On the theme of spam......
Hi All, We have experienced a vast increase in the amount of spam our employees have been getting (in the region of 3-400% increase) over the last 6 months. Prior to this, our MailSweeper was coping quite well with the problem, but is having significant problems with HTML based email ( the ones with w!xyzords split up like th!dfgis ). It got to the point where about 50% of the mail arriving was of this form and was getting past the filters. We have recently taken the rather drastic measure (with board backing) to restrict inbound HTML, with a 'whitelist' for exceptional circumstances. Understandably, this was not a very popular move, but has reduced the inbound spam to virtually nil. The way I have designed my whitelist also means that I have a workably low proportion of false positives. I am not completely happy with this solution, but am prepared to live with it until I have an alternative that is as effective. I have however been asked a question which I would like to relay Do any of you restrict HTML based email to either a greater or lesser extent? Thanks for taking time to respond Nick The information in this e-mail and any attachment(s) is confidential and may be legally privileged. This e-mail is intended solely for the addressee. If you are not the addressee, dissemination, copying or other use of this e-mail or any of its content is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful. If you are not the intended recipient please inform the sender immediately and destroy the e-mail and any copies. All liability for viruses is excluded to the fullest extent permitted by law. Any views expressed in this message are those of the individual sender. No contract may be construed by this e-mail. _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Strange Calendar Behaviour
Hi All, Hopefully, someone has seen this before and there is a simple fix I'm using EX5.5 One of my users decided to give a Distribution List 'Editor' permissions to his calendar. When the next person sent him a meeting invite, it went to both him and the DL. He then removed the permissions, but the DL still gets sent his meeting invites. This was several days ago, and it is still occurring. Can anyone give me a tip or two on how to stop this? Thanks Nick The information in this e-mail and any attachment(s) is confidential and may be legally privileged. This e-mail is intended solely for the addressee. If you are not the addressee, dissemination, copying or other use of this e-mail or any of its content is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful. If you are not the intended recipient please inform the sender immediately and destroy the e-mail and any copies. All liability for viruses is excluded to the fullest extent permitted by law. Any views expressed in this message are those of the individual sender. No contract may be construed by this e-mail. _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Strange Calendar Behaviour
Thanks Jeff - that worked a treat. (Why is it always the simple things that get overlooked?) Nick -Original Message- From: Jeff Beckham [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 13 October 2003 10:23 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Strange Calendar Behaviour Check and see if the DL is listed as a delegate. ToolsOptionsdelegates. Just remove it and you should be OK. Jeff -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Nick Field Posted At: Monday, October 13, 2003 2:51 AM Posted To: Exchange Discussion List Conversation: Strange Calendar Behaviour Subject: Strange Calendar Behaviour Hi All, Hopefully, someone has seen this before and there is a simple fix I'm using EX5.5 One of my users decided to give a Distribution List 'Editor' permissions to his calendar. When the next person sent him a meeting invite, it went to both him and the DL. He then removed the permissions, but the DL still gets sent his meeting invites. This was several days ago, and it is still occurring. Can anyone give me a tip or two on how to stop this? Thanks Nick The information in this e-mail and any attachment(s) is confidential and may be legally privileged. This e-mail is intended solely for the addressee. If you are not the addressee, dissemination, copying or other use of this e-mail or any of its content is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful. If you are not the intended recipient please inform the sender immediately and destroy the e-mail and any copies. All liability for viruses is excluded to the fullest extent permitted by law. Any views expressed in this message are those of the individual sender. No contract may be construed by this e-mail. _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=; lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang =english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: CAL for shared mailbox?
Ummm... You need a Client Access License for every Client that Accesses the server. AFAIK, the client is defined as the machine that the client software is installed on - Therefore if you run multiple instances if client software on a single machine, one CAL will cover it. Similarly, if you use a single piece of client software to open multiple mailboxes/resources on the same server, a single CAL would suffice. As always though - If you have queries about Microsoft licensing (or any other licensing for that matter), for a definitive answer - Ask the license supplier. Nick -Original Message- From: Rob Ellis [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 09 September 2003 11:33 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: CAL for shared mailbox? Probably a stupid question. Do I need an Exchange CAL for all mailboxes including shared boxes such as 'meeting room 1' 'IT Support' etc? Thanks Regards, Rob Ellis IT Manager Samsara Group plc Tel 023 9224 7979 Mob 07974 111867 MCP BEng(hons) _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang =english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] The information in this e-mail and any attachment(s) is confidential and may be legally privileged. This e-mail is intended solely for the addressee. If you are not the addressee, dissemination, copying or other use of this e-mail or any of its content is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful. If you are not the intended recipient please inform the sender immediately and destroy the e-mail and any copies. All liability for viruses is excluded to the fullest extent permitted by law. Any views expressed in this message are those of the individual sender. No contract may be construed by this e-mail. _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: 3 Layers of Virus protection.
