RE: E2K services stopping
What version of Groupshield and are you using ESE scanning? -Original Message- From: Alastair Morrison [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 11 November 2003 17:29 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: E2K services stopping Last week I posting to this list about SMTP between our current E2K server and newly installed (into the same organisation and routing group) E2K3 cluster. That problem is that when sending from an E2K mailbox via MAPI or OWA the message appears to be queued for the E2K3 cluster and leave that queue, but no evidence of it is ever seen on the E2K3 cluster and eventually it reappears back in the E2K server's queue. What does work, however, is telneting on port 25 from the E2K server to the E2K3 cluster and conducting the SMTP dialogue at that level. Microsoft is now investigating this problem. However this posting relates to the following. Yesterday, as part of our attempts to resolve the SMTP issue we installed and ran Winroute and Netmon on the E2K server. (This server has run without problems for well over a year and a half. It is uptodate with windows and exchange service packs and patches. Groupshield antivirus dat files are updated daily.) Subsequently the Information store on the server has started to stop for no apparent reason (the system log says - The Microsoft exchange information store service terminated unexpectedly - id 7031 ( which was of little help). After the first occurrence we removed Netmon and after a further occurrence rebooted the server. The problem persisted. We also had an additional (worse?) problem. Whereas with the above problem the information store could be manually restarted, with the latest problem various services stopped functioning, (smtp, www, IISadmin etc) although the Services display indicated they were still running. Attempting to stop or start them failed and resulted in the message - Error 1053: The service did not respond to the start or control request in a timely fashion. Rebooting was the only way to get the services running again. Any advice only how to restore the stability of the E2K server would be appreciated. Thanks. Alastair Morrison IT Services Strathclyde University UK - [EMAIL PROTECTED] Strathclyde University Glasgow UK _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang =english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] ** The information contained in this message or any of its attachments may be confidential and is intended for the exclusive use of the addressee(s). Any disclosure, reproduction, distribution or other dissemination or use of this communication is strictly prohibited without the express permission of the sender. The views expressed in this email are those of the individual and not necessarily those of Sony or Sony affiliated companies. Sony email is for business use only. This email and any response may be monitored by Sony United Kingdom Limited. (05) ** _ 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: E2k multiple domains
Not sure if this got posted, but... I did that, is there anything else? Do I need to add that domain into the allow relay? Users can use their outlook to get the mail, but when they try to send they get the 550 relay denied. These outlook users are in remote locations and are using Outlook Internet Mail, not exchange. Thanks! -Original Message- From: Ed Crowley [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, September 15, 2003 6:01 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Re: E2k multiple domains You need domain2.com in a recipient policy. Ed --- Steck, Herb [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I have to be missing something and it's causing me to go bald very early in life. Here is what I am doing: Single Exchange 2k Server domain1.com has always worked Have added new users that will be using domain2.com. DNS records are changed and pointing to the same server and are working fine. Whenever a user gets an e-mail from the outside the sender gets relaying not allowed. I went into the SMTP VS and added the domain2.com as granted. Even restarted the VS and still get relay not allowed. Now I have made this work on 5.5 servers for an ISP that wanted to use Exchange for their users mail server, but I must be missing something in E2K to make it work right. Any help, direction would be great. Am sure this has been discussed before, but I don't have access to my archives right now. Thanks in advance! The information transmitted is intended only for the person or entity to which it is addressed and may contain proprietary, confidential and/or legally privileged material. Any review, retransmission, dissemination or other use of, or taking of any action in reliance upon, this information by persons or entities other than the intended recipient is prohibited. If you received this in error, please contact the sender and delete the material from all computers. _ 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] __ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software http://sitebuilder.yahoo.com _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] The information transmitted is intended only for the person or entity to which it is addressed and may contain proprietary, confidential and/or legally privileged material. Any review, retransmission, dissemination or other use of, or taking of any action in reliance upon, this information by persons or entities other than the intended recipient is prohibited. If you received this in error, please contact the sender and delete the material from all computers. _ 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: E2k multiple domains
I added that. Anything else I need to do? Users can get their mail via pop, but now when they try to send they get the 550 error. -Original Message- From: Ed Crowley [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, September 15, 2003 6:01 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Re: E2k multiple domains You need domain2.com in a recipient policy. Ed --- Steck, Herb [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I have to be missing something and it's causing me to go bald very early in life. Here is what I am doing: Single Exchange 2k Server domain1.com has always worked Have added new users that will be using domain2.com. DNS records are changed and pointing to the same server and are working fine. Whenever a user gets an e-mail from the outside the sender gets relaying not allowed. I went into the SMTP VS and added the domain2.com as granted. Even restarted the VS and still get relay not allowed. Now I have made this work on 5.5 servers for an ISP that wanted to use Exchange for their users mail server, but I must be missing something in E2K to make it work right. Any help, direction would be great. Am sure this has been discussed before, but I don't have access to my archives right now. Thanks in advance! The information transmitted is intended only for the person or entity to which it is addressed and may contain proprietary, confidential and/or legally privileged material. Any review, retransmission, dissemination or other use of, or taking of any action in reliance upon, this information by persons or entities other than the intended recipient is prohibited. If you received this in error, please contact the sender and delete the material from all computers. _ 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] __ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software http://sitebuilder.yahoo.com _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] The information transmitted is intended only for the person or entity to which it is addressed and may contain proprietary, confidential and/or legally privileged material. Any review, retransmission, dissemination or other use of, or taking of any action in reliance upon, this information by persons or entities other than the intended recipient is prohibited. If you received this in error, please contact the sender and delete the material from all computers. _ 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: E2k multiple domains
Make sure they are authenticating properly and that you have relaying with authentication turned on. -Original Message- From: Steck, Herb [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, September 16, 2003 2:00 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: E2k multiple domains Not sure if this got posted, but... I did that, is there anything else? Do I need to add that domain into the allow relay? Users can use their outlook to get the mail, but when they try to send they get the 550 relay denied. These outlook users are in remote locations and are using Outlook Internet Mail, not exchange. Thanks! _ 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: E2k multiple domains
You need domain2.com in a recipient policy. Ed --- Steck, Herb [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I have to be missing something and it's causing me to go bald very early in life. Here is what I am doing: Single Exchange 2k Server domain1.com has always worked Have added new users that will be using domain2.com. DNS records are changed and pointing to the same server and are working fine. Whenever a user gets an e-mail from the outside the sender gets relaying not allowed. I went into the SMTP VS and added the domain2.com as granted. Even restarted the VS and still get relay not allowed. Now I have made this work on 5.5 servers for an ISP that wanted to use Exchange for their users mail server, but I must be missing something in E2K to make it work right. Any help, direction would be great. Am sure this has been discussed before, but I don't have access to my archives right now. Thanks in advance! The information transmitted is intended only for the person or entity to which it is addressed and may contain proprietary, confidential and/or legally privileged material. Any review, retransmission, dissemination or other use of, or taking of any action in reliance upon, this information by persons or entities other than the intended recipient is prohibited. If you received this in error, please contact the sender and delete the material from all computers. _ 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] __ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software http://sitebuilder.yahoo.com _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: E2K migration issue
Hmmm. No, it won't work if they're not in the same ORG. I'd follow Chris's link from before regarding some of the command line utilities from Slipstick. Use one of those to generate/modify the profile during login. Steven --- Steven Dickenson [EMAIL PROTECTED] Network Administrator The Key School, Annapolis Maryland -Original Message- From: Bennett, Joshua [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, August 11, 2003 4:02 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: E2K migration issue Not too sure that will work. The E2K servers are in AD will the 5.5 servers are not. Also, the E2K servers are in a new Exchange ORG. -Original Message- From: Dickenson, Steven [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, August 11, 2003 4:02 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: E2K migration issue Leave up the old Ex5.5 server for a little while. Outlook will see that it's mailbox has moved to a new server, and update the profile itself. Steven --- Steven Dickenson [EMAIL PROTECTED] Network Administrator The Key School, Annapolis Maryland -Original Message- From: Bennett, Joshua [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, August 11, 2003 2:58 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: E2K migration issue Hello all, I was wondering if anyone out there knew of way to script Outlook profile changes. We are doing an E2K migration and I am looking for a way to automate the changes to the users Outlook profile. We are building out brand new E2K servers and exporting/importing all the mail from 5.5 to the E2K servers and need to point the users at the new servers. Josh Bennett Exchange Administrator Cotelligent, Inc. 401 Parkway Drive Broomall, PA 19008 610.359.5929 Tel 610.353.1693 Fax www.cotelligent.com Connecting People to Information _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang =english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang =english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang =english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: E2K migration issue
It doesn't work if the exchange servers aren't in the same org. From: Peter Orlowski [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Mon, 11 Aug 2003 13:09:59 -0700 To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: E2K migration issue It will work. Its by design. - Peter -Original Message- From: Bennett, Joshua [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, August 11, 2003 1:02 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: E2K migration issue Not too sure that will work. The E2K servers are in AD will the 5.5 servers are not. Also, the E2K servers are in a new Exchange ORG. -Original Message- From: Dickenson, Steven [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, August 11, 2003 4:02 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: E2K migration issue Leave up the old Ex5.5 server for a little while. Outlook will see that it's mailbox has moved to a new server, and update the profile itself. Steven --- Steven Dickenson [EMAIL PROTECTED] Network Administrator The Key School, Annapolis Maryland -Original Message- From: Bennett, Joshua [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, August 11, 2003 2:58 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: E2K migration issue Hello all, I was wondering if anyone out there knew of way to script Outlook profile changes. We are doing an E2K migration and I am looking for a way to automate the changes to the users Outlook profile. We are building out brand new E2K servers and exporting/importing all the mail from 5.5 to the E2K servers and need to point the users at the new servers. Josh Bennett Exchange Administrator Cotelligent, Inc. 401 Parkway Drive Broomall, PA 19008 610.359.5929 Tel 610.353.1693 Fax www.cotelligent.com Connecting People to Information _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang =english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang =english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang =english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang=e nglish 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: E2K and Trend Micro Server Protect
We are running Trend with EX2K with no issues at all. John Parker, MCSE IS Admin. Senior Technical Specialist Digital Display Systems. Alpha Video 7711 Computer Ave. Edina, MN. 55435 952-896-9898 Local 800-388-0008 Watts 952-896-9899 Fax 612-804-8769 Cell 952-841-3327 Direct [EMAIL PROTECTED] Be excellent to each other ---End of Line--- -Original Message- From: HongKong [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, August 11, 2003 12:07 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: E2K and Trend Micro Server Protect Does anyone have a problem running Trend Micro Server Protect with E2K? We have a E2K server would not mount Priv1.edb store. This problem occured last week and we isolated it to Trend Micro Server Protect. Everytime we enabled Trend Micro Server Protect, E2K crashed (i.e. priv1.edb would not mount). We had not change anything on the server. Trend Server Protect has been on our E2K for the last three years without a problem. Event logs showed the followings: System Log Error 7031 the RPC service terminated unexpectedly. Application log error 9099 the MAD monitoring thread was unable to read the state of services Application log error 9097 The Mad monitoring thread was unable to connect ot WMI 0x8007005 (This last error 9087 repeated every 5 minutes until the problem was correct.) Application log error 4097 COM+ event system detected a bad return code 8007005 (this error recurs at each attempted log on). Thanks in advance. _ 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: E2K migration issue
Leave up the old Ex5.5 server for a little while. Outlook will see that it's mailbox has moved to a new server, and update the profile itself. Steven --- Steven Dickenson [EMAIL PROTECTED] Network Administrator The Key School, Annapolis Maryland -Original Message- From: Bennett, Joshua [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, August 11, 2003 2:58 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: E2K migration issue Hello all, I was wondering if anyone out there knew of way to script Outlook profile changes. We are doing an E2K migration and I am looking for a way to automate the changes to the users Outlook profile. We are building out brand new E2K servers and exporting/importing all the mail from 5.5 to the E2K servers and need to point the users at the new servers. Josh Bennett Exchange Administrator Cotelligent, Inc. 401 Parkway Drive Broomall, PA 19008 610.359.5929 Tel 610.353.1693 Fax www.cotelligent.com Connecting People to Information _ 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: E2K migration issue
Are you doing it all in one shot? You can just put a cname in dns and a static record in wins pointing to your old server. If I remember correctly, Outlook was able to find the new exchange server for mailbox that have been moved to e2k as long as the exchange 5.5 server was online the first time the users logged into their mailboxes after the move. -Original Message- From: Bennett, Joshua [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, August 11, 2003 11:58 AM To: Exchange Discussions Hello all, I was wondering if anyone out there knew of way to script Outlook profile changes. We are doing an E2K migration and I am looking for a way to automate the changes to the users Outlook profile. We are building out brand new E2K servers and exporting/importing all the mail from 5.5 to the E2K servers and need to point the users at the new servers. Josh Bennett Exchange Administrator Cotelligent, Inc. 401 Parkway Drive Broomall, PA 19008 610.359.5929 Tel 610.353.1693 Fax www.cotelligent.com Connecting People to Information _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=; lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] This email message may contain information that is confidential and proprietary to Babcock Brown or a third party. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender and destroy the original and any copies of the original message. Babcock Brown takes measures to protect the content of its communications. However, Babcock Brown cannot guarantee that email messages will not be intercepted by third parties or that email messages will be free of errors or viruses. _ 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: E2K migration issue
Not too sure that will work. The E2K servers are in AD will the 5.5 servers are not. Also, the E2K servers are in a new Exchange ORG. -Original Message- From: Dickenson, Steven [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, August 11, 2003 4:02 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: E2K migration issue Leave up the old Ex5.5 server for a little while. Outlook will see that it's mailbox has moved to a new server, and update the profile itself. Steven --- Steven Dickenson [EMAIL PROTECTED] Network Administrator The Key School, Annapolis Maryland -Original Message- From: Bennett, Joshua [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, August 11, 2003 2:58 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: E2K migration issue Hello all, I was wondering if anyone out there knew of way to script Outlook profile changes. We are doing an E2K migration and I am looking for a way to automate the changes to the users Outlook profile. We are building out brand new E2K servers and exporting/importing all the mail from 5.5 to the E2K servers and need to point the users at the new servers. Josh Bennett Exchange Administrator Cotelligent, Inc. 401 Parkway Drive Broomall, PA 19008 610.359.5929 Tel 610.353.1693 Fax www.cotelligent.com Connecting People to Information _ 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: E2K Forest/Domain-prep on Win2003 Domain?
