2K Migration Yep, that helps out big time. Just too bad when I go to import the Key pair, that I don't have a clue what the password is. That Exchange Admin is long gone by now. So is it safe to say just create a certificate server from scratch on W2K? Are there any gotcha's while setting up a fresh Cert Server on W2K? Thanks, ___ John Bowles Exchange Administrator Enterprise Support Engineering Celera Genomics [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] -Original Message- From: Stevens, Dave [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, March 25, 2002 9:46 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: SSL/E2K Migration Does this help? http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;EN-US;q227888 -Original Message- From: Bowles, John L. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, March 25, 2002 9:39 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: SSL/E2K Migration All, I'm in the planning process of moving from Exchange 5.5 to Exchange 2000. Now we currently are running Certificate server on this same Exchange 5.5 box which is being used for our SSL on our OWA. Now my question is, how will I get SSL over onto my Exchange 2000 server? Cause once we migrate our mailboxes etc over to the E2K box we are going to take the old Exchange 5.5 out of service. Now, am I going to have to remove that certificate server after the last mailbox has been moved, since this servers is going out of service? And then install Certificate server from a new W2K server to provide us SSL for our OWA clients? Please let me know, I'm a little stumped. Thanks, ___ 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] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/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: NDR's (was content)
Morning/Afternoon/Evening (Delete as applicable) This sort of jumps in and out of topic re: this forum, so apologies if I stray too far, and bear with me .. it all ultimately relates to mail .. honest :) I wish to use a stand-alone root CA on Win2K, certificated (is there such a word?) through one of the trusted root authorities - Verisign/Thwaite/Entrust. Hanging off this stand-alone root will be subordinate stand-alone's and subordinate Enterprise CA's. The ultimate aim, being able to distinguish between internal/external users from an certificate enrollment perspective, and to use various encryption/signing techniques for transmitting mail. Questions are twofold: 1. Do I have to use DSSTORE to import the certificate from the trusted third-party into the stand-alone Root CA and is the only valid format PKCS#12 ? There is an import button on the Install wizard during the Certsrv installation phase which suggests certs can be brought in from trusted sources. 2. Is the use of certificates in this grandfather/father/child type manner a valid one. btw... any URL's or links to sites concerning PKI and Messaging would be appreciated. Ta muchly, Mylo PS: Has anyone actually done 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]
CA's/PKI
Damn previous post should have been under the CA's/PKI subject header, not NDR's (was content) Apologies Mylo This sort of jumps in and out of topic re: this forum, so apologies if I stray too far, and bear with me .. it all ultimately relates to mail .. honest :) I wish to use a stand-alone root CA on Win2K, certificated (is there such a word?) through one of the trusted root authorities - Verisign/Thwaite/Entrust. Hanging off this stand-alone root will be subordinate stand-alone's and subordinate Enterprise CA's. The ultimate aim, being able to distinguish between internal/external users from an certificate enrollment perspective, and to use various encryption/signing techniques for transmitting mail. Questions are twofold: 1. Do I have to use DSSTORE to import the certificate from the trusted third-party into the stand-alone Root CA and is the only valid format PKCS#12 ? There is an import button on the Install wizard during the Certsrv installation phase which suggests certs can be brought in from trusted sources. 2. Is the use of certificates in this grandfather/father/child type manner a valid one. btw... any URL's or links to sites concerning PKI and Messaging would be appreciated. Ta muchly, Mylo PS: Has anyone actually done 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]
RE: Front-End/Back-End Topology - Ex2K