We use 3. We use Sophos on the mail gateway (MailSweeper), NAV MSE at server level, NAV CE (excluding Exch) then NAV CE at desktop. Despite MailSweeper blocking/quarantining 99.999% of everything we ask it to, I have seen the odd thing get through. We also get the odd 'prat' that 'bypasses' policy and brings something in from outside Nick -Original Message- From: Tony Hlabse [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 20 August 2003 13:39 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: 3 Layers of Virus protection. I was curious how many have 3 layers of protection for their email systems. My current assignment has me at a place where they are comfortable with desktop and a set of SMTP servers doing virus and spam. Desktop is Symantec and Trend on the SMTP servers. My gut feeling is to also protect the IS stores too. How many have 3 levels. _ bGet MSN 8/b and help protect your children with advanced parental controls. http://join.msn.com/?page=features/parental _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang =english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] The information in this e-mail and any attachment(s) is confidential and may be legally privileged. This e-mail is intended solely for the addressee. If you are not the addressee, dissemination, copying or other use of this e-mail or any of its content is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful. If you are not the intended recipient please inform the sender immediately and destroy the e-mail and any copies. All liability for viruses is excluded to the fullest extent permitted by law. Any views expressed in this message are those of the individual sender. No contract may be construed by this e-mail. _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Heads up on a new virus
No, but they do have it in their intelligent updater/xdb update if you use NAV/SAV CE, it should be easy enough to roll out. Nick -Original Message- From: Jim Helfer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 01 August 2003 19:42 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Heads up on a new virus Symantec doesn't have the virusdef file that blocks this ready for live update yet :-( Aaron Brasslett wrote: Thanks Martin. We are already seeing this virus hit our file filters. Aaron -Original Message- From: Martin Tuip [MVP] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, August 01, 2003 1:51 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Heads up on a new virus http://www.trendmicro.com/vinfo/virusencyclo/default5.asp?VName=WORM_MIMAIL. A -- Martin Tuip MVP Exchange Exchange 2000 List owner www.exchange-mail.org www.sharepointserver.com [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang =english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang =english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang =english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] The information in this e-mail and any attachment(s) is confidential and may be legally privileged. This e-mail is intended solely for the addressee. If you are not the addressee, dissemination, copying or other use of this e-mail or any of its content is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful. If you are not the intended recipient please inform the sender immediately and destroy the e-mail and any copies. All liability for viruses is excluded to the fullest extent permitted by law. Any views expressed in this message are those of the individual sender. No contract may be construed by this e-mail. _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: POP = Bad? -- SMTP = Good?
Hi Matt, If I am reading this right, the OpenBSD servers selectively (dependant upon account) forward some of the mail to your Exchange system and retain the rest for POP collection? The users with POP email programs then bypass any perimeter security you have implemented by collecting direct from the OpenBSD server that has not stripped attachments. All users that can communicate with the Exchange system do so, and by doing so only collect mail that has had sensitive attachments stripped. If this is the case, why not do the following:- Create accounts for all your users on your Exchange system and arrange for all mail to be forwarded by SMTP. Close POP at the firewall to prevent abuse. To allow those users that 'must' continue to use POP to collect their mail, enable POP collection from your Exchange server. The result is - You are fully protected, as all mail has attachments stripped, and the users are happy as they have not had to change their methods of mail retrieval. Nick -Original Message- From: Matt Plahtinsky [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 13 June 2003 04:38 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: POP = Bad? -- SMTP = Good? Ok Im getting tired and its late and I've been here at work since 8:00am. I'm going to try one more time to clear this up. Campus email servers are OpenBSD something or other. They forward mail to my exchange server via SMTP. (not the problem) Users inside my firewall that don't use my exchange server get their mail from the main campus OpenBSD email server via POP. (the problem) Therefore bypassing my ability to strip there harmful attachments. Matt -Original Message- From: deji [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, June 12, 2003 11:16 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: POP = Bad? -- SMTP = Good? Then in this case I would say it does not matter whether they POP, PIP, or personally imbibe it, IF your exchange server's AV signature doesn't catch the Virus, the client will get it. All the mails go through your Exchange server. Concentrate your efforts on making