I have considered that, however we have Exchange 2000 EE free as part of an upgrade advantage purchased with Exchange 5.5 EE. Upgrading to E2K3 EE would cost me upwards of $1000. Is it worth it? In addition, I will be doing the install on a P3600 with 512MB of RAM and 3 18GB RAID1 arrays. Can the hardware cope well? PS - What the he11 does IMNSHO mean? Steven --- Steven Dickenson [EMAIL PROTECTED] Network Administrator The Key School, Annapolis Maryland -Original Message- From: Chris Scharff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, August 05, 2003 12:58 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Re: E2K Forest/Domain-prep on Win2003 Domain? IMNSHO upgrading to W2K at this point is a waste of time. If you're going to upgrade, upgrade to E2K3. It greatly simplifies the upgrade process from Exchange 5.5 and offers a number of significant enhancement which make it a much more compelling upgrade story than E2K. From: Dickenson, Steven [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Tue, 5 Aug 2003 12:29:31 -0400 To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: E2K Forest/Domain-prep on Win2003 Domain? Hi guys, I'm getting ready to add a Windows 2003 DC to my Win2k AD network, which will eventually be an all Win2k3 AD domain. However, I'm also planning an Exchange 2000 upgrade in a matter of weeks. My question is, will I be able to run Forestprep and Domainprep against the Win2k3 AD? Or should I do this before adding the Win2k3 AD DC? NOTE: I will not be installing Exchange 2000 on a Win2003 box (for obvious reasons). _ 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: E2K and Trend Micro Server Protect
Yes, we excluded E2K directories from Trend AV. Again, the server was running fine without a problem until last week. We did not make any changes to the server nor Trend Micro Server Protect. For Priv1.edb to mount, we have to turn off Trend Server Protect service. _ 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: E2K and Trend Micro Server Protect
Mr. Kong, Please check the box in your application to include the reply so that others might follow along. If the directories are excluded, I'd recommend using that software maintenance Trend is so keen on everyone buying and dial them up. File based scanners should effect Exchange if the working directories aren't included Unless perhaps it is an underlying OS issue. Have you recently upgraded or patched the Exchange server to a version which may not be supported by the underlying AV software? From: HongKong [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Mon, 11 Aug 2003 10:09:51 -0700 To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: E2K and Trend Micro Server Protect Yes, we excluded E2K directories from Trend AV. Again, the server was running fine without a problem until last week. We did not make any changes to the server nor Trend Micro Server Protect. For Priv1.edb to mount, we have to turn off Trend Server Protect service. _ 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: E2K and Trend Micro Server Protect
Mr. Kong, I assume you've excluded the Exchange working directories from being scanned by your file based AV product, is that correct? From: HongKong [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Sun, 10 Aug 2003 22:06:47 -0700 To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: E2K and Trend Micro Server Protect Does anyone have a problem running Trend Micro Server Protect with E2K? We have a E2K server would not mount Priv1.edb store. This problem occured last week and we isolated it to Trend Micro Server Protect. Everytime we enabled Trend Micro Server Protect, E2K crashed (i.e. priv1.edb would not mount). We had not change anything on the server. Trend Server Protect has been on our E2K for the last three years without a problem. Event logs showed the followings: System Log Error 7031 the RPC service terminated unexpectedly. Application log error 9099 the MAD monitoring thread was unable to read the state of services Application log error 9097 The Mad monitoring thread was unable to connect ot WMI 0x8007005 (This last error 9087 repeated every 5 minutes until the problem was correct.) Application log error 4097 COM+ event system detected a bad return code 8007005 (this error recurs at each attempted log on). _ 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: E2K and Trend Micro Server Protect
Trend has an unstable scan engine. I have had to upgrade to their non-ga of 6.6 in order to resolve the problem you are experiencing. I have had to do this on all servers globally. I would contact them and isolate the issue to the modular engine they have in their product line. I had the same problem and several others over the past two months. Erik L. Vesneski WCDC Intel Lead/Sr. Systems Specialist ISO - Intel Systems Ph#: 925-658-6161 www.pmigroup.com mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] -Original Message- From: Jeff Beckham [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, August 11, 2003 2:11 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: E2K and Trend Micro Server Protect This looks like results of being hacked because the patch from MS03-026 has not been applied. (It may have been applied at one time and somebody reran an older SP on the system) Jeff -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of HongKong Posted At: Monday, August 11, 2003 12:07 AM Posted To: Exchange Discussion List Conversation: E2K and Trend Micro Server Protect Subject: E2K and Trend Micro Server Protect Does anyone have a problem running Trend Micro Server Protect with E2K? We have a E2K server would not mount Priv1.edb store. This problem occured last week and we isolated it to Trend Micro Server Protect. Everytime we enabled Trend Micro Server Protect, E2K crashed (i.e. priv1.edb would not mount). We had not change anything on the server. Trend Server Protect has been on our E2K for the last three years without a problem. Event logs showed the followings: System Log Error 7031 the RPC service terminated unexpectedly. Application log error 9099 the MAD monitoring thread was unable to read the state of services Application log error 9097 The Mad monitoring thread was unable to connect ot WMI 0x8007005 (This last error 9087 repeated every 5 minutes until the problem was correct.) Application log error 4097 COM+ event system detected a bad return code 8007005 (this error recurs at each attempted log on). Thanks in advance. _ 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: E2K migration issue
Oops, I missed the part about them not being on the same ORG. -Original Message- From: Dickenson, Steven [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, August 11, 2003 1:47 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: E2K migration issue Hmmm. No, it won't work if they're not in the same ORG. I'd follow Chris's link from before regarding some of the command line utilities from Slipstick. Use one of those to generate/modify the profile during login. Steven --- Steven Dickenson [EMAIL PROTECTED] Network Administrator The Key School, Annapolis Maryland -Original Message- From: Bennett, Joshua [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, August 11, 2003 4:02 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: E2K migration issue Not too sure that will work. The E2K servers are in AD will the 5.5 servers are not. Also, the E2K servers are in a new Exchange ORG. -Original Message- From: Dickenson, Steven [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, August 11, 2003 4:02 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: E2K migration issue Leave up the old Ex5.5 server for a little while. Outlook will see that it's mailbox has moved to a new server, and update the profile itself. Steven --- Steven Dickenson [EMAIL PROTECTED] Network Administrator The Key School, Annapolis Maryland -Original Message- From: Bennett, Joshua [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, August 11, 2003 2:58 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: E2K migration issue Hello all, I was wondering if anyone out there knew of way to script Outlook profile changes. We are doing an E2K migration and I am looking for a way to automate the changes to the users Outlook profile. We are building out brand new E2K servers and exporting/importing all the mail from 5.5 to the E2K servers and need to point the users at the new servers. Josh Bennett Exchange Administrator Cotelligent, Inc. 401 Parkway Drive Broomall, PA 19008 610.359.5929 Tel 610.353.1693 Fax www.cotelligent.com Connecting People to Information _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang =english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang =english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang =english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang =english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ 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: E2K and Trend Micro Server Protect
This looks like results of being hacked because the patch from MS03-026 has not been applied. (It may have been applied at one time and somebody reran an older SP on the system) Jeff -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of HongKong Posted At: Monday, August 11, 2003 12:07 AM Posted To: Exchange Discussion List Conversation: E2K and Trend Micro Server Protect Subject: E2K and Trend Micro Server Protect Does anyone have a problem running Trend Micro Server Protect with E2K? We have a E2K server would not mount Priv1.edb store. This problem occured last week and we isolated it to Trend Micro Server Protect. Everytime we enabled Trend Micro Server Protect, E2K crashed (i.e. priv1.edb would not mount). We had not change anything on the server. Trend Server Protect has been on our E2K for the last three years without a problem. Event logs showed the followings: System Log Error 7031 the RPC service terminated unexpectedly. Application log error 9099 the MAD monitoring thread was unable to read the state of services Application log error 9097 The Mad monitoring thread was unable to connect ot WMI 0x8007005 (This last error 9087 repeated every 5 minutes until the problem was correct.) Application log error 4097 COM+ event system detected a bad return code 8007005 (this error recurs at each attempted log on). Thanks in advance. _ 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: E2K migration issue
It will work. Its by design. - Peter -Original Message- From: Bennett, Joshua [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, August 11, 2003 1:02 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: E2K migration issue Not too sure that will work. The E2K servers are in AD will the 5.5 servers are not. Also, the E2K servers are in a new Exchange ORG. -Original Message- From: Dickenson, Steven [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, August 11, 2003 4:02 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: E2K migration issue Leave up the old Ex5.5 server for a little while. Outlook will see that it's mailbox has moved to a new server, and update the profile itself. Steven --- Steven Dickenson [EMAIL PROTECTED] Network Administrator The Key School, Annapolis Maryland -Original Message- From: Bennett, Joshua [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, August 11, 2003 2:58 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: E2K migration issue Hello all, I was wondering if anyone out there knew of way to script Outlook profile changes. We are doing an E2K migration and I am looking for a way to automate the changes to the users Outlook profile. We are building out brand new E2K servers and exporting/importing all the mail from 5.5 to the E2K servers and need to point the users at the new servers. Josh Bennett Exchange Administrator Cotelligent, Inc. 401 Parkway Drive Broomall, PA 19008 610.359.5929 Tel 610.353.1693 Fax www.cotelligent.com Connecting People to Information _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang =english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang =english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang =english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: E2K migration issue
http://www.slipstick.com/exs/olroam.htm From: Bennett, Joshua [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Mon, 11 Aug 2003 14:58:19 -0400 To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: E2K migration issue Hello all, I was wondering if anyone out there knew of way to script Outlook profile changes. We are doing an E2K migration and I am looking for a way to automate the changes to the users Outlook profile. We are building out brand new E2K servers and exporting/importing all the mail from 5.5 to the E2K servers and need to point the users at the new servers. _ 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: E2K Forest/Domain-prep on Win2003 Domain?
IMNSHO upgrading to W2K at this point is a waste of time. If you're going to upgrade, upgrade to E2K3. It greatly simplifies the upgrade process from Exchange 5.5 and offers a number of significant enhancement which make it a much more compelling upgrade story than E2K. From: Dickenson, Steven [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Tue, 5 Aug 2003 12:29:31 -0400 To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: E2K Forest/Domain-prep on Win2003 Domain? Hi guys, I'm getting ready to add a Windows 2003 DC to my Win2k AD network, which will eventually be an all Win2k3 AD domain. However, I'm also planning an Exchange 2000 upgrade in a matter of weeks. My question is, will I be able to run Forestprep and Domainprep against the Win2k3 AD? Or should I do this before adding the Win2k3 AD DC? NOTE: I will not be installing Exchange 2000 on a Win2003 box (for obvious reasons). _ 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: E2K Forest/Domain-prep on Win2003 Domain?