Sorry.. I was being flippant re: Hotmail.. more to highlight a reluctance to use POP3 (through a firewall) than any desire to use Hotmail... The comment about OWA was regards having to wrap a session with SSL to get around the basic authentication requirement/clear text password limitation of a FE/BE deployment and make it 'secure'. Thanks for the pointer on the IPSec article. -Original Message- From: William Lefkovics [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 19 March 2002 23:11 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Front-End/Back-End Topology - Ex2K With OWA2000 over SSL, the entire session is encrypted. With Hotmail, ony authentication is encrypted (I believe). AND you ought to read Martin Tuip's article on deploying IPSec to secure the front end to back end communication for OWA. Riveting stuff!! -Original Message- From: Myles, Damian [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, March 19, 2002 2:19 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Front-End/Back-End Topology - Ex2K More an aversion to using something (POP/IMAP) with passwords in clear text and since Outlook doesn't support APOP we have to go over SSL. Having said all that, I have to do HTTP over SSL with OWA and a front-end/back-end topology anyway ... so I'll just get my coat :) Mylo -Original Message- From: William Lefkovics [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 19 March 2002 01:36 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Front-End/Back-End Topology - Ex2K Why? What's wrong with POP/IMAP? IMAP4 over SSL for example. Why would you rather give them Hotmail? William -Original Message- From: Myles, Damian [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, March 18, 2002 7:38 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Front-End/Back-End Topology - Ex2K I'd be happier giving them a hotmail account than POP/IMAP.. -Original Message- From: Roger Seielstad [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 18 March 2002 16:35 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Front-End/Back-End Topology - Ex2K Let's see - OWA = SSL POP/IMAP = doesn't happen on my network, but it it did, it would only be via VPN -- Roger D. Seielstad - MCSE Sr. Systems Administrator Peregrine Systems Atlanta, GA -Original Message- From: Matt Plahtinsky [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, March 18, 2002 8:48 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Front-End/Back-End Topology - Ex2K How do you guys secure exchange with OWA and POP/IMAP if you don't put it in a DMZ? Matt -Original Message- From: Martin Blackstone [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, March 18, 2002 8:44 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Front-End/Back-End Topology - Ex2K There should be a rotating tag line appended to each message; Exchange doesn't belong in the DMZ PST=BAD BLB=BAD Etc _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/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: Change password for Exchange in DMZ
Are your users in the DMZ as well ? -Original Message- From: Woodrick, Ed [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 15 March 2002 02:14 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Change password for Exchange in DMZ So what the heck is on the internal LAN? You've moved every piece of sensitive information into public view. One REALLY big thing to consider is traffic to the server. Are your routers and firewalls fast enough to handle approximately 60% of your current network traffic going to the DMZ? Yep, 60% is probably a pretty good estimate of the amount of your LAN that Email is using. Having machines that straddle a NAT registering in the same WINS/DNS is going to cause problems. ed -Original Message- From: Pfefferkorn, Pete (PFEFFEPE) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Posted At: Thursday, March 14, 2002 4:37 PM Posted To: Microsoft Exchange Conversation: Change password for Exchange in DMZ Subject: RE: Change password for Exchange in DMZ The domain controller, Wins Server, and Exchange server are all in the DMZ. I can go over in the DMZ access the test account and I can change the password. If I go back over into the private network 10.n.n.n and get into the same account, then I cannot change the corresponding password. -Original Message- From: Andrew Chan [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, March 14, 2002 3:17 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Change password for Exchange in DMZ Agreed, but if he CAN authenticate the test users, then the job of locating the DC is fulfilled. There is no more ties of WINS to Password any more. I guess I wasn't clear when I made that second comment. Andrew, MCSE (NT W2K) + CCNA -Original Message- From: Roger Seielstad [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Posted At: Thursday, March 14, 2002 12:04 PM Posted To: DiscussionGroup Conversation: Change password for Exchange in DMZ Subject: RE: Change password for Exchange in DMZ The second question is easy - WINS is needed to find the Domain controllers so you CAN change the password -- Roger