your AV work better on the server, and stop worrying about a non-issue. HTH Dèjì Akómöláfé, MCSE MCSA MCP+I www.akomolafe.com www.iyaburo.com Do you now realize that Today is the Tomorrow you were worried about Yesterday? -anon -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Matt Plahtinsky Sent: Thursday, June 12, 2003 3:35 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: POP = Bad? -- SMTP = Good? The reason I asked the original question is because I work at a .EDU All mail goes to a [EMAIL PROTECTED] address on a central campus server. From there people either have their mail forwarded to their department mail server like [EMAIL PROTECTED] (my exchange server) address or use POP to down load their mail from the campus server. I have been trying to get management to force everyone to go through my exchange server so my firewall can strip all those bad attachment types. As it is a virus can sneak into my network with an attachment through POP. All my anti-virus software is set to update daily but if a new virus is able to make it in via POP before my anti-virus software updates. BAM lots and lots of work :( Matt -Original Message- From: Durkee, Peter [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, June 12, 2003 5:32 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: POP = Bad? -- SMTP = Good? I think the original question must have related to POPing out for personal mail, because otherwise the normal attachment stripping would occur. Clearly if you're just popping into your regular Exchange mailbox, you're just as protected from viruses as you are accessing it any other way. -Peter -Original Message- From: Erik Sojka [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, June 12, 2003 14:04 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: POP = Bad? -- SMTP = Good? Allowing employees to POP personal mail? Hmmm I didn't see that in the question but it's als a bad idea... -Original Message- From: Ed Crowley [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, June 12, 2003 4:46 PM To: Exchange Discussions I believe the question here was specifically whether to allow internal POP clients to pull their mail (personal, presumably) from outside sources. To that, I would agree it is a very poor idea to allow that. As to whether to allow POP usage from outside, I would also agree that allowing it is a poor idea, but there are ways to make it not so poor. Even though it is primative, POP is still a protocol that is necessary for clients running on non-Windows platforms. You can configure Exchange 2000 to support only POP with SSL, somewhat reducing the vulnerability, or, better yet, allow it only through a VPN. Still, I would be encouraging such users to try to use IMAP instead, but it is not without its risks as well. Ed Crowley MCSE+Internet MVP Freelance E-Mail Philosopher Protecting the world from PSTs and
RE: DS_E_COMMUNICATIONS_PROBLEM
I just wanted to say thanks to Chris for making me aware of this problem. I have been trying to fix a problem with being unable to connect to mailboxes on only one of my servers via OWA for quite a while. It would appear that NT4 talking to NT4 does not suffer even if these files are mismatched, but w2k talking to NT4 does. After updating, problem is fixed. Thanks again Nick -Original Message- From: Chris Scharff [mailto:chris_scharff;messageone.com] Sent: 08 November 2002 17:34 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: DS_E_COMMUNICATIONS_PROBLEM I forgot to provide attribution to those steps... it was Peter Peedu from MS who suggested it in the public newsgroups. I don't know anything about it other than it has worked for a couple of people. -Original Message- From: Mellott, Bill [mailto:bmellott;SND.com] Sent: Friday, November 08, 2002 11:20 AM To: Exchange Discussions Chris that's an idea.. Of course Ive wiped the machine now. I could reload the ghost image for kicks and try it. One Q: for kicks I checked my term W2K Pro (which has ech55 admin ..work fine) ie.ethe SECURITY.DLL only shows me the version number not any of the text you indicate. Should I ref by the ver number to find which ones i.e. 56 or 128? thats for the input bill -Original Message- From: Chris Scharff [mailto:chris_scharff;messageone.com] Sent: Friday, November 08, 2002 11:56 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: DS_E_COMMUNICATIONS_PROBLEM I was logging in with the domain administrator account My domain admin account doesn't have Exchange admin permissions, so it'd create this error every time, however... Check the following files. How to determine if you are using 56bit or 128 bit encryption on SECURITY.DLL , NTLMSSPS.DLL and SCHANNEL.DLL file. Take properties and Version the description of the file will tell. SECURITY.DLL NtLm Security Support Provider Client DLL (Export Version) 56 bit version NtLm Security Support Provider Client DLL (Domestic Use Only) 128 bit version NTLMSSPS.DLL NtLm Security Support Provider Service DLL (Export Version) 56 bit version NtLm Security Support Provider Service DLL (Domestic Use Only) 128 bit version SCHANNEL.DLL TLS / SSL Security Provider (Export Version) 56 bit version TLS / SSL Security Provider (Domestic Use Only) 128 bit version Make sure you DO NOT have a mix of these files. Meaning either 128 Bit on all three or 56 bit on all three. -Original Message- From: Mellott, Bill [mailto:bmellott;SND.com] Sent: Friday, November 08, 2002 8:31 AM To: Exchange Discussions I was logging in with the domain administrator account. Background: Ghosted server from one machine to another. From IDE drive machine to scsi raid. Had to Run W2K svr cd cause Boot Inaccess... W2K svr. Added machine back into domain. Got Exchange error Unload exchange