The hardware requirements for E2K3 vs E2K are generally equivalent, whether that hardware is sufficient for you org is not really something I can say with any degree of certainty. It meets the minimum hardware requirements I believe. Whether or not it is worth $1000 for you is not really a question I can answer. It is for customers who hire me to do the work, since I performed my last E2K migration the weekend after TechEd and haven't looked back since. From: Dickenson, Steven [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Tue, 5 Aug 2003 13:03:45 -0400 To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: E2K Forest/Domain-prep on Win2003 Domain? I have considered that, however we have Exchange 2000 EE free as part of an upgrade advantage purchased with Exchange 5.5 EE. Upgrading to E2K3 EE would cost me upwards of $1000. Is it worth it? In addition, I will be doing the install on a P3600 with 512MB of RAM and 3 18GB RAID1 arrays. Can the hardware cope well? PS - What the he11 does IMNSHO mean? Steven --- Steven Dickenson [EMAIL PROTECTED] Network Administrator The Key School, Annapolis Maryland -Original Message- From: Chris Scharff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, August 05, 2003 12:58 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Re: E2K Forest/Domain-prep on Win2003 Domain? IMNSHO upgrading to W2K at this point is a waste of time. If you're going to upgrade, upgrade to E2K3. It greatly simplifies the upgrade process from Exchange 5.5 and offers a number of significant enhancement which make it a much more compelling upgrade story than E2K. From: Dickenson, Steven [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Tue, 5 Aug 2003 12:29:31 -0400 To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: E2K Forest/Domain-prep on Win2003 Domain? Hi guys, I'm getting ready to add a Windows 2003 DC to my Win2k AD network, which will eventually be an all Win2k3 AD domain. However, I'm also planning an Exchange 2000 upgrade in a matter of weeks. My question is, will I be able to run Forestprep and Domainprep against the Win2k3 AD? Or should I do this before adding the Win2k3 AD DC? NOTE: I will not be installing Exchange 2000 on a Win2003 box (for obvious reasons). _ 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=e nglish 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: E2K Forest/Domain-prep on Win2003 Domain?
Im My Not So Humble Opinion. - Original Message - From: Dickenson, Steven [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, August 05, 2003 1:03 PM Subject: RE: E2K Forest/Domain-prep on Win2003 Domain? I have considered that, however we have Exchange 2000 EE free as part of an upgrade advantage purchased with Exchange 5.5 EE. Upgrading to E2K3 EE would cost me upwards of $1000. Is it worth it? In addition, I will be doing the install on a P3600 with 512MB of RAM and 3 18GB RAID1 arrays. Can the hardware cope well? PS - What the he11 does IMNSHO mean? Steven --- Steven Dickenson [EMAIL PROTECTED] Network Administrator The Key School, Annapolis Maryland -Original Message- From: Chris Scharff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, August 05, 2003 12:58 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Re: E2K Forest/Domain-prep on Win2003 Domain? IMNSHO upgrading to W2K at this point is a waste of time. If you're going to upgrade, upgrade to E2K3. It greatly simplifies the upgrade process from Exchange 5.5 and offers a number of significant enhancement which make it a much more compelling upgrade story than E2K. From: Dickenson, Steven [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Tue, 5 Aug 2003 12:29:31 -0400 To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: E2K Forest/Domain-prep on Win2003 Domain? Hi guys, I'm getting ready to add a Windows 2003 DC to my Win2k AD network, which will eventually be an all Win2k3 AD domain. However, I'm also planning an Exchange 2000 upgrade in a matter of weeks. My question is, will I be able to run Forestprep and Domainprep against the Win2k3 AD? Or should I do this before adding the Win2k3 AD DC? NOTE: I will not be installing Exchange 2000 on a Win2003 box (for obvious reasons). _ 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: E2k trans logs #s increasing rapidly
Mail Loop? - Original Message - From: George, Reju [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, July 11, 2003 3:44 PM Subject: E2k trans logs #s increasing rapidly Hi all, The number of transaction logs being created on one of my Exchange servers(E2k sp3) has increased quite a bit recently. For this installation, the total trans log size was under 1 gig every day until a few weeks back and now is between 4-5 gig. MSFT KB talks about the possible culprits being Virusscan or backup programs accessing the M drive for filescans or to make backups. In my case I use both Exchange aware AV program and backup program(Groupshield and Arcserve E2k agent) and I confirmed that neither is accessing the M drive directly for scanning or backing up. Searches from OWA also supposedly increases the number of logs being created, but I don't think that is the case here - don't think usage pattern has changed dramatically in the last few weeks. Has anyone else experienced this problem? Any other thoughts on what could be causing this. Thanks in advance . Regards, Reju _ 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: E2K machine services hanging on starting
Acknowledged that the M drive is special, can't say it is non existent as it appears in the folder tree. The question is more about how to avoid the interactions that cause the hanging behaviour. Knowing the mechanism of the lockup would be useful. Setting the exclusion on an anti virus product should be easy, the backup agent shouldn't need configuration to exclude drives, that is something done when specifying a backup. This is why I suspect dependencies may be an issue (the basic backup agent wouldn't know about Exchange). If anyone has seen this behaviour it would be interesting to know what they found. If it hasn't been seen then maybe I should be looking for a cause not related to Exchange. regards, Richard Dann -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 10 June 2003 19:01 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: E2K machine services hanging on starting As I'm sure everyone will tell you shortly, there is no M: drive. It does not exist. Make sure nothing tries to touch the non-existent M: drive, especially AV products. David -Original Message- From: Richard Dann [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, June 10, 2003 10:55 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: E2K machine services hanging on starting I've got an Exchange 2000 SP3 machine running on a security hardened W2K SP3 machine. If I attempt to run an anti virus product on the non Exchange files I've had problems with services hanging on starting (if the AV was allowed to scan the M drive all sorts of things started locking up). I've also tried installing a backup application (HP Omniback) to allow backup to a large tape silo. this caused similar problems (SRS service showed up as Starting, unable to start or stop other services) until I set it to manual start and let everything else start first. Has anyone seen similar problems? Do I need to set a dependency for the backup service or is there something more fundamental going on? regards, Richard Dann Telenor Business Solutions, a division of international telecoms organisation Telenor, is a leading European Communications Service Provider. For further information, visit http://www.telenorbusinesssolutions.co.uk. With the exclusion of purchase orders/requests with reference to repair quotations the views, information and opinion contained in this e-mail are that of the author. Where it is intended to place reliance upon any statement made, then a formal confirmation should be requested. _ 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] Telenor Business Solutions, a division of international telecoms organisation Telenor, is a leading European Communications Service Provider. For further information, visit http://www.telenorbusinesssolutions.co.uk. With the exclusion of purchase orders/requests with reference to repair quotations the views, information and opinion contained in this e-mail are that of the author. Where it is intended to place reliance upon any statement made, then a formal confirmation should be requested. _ 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: E2K machine services hanging on starting
There's a reg hack that will hide the M: and put that part of the issue to bed for good. Ed Crowley MCSE+Internet MVP Freelance E-Mail Philosopher Protecting the world from PSTs and Bricked Backups!T -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Richard Dann Sent: Friday, June 13, 2003 5:36 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: E2K machine services hanging on starting Acknowledged that the M drive is special, can't say it is non existent as it appears in the folder tree. The question is more about how to avoid the interactions that cause the hanging behaviour. Knowing the mechanism of the lockup would be useful. Setting the exclusion on an anti virus product should be easy, the backup agent shouldn't need configuration to exclude drives, that is something done when specifying a backup. This is why I suspect dependencies may be an issue (the basic backup agent wouldn't know about Exchange). If anyone has seen this behaviour it would be interesting to know what they found. If it hasn't been seen then maybe I should be looking for a cause not related to Exchange. regards, Richard Dann -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 10 June 2003 19:01 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: E2K machine services hanging on starting As I'm sure everyone will tell you shortly, there is no M: drive. It does not exist. Make sure nothing tries to touch the non-existent M: drive, especially AV products. David -Original Message- From: Richard Dann [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, June 10, 2003 10:55 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: E2K machine services hanging on starting I've got an Exchange 2000 SP3 machine running on a security hardened W2K SP3 machine. If I attempt to run an anti virus product on the non Exchange files I've had problems with services hanging on starting (if the AV was allowed to scan the M drive all sorts of things started locking up). I've also tried installing a backup application (HP Omniback) to allow backup to a large tape silo. this caused similar problems (SRS service showed up as Starting, unable to start or stop other services) until I set it to manual start and let everything else start first. Has anyone seen similar problems? Do I need to set a dependency for the backup service or is there something more fundamental going on? regards, Richard Dann Telenor Business Solutions, a division of international telecoms organisation Telenor, is a leading European Communications Service Provider. For further information, visit http://www.telenorbusinesssolutions.co.uk. With the exclusion of purchase orders/requests with reference to repair quotations the views, information and opinion contained in this e-mail are that of the author. Where it is intended to place reliance upon any statement made, then a formal confirmation should be requested. _ 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] Telenor Business Solutions, a division of international telecoms organisation Telenor, is a leading European Communications Service Provider. For further information, visit http://www.telenorbusinesssolutions.co.uk. With the exclusion of purchase orders/requests with reference to repair quotations the views, information and opinion contained in this e-mail are that of the author. Where it is intended to place reliance upon any statement made, then a formal confirmation should be requested. _ 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: E2K machine services hanging on starting
More of a script than a reg hack... It's a part of my standard E2k server build! http://support.microsoft.com/?id=305145 Neil -Original Message- From: Ed Crowley [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Posted At: 13 June 2003 17:08 Posted To: Swynk Exchange List Conversation: E2K machine services hanging on starting Subject: RE: E2K machine services hanging on starting There's a reg hack that will hide the M: and put that part of the issue to bed for good. Ed Crowley MCSE+Internet MVP Freelance E-Mail Philosopher Protecting the world from PSTs and Bricked Backups!T -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Richard Dann Sent: Friday, June 13, 2003 5:36 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: E2K machine services hanging on starting Acknowledged that the M drive is special, can't say it is non existent as it appears in the folder tree. The question is more about how to avoid the interactions that cause the hanging behaviour. Knowing the mechanism of the lockup would be useful. Setting the exclusion on an anti virus product should be easy, the backup agent shouldn't need configuration to exclude drives, that is something done when specifying a backup. This is why I suspect dependencies may be an issue (the basic backup agent wouldn't know about Exchange). If anyone has seen this behaviour it would be interesting to know what they found. If it hasn't been seen then maybe I should be looking for a cause not related to Exchange. regards, Richard Dann -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 10 June 2003 19:01 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: E2K machine services hanging on starting As I'm sure everyone will tell you shortly, there is no M: drive. It does not exist. Make sure nothing tries to touch the non-existent M: drive, especially AV products. David -Original Message- From: Richard Dann [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, June 10, 2003 10:55 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: E2K machine services hanging on starting I've got an Exchange 2000 SP3 machine running on a security hardened W2K SP3 machine. If I attempt to run an anti virus product on the non Exchange files I've had problems with services hanging on starting (if the AV was allowed to scan the M drive all sorts of things started locking up). I've also tried installing a backup application (HP Omniback) to allow backup to a large tape silo. this caused similar problems (SRS service showed up as Starting, unable to start or stop other services) until I set it to manual start and let everything else start first. Has anyone seen similar problems? Do I need to set a dependency for the backup service or is there something more fundamental going on? regards, Richard Dann Telenor Business Solutions, a division of international telecoms organisation Telenor, is a leading European Communications Service Provider. For further information, visit http://www.telenorbusinesssolutions.co.uk. With the exclusion of purchase orders/requests with reference to repair quotations the views, information and opinion contained in this e-mail are that of the author. Where it is intended to place reliance upon any statement made, then a formal confirmation should be requested. _ 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] Telenor Business Solutions, a division of international telecoms organisation Telenor, is a leading European Communications Service Provider. For further information, visit http://www.telenorbusinesssolutions.co.uk. With the exclusion of purchase orders/requests with reference to repair quotations the views, information and opinion contained in this e-mail are that of the author. Where it is intended to place reliance upon any statement made, then a formal confirmation should be requested. _ 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
RE: E2K machine services hanging on starting