D. Seielstad - MCSE Sr. Systems Administrator Peregrine Systems Atlanta, GA -Original Message- From: Andrew Chan [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, March 14, 2002 2:40 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Change password for Exchange in DMZ Are you saying that your Exchange server in the DMZ are in the same domain as your corporate? Also, I am a little baffled. Since when does WINS have anything to do with Password change? Andrew, MCSE (NT W2K) + CCNA -Original Message- From: Pfefferkorn, Pete (PFEFFEPE) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Posted At: Thursday, March 14, 2002 11:26 AM Posted To: DiscussionGroup Conversation: Change password for Exchange in DMZ Subject: Change password for Exchange in DMZ Exchange 5.5 SP3. I've been instructed to move our Exchange deployment into our DMZ. I know...I know...VPN, not my decision. We're performing a test and put a Wins and Exchange server over in the DMZ, created a few test accounts. We can get in from our private network with no problems. The issue I'm seeing is trying to change the password of an account. We have the WINS in the private network pulling from the Wins in the DMZ. If I point to the WINS in the private which is aware of the WINS in the DMZ, I still cannot change the password. Do I have to open up a specific port for the WINS in the DMZ to the private? Pete Pfefferkorn Senior Systems Engineer/Mail Administrator University of Cincinnati 51 Goodman Street Cincinnati, OH 45221 Phone - (513) 556-9076 Fax - (513) 556-2042 _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/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: Front-End/Back-End Topology - Ex2K
More an aversion to using something (POP/IMAP) with passwords in clear text and since Outlook doesn't support APOP we have to go over SSL. Having said all that, I have to do HTTP over SSL with OWA and a front-end/back-end topology anyway ... so I'll just get my coat :) Mylo -Original Message- From: William Lefkovics [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 19 March 2002 01:36 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Front-End/Back-End Topology - Ex2K Why? What's wrong with POP/IMAP? IMAP4 over SSL for example. Why would you rather give them Hotmail? William -Original Message- From: Myles, Damian [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, March 18, 2002 7:38 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Front-End/Back-End Topology - Ex2K I'd be happier giving them a hotmail account than POP/IMAP.. -Original Message- From: Roger Seielstad [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 18 March 2002 16:35 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Front-End/Back-End Topology - Ex2K Let's see - OWA = SSL POP/IMAP = doesn't happen on my network, but it it did, it would only be via VPN -- Roger D. Seielstad - MCSE Sr. Systems Administrator Peregrine Systems Atlanta, GA -Original Message- From: Matt Plahtinsky [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, March 18, 2002 8:48 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Front-End/Back-End Topology - Ex2K How do you guys secure exchange with OWA and POP/IMAP if you don't put it in a DMZ? Matt -Original Message- From: Martin Blackstone [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, March 18, 2002 8:44 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Front-End/Back-End Topology - Ex2K There should be a rotating tag line appended to each message; Exchange doesn't belong in the DMZ PST=BAD BLB=BAD Etc -Original Message- From: missy koslosky [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, March 18, 2002 5:22 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Re: Front-End/Back-End Topology - Ex2K Go with your instincts. Keep it out of the DMZ. There's lots of history on this in the archives of this list. Missy - Original Message - From: Myles, Damian [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, March 18, 2002 7:47 AM Subject: Front-End/Back-End Topology - Ex2K Posted this on the ISA forums a few days ago, but thought it might be an idea to post for discussion. A while back I tested a FE/BE topology with the FE server sitting on or DMZ, opening numerous ports on our interior firewall to allow AD/GC lookups through etc. Now it comes to actual putting these fruits of labour into practice in a production environment, I'm far from convinced of the rationale of placing a FE server on a DMZ, given the security implications of doing so with regards the numerous open ports. I'm more inclined to allow to publish the front-end server (on our LAN) and allow remote users to connect through HTTPS, secured behind ISA, acknowledging there is always a risk putting Internet-accessed resources on a