admin, regclean, reload exchange admin, run sp4, run Q289606. still get exchange error. No Had not tried RPCping yet. Looked at archives - NO results returned..blank page. I do not remember this topic on the list (IF you can tell me when I look back over my last 1 1/2 worth of list) MS Technet - NG It worked fine on the original server. I know it has something to do with having to reload w2k kind'a to get the scsi drive to loadup right. But why it would not comm..after reloading has got me puzzled. bill -Original Message- From: Andy David [mailto:davida;vss.com] Sent: Thursday, November 07, 2002 7:59 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: DS_E_COMMUNICATIONS_PROBLEM What account have you logged into the workstation with? Does it have SA rights? -Original Message- From: Mellott, Bill [mailto:bmellott;SND.com] Sent: Thursday, November 07, 2002 6:20 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: DS_E_COMMUNICATIONS_PROBLEM has anyone seen this error DS_E_COMMUNICATIONS_PROBLEM from trying to run exchange admin exchange 55sp4 admin loaded on machine (which was ghosted/cloned) reloaded admin + sp4 + Q289606 still get error any clues? No luck for me on MS technet thanks bill _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:leave-exchange;ls.swynk.com Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] -- -- -- The information contained in this email message is privileged and confidential information intended only for the use of the individual or entity to whom it is addressed. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copy of this message is strictly
RE: Unusual OWA problem
The plot thickens... I found the registry key which controls which server OWA contacts for DS info - HKEY_LM\SYSTEM\CurrentControlSet\Services\MSExchangeWEB\Parameters\Server I tried changing it to the 4th server. Users still cannot access their mailboxes on the 4th server, all other users can still access their mailboxes. This suggests that OWA is not only accessing the 4th server ok, but is able to read the directory on that server. Therefore the problem probably lies elsewhere - Something unique to the mailbox setup on that server maybe? I have just gone through the mailbox properties and compared them to a mailbox that is working (I also compared the raw properties), and cannot find any differences (other than ones I would expect). So once again I am puzzled - Not an unusual state of affairs :) Nick -Original Message- From: Chris H [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 11 October 2002 01:42 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Re: Unusual OWA problem The value for the exchange server OWA hits is in the registry (I forget the key but it is in the MS KB). Perhaps change this server to the failing server and see if that helps? Chris - Original Message - From: Nick Field [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, October 10, 2002 9:07 AM Subject: RE: Unusual OWA problem Hi Tony, thanks for the response - I'm guessing that when users hit the OWA box, (if authentication is stipulated) they are authenticated against the domain, then once authenticated the OWA code attempts to contact the mailbox specified in the 'Log On' textbox, I am unsure how it determines which server to contact (I assume it connects to the DS on one server, but which server or how it determines which server is unknown to me) and I suspect this is where the problem lies. Name resolution 'seems' ok... ie the OWA box can resolve the 4th server name to IP address without problems. OWA originally worked talking to the 4th server. The IP address of the 4th server did change some time ago. Several weeks before a report of problems with OWA. (I am not discounting this, since users are notorious for not reporting problems immediately). Test users fail in the same manner as normal users. I get the same results connecting either from inside or outside. If this could be a problem caused by the change in IP address, I would appreciate any ideas on where to start looking - WINS is fully updated, we do not use DNS, all name resolution seems to be working. Is there anything within the Exchange install that 'hard codes' the IP address? Nick -Original Message- From: Tony Hlabse [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 10 October 2002 15:32 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Re: Unusual OWA problem You have to ask what happens when a users hits the OWA box. Sounds like a name resolution problem. Did some change an IP or something on that 4th box. Did this just start? Check event logs on 4th box. What happens if you create a test users and try to get in. Does this happen only from the outside world. Does in work OK internally? - Original Message - From: Nick Field [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, October 10, 2002 8:13 AM Subject: Unusual OWA problem I am using Exchange 5.5, SP4 on 4 servers in a single exchange site, single NT4 Domain, multiple geographical offices. I have a 5th server running OWA also SP4. All mailboxes on servers 1 through 3 can be accessed by their relative users via OWA, all mailboxes on server 4 are inaccessible by their relative users. All users on all 4 servers can access their mailbox via an Outlook client. I get the standard - 'OWA was unable to get your Inbox' error. I have followed as many of the MS help/KB articles I can find, to no avail. There is no firewall between the OWA box and the 4 servers. All users have the same permissions on all 4 servers, and all have 'log on locally' on the OWA box. I have cranked all the diagnostic logging within Exchange up to maximum and not seen any information regarding a logon attempt from the user attempting to connect via OWA, suggesting problems with communication from the OWA system however all other communication between the two servers I have tried seems to be fine. Has anyone got any suggestions? Cheers Nick _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List