Does this break OWA? OWA seems to use M: -Original Message- From: Neil Hobson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, June 13, 2003 11:11 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: E2K machine services hanging on starting More of a script than a reg hack... It's a part of my standard E2k server build! http://support.microsoft.com/?id=305145 Neil -Original Message- From: Ed Crowley [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Posted At: 13 June 2003 17:08 Posted To: Swynk Exchange List Conversation: E2K machine services hanging on starting Subject: RE: E2K machine services hanging on starting There's a reg hack that will hide the M: and put that part of the issue to bed for good. Ed Crowley MCSE+Internet MVP Freelance E-Mail Philosopher Protecting the world from PSTs and Bricked Backups!T -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Richard Dann Sent: Friday, June 13, 2003 5:36 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: E2K machine services hanging on starting Acknowledged that the M drive is special, can't say it is non existent as it appears in the folder tree. The question is more about how to avoid the interactions that cause the hanging behaviour. Knowing the mechanism of the lockup would be useful. Setting the exclusion on an anti virus product should be easy, the backup agent shouldn't need configuration to exclude drives, that is something done when specifying a backup. This is why I suspect dependencies may be an issue (the basic backup agent wouldn't know about Exchange). If anyone has seen this behaviour it would be interesting to know what they found. If it hasn't been seen then maybe I should be looking for a cause not related to Exchange. regards, Richard Dann -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 10 June 2003 19:01 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: E2K machine services hanging on starting As I'm sure everyone will tell you shortly, there is no M: drive. It does not exist. Make sure nothing tries to touch the non-existent M: drive, especially AV products. David -Original Message- From: Richard Dann [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, June 10, 2003 10:55 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: E2K machine services hanging on starting I've got an Exchange 2000 SP3 machine running on a security hardened W2K SP3 machine. If I attempt to run an anti virus product on the non Exchange files I've had problems with services hanging on starting (if the AV was allowed to scan the M drive all sorts of things started locking up). I've also tried installing a backup application (HP Omniback) to allow backup to a large tape silo. this caused similar problems (SRS service showed up as Starting, unable to start or stop other services) until I set it to manual start and let everything else start first. Has anyone seen similar problems? Do I need to set a dependency for the backup service or is there something more fundamental going on? regards, Richard Dann Telenor Business Solutions, a division of international telecoms organisation Telenor, is a leading European Communications Service Provider. For further information, visit http://www.telenorbusinesssolutions.co.uk. With the exclusion of purchase orders/requests with reference to repair quotations the views, information and opinion contained in this e-mail are that of the author. Where it is intended to place reliance upon any statement made, then a formal confirmation should be requested. _ 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] Telenor Business Solutions, a division of international telecoms organisation Telenor, is a leading European Communications Service Provider. For further information, visit http://www.telenorbusinesssolutions.co.uk. With the exclusion of purchase orders/requests with reference to repair quotations the views, information and opinion contained in this e-mail are that of the author. Where it is intended to place reliance upon any statement made, then a formal confirmation should be requested. _ 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
RE: E2K machine services hanging on starting
Exchange 5.5 OWA is really MAPI, as I recall, the M: showing in IIS isn't important. Ed Crowley MCSE+Internet MVP Freelance E-Mail Philosopher Protecting the world from PSTs and Bricked Backups!T -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Ken Cornetet Sent: Friday, June 13, 2003 9:25 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: E2K machine services hanging on starting Does this break OWA? OWA seems to use M: -Original Message- From: Neil Hobson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, June 13, 2003 11:11 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: E2K machine services hanging on starting More of a script than a reg hack... It's a part of my standard E2k server build! http://support.microsoft.com/?id=305145 Neil -Original Message- From: Ed Crowley [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Posted At: 13 June 2003 17:08 Posted To: Swynk Exchange List Conversation: E2K machine services hanging on starting Subject: RE: E2K machine services hanging on starting There's a reg hack that will hide the M: and put that part of the issue to bed for good. Ed Crowley MCSE+Internet MVP Freelance E-Mail Philosopher Protecting the world from PSTs and Bricked Backups!T -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Richard Dann Sent: Friday, June 13, 2003 5:36 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: E2K machine services hanging on starting Acknowledged that the M drive is special, can't say it is non existent as it appears in the folder tree. The question is more about how to avoid the interactions that cause the hanging behaviour. Knowing the mechanism of the lockup would be useful. Setting the exclusion on an anti virus product should be easy, the backup agent shouldn't need configuration to exclude drives, that is something done when specifying a backup. This is why I suspect dependencies may be an issue (the basic backup agent wouldn't know about Exchange). If anyone has seen this behaviour it would be interesting to know what they found. If it hasn't been seen then maybe I should be looking for a cause not related to Exchange. regards, Richard Dann -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 10 June 2003 19:01 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: E2K machine services hanging on starting As I'm sure everyone will tell you shortly, there is no M: drive. It does not exist. Make sure nothing tries to touch the non-existent M: drive, especially AV products. David -Original Message- From: Richard Dann [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, June 10, 2003 10:55 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: E2K machine services hanging on starting I've got an Exchange 2000 SP3 machine running on a security hardened W2K SP3 machine. If I attempt to run an anti virus product on the non Exchange files I've had problems with services hanging on starting (if the AV was allowed to scan the M drive all sorts of things started locking up). I've also tried installing a backup application (HP Omniback) to allow backup to a large tape silo. this caused similar problems (SRS service showed up as Starting, unable to start or stop other services) until I set it to manual start and let everything else start first. Has anyone seen similar problems? Do I need to set a dependency for the backup service or is there something more fundamental going on? regards, Richard Dann Telenor Business Solutions, a division of international telecoms organisation Telenor, is a leading European Communications Service Provider. For further information, visit http://www.telenorbusinesssolutions.co.uk. With the exclusion of purchase orders/requests with reference to repair quotations the views, information and opinion contained in this e-mail are that of the author. Where it is intended to place reliance upon any statement made, then a formal confirmation should be requested. _ 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] Telenor Business Solutions, a division of international telecoms organisation Telenor, is a leading European Communications Service Provider. For further information, visit http://www.telenorbusinesssolutions.co.uk. With the exclusion of purchase orders/requests with reference to repair quotations the views, information and opinion contained in this e-mail are that of the author. Where
RE: E2K machine services hanging on starting
I'm talking about OWA2k. -Original Message- From: Ed Crowley [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, June 13, 2003 11:33 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: E2K machine services hanging on starting Exchange 5.5 OWA is really MAPI, as I recall, the M: showing in IIS isn't important. Ed Crowley MCSE+Internet MVP Freelance E-Mail Philosopher Protecting the world from PSTs and Bricked Backups!T -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Ken Cornetet Sent: Friday, June 13, 2003 9:25 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: E2K machine services hanging on starting Does this break OWA? OWA seems to use M: -Original Message- From: Neil Hobson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, June 13, 2003 11:11 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: E2K machine services hanging on starting More of a script than a reg hack... It's a part of my standard E2k server build! http://support.microsoft.com/?id=305145 Neil -Original Message- From: Ed Crowley [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Posted At: 13 June 2003 17:08 Posted To: Swynk Exchange List Conversation: E2K machine services hanging on starting Subject: RE: E2K machine services hanging on starting There's a reg hack that will hide the M: and put that part of the issue to bed for good. Ed Crowley MCSE+Internet MVP Freelance E-Mail Philosopher Protecting the world from PSTs and Bricked Backups!T -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Richard Dann Sent: Friday, June 13, 2003 5:36 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: E2K machine services hanging on starting Acknowledged that the M drive is special, can't say it is non existent as it appears in the folder tree. The question is more about how to avoid the interactions that cause the hanging behaviour. Knowing the mechanism of the lockup would be useful. Setting the exclusion on an anti virus product should be easy, the backup agent shouldn't need configuration to exclude drives, that is something done when specifying a backup. This is why I suspect dependencies may be an issue (the basic backup agent wouldn't know about Exchange). If anyone has seen this behaviour it would be interesting to know what they found. If it hasn't been seen then maybe I should be looking for a cause not related to Exchange. regards, Richard Dann -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 10 June 2003 19:01 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: E2K machine services hanging on starting As I'm sure everyone will tell you shortly, there is no M: drive. It does not exist. Make sure nothing tries to touch the non-existent M: drive, especially AV products. David -Original Message- From: Richard Dann [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, June 10, 2003 10:55 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: E2K machine services hanging on starting I've got an Exchange 2000 SP3 machine running on a security hardened W2K SP3 machine. If I attempt to run an anti virus product on the non Exchange files I've had problems with services hanging on starting (if the AV was allowed to scan the M drive all sorts of things started locking up). I've also tried installing a backup application (HP Omniback) to allow backup to a large tape silo. this caused similar problems (SRS service showed up as Starting, unable to start or stop other services) until I set it to manual start and let everything else start first. Has anyone seen similar problems? Do I need to set a dependency for the backup service or is there something more fundamental going on? regards, Richard Dann Telenor Business Solutions, a division of international telecoms organisation Telenor, is a leading European Communications Service Provider. For further information, visit http://www.telenorbusinesssolutions.co.uk. With the exclusion of purchase orders/requests with reference to repair quotations the views, information and opinion contained in this e-mail are that of the author. Where it is intended to place reliance upon any statement made, then a formal confirmation should be requested. _ 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] Telenor Business Solutions, a division of international telecoms organisation Telenor, is a leading European Communications Service Provider. For further information, visit
RE: E2K machine services hanging on starting
Same. Ed Crowley MCSE+Internet MVP Freelance E-Mail Philosopher Protecting the world from PSTs and Bricked Backups!T -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Ken Cornetet Sent: Friday, June 13, 2003 9:36 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: E2K machine services hanging on starting I'm talking about OWA2k. -Original Message- From: Ed Crowley [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, June 13, 2003 11:33 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: E2K machine services hanging on starting Exchange 5.5 OWA is really MAPI, as I recall, the M: showing in IIS isn't important. Ed Crowley MCSE+Internet MVP Freelance E-Mail Philosopher Protecting the world from PSTs and Bricked Backups!T -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Ken Cornetet Sent: Friday, June 13, 2003 9:25 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: E2K machine services hanging on starting Does this break OWA? OWA seems to use M: -Original Message- From: Neil Hobson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, June 13, 2003 11:11 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: E2K machine services hanging on starting More of a script than a reg hack... It's a part of my standard E2k server build! http://support.microsoft.com/?id=305145 Neil -Original Message- From: Ed Crowley [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Posted At: 13 June 2003 17:08 Posted To: Swynk Exchange List Conversation: E2K machine services hanging on starting Subject: RE: E2K machine services hanging on starting There's a reg hack that will hide the M: and put that part of the issue to bed for good. Ed Crowley MCSE+Internet MVP Freelance E-Mail Philosopher Protecting the world from PSTs and Bricked Backups!T -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Richard Dann Sent: Friday, June 13, 2003 5:36 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: E2K machine services hanging on starting Acknowledged that the M drive is special, can't say it is non existent as it appears in the folder tree. The question is more about how to avoid the interactions that cause the hanging behaviour. Knowing the mechanism of the lockup would be useful. Setting the exclusion on an anti virus product should be easy, the backup agent shouldn't need configuration to exclude drives, that is something done when specifying a backup. This is why I suspect dependencies may be an issue (the basic backup agent wouldn't know about Exchange). If anyone has seen this behaviour it would be interesting to know what they found. If it hasn't been seen then maybe I should be looking for a cause not related to Exchange. regards, Richard Dann -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 10 June 2003 19:01 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: E2K machine services hanging on starting As I'm sure everyone will tell you shortly, there is no M: drive. It does not exist. Make sure nothing tries to touch the non-existent M: drive, especially AV products. David -Original Message- From: Richard Dann [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, June 10, 2003 10:55 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: E2K machine services hanging on starting I've got an Exchange 2000 SP3 machine running on a security hardened W2K SP3 machine. If I attempt to run an anti virus product on the non Exchange files I've had problems with services hanging on starting (if the AV was allowed to scan the M drive all sorts of things started locking up). I've also tried installing a backup application (HP Omniback) to allow backup to a large tape silo. this caused similar problems (SRS service showed up as Starting, unable to start or stop other services) until I set it to manual start and let everything else start first. Has anyone seen similar problems? Do I need to set a dependency for the backup service or is there something more fundamental going on? regards, Richard Dann Telenor Business Solutions, a division of international telecoms organisation Telenor, is a leading European Communications Service Provider. For further information, visit http://www.telenorbusinesssolutions.co.uk. With the exclusion of purchase orders/requests with reference to repair quotations the views, information and opinion contained in this e-mail are that of the author. Where it is intended to place reliance upon any statement made, then a formal confirmation should be requested. _ 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