production LAN. Since this is a back-to-back firewall, the following ports would need to be opened Exterior Firewall - 443/TCP HTTPS 25/TCP SMTP 993/TCP IMAPS Interior Firewall - 80/TCP HTTP 143/TCP IMAP 25/TCP SMTP 389/TCP LDAP 389/UDP LDAP 3268/TCP 88/TCP KERBEROS 88/UDP KERBEROS 53/TCP DNS 53/UDP DNS 135/TCP RPC 445/TCP NETLOGON I know a lot of the above can be secured over SSL and RPC limited to a single port (rather than anything above 1024), and that I can tunnel HTTP through IPSEC or VPN. However, since I'm using SecureNAT clients with ISA, IPSEC isn't really viable. Would appreciate any feedback on this and to find out what the general consensus of opinion is? Regards Mylo _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/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]
Front-End/Back-End Topology - Ex2K
Posted this on the ISA forums a few days ago, but thought it might be an idea to post for discussion. A while back I tested a FE/BE topology with the FE server sitting on or DMZ, opening numerous ports on our interior firewall to allow AD/GC lookups through etc. Now it comes to actual putting these fruits of labour into practice in a production environment, I'm far from convinced of the rationale of placing a FE server on a DMZ, given the security implications of doing so with regards the numerous open ports. I'm more inclined to allow to publish the front-end server (on our LAN) and allow remote users to connect through HTTPS, secured behind ISA, acknowledging there is always a risk putting Internet-accessed resources on a production LAN. Since this is a back-to-back firewall, the following ports would need to be opened Exterior Firewall - 443/TCP HTTPS 25/TCP SMTP 993/TCP IMAPS Interior Firewall - 80/TCP HTTP 143/TCP IMAP 25/TCP SMTP 389/TCP LDAP 389/UDP LDAP 3268/TCP 88/TCP KERBEROS 88/UDP KERBEROS 53/TCP DNS 53/UDP DNS 135/TCP RPC 445/TCP NETLOGON I know a lot of the above can be secured over SSL and RPC limited to a single port (rather than anything above 1024), and that I can tunnel HTTP through IPSEC or VPN. However, since I'm using SecureNAT clients with ISA, IPSEC isn't really viable. Would appreciate any feedback on this and to find out what the general consensus of opinion is? Regards Mylo _ List posting FAQ: http://www.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: Front-End/Back-End Topology - Ex2K
Matt, Publishing everything behind the firewall and run inbound services over SSL. Mylo PS: Thanks for all the feedback. -Original Message- From: Matt Plahtinsky [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 18 March 2002 14:48 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Front-End/Back-End Topology - Ex2K How do you guys secure exchange with OWA and POP/IMAP if you don't put it in a DMZ? Matt -Original Message- From: Martin Blackstone [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, March 18, 2002 8:44 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Front-End/Back-End Topology - Ex2K There should be a rotating tag line appended to each message; Exchange doesn't belong in the DMZ PST=BAD BLB=BAD Etc -Original Message- From: missy koslosky [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, March 18, 2002 5:22 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Re: Front-End/Back-End Topology - Ex2K Go with your instincts. Keep it out of the DMZ. There's lots of history on this in the archives of this list. Missy - Original Message - From: Myles, Damian [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, March 18, 2002 7:47 AM Subject: Front-End/Back-End Topology - Ex2K Posted this on the ISA forums a few days ago, but thought it might be an idea to post for discussion. A while back I tested a FE/BE topology with the FE server sitting on or DMZ, opening numerous ports on our interior firewall to allow AD/GC lookups through etc. Now it comes to actual putting these fruits of labour into practice in a production environment, I'm far from convinced of the rationale of placing a FE server on a DMZ, given the security implications of doing so with regards the numerous open ports. I'm more inclined to allow to publish the front-end server (on our LAN) and allow remote users to connect through HTTPS, secured behind ISA, acknowledging there is always a risk putting Internet-accessed resources on a production LAN. Since this is a back-to-back firewall, the following ports would need to be opened Exterior Firewall - 443/TCP HTTPS 25/TCP SMTP 993/TCP IMAPS Interior Firewall - 80/TCP HTTP 143/TCP IMAP 25/TCP SMTP 389/TCP LDAP 389/UDP LDAP 3268/TCP 88/TCP KERBEROS 88/UDP KERBEROS 53/TCP DNS 53/UDP DNS 135/TCP RPC 445/TCP NETLOGON I know a lot of the above can be secured over SSL and RPC limited to a single port (rather than anything above 1024), and that I can tunnel HTTP through IPSEC or VPN. However, since I'm using SecureNAT clients with ISA, IPSEC isn't really viable. Would appreciate any feedback on this and to find out what the general consensus of opinion is? Regards Mylo _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/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: Front-End/Back-End Topology - Ex2K