RE: Unusual OWA problem
Thanks for the input Roger. Have just checked, and all was already set up as you suggest. Nick -Original Message- From: Roger Seielstad [mailto:roger.seielstad;inovis.com] Sent: 11 October 2002 14:02 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Unusual OWA problem I meant IS. -- Roger D. Seielstad - MCSE Sr. Systems Administrator Inovis - Formerly Harbinger and Extricity Atlanta, GA -Original Message- From: Roger Seielstad Sent: Friday, October 11, 2002 8:57 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Unusual OWA problem Sounds like that server's IIS has the HTTP protocol disabled for its users. In ExAdmin, Site | Configuration Container | Protocols and make sure HTTP is enabled, then make sure that the server is set to use the site defaults for protocols -- Roger D. Seielstad - MCSE Sr. Systems Administrator Inovis - Formerly Harbinger and Extricity Atlanta, GA -Original Message- From: Nick Field [mailto:Nick.Field;Comino.com] Sent: Friday, October 11, 2002 5:59 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Unusual OWA problem The plot thickens... I found the registry key which controls which server OWA contacts for DS info - HKEY_LM\SYSTEM\CurrentControlSet\Services\MSExchangeWEB\Parame ters\Server I tried changing it to the 4th server. Users still cannot access their mailboxes on the 4th server, all other users can still access their mailboxes. This suggests that OWA is not only accessing the 4th server ok, but is able to read the directory on that server. Therefore the problem probably lies elsewhere - Something unique to the mailbox setup on that server maybe? I have just gone through the mailbox properties and compared them to a mailbox that is working (I also compared the raw properties), and cannot find any differences (other than ones I would expect). So once again I am puzzled - Not an unusual state of affairs :) Nick -Original Message- From: Chris H [mailto:ntpro;woh.rr.com] Sent: 11 October 2002 01:42 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Re: Unusual OWA problem The value for the exchange server OWA hits is in the registry (I forget the key but it is in the MS KB). Perhaps change this server to the failing server and see if that helps? Chris - Original Message - From: Nick Field [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, October 10, 2002 9:07 AM Subject: RE: Unusual OWA problem Hi Tony, thanks for the response - I'm guessing that when users hit the OWA box, (if authentication is stipulated) they are authenticated against the domain, then once authenticated the OWA code attempts to contact the mailbox specified in the 'Log On' textbox, I am unsure how it determines which server to contact (I assume it connects to the DS on one server, but which server or how it determines which server is unknown to me) and I suspect this is where the problem lies. Name resolution 'seems' ok... ie the OWA box can resolve the 4th server name to IP address without problems. OWA originally worked talking to the 4th server. The IP address of the 4th server did change some time ago. Several weeks before a report of problems with OWA. (I am not discounting this, since users are notorious for not reporting problems immediately). Test users fail in the same manner as normal users. I get the same results connecting either from inside or outside. If this could be a problem caused by the change in IP address, I would appreciate any ideas on where to start looking - WINS is fully updated, we do not use DNS, all name resolution seems to be working. Is there anything within the Exchange install that 'hard codes' the IP address? Nick -Original Message- From: Tony Hlabse [mailto:thlabse;hotmail.com] Sent: 10 October 2002 15:32 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Re: Unusual OWA problem You have to ask what happens when a users hits the OWA box. Sounds like a name resolution problem. Did some change an IP or something on that 4th box. Did this just start? Check event logs on 4th box. What happens if you create a test users and try to get in. Does this happen only from the outside world. Does in work OK internally? - Original Message - From: Nick Field [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, October 10, 2002 8:13 AM Subject: Unusual OWA problem I am using Exchange 5.5, SP4 on 4 servers in a single exchange site, single NT4 Domain, multiple geographical offices. I have a 5th server running OWA also SP4. All mailboxes on servers
RE: Unusual OWA problem
Hi Tony, thanks for the response - I'm guessing that when users hit the OWA box, (if authentication is stipulated) they are authenticated against the domain, then once authenticated the OWA code attempts to contact the mailbox specified in the 'Log On' textbox, I am unsure how it determines which server to contact (I assume it connects to the DS on one server, but which server or how it determines which server is unknown to me) and I suspect this is where the problem lies. Name resolution 'seems' ok... ie the OWA box can resolve the 4th server name to IP address without problems. OWA originally worked talking to the 4th server. The IP address of the 4th server did change some time ago. Several weeks before a report of problems with OWA. (I am not discounting this, since users are notorious for not reporting problems immediately). Test users fail in the same manner as normal users. I get the same results connecting either from inside or outside. If this could be a problem