RE: E2K machine services hanging on starting
Although the M: shows up in IIS, it isn't really used. It's just there to fill the field. Ed Crowley MCSE+Internet MVP Freelance E-Mail Philosopher Protecting the world from PSTs and Bricked Backups!T -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Ken Cornetet Sent: Friday, June 13, 2003 9:36 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: E2K machine services hanging on starting I'm talking about OWA2k. -Original Message- From: Ed Crowley [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, June 13, 2003 11:33 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: E2K machine services hanging on starting Exchange 5.5 OWA is really MAPI, as I recall, the M: showing in IIS isn't important. Ed Crowley MCSE+Internet MVP Freelance E-Mail Philosopher Protecting the world from PSTs and Bricked Backups!T -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Ken Cornetet Sent: Friday, June 13, 2003 9:25 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: E2K machine services hanging on starting Does this break OWA? OWA seems to use M: -Original Message- From: Neil Hobson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, June 13, 2003 11:11 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: E2K machine services hanging on starting More of a script than a reg hack... It's a part of my standard E2k server build! http://support.microsoft.com/?id=305145 Neil -Original Message- From: Ed Crowley [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Posted At: 13 June 2003 17:08 Posted To: Swynk Exchange List Conversation: E2K machine services hanging on starting Subject: RE: E2K machine services hanging on starting There's a reg hack that will hide the M: and put that part of the issue to bed for good. Ed Crowley MCSE+Internet MVP Freelance E-Mail Philosopher Protecting the world from PSTs and Bricked Backups!T -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Richard Dann Sent: Friday, June 13, 2003 5:36 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: E2K machine services hanging on starting Acknowledged that the M drive is special, can't say it is non existent as it appears in the folder tree. The question is more about how to avoid the interactions that cause the hanging behaviour. Knowing the mechanism of the lockup would be useful. Setting the exclusion on an anti virus product should be easy, the backup agent shouldn't need configuration to exclude drives, that is something done when specifying a backup. This is why I suspect dependencies may be an issue (the basic backup agent wouldn't know about Exchange). If anyone has seen this behaviour it would be interesting to know what they found. If it hasn't been seen then maybe I should be looking for a cause not related to Exchange. regards, Richard Dann -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 10 June 2003 19:01 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: E2K machine services hanging on starting As I'm sure everyone will tell you shortly, there is no M: drive. It does not exist. Make sure nothing tries to touch the non-existent M: drive, especially AV products. David -Original Message- From: Richard Dann [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, June 10, 2003 10:55 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: E2K machine services hanging on starting I've got an Exchange 2000 SP3 machine running on a security hardened W2K SP3 machine. If I attempt to run an anti virus product on the non Exchange files I've had problems with services hanging on starting (if the AV was allowed to scan the M drive all sorts of things started locking up). I've also tried installing a backup application (HP Omniback) to allow backup to a large tape silo. this caused similar problems (SRS service showed up as Starting, unable to start or stop other services) until I set it to manual start and let everything else start first. Has anyone seen similar problems? Do I need to set a dependency for the backup service or is there something more fundamental going on? regards, Richard Dann Telenor Business Solutions, a division of international telecoms organisation Telenor, is a leading European Communications Service Provider. For further information, visit http://www.telenorbusinesssolutions.co.uk. With the exclusion of purchase orders/requests with reference to repair quotations the views, information and opinion contained in this e-mail are that of the author. Where it is intended to place reliance upon any statement made, then a formal confirmation should be requested. _ 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
RE: E2K machine services hanging on starting
As I'm sure everyone will tell you shortly, there is no M: drive. It does not exist. Make sure nothing tries to touch the non-existent M: drive, especially AV products. David -Original Message- From: Richard Dann [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, June 10, 2003 10:55 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: E2K machine services hanging on starting I've got an Exchange 2000 SP3 machine running on a security hardened W2K SP3 machine. If I attempt to run an anti virus product on the non Exchange files I've had problems with services hanging on starting (if the AV was allowed to scan the M drive all sorts of things started locking up). I've also tried installing a backup application (HP Omniback) to allow backup to a large tape silo. this caused similar problems (SRS service showed up as Starting, unable to start or stop other services) until I set it to manual start and let everything else start first. Has anyone seen similar problems? Do I need to set a dependency for the backup service or is there something more fundamental going on? regards, Richard Dann Telenor Business Solutions, a division of international telecoms organisation Telenor, is a leading European Communications Service Provider. For further information, visit http://www.telenorbusinesssolutions.co.uk. With the exclusion of purchase orders/requests with reference to repair quotations the views, information and opinion contained in this e-mail are that of the author. Where it is intended to place reliance upon any statement made, then a formal confirmation should be requested. _ 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: E2K Clustering advice
Thanks for the feedback! The Proxy idea is the best one yet as they won't go for any kind of non-MS OS. They are migrating from a mixed Novell/NT environment and want to standardize. Jeff -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Ken Cornetet Sent: Monday, March 10, 2003 9:28 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: E2K Clustering advice Talk them into using a proxy server to publish their front-end server to the Internet. Benefits: 1. You can make the non-clustered FE server the first server in site without, as Ed points out, having SRS in the DMZ. 2. Much easier to secure a dedicated proxy in a DMZ (one port in, one out) 3. For a few extra bucks, the proxy can do the SSL stuff, offloading some cycles from the FE server. Some possibilities: 1. Network Appliance netcache. 2. MS ISA server. 3. Apache web server in proxy mode. (To my knowledge, this combination has never been tried) -Original Message- From: Ed Crowley [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, March 07, 2003 11:39 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: E2K Clustering advice Building the non-clustered front-end as the first server in the site would mean that your Site Replication Server would reside in the DMZ. That's even worse than a front-end server in a DMZ; I agree with your opinion on that. Ed Crowley MCSE+Internet MVP Freelance E-Mail Philosopher Protecting the world from PSTs and Bricked Backups!T -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Jeffrey Dubyn Sent: Friday, March 07, 2003 8:15 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: E2K Clustering advice For those that have done this, I'm looking for some advice on clustering E2K. I have a customer with an existing Exchange 5.5 site (1 server) who wants to setup 1 Exchange 2K Front-End server in the DMZ and then have a single Exchange 2K cluster on the inside. I'm trying to talk them out of OWA altogether and to use Nfuse instead, but the customer seems to have predetermined this is what they need. As for the clustering, I don't see how it's really going to benefit them - only if the motherboard or memory fails, or for scheduled maintenance on one of the nodes. The rest of the server is fault tolerant (power supply, NIC, disks) Anyway, as per http://support.microsoft.com/?id=316886 , an Exchange 2000 cluster cannot be the first Exchange 2000 server in a site. I'm trying to figure out if the nonclustered Front End server work as the first server in the site? It seems that this can be done, but that the system folders have to be rehomed elsewhere. Can these be rehomed on the cluster? If so, how? Does anyone have any experience with this? 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] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.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: E2K and E2K RC1
The Exchange guru from MS states that you can not move servers from one Admin group to another. Hope this helps you. From: Leeann McCallum [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: E2K and E2K RC1 Date: Tue, 11 Mar 2003 18:15:12 +1300 Thanks Jim, We do want to collapse all our sites into one AG, but we can only achieve this by using a 2-hop method as Ed has mentioned in a previous post a few weeks back. Install E2K in each site, remove 5.5, switch to native, install E2K into desired AG and move mailboxes from original site. I started questioning it again when I re-read Tony's article, AND after a discussion I had with Microsoft last week who also indicated that I could simply install my E2K servers in each site, and then 'collapse them' in a single hop. -Original Message- From: McBee, Jim [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, 11 March 2003 5:50 p.m. To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: E2K and E2K RC1 Moving servers between admin groups was something they attempted in the betas but coul dnot make work. Even with Exchange 2000 in native mode, all objects have a legacyExchangeDN associated with them. If I remember correctly, this was the reason that the decided it was going to be too difficult to get working. Like Tony, I don't remember the exact reason, but I'm thinking that was it. I remember doing it a few times in Beta 3 and causing myself a lot of headaches (stores would not mount). If you are hoping to re-architect your organization, once you are in native mode you CAN move mailboxes between servers in different admin groups. If this is what you want to accomplish, then perhaps this is the best approach. HTH, Jim -Original Message- From: Leeann McCallum [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Posted At: Monday, March 10, 2003 4:02 PM Posted To: Exchange Technical Mailing List Conversation: E2K and E2K RC1 Subject: E2K and E2K RC1 I was reading an article by Tony Redmond http://www.exchangeadmin.com/articles/print.cfm?articleID=8743 which seems to indicate that is was possible to move servers between Administrative Groups in RC1, yet according to everything else I've read, including Ed, this is no longer possible in E2K SP3. Anyone know why this was taken out? I don't think I'm going to enjoy my migration as much as I had hoped. Rgds, Leeann NOTICE - This e-mail is only intended to be read by the named recipient. It may contain information which is confidential, proprietary or the subject of legal privilege. If you are not the intended recipient please notify the sender immediately and delete this e-mail. You may not use any information contained in it. Legal privilege is not waived because you have read this e-mail. For further information on the Beca Group of Companies, visit our web page http://www.beca.co.nz _ List posting FAQ: http://www.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] NOTICE - This e-mail is only intended to be read by the named recipient. It may contain information which is confidential, proprietary or the subject of legal privilege. If you are not the intended recipient please notify the sender immediately and delete this e-mail. You may not use any information contained in it. Legal privilege is not waived because you have read this e-mail. For further information on the Beca Group of Companies, visit our web page http://www.beca.co.nz _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ Help STOP SPAM with the new MSN 8 and get 2 months FREE* http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail _ List posting FAQ: http://www.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: E2K Clustering advice
Talk them into using a proxy server to publish their front-end server to the Internet. Benefits: 1. You can make the non-clustered FE server the first server in site without, as Ed points out, having SRS in the DMZ. 2. Much easier to secure a dedicated proxy in a DMZ (one port in, one out) 3. For a few extra bucks, the proxy can do the SSL stuff, offloading some cycles from the FE server. Some possibilities: 1. Network Appliance netcache. 2. MS ISA server. 3. Apache web server in proxy mode. (To my knowledge, this combination has never been tried) -Original Message- From: Ed Crowley [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, March 07, 2003 11:39 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: E2K Clustering advice Building the non-clustered front-end as the first server in the site would mean that your Site Replication Server would reside in the DMZ. That's even worse than a front-end server in a DMZ; I agree with your opinion on that. Ed Crowley MCSE+Internet MVP Freelance E-Mail Philosopher Protecting the world from PSTs and Bricked Backups!T -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Jeffrey Dubyn Sent: Friday, March 07, 2003 8:15 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: E2K Clustering advice For those that have done this, I'm looking for some advice on clustering E2K. I have a customer with an existing Exchange 5.5 site (1 server) who wants to setup 1 Exchange 2K Front-End server in the DMZ and then have a single Exchange 2K cluster on the inside. I'm trying to talk them out of OWA altogether and to use Nfuse instead, but the customer seems to have predetermined this is what they need. As for the clustering, I don't see how it's really going to benefit them - only if the motherboard or memory fails, or for scheduled maintenance on one of the nodes. The rest of the server is fault tolerant (power supply, NIC, disks) Anyway, as per http://support.microsoft.com/?id=316886 , an Exchange 2000 cluster cannot be the first Exchange 2000 server in a site. I'm trying to figure out if the nonclustered Front End server work as the first server in the site? It seems that this can be done, but that the system folders have to be rehomed elsewhere. Can these be rehomed on the cluster? If so, how? Does anyone have any experience with this? 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]
RE: E2K Clustering advice