Check out this article, to ferment further conversation :) http://isaserver.org/shinder/tutorials/intradomain_communications.htm It looks at intra-domain communication through an ISA firewall.. anything that turns your firewall into a cullinder comes up short in my book :) Regards Mylo -Original Message- From: Woodrick, Ed [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 18 March 2002 16:15 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Front-End/Back-End Topology - Ex2K How would you expect to secure Exchange and put it in a DMZ? Let's say that you secure the box by putting it in the DMZ. This usually means that you've restricted port access to the server to the HTTPS port. Okay, fine. Now why isn't this same box secure if you put it inside the network and restrict the same ports? Well, you say, if the box's security is breached, you're still protected. Common response, but very incorrect. If your DMZ box gets breached, and a hacker is able to launch a script on the box, then let's see what they have access to. All other Exchange Servers and Domain Controllers at a minimum, and more than likely NetBIOS access to every machine on the network with 139 open. But let's say that you restricted it as much as possible. Then you only have access to Exchange Servers and Domain Controllers. Do you happen to see the problem here? Once you have access to the Domain Controllers, it really doesn't matter what else you have access to! So by putting an Exchange Server in the DMZ, you completely compromised the DMZ. BTW, the concept of the DMZ is a area in which connections enter, but do not exit. The original types of DMZ boxes were FTP servers. People from the inside would FTP to the server and drop off files, people on the outside would FTP to the server and pickup the files. At the point that you allow a connection to exit the DMZ, you have compromised the security of the DMZ. -Original Message- From: Matt Plahtinsky [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Posted At: Monday, March 18, 2002 8:48 AM Posted To: Microsoft Exchange Conversation: Front-End/Back-End Topology - Ex2K Subject: RE: Front-End/Back-End Topology - Ex2K How do you guys secure exchange with OWA and POP/IMAP if you don't put it in a DMZ? Matt _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/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: Accessing OWA via a Proxy/Relay Server
It does sound like a Front-end/Back-end ... if so, make sure you are using basic (clear text) authentication... it won't work without it. Are you getting any error messages in your event log ? I'd be very wary of opening up Port 80 on my firewall... have you considered using SSL as well ? Regards Mylo -Original Message- From: Tony Hlabse [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 28 February 2002 04:22 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Re: Accessing OWA via a Proxy/Relay Server So you set it up as a front end/ back end deployment? - Original Message - From: Alex T [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, February 27, 2002 4:24 PM Subject: Accessing OWA via a Proxy/Relay Server Apologies in advance if this question is dumb or has already been addressed in the archives or elsewhere--we are still Win2K/Exchange novices and would appreciate some help. We upgraded to Exchange from a UNIX/sendmail system. About 75 mailboxes. Server is running Win2K SP2 and E2K SP2. Clients running Windows98/NT4 with Outlook 2000. We also have a few internal Mac clients that access Exchange via OWA. We now want to open up OWA for off-site users and do so securely. We installed a new separate Win2K SP2 server behind the firewall, opened the firewall to allow Internet traffic to this new server, and enabled IIS on it with virtual folders pointing to the OWA folders on the Exchange Server. This new server is running ISA. When we attempt to connect from the outside using http://newservername/exchange, we are prompted for user/password, but after entering an administrator userID/password (who has an e-mail account), we get 403 Unauthorized Access error. We are able to connect to other non-exchange folders on the Exchange server using this method (e.g. http://newservername/intranet to reach the corporate Intranet site). We have followed the directions in MS articles Q308599, Q290113, Q207655. What are we missing here? _ Chat with friends online, try MSN Messenger: http://messenger.msn.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: bringing it all together