caused by the change in IP address, I would appreciate any ideas on where to start looking - WINS is fully updated, we do not use DNS, all name resolution seems to be working. Is there anything within the Exchange install that 'hard codes' the IP address? Nick -Original Message- From: Tony Hlabse [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 10 October 2002 15:32 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Re: Unusual OWA problem You have to ask what happens when a users hits the OWA box. Sounds like a name resolution problem. Did some change an IP or something on that 4th box. Did this just start? Check event logs on 4th box. What happens if you create a test users and try to get in. Does this happen only from the outside world. Does in work OK internally? - Original Message - From: Nick Field [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, October 10, 2002 8:13 AM Subject: Unusual OWA problem I am using Exchange 5.5, SP4 on 4 servers in a single exchange site, single NT4 Domain, multiple geographical offices. I have a 5th server running OWA also SP4. All mailboxes on servers 1 through 3 can be accessed by their relative users via OWA, all mailboxes on server 4 are inaccessible by their relative users. All users on all 4 servers can access their mailbox via an Outlook client. I get the standard - 'OWA was unable to get your Inbox' error. I have followed as many of the MS help/KB articles I can find, to no avail. There is no firewall between the OWA box and the 4 servers. All users have the same permissions on all 4 servers, and all have 'log on locally' on the OWA box. I have cranked all the diagnostic logging within Exchange up to maximum and not seen any information regarding a logon attempt from the user attempting to connect via OWA, suggesting problems with communication from the OWA system however all other communication between the two servers I have tried seems to be fine. Has anyone got any suggestions? Cheers Nick _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.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: W32/Bugbear@MM - No File Attachment
I have seen these arrive in a similar state, they get through MailSweeper 4.3 (with Sophos). I understand that it gets through MS because some of the content boundaries are malformed and therefore MS only scans the header, maybe this is happening with GS? We use NAVMSE at the back end which catches any that get through. Nick -Original Message- From: Garrish, Robert B. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 08 October 2002 14:24 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: W32/Bugbear@MM - No File Attachment Dear DL Members, At Wawa, on the Exchange Servers, we are running GroupShield 4.0.4. The Scan Engine (4160) and DAT files (4227) are up to date. GroupShield is detecting and quarantining the W32/Bugbear@MM virus, as long as the infected e-mail message has an actual file attachment. If the infected e-mail message does not have a file attachment, GroupShield is not detecting it, thus we have some PCs and Laptops that get infected, and our Network Printers and Shared Printers print off over 100 pages of garbled text. Common to these e-mail messages with not files attachments is, they are all HTML (as opposed to Rich Text or Plain Text). Is anyone else with GroupShield experiencing this problem? What are you doing, to the Exchange Servers, to fix this? I can open these e-mail messages from my Laptop, which has the latest version of the Scan Engine and DAT files, without getting infected. Having the client Scan Engine and DAT files is a solution, and we are working on it. Let me know. Thanks. Rob Garrish Exchange Administrator Wawa Inc. 610-558-8371 _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.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: Errors administering one server in a site.
Outlook client can connect to a mailbox on the fifth server from the XP box. The HKLM\Software\Microsoft\Exchange\Exchange Provider\Rpc_Binding_Order keys are identical on XP workstation NT workstation and all servers. I am currently looking into network binding orders... Nick -Original Message- From: Jon Hill [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 02 July 2002 19:05 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Errors administering one server in a site. WAG - have you checked the HKLM\Software\Microsoft\Exchange\Exchange Provider\Rpc_Binding_Order key on your workstation and on the server? Does Outlook on your XP box reach the fifth server? -Original Message- From: Nick Field [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, July 02, 2002 6:19 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Errors administering one server in a site. Hi all, I am having a strange problem which I am hoping people here might have some ideas about. I have recently ( about a month ago ) added a fifth server to our Exchange 5.5 (Sp4 NT4sp6a domain ) site. Everything seems to be working fine except one niggling little problem, I have the Admin program installed on my Windows XP workstation. I can connect to the first four servers with no problem, but when I try to connect to the new server ( either by File-Connect to Server or Expand server and try to access any information ) I get DS_E_COMMUNICATION_PROBLEM or something similar. I can administer this server fine from an NT4 workstation at the same location as my XP workstation. I have tried re-installing the admin program to no avail. The only reference to problems like this I can find in the KB reference separate domains, but this is not the case. Thanks for any thoughts. Nick _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Errors administering one server in a site.