Option 4 - Squid proxy running on your choice of freeware OS (I'd recommend OpenBSD). It can also function as the SSL accelerator. We're doing it here for OWA for Ex 5.5, but no reason it wouldn't work for E2k. -- Roger D. Seielstad - MCSE Sr. Systems Administrator Inovis Inc. -Original Message- From: Ken Cornetet [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, March 10, 2003 9:28 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: E2K Clustering advice Talk them into using a proxy server to publish their front-end server to the Internet. Benefits: 1. You can make the non-clustered FE server the first server in site without, as Ed points out, having SRS in the DMZ. 2. Much easier to secure a dedicated proxy in a DMZ (one port in, one out) 3. For a few extra bucks, the proxy can do the SSL stuff, offloading some cycles from the FE server. Some possibilities: 1. Network Appliance netcache. 2. MS ISA server. 3. Apache web server in proxy mode. (To my knowledge, this combination has never been tried) -Original Message- From: Ed Crowley [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, March 07, 2003 11:39 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: E2K Clustering advice Building the non-clustered front-end as the first server in the site would mean that your Site Replication Server would reside in the DMZ. That's even worse than a front-end server in a DMZ; I agree with your opinion on that. Ed Crowley MCSE+Internet MVP Freelance E-Mail Philosopher Protecting the world from PSTs and Bricked Backups!T -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Jeffrey Dubyn Sent: Friday, March 07, 2003 8:15 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: E2K Clustering advice For those that have done this, I'm looking for some advice on clustering E2K. I have a customer with an existing Exchange 5.5 site (1 server) who wants to setup 1 Exchange 2K Front-End server in the DMZ and then have a single Exchange 2K cluster on the inside. I'm trying to talk them out of OWA altogether and to use Nfuse instead, but the customer seems to have predetermined this is what they need. As for the clustering, I don't see how it's really going to benefit them - only if the motherboard or memory fails, or for scheduled maintenance on one of the nodes. The rest of the server is fault tolerant (power supply, NIC, disks) Anyway, as per http://support.microsoft.com/?id=316886 , an Exchange 2000 cluster cannot be the first Exchange 2000 server in a site. I'm trying to figure out if the nonclustered Front End server work as the first server in the site? It seems that this can be done, but that the system folders have to be rehomed elsewhere. Can these be rehomed on the cluster? If so, how? Does anyone have any experience with this? 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] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.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: E2K and E2K RC1
Trying to remember. But I think it has to do with if your in Ad Native mode or not and or in a mixed Exchange environment or not. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Leeann McCallum Sent: Monday, March 10, 2003 9:02 PM To: Exchange Discussions I was reading an article by Tony Redmond http://www.exchangeadmin.com/articles/print.cfm?articleID=8743 which seems to indicate that is was possible to move servers between Administrative Groups in RC1, yet according to everything else I've read, including Ed, this is no longer possible in E2K SP3. Anyone know why this was taken out? I don't think I'm going to enjoy my migration as much as I had hoped. Rgds, Leeann NOTICE - This e-mail is only intended to be read by the named recipient. It may contain information which is confidential, proprietary or the subject of legal privilege. If you are not the intended recipient please notify the sender immediately and delete this e-mail. You may not use any information contained in it. Legal privilege is not waived because you have read this e-mail. For further information on the Beca Group of Companies, visit our web page http://www.beca.co.nz _ List posting FAQ: http://www.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: E2K and E2K RC1
Info I've seen says that regardless of whether you are in native or mixed, you still cannot move E2K servers betwixt AG's. You can however, move mailboxes between AG's in native. -Original Message- From: Tony Hlabse [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, 11 March 2003 3:08 p.m. To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: E2K and E2K RC1 Trying to remember. But I think it has to do with if your in Ad Native mode or not and or in a mixed Exchange environment or not. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Leeann McCallum Sent: Monday, March 10, 2003 9:02 PM To: Exchange Discussions I was reading an article by Tony Redmond http://www.exchangeadmin.com/articles/print.cfm?articleID=8743 which seems to indicate that is was possible to move servers between Administrative Groups in RC1, yet according to everything else I've read, including Ed, this is no longer possible in E2K SP3. Anyone know why this was taken out? I don't think I'm going to enjoy my migration as much as I had hoped. Rgds, Leeann NOTICE - This e-mail is only intended to be read by the named recipient. It may contain information which is confidential, proprietary or the subject of legal privilege. If you are not the intended recipient please notify the sender immediately and delete this e-mail. You may not use any information contained in it. Legal privilege is not waived because you have read this e-mail. For further information on the Beca Group of Companies, visit our web page http://www.beca.co.nz _ List posting FAQ: http://www.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] NOTICE - This e-mail is only intended to be read by the named recipient. It may contain information which is confidential, proprietary or the subject of legal privilege. If you are not the intended recipient please notify the sender immediately and delete this e-mail. You may not use any information contained in it. Legal privilege is not waived because you have read this e-mail. For further information on the Beca Group of Companies, visit our web page http://www.beca.co.nz _ List posting FAQ: http://www.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: E2K and E2K RC1
Well I remember this coming up a while back. You might want to check the archives. When I get to work tomorrow, one of MS's Exchange gurus will be in. I'll ask him. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Leeann McCallum Sent: Monday, March 10, 2003 9:09 PM To: Exchange Discussions Info I've seen says that regardless of whether you are in native or mixed, you still cannot move E2K servers betwixt AG's. You can however, move mailboxes between AG's in native. -Original Message- From: Tony Hlabse [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, 11 March 2003 3:08 p.m. To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: E2K and E2K RC1 Trying to remember. But I think it has to do with if your in Ad Native mode or not and or in a mixed Exchange environment or not. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Leeann McCallum Sent: Monday, March 10, 2003 9:02 PM To: Exchange Discussions I was reading an article by Tony Redmond http://www.exchangeadmin.com/articles/print.cfm?articleID=8743 which seems to indicate that is was possible to move servers between Administrative Groups in RC1, yet according to everything else I've read, including Ed, this is no longer possible in E2K SP3. Anyone know why this was taken out? I don't think I'm going to enjoy my migration as much as I had hoped. Rgds, Leeann NOTICE - This e-mail is only intended to be read by the named recipient. It may contain information which is confidential, proprietary or the subject of legal privilege. If you are not the intended recipient please notify the sender immediately and delete this e-mail. You may not use any information contained in it. Legal privilege is not waived because you have read this e-mail. For further information on the Beca Group of Companies, visit our web page http://www.beca.co.nz _ List posting FAQ: http://www.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] NOTICE - This e-mail is only intended to be read by the named recipient. It may contain information which is confidential, proprietary or the subject of legal privilege. If you are not the intended recipient please notify the sender immediately and delete this e-mail. You may not use any information contained in it. Legal privilege is not waived because you have read this e-mail. For further information on the Beca Group of Companies, visit our web page http://www.beca.co.nz _ List posting FAQ: http://www.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: E2K and E2K RC1
Moving servers between admin groups was something they attempted in the betas but coul dnot make work. Even with Exchange 2000 in native mode, all objects have a legacyExchangeDN associated with them. If I remember correctly, this was the reason that the decided it was going to be too difficult to get working. Like Tony, I don't remember the exact reason, but I'm thinking that was it. I remember doing it a few times in Beta 3 and causing myself a lot of headaches (stores would not mount). If you are hoping to re-architect your organization, once you are in native mode you CAN move mailboxes between servers in different admin groups. If this is what you want to accomplish, then perhaps this is the best approach. HTH, Jim -Original Message- From: Leeann McCallum [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Posted At: Monday, March 10, 2003 4:02 PM Posted To: Exchange Technical Mailing List Conversation: E2K and E2K RC1 Subject: E2K and E2K RC1 I was reading an article by Tony Redmond http://www.exchangeadmin.com/articles/print.cfm?articleID=8743 which seems to indicate that is was possible to move servers between Administrative Groups in RC1, yet according to everything else I've read, including Ed, this is no longer possible in E2K SP3. Anyone know why this was taken out? I don't think I'm going to enjoy my migration as much as I had hoped. Rgds, Leeann NOTICE - This e-mail is only intended to be read by the named recipient. It may contain information which is confidential, proprietary or the subject of legal privilege. If you are not the intended recipient please notify the sender immediately and delete this e-mail. You may not use any information contained in it. Legal privilege is not waived because you have read this e-mail. For further information on the Beca Group of Companies, visit our web page http://www.beca.co.nz _ List posting FAQ: http://www.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: E2K and E2K RC1
Thanks Jim, We do want to collapse all our sites into one AG, but we can only achieve this by using a 2-hop method as Ed has mentioned in a previous post a few weeks back. Install E2K in each site, remove 5.5, switch to native, install E2K into desired AG and move mailboxes from original site. I started questioning it again when I re-read Tony's article, AND after a discussion I had with Microsoft last week who also indicated that I could simply install my E2K servers in each site, and then 'collapse them' in a single hop. -Original Message- From: McBee, Jim [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, 11 March 2003 5:50 p.m. To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: E2K and E2K RC1 Moving servers between admin groups was something they attempted in the betas but coul dnot make work. Even with Exchange 2000 in native mode, all objects have a legacyExchangeDN associated with them. If I remember correctly, this was the reason that the decided it was going to be too difficult to get working. Like Tony, I don't remember the exact reason, but I'm thinking that was it. I remember doing it a few times in Beta 3 and causing myself a lot of headaches (stores would not mount). If you are hoping to re-architect your organization, once you are in native mode you CAN move mailboxes between servers in different admin groups. If this is what you want to accomplish, then perhaps this is the best approach. HTH, Jim -Original Message- From: Leeann McCallum [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Posted At: Monday, March 10, 2003 4:02 PM Posted To: Exchange Technical Mailing List Conversation: E2K and E2K RC1 Subject: E2K and E2K RC1 I was reading an article by Tony Redmond http://www.exchangeadmin.com/articles/print.cfm?articleID=8743 which seems to indicate that is was possible to move servers between Administrative Groups in RC1, yet according to everything else I've read, including Ed, this is no longer possible in E2K SP3. Anyone know why this was taken out? I don't think I'm going to enjoy my migration as much as I had hoped. Rgds, Leeann NOTICE - This e-mail is only intended to be read by the named recipient. It may contain information which is confidential, proprietary or the subject of legal privilege. If you are not the intended recipient please notify the sender immediately and delete this e-mail. You may not use any information contained in it. Legal privilege is not waived because you have read this e-mail. For further information on the Beca Group of Companies, visit our web page http://www.beca.co.nz _ List posting FAQ: http://www.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] NOTICE - This e-mail is only intended to be read by the named recipient. It may contain information which is confidential, proprietary or the subject of legal privilege. If you are not the intended recipient please notify the sender immediately and delete this e-mail. You may not use any information contained in it. Legal privilege is not waived because you have read this e-mail. For further information on the Beca Group of Companies, visit our web page http://www.beca.co.nz _ List posting FAQ: http://www.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: E2K Clustering advice
Building the non-clustered front-end as the first server in the site would mean that your Site Replication Server would reside in the DMZ. That's even worse than a front-end server in a DMZ; I agree with your opinion on that. Ed Crowley MCSE+Internet MVP Freelance E-Mail Philosopher Protecting the world from PSTs and Bricked Backups!T -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Jeffrey Dubyn Sent: Friday, March 07, 2003 8:15 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: E2K Clustering advice For those that have done this, I'm looking for some advice on clustering E2K. I have a customer with an existing Exchange 5.5 site (1 server) who wants to setup 1 Exchange 2K Front-End server in the DMZ and then have a single Exchange 2K cluster on the inside. I'm trying to talk them out of OWA altogether and to use Nfuse instead, but the customer seems to have predetermined this is what they need. As for the clustering, I don't see how it's really going to benefit them - only if the motherboard or memory fails, or for scheduled maintenance on one of the nodes. The rest of the server is fault tolerant (power supply, NIC, disks) Anyway, as per http://support.microsoft.com/?id=316886 , an Exchange 2000 cluster cannot be the first Exchange 2000 server in a site. I'm trying to figure out if the nonclustered Front End server work as the first server in the site? It seems that this can be done, but that the system folders have to be rehomed elsewhere. Can these be rehomed on the cluster? If so, how? Does anyone have any experience with this? 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: E2K OWA timeouts
Timeout of what? -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Ken Cornetet Sent: Friday, February 14, 2003 9:36 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: E2K OWA timeouts We are looking for a solution to E2K OWA's lack of a timeout feature. We are currently looking at several options, but I thought I'd ask the list what they are doing? Suggestions? Experiences (good or bad)? _ List posting FAQ: http://www.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: E2K OWA timeouts
Schedule periodic reboots of the client computer in question. Ed Crowley MCSE+Internet MVP Freelance E-Mail Philosopher Protecting the world from PSTs and Bricked Backups!T -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Ken Cornetet Sent: Friday, February 14, 2003 8:36 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: E2K OWA timeouts We are looking for a solution to E2K OWA's lack of a timeout feature. We are currently looking at several options, but I thought I'd ask the list what they are doing? Suggestions? Experiences (good or bad)? _ List posting FAQ: http://www.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: E2K OWA timeouts