If you've got the cash look at DirXML from Novell Regards, Mylo -Original Message- From: Ed Crowley [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 27 February 2002 22:37 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: bringing it all together Avaliable options I'm aware of: 1. Compaq LDAP Directory Synchronization Utility (LDSU) 2. Microsoft Metadirectory Server 3. SimpleSync 4. MS Mail Dirsync (unsupported by Microsoft, but is supposed to work) 5. InterOrg tool Ed Crowley MCSE+Internet MVP kcCC+I Tech Consultant Compaq Computer Corporation Protecting the world from PSTs and Bricked Backups! -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of RB Sent: Wednesday, February 27, 2002 6:03 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: bringing it all together Folks, a quick question which probably has many answers. With the build of a new Exchange 2000 organisation if I want to synchronise all the GALS from the MSX 5.5 orgs and add to this the E2k GAL In order to get one version of the GAL across all orgs (5.5 and E2k). Is there a tool that can do this ? Thanks RB _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/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: Bridgeheads on the DMZ
Let me guess... he/she wants it to be closer to the Internet - improving mail delivery times ;) Seriously, there's hardly any reasons why you should do this and lots of reasons why not. If you're going to stick anything on the perimeter network relating to SMTP, make it a machine which is doing content filtering/SMTP filtering, protecting your mail, rather than offering it up for public viewing (a la the bridgeheads). I'd appreciate it if you could ask them to explain their logic.. as I'm a bit baffled. Regards Mylo -Original Message- From: Sagert, Lori [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 25 February 2002 22:12 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Bridgeheads on the DMZ Hello All: Exchange 5.5 sp4 W2k We have a new Security manager who wants to put our SMTP only Bridgeheads out on the DMZ. I don't feel comfortable with this and was wondering if any of you had done this and ran across any gotcha's? TIA Lori Sagert gedasUSA, Inc./Volkswagen of America NT/Exchange Administrator 3800 Hamlin Road Auburn Hills, MI 48326 USA phone +1-248-754-6401 telefax +1-248-754-6399 Mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.gedas.net _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/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: Bridgeheads on the DMZ
But if you've got a DMZ.. you've likely got either a tri-homed or back-to-back firewall. Pushing the Exchange server out onto the DMZ does not make your internal network any more secure, but does expose your bridgeheads. Plus... if you're going to stick your Exchange boxes out on the DMZ, you're going to have to open up your interior firewall (so that your internal Exchange servers can talk to your bridgeheads and vice-versa) and that's not the greatest idea. If he's worried about inbound SMTP, check out filtering products as MIMEsweeper. I'm not sure whether 5.5.SP4 has any anti-spam/relay features built-in.. but I'm sure someone else can clarify that. Cheers, Mylo -Original Message- From: Sagert, Lori [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 27 February 2002 15:47 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Bridgeheads on the DMZ He feels that having the Bridgeheads receive SMTP mail on the internal network poses a security problem. Of course the Bridgehead is using a NAT ip address but he wants to lock it down further. -Original Message- From: Andy David [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, February 26, 2002 6:45 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Bridgeheads on the DMZ What is his/her logic? -Original Message- From: Sagert, Lori [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, February 25, 2002 4:12 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Bridgeheads on the DMZ Hello All: Exchange 5.5 sp4 W2k We have a new Security manager who wants to put our SMTP only Bridgeheads out on the DMZ. I don't feel comfortable with this and was wondering if any of you had done this and ran across any gotcha's? TIA Lori Sagert gedasUSA, Inc./Volkswagen of America NT/Exchange Administrator 3800 Hamlin Road Auburn Hills, MI 48326 USA phone +1-248-754-6401 telefax +1-248-754-6399 Mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.gedas.net _ List posting FAQ: http://www.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] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: How is this possible ?