Hi all, I am having a strange problem which I am hoping people here might have some ideas about. I have recently ( about a month ago ) added a fifth server to our Exchange 5.5 (Sp4 NT4sp6a domain ) site. Everything seems to be working fine except one niggling little problem, I have the Admin program installed on my Windows XP workstation. I can connect to the first four servers with no problem, but when I try to connect to the new server ( either by File-Connect to Server or Expand server and try to access any information ) I get DS_E_COMMUNICATION_PROBLEM or something similar. I can administer this server fine from an NT4 workstation at the same location as my XP workstation. I have tried re-installing the admin program to no avail. The only reference to problems like this I can find in the KB reference separate domains, but this is not the case. Thanks for any thoughts. Nick _ List posting FAQ: http://www.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: Errors administering one server in a site.
Yes, the XP workstation has Exchange SP4 on ( as have all the servers ). Nick -Original Message- From: Dale Geoffrey Edwards [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 02 July 2002 16:37 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Errors administering one server in a site. Did you re-apply the Exchange Service Pack to your XP machine as the other Exchange Servers have? Geoff... -Original Message- From: Nick Field [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, July 02, 2002 6:19 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Errors administering one server in a site. Hi all, I am having a strange problem which I am hoping people here might have some ideas about. I have recently ( about a month ago ) added a fifth server to our Exchange 5.5 (Sp4 NT4sp6a domain ) site. Everything seems to be working fine except one niggling little problem, I have the Admin program installed on my Windows XP workstation. I can connect to the first four servers with no problem, but when I try to connect to the new server ( either by File-Connect to Server or Expand server and try to access any information ) I get DS_E_COMMUNICATION_PROBLEM or something similar. I can administer this server fine from an NT4 workstation at the same location as my XP workstation. I have tried re-installing the admin program to no avail. The only reference to problems like this I can find in the KB reference separate domains, but this is not the case. Thanks for any thoughts. Nick _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.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: Network Error During Host Resolution
There does not appear to be a MX record for de.durr-usa.com Perhaps this is your problem. Nick -Original Message- From: Joe Pochedley [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 13 March 2002 16:40 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Network Error During Host Resolution Kind ladies and gentlemen of the list. I am sending this message again in hopes that someone will be able to help me. I'm not intending to spam the list, just looking for some assistance. I've heard from a few people off list that they've also experienced similar problems, but none of them have / had a solution and were hoping that I had found something with yesterday's inquiry... If anyone out there can help, or at least give me another direction to explore I would greatly appreciate it. (I know about MS PSS and it is my final option, but I'd rather not go there). My Exchange Server is v5.5 SP4 Problem is as follows: -Begin Quoted Error Message- Your message did not reach some or all of the intended recipients. Subject: RE: Durr Industries Sent: 3/10/02 1:11 PM The following recipient(s) could not be reached: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' on 3/12/02 1:01 PM The recipient name is not recognized The MTS-ID of the original message is: c=US;a= ;p=namfg;l=SEQUOYAH-020310181103Z-71 MSEXCH:IMS:namfg:cleveland:SEQUOYAH 3499 (000B09AA) network error during host resolution [EMAIL PROTECTED] on 3/12/02 1:01 PM The recipient name is not recognized The MTS-ID of the original message is: c=US;a= ;p=namfg;l=SEQUOYAH-020310181103Z-71 MSEXCH:IMS:namfg:cleveland:SEQUOYAH 3499 (000B09AA) network error during host resolution -End Quoted Error Message- I'm getting this error when trying to send to de.durr-usa.com, and have in the past had this error on a few other addresses, but the message has always eventually gone through in the past. This time though, I can't get anything to go through to de.durr-usa.com. Supposedly, we have been able to send to these recipients in the past, but it's only been in the past two months that there have been any problems that the end user has complained about... No changes have been made to our Exchange Server or DNS servers for at least the past 4-6 months. I am able to look up de.durr-usa.com using the same DNS server that the exchange server is using, so it's not that the DNS server can't resolve the host name... I looked up durr-usa.com's DNS records and there is no MX record for the sub domain 'de' but there is an A record, so theoretically the Exchange SMTP service should use the A record in place of the MX record, correct? I am at a loss. Thanks in advance. Joe Pochedley _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.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 address resolution SO SLOW