Ken: Are you looking at MessageWare (http://www.messageware.com)? I have not worked with them personally, but I know a couple of folks that have had good things to say about them. Of course, you could always wait for Exchange 2003. :-) Jim -Original Message- From: Ken Cornetet [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Posted At: Friday, February 14, 2003 6:36 AM Posted To: Exchange Technical Mailing List Conversation: E2K OWA timeouts Subject: E2K OWA timeouts We are looking for a solution to E2K OWA's lack of a timeout feature. We are currently looking at several options, but I thought I'd ask the list what they are doing? Suggestions? Experiences (good or bad)? _ List posting FAQ: http://www.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: E2K OWA timeouts
You might give Q294752 a try. I have to say though, it didn't work for me. I personally like Ed's solution the best. Aaron -Original Message- From: McBee, Jim [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, February 14, 2003 10:54 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: E2K OWA timeouts Ken: Are you looking at MessageWare (http://www.messageware.com)? I have not worked with them personally, but I know a couple of folks that have had good things to say about them. Of course, you could always wait for Exchange 2003. :-) Jim -Original Message- From: Ken Cornetet [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Posted At: Friday, February 14, 2003 6:36 AM Posted To: Exchange Technical Mailing List Conversation: E2K OWA timeouts Subject: E2K OWA timeouts We are looking for a solution to E2K OWA's lack of a timeout feature. We are currently looking at several options, but I thought I'd ask the list what they are doing? Suggestions? Experiences (good or bad)? _ List posting FAQ: http://www.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: E2K OWA timeouts
Of logons so that when #$%@! idio^H^H^H^H users walk away from logged on sessions someone can't walk in behind them and have their session. -Original Message- From: Charles Marriott [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, February 14, 2003 1:01 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: E2K OWA timeouts Timeout of what? -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Ken Cornetet Sent: Friday, February 14, 2003 9:36 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: E2K OWA timeouts We are looking for a solution to E2K OWA's lack of a timeout feature. We are currently looking at several options, but I thought I'd ask the list what they are doing? Suggestions? Experiences (good or bad)? _ List posting FAQ: http://www.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: E2K OWA timeouts
I'm looking for solutions for our Internet OWA servers. -Original Message- From: Ed Crowley [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, February 14, 2003 1:01 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: E2K OWA timeouts Schedule periodic reboots of the client computer in question. Ed Crowley MCSE+Internet MVP Freelance E-Mail Philosopher Protecting the world from PSTs and Bricked Backups!T -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Ken Cornetet Sent: Friday, February 14, 2003 8:36 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: E2K OWA timeouts We are looking for a solution to E2K OWA's lack of a timeout feature. We are currently looking at several options, but I thought I'd ask the list what they are doing? Suggestions? Experiences (good or bad)? _ List posting FAQ: http://www.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: E2K OWA timeouts
That is an HTTP thing. Limit connection timeout in IIS. There are 3rd party products too. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Ken Cornetet Sent: Friday, February 14, 2003 12:28 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: E2K OWA timeouts Of logons so that when #$%@! idio^H^H^H^H users walk away from logged on sessions someone can't walk in behind them and have their session. -Original Message- From: Charles Marriott [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, February 14, 2003 1:01 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: E2K OWA timeouts Timeout of what? -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Ken Cornetet Sent: Friday, February 14, 2003 9:36 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: E2K OWA timeouts We are looking for a solution to E2K OWA's lack of a timeout feature. We are currently looking at several options, but I thought I'd ask the list what they are doing? Suggestions? Experiences (good or bad)? _ List posting FAQ: http://www.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: E2K OWA timeouts
They are on the short list. I was hoping to hear about them. -Original Message- From: McBee, Jim [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, February 14, 2003 1:54 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: E2K OWA timeouts Ken: Are you looking at MessageWare (http://www.messageware.com)? I have not worked with them personally, but I know a couple of folks that have had good things to say about them. Of course, you could always wait for Exchange 2003. :-) Jim -Original Message- From: Ken Cornetet [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Posted At: Friday, February 14, 2003 6:36 AM Posted To: Exchange Technical Mailing List Conversation: E2K OWA timeouts Subject: E2K OWA timeouts We are looking for a solution to E2K OWA's lack of a timeout feature. We are currently looking at several options, but I thought I'd ask the list what they are doing? Suggestions? Experiences (good or bad)? _ List posting FAQ: http://www.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: E2K OWA timeouts
Thanks for trying but at the end of that Q article: NOTE: The above setting has to do with the connection between the client and the server and it does not affect authentication in any way. When you set the user context time-out to a number, even if this time-out passes, the client browser will still have the user's credentials cached and the user will not be prompted for credentials.. -Original Message- From: Edwards, Aaron [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, February 14, 2003 2:03 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: E2K OWA timeouts You might give Q294752 a try. I have to say though, it didn't work for me. I personally like Ed's solution the best. Aaron -Original Message- From: McBee, Jim [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, February 14, 2003 10:54 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: E2K OWA timeouts Ken: Are you looking at MessageWare (http://www.messageware.com)? I have not worked with them personally, but I know a couple of folks that have had good things to say about them. Of course, you could always wait for Exchange 2003. :-) Jim -Original Message- From: Ken Cornetet [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Posted At: Friday, February 14, 2003 6:36 AM Posted To: Exchange Technical Mailing List Conversation: E2K OWA timeouts Subject: E2K OWA timeouts We are looking for a solution to E2K OWA's lack of a timeout feature. We are currently looking at several options, but I thought I'd ask the list what they are doing? Suggestions? Experiences (good or bad)? _ List posting FAQ: http://www.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: E2K OWA timeouts
This has always been an issue with OWA and why some companies flat out refuse to use it. -Original Message- From: Ken Cornetet [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, February 14, 2003 11:37 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: E2K OWA timeouts Thanks for trying but at the end of that Q article: NOTE: The above setting has to do with the connection between the client and the server and it does not affect authentication in any way. When you set the user context time-out to a number, even if this time-out passes, the client browser will still have the user's credentials cached and the user will not be prompted for credentials.. -Original Message- From: Edwards, Aaron [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, February 14, 2003 2:03 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: E2K OWA timeouts You might give Q294752 a try. I have to say though, it didn't work for me. I personally like Ed's solution the best. Aaron -Original Message- From: McBee, Jim [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, February 14, 2003 10:54 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: E2K OWA timeouts Ken: Are you looking at MessageWare (http://www.messageware.com)? I have not worked with them personally, but I know a couple of folks that have had good things to say about them. Of course, you could always wait for Exchange 2003. :-) Jim -Original Message- From: Ken Cornetet [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Posted At: Friday, February 14, 2003 6:36 AM Posted To: Exchange Technical Mailing List Conversation: E2K OWA timeouts Subject: E2K OWA timeouts We are looking for a solution to E2K OWA's lack of a timeout feature. We are currently looking at several options, but I thought I'd ask the list what they are doing? Suggestions? Experiences (good or bad)? _ List posting FAQ: http://www.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: E2K OWA timeouts
We've front ended ours with an ISA server with RSA authentication. Timeouts can be set to either x minutes of non-usage (or will be once they fix a little bug) or x minutes of usage. Once it's timed out, you're done. There is also a piece of sample code that they give you that can wipe the session cookie out of memory so once the user hits the logoff page, they're done. -Original Message- From: Martin Blackstone [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, February 14, 2003 2:36 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: E2K OWA timeouts This has always been an issue with OWA and why some companies flat out refuse to use it. -Original Message- From: Ken Cornetet [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, February 14, 2003 11:37 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: E2K OWA timeouts Thanks for trying but at the end of that Q article: NOTE: The above setting has to do with the connection between the client and the server and it does not affect authentication in any way. When you set the user context time-out to a number, even if this time-out passes, the client browser will still have the user's credentials cached and the user will not be prompted for credentials.. -Original Message- From: Edwards, Aaron [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, February 14, 2003 2:03 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: E2K OWA timeouts You might give Q294752 a try. I have to say though, it didn't work for me. I personally like Ed's solution the best. Aaron -Original Message- From: McBee, Jim [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, February 14, 2003 10:54 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: E2K OWA timeouts Ken: Are you looking at MessageWare (http://www.messageware.com)? I have not worked with them personally, but I know a couple of folks that have had good things to say about them. Of course, you could always wait for Exchange 2003. :-) Jim -Original Message- From: Ken Cornetet [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Posted At: Friday, February 14, 2003 6:36 AM Posted To: Exchange Technical Mailing List Conversation: E2K OWA timeouts Subject: E2K OWA timeouts We are looking for a solution to E2K OWA's lack of a timeout feature. We are currently looking at several options, but I thought I'd ask the list what they are doing? Suggestions? Experiences (good or bad)? _ List posting FAQ: http://www.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: E2K OWA timeouts
Limiting connection timeout in IIS does not solve the problem. Ed Crowley MCSE+Internet MVP Freelance E-Mail Philosopher Protecting the world from PSTs and Bricked Backups!T -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Charles Marriott Sent: Friday, February 14, 2003 11:37 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: E2K OWA timeouts That is an HTTP thing. Limit connection timeout in IIS. There are 3rd party products too. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Ken Cornetet Sent: Friday, February 14, 2003 12:28 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: E2K OWA timeouts Of logons so that when #$%@! idio^H^H^H^H users walk away from logged on sessions someone can't walk in behind them and have their session. -Original Message- From: Charles Marriott [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, February 14, 2003 1:01 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: E2K OWA timeouts Timeout of what? -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Ken Cornetet Sent: Friday, February 14, 2003 9:36 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: E2K OWA timeouts We are looking for a solution to E2K OWA's lack of a timeout feature. We are currently looking at several options, but I thought I'd ask the list what they are doing? Suggestions? Experiences (good or bad)? _ List posting FAQ: http://www.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: E2K WEIRD GATEWAY ADDRESS
Having multiple gateways always causes problems in my experience. What is the reason for having the multiple gateways? Are they both in the same subnet? You are much better off avoiding a multiple gateway configuration if you can. -Kevin -Original Message- From: Jojo Solis [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Posted At: Wednesday, February 12, 2003 5:17 AM Posted To: Exchange Conversation: E2K WEIRD GATEWAY ADDRESS Subject: E2K WEIRD GATEWAY ADDRESS scenario we have two gateway for our Internet Server, G1 and G2. before i restarted my E2K server the gateway is pointed to G1 (gateway 1), when I start the server the IS and the MTA stacks service did not start successfully, the event log says the Routing Engine hung on starting (Event 7022) and the IS also not start with error message terminated with service specific error 0 (event 7024), but when i try to start those services manually it starts successfully without any error. the weird thing is the gateway are not correctly pointed for what is supposed to be pointed which is the G1, the TCPIP says it is on the G1 but if i check it using ipconfig command the default gateways says its on the G2. its so weird!!! please help me solving this problem. thanks! jojo _ List posting FAQ: http://www.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: E2K WEIRD GATEWAY ADDRESS
those gateways are not use at the same time, only one gateway at a time, the problem is in the TCPIP the gateways is set to G1 but if i look it using the IPCONFIG command it says the gateways is set on G2. -Original Message- From: Public Folder: Exchange [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, February 12, 2003 11:20 PM To: Exchange Discussions Cc: Jojo Solis Subject: RE: E2K WEIRD GATEWAY ADDRESS Having multiple gateways always causes problems in my experience. What is the reason for having the multiple gateways? Are they both in the same subnet? You are much better off avoiding a multiple gateway configuration if you can. -Kevin -Original Message- From: Jojo Solis [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Posted At: Wednesday, February 12, 2003 5:17 AM Posted To: Exchange Conversation: E2K WEIRD GATEWAY ADDRESS Subject: E2K WEIRD GATEWAY ADDRESS scenario we have two gateway for our Internet Server, G1 and G2. before i restarted my E2K server the gateway is pointed to G1 (gateway 1), when I start the server the IS and the MTA stacks service did not start successfully, the event log says the Routing Engine hung on starting (Event 7022) and the IS also not start with error message terminated with service specific error 0 (event 7024), but when i try to start those services manually it starts successfully without any error. the weird thing is the gateway are not correctly pointed for what is supposed to be pointed which is the G1, the TCPIP says it is on the G1 but if i check it using ipconfig command the default gateways says its on the G2. its so weird!!! please help me solving this problem. thanks! jojo _ List posting FAQ: http://www.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: E2k and Permissions