It's possible to setup SMTP masquerading to mask the true domain to reply to messages. -Original Message- From: RBHATIA [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 27 February 2002 16:42 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: How is this possible ? I have a user who received an email where the TO: field showed a 'bellatlantic.net' email address (which he claims he doesn't own). However, the email showed up on our Exchange server in his Exchange mailbox (on his 'aim.org' email address) How is this possible ? _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/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: Experience poll 20,000 users
I was involved in a 25,000+ user rollout on 5.5 ... typically, the difference lay in the use and function of servers (e.g. dedicated bridgeheads for X400 and SMTP traffic) other elements to consider were working within the constraints of the NT4.0 domain model and how this might impact overall WAN performance/impact on Exchange.. i.e. unsuitability of single domain model) Others depend on how they deploy... they may have a requirement for clustering/server farms experience, so the assumption being is that an individual with 20,000 user design experience would be familiar with it... also backup/disaster recovery would be an interesting consideration. Having said all that, there's hardly a world of difference between an Exchange admin who has to manage 7,500 users versus one who manages 25,000. Regards Mylo -Original Message- From: Tony Hlabse [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 06 February 2002 12:57 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Experience poll 20,000 users I recently applied for a job which requires experience with at least 20,000 users. The job would be as a Exchange Admin. , part of a team. They said I have all the qualifications except no 20,000 environment experience. Even though over the past 5 years I have had experience at sites ranging from say a few hundred to 7,000, it seems its 20,000 experience or nothing. I was curious as to how many here have experience with 20,000+ and what is the real difference between say 5,000 and 20,000 except for more servers, more connections and more users, hence more calls? _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/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: Experience poll 20,000 users
That's true... also if its a greenfields project and involves workstations as well as servers then you're likely to find a separate project team with its own project life cycle for deployment, design and testing teams and separate rollout teams. They may just have decided to 'scope' anyone with less than 20,000 user experience out for streamlining interview candidates. Regards Mylo -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 06 February 2002 13:54 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Experience poll 20,000 users I have worked in an environment with 30,000 users and 30 servers. The big difference I have seen between large and small environments, is the large environment had no exceptions, had their processes and procedures streamlined, had a team of 12, had change control, and new their stuff really well. In the smaller environments, I have noticed that the smaller company fights over server settings more often, do not have their procedures in place, are under staffed, no change control, too many exceptions to the procedures they have, and have more security holes. This has just been my experience. LaCretia -Original Message- From: Tony Hlabse [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, February 06, 2002 5:57 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject:Experience poll 20,000 users I recently applied for a job which requires experience with at least 20,000 users. The job would be as a Exchange Admin. , part of a team. They said I have all the qualifications except no 20,000 environment experience. Even though over the past 5 years I have had experience at sites ranging from say a few hundred to 7,000, it seems its 20,000 experience or nothing. I was curious as to how many here have experience with 20,000+ and what is the real difference between say 5,000 and 20,000 except for more servers, more connections and more users, hence more calls? _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: How to setup multiple E2k Servers? -- Bounced Messages
Have you set a smart host on one of the SMTP Virtual Servers ?(SMTP|Properties|Delivery|Advanced)... ensure direct connect box is checked. An incorrectly configured SMTP Connector can also cause problems as some of the settings within override those on the virtual server. Where are the NDR's occurring .. Try enabling message tracking it's most likely that you've unwittingly checked a box somewhere :) Regards Mylo -Original Message- From: Terry Lee [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 29 January 2002 01:51 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: How to setup multiple E2k Servers? -- Bounced Messages My org recently migrated from a 2-site, 1 Exchange 5.5 Org to E2K w/TWO exchange servers that are in 2 physical locations. Previously, I had 1 E55 server that had the single Internet Mail Server while the 2nd server got mail replicated to it. Now, we have the 2 E2k servers w/2 SMTP virtual servers w/1 SMTP connector. We can send mail externally from both servers and receive external email but we cannot send mail to each other. We're getting bouncing mail between two servers. Can someone help with this...I'm not sure if I need a routing group or my bridgehead servers are wrong or what. NOTE: The servers are physically separated by routers but they serve the same domain, example: abc.com Any clues? Terry _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/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]