Long shot here, but have you checked the location and accessibility of the address lists that the client uses for 'auto' name resolution? Nick -Original Message- From: Roger Mackenzie [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, January 17, 2002 10:32 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Outlook address resolution SO SLOW Folks, Does anyone recognise this bizarre situation. Outlook 98 on a NT4 Terminal Server (hosting a witches brew of other applications to do with telephone logging). MAPI profile connecting an Exchange 5.5 SP3 + store fix. Console auto logs in to run telephone statistics collection and uses Outlook 98 for the purposes of e-mailing reports. If you manually send mail to GAL entries, no problem. If you manually send mail to an SMTP address ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) the Outlook process freezes as you type the '@' (this is not displayed) and task manager shows it burning lots of cpu. It eventually returns control. The automated report mailing process by necessity uses SMTP addresses and times out the application. Bizarrely if you check the properties of any of the standard folders they do not display permissions tabs, synchronisation tab etc as if the folders were based on a PST. BUT if you login to the same user via the TS client service, Outlook 98, using the same mail profile behaves completely normally! As this is a live logging service with bundles of bespoke applications I'm completely stuffed when it comes to experimenting with the service. Any thoughts? Regards, Roger Mackenzie (Glasgow University) _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
NDR when sending mail to PF
Hi All, Am probably overlooking something simple here, does anyone know what I am doing wrong? Exch 5.5 SP4 I am trying to send a mail to a public folder from a source external to the organisation. On each attempt I get an NDR containing the following text:- The message could not be delivered because you do not have create permissions on this folder or it is only available to folder owners at this time I have looked at Q193926, which does not apply. I suspect it is a permissions problem as the NDR suggests, but I am now stumped as to where to look from here. The anonymous permissions on the folder is Contributor. Thanks Nick Field Comino PLC _ List posting FAQ: http://www.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 when sending mail to PF
Neil, You are a star. This worked a treat. I knew it would be something simple, I can't believe that I missed trying that. Thanks again Nick Field Comino PLC -Original Message- From: Neil Hobson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, December 06, 2001 5:35 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: NDR when sending mail to PF Set the DEFAULT role to Contributor, not Anonymous. But remember to switch this around when you migrate to Exchange 2000, as it works the other way! Neil -Original Message- From: Nick Field [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Posted At: 06 December 2001 17:33 Posted To: Exchange Mailing List Conversation: NDR when sending mail to PF Subject: NDR when sending mail to PF Hi All, Am probably overlooking something simple here, does anyone know what I am doing wrong? Exch 5.5 SP4 I am trying to send a mail to a public folder from a source external to the organisation. On each attempt I get an NDR containing the following text:- The message could not be delivered because you do not have create permissions on this folder or it is only available to folder owners at this time I have looked at Q193926, which does not apply. I suspect it is a permissions problem as the NDR suggests, but I am now stumped as to where to look from here. The anonymous permissions on the folder is Contributor. Thanks Nick Field Comino PLC _ List posting FAQ: http://www.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 eMail and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual to whom it is addressed. Any view or opinions presented are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of Silversands or any of its subsidiary companies. If you have received this eMail in error please contact the Support Desk Immediately by telephone on 01202-36 or on eMail at [EMAIL PROTECTED] ** _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.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: Server why, why me
I have seen this happen with PcAnywhere. Remotely killed it and the server decided to play again. Nick -Original Message- From: Tener, Richard [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, November 30, 2001 4:01 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Server why, why me Came into work today and my exchange server 5.5 on windows nt sp6 was not responding. I dont know how this happened, the only thing that was on the desktop was the cursor and wallpaper no icons or start menu. I tried to press Ctrl alt del and nothing happened. Couldnt get the server to respond for some reason. The cusor would move when I moved the mouse and thats it so I pressed the big button. The server is up and running fine now and I check the event viewer and the only thing it gave me back was an unexpected shutdown occoured at 11:46pm. Did this ever happen to anyone before. All thoughts would be appreciated. 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]
RE: Only Admins can access OWA??
Sorry to belabour the point, but did you ensure that User Manager for Domains was focussed on the local machine and not the domain when you set Log on Locally rights? Nick -Original Message- From: Rich Gomes [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, October 29, 2001 9:16 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Only Admins can access OWA?? The Everyone group has Log On Locally as well as Access from the network. In addition, the Exchange virtual directory has Read, log access and index this directory permissions checked. _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