Admins are denied access to all mailboxes by default in Exchange 2000. For workarounds, see: http://support.microsoft.com/?id=262054 Neil -Original Message- From: Joshua R. Morgan [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Posted At: 10 February 2003 14:37 Posted To: Swynk Exchange List Conversation: E2k and Permissions Subject: E2k and Permissions When I was running Exchange 5.5 I had rights to view other users mailboxes to troubleshoot issues Now With Exchange 2000 I get Access Denied even when logging on with the Exchange Admin Account. Can someone point me to what I need to se to be allowed to open other users mailboxes without being that user in Exchange 2000? Or is it possible? TIA, Joshua Joshua Morgan Method IQ Senior Network Engineer Main: (864) 272-1145 Mobile: (864) 449-9912 Email: [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 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. If you have received this email in error, please contact our Support Desk immediately on 01202-360360 or email [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: E2K Logging question
If the SMTP logs don't show any outgoing records, then maybe the Virtual SMTP server is not even trying to send them? -Original Message- From: Michael A. Brown [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, January 31, 2003 11:42 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: E2K Logging question Hello, I have an E2K SP3 system and am having some trouble with emails being sent and not arriving at their external destinations. I've turned up logging on the Virtual SMTP Server, and chose all options in the Advanced Properties page. Going through the log, I seem to only see incoming emails, not outgoing. I can see the emails in the users Sent Items, but need to trace it from there. Any suggestions? (By the way - I am posting this for Jeff Dubyn so I'll refer wisecracks, condescension and flames back to him!!#$!!) Thanks, Mike Brown _ List posting FAQ: http://www.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: E2K Logging question
Michael - Thank you very much for the assistance today. I finally found the problem: I was looking in the SMTP logs in %windir%\system32\logfiles, not in correct place of C:\Program Files\Exchsrv\server.log directory. Once looking in the correct log, I found the outgoing email. This of course led to another issue in that the email was going to a Contact, but it didn't go to the Primary SMTP address of that contact, it went to a secondary address listed in the Addresses tab of the Contacts properties. The contact had two SMTP addresses set up. The email was sent to the one that was NOT set as the primary address (and was NOT listed as the address in the general page of the Contacts properties). When I tried to delete the non-primary address, I received an error message This is the home e-mail address of the recipient. It cannot be removed. I worked around this by deleting the entire contact, then creating two contacts, one each with the SMTP address. Anyone with idea why this happened? Thanks! -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Michael A. Brown Sent: Friday, January 31, 2003 11:42 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: E2K Logging question Hello, I have an E2K SP3 system and am having some trouble with emails being sent and not arriving at their external destinations. I've turned up logging on the Virtual SMTP Server, and chose all options in the Advanced Properties page. Going through the log, I seem to only see incoming emails, not outgoing. I can see the emails in the users Sent Items, but need to trace it from there. Any suggestions? (By the way - I am posting this for Jeff Dubyn so I'll refer wisecracks, condescension and flames back to him!!#$!!) Thanks, Mike Brown _ List posting FAQ: http://www.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: E2K Org Forms not appearing
Yes we do have a public folder store, public folder are working fine. We used the move mailbox method. regards Uso - Original Message - From: Ed Crowley [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, December 23, 2002 9:46 PM Subject: RE: E2K Org Forms not appearing Do you have a public folder store on one of your Exchange 2000 servers? You didn't delete it, did you? How did you move to Exchange 2000? 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 Uso Sent: Monday, December 23, 2002 3:58 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: E2K Org Forms not appearing Hi, we recently moved to Exchange 2000. I can not see the organizational Forms from Outlook. I can see the folder in System Manager. I also created a new org folder but I can't see it in Outlook. In Outlook I see only Personal Forms and Company Forms which is a folder we created for custom designed forms. Our fax application can not install the forms and gives an error and I can't install the forms manually because I don't see that org forms folder either. Any ideas? regards Uso _ List posting FAQ: http://www.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: E2K Org Forms not appearing
Do you have a public folder store on one of your Exchange 2000 servers? You didn't delete it, did you? How did you move to Exchange 2000? 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 Uso Sent: Monday, December 23, 2002 3:58 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: E2K Org Forms not appearing Hi, we recently moved to Exchange 2000. I can not see the organizational Forms from Outlook. I can see the folder in System Manager. I also created a new org folder but I can't see it in Outlook. In Outlook I see only Personal Forms and Company Forms which is a folder we created for custom designed forms. Our fax application can not install the forms and gives an error and I can't install the forms manually because I don't see that org forms folder either. Any ideas? regards Uso _ List posting FAQ: http://www.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: E2K Org Forms not appearing
Seen this? http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=KB;en-us;q244591 HTH Deji - Original Message - From: Uso [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, December 23, 2002 3:57 AM Subject: E2K Org Forms not appearing Hi, we recently moved to Exchange 2000. I can not see the organizational Forms from Outlook. I can see the folder in System Manager. I also created a new org folder but I can't see it in Outlook. In Outlook I see only Personal Forms and Company Forms which is a folder we created for custom designed forms. Our fax application can not install the forms and gives an error and I can't install the forms manually because I don't see that org forms folder either. Any ideas? regards Uso _ List posting FAQ: http://www.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: E2K front-end and back-end in different domains?
I would really have to guess this is a misprint based on the other destructions in the FE/BE topo documentation. Such as, having to add virtual servers for different SMTP domains, etc. This is our setup, and it works fine. We have the FE in a child domain, and E2K servers in every other child domain. Nothing is in the root. -Original Message- From: Ed Crowley [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, December 13, 2002 3:28 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: E2K front-end and back-end in different domains? If it works, why would you call PSS? 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 Ken Cornetet Sent: Thursday, December 12, 2002 2:26 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: E2K front-end and back-end in different domains? A while back I queried the group about putting E2K front-end servers in a different domain (but same forest) than the backend servers. A couple of people responded that they could indeed be in different domains and were in fact running that way. Based on that positive feedback, I decided to try it out in test, and lo and behold it does seem to work (very limited testing so far...). Now the weird part: While perusing the Microsoft document titled Exchange Front-end and Back-end Topology White Paper for firewall information, I found a blurb on page 16 that specifically states that back-end servers must be in the same domain as the front-end servers. I had missed that entirely in previous reads! This paper is dated July 2000. I'm hoping that this is either wrong, or outdated (superceded by a service pack perhaps?) Does anyone have any references showing that this supported? I really hate to burn a PSS call on this... _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.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: E2K front-end and back-end in different domains?
There is an updated version as of July 2002. I don't have the link to hand but I was able to download it from the MS site as part of a set of E2K Whitepapers. -Original Message- From: Hutchins, Mike [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 16 December 2002 13:34 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: E2K front-end and back-end in different domains? I would really have to guess this is a misprint based on the other destructions in the FE/BE topo documentation. Such as, having to add virtual servers for different SMTP domains, etc. This is our setup, and it works fine. We have the FE in a child domain, and E2K servers in every other child domain. Nothing is in the root. -Original Message- From: Ed Crowley [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, December 13, 2002 3:28 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: E2K front-end and back-end in different domains? If it works, why would you call PSS? 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 Ken Cornetet Sent: Thursday, December 12, 2002 2:26 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: E2K front-end and back-end in different domains? A while back I queried the group about putting E2K front-end servers in a different domain (but same forest) than the backend servers. A couple of people responded that they could indeed be in different domains and were in fact running that way. Based on that positive feedback, I decided to try it out in test, and lo and behold it does seem to work (very limited testing so far...). Now the weird part: While perusing the Microsoft document titled Exchange Front-end and Back-end Topology White Paper for firewall information, I found a blurb on page 16 that specifically states that back-end servers must be in the same domain as the front-end servers. I had missed that entirely in previous reads! This paper is dated July 2000. I'm hoping that this is either wrong, or outdated (superceded by a service pack perhaps?) Does anyone have any references showing that this supported? I really hate to burn a PSS call on this... _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] BBCi at http://www.bbc.co.uk/ This e-mail (and any attachments) is confidential and may contain personal views which are not the views of the BBC unless specifically stated. If you have received it in error, please delete it from your system, do not use, copy or disclose the information in any way nor act in reliance on it and notify the sender immediately. Please note that the BBC monitors e-mails sent or received. Further communication will signify your consent to this. _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: E2K front-end and back-end in different domains?
1. Maybe my testing hasn't hit all the corner cases. 2. Perhaps it won't work in a future SP or hotfix. 3. When the president of the company or the CEO is trying to use OWA, and it's broke, I don't want to call PSS and have them say Um, that's not supported - it won't work. I am very hesitant to put something in production with the knowledge that a Microsoft document has said Don't do that. I was hoping that some of the people who have implemented this have found some other documentation saying it is a blessed configuration. -Original Message- From: Ed Crowley [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, December 13, 2002 5:28 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: E2K front-end and back-end in different domains? If it works, why would you call PSS? 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 Ken Cornetet Sent: Thursday, December 12, 2002 2:26 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: E2K front-end and back-end in different domains? A while back I queried the group about putting E2K front-end servers in a different domain (but same forest) than the backend servers. A couple of people responded that they could indeed be in different domains and were in fact running that way. Based on that positive feedback, I decided to try it out in test, and lo and behold it does seem to work (very limited testing so far...). Now the weird part: While perusing the Microsoft document titled Exchange Front-end and Back-end Topology White Paper for firewall information, I found a blurb on page 16 that specifically states that back-end servers must be in the same domain as the front-end servers. I had missed that entirely in previous reads! This paper is dated July 2000. I'm hoping that this is either wrong, or outdated (superceded by a service pack perhaps?) Does anyone have any references showing that this supported? I really hate to burn a PSS call on this... _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.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: E2K front-end and back-end in different domains?
Look for E2KFBTop.doc on MS website. It has destructions for hosting for multiple domains, wether they be AD domains or SMTP domains makes no difference, same theory. It will become clear. Plus, I have had a PSS call involving OWA in this org and PSS said that my topology was fine. The call was a DNS related issue. Some nuthugger put in a host file on a server in Jackson, Mississippi... -Original Message- From: Ken Cornetet [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, December 16, 2002 12:15 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: E2K front-end and back-end in different domains? 1. Maybe my testing hasn't hit all the corner cases. 2. Perhaps it won't work in a future SP or hotfix. 3. When the president of the company or the CEO is trying to use OWA, and it's broke, I don't want to call PSS and have them say Um, that's not supported - it won't work. I am very hesitant to put something in production with the knowledge that a Microsoft document has said Don't do that. I was hoping that some of the people who have implemented this have found some other documentation saying it is a blessed configuration. -Original Message- From: Ed Crowley [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, December 13, 2002 5:28 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: E2K front-end and back-end in different domains? If it works, why would you call PSS? 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 Ken Cornetet Sent: Thursday, December 12, 2002 2:26 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: E2K front-end and back-end in different domains? A while back I queried the group about putting E2K front-end servers in a different domain (but same forest) than the backend servers. A couple of people responded that they could indeed be in different domains and were in fact running that way. Based on that positive feedback, I decided to try it out in test, and lo and behold it does seem to work (very limited testing so far...). Now the weird part: While perusing the Microsoft document titled Exchange Front-end and Back-end Topology White Paper for firewall information, I found a blurb on page 16 that specifically states that back-end servers must be in the same domain as the front-end servers. I had missed that entirely in previous reads! This paper is dated July 2000. I'm hoping that this is either wrong, or outdated (superceded by a service pack perhaps?) Does anyone have any references showing that this supported? I really hate to burn a PSS call on this... _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.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: E2K front-end and back-end in different domains?
Mmmm destructing domains -Original Message- From: Hutchins, Mike [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, December 16, 2002 11:32 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: E2K front-end and back-end in different domains? Look for E2KFBTop.doc on MS website. It has destructions for hosting for multiple domains, wether they be AD domains or SMTP domains makes no difference, same theory. It will become clear. Plus, I have had a PSS call involving OWA in this org and PSS said that my topology was fine. The call was a DNS related issue. Some nuthugger put in a host file on a server in Jackson, Mississippi... -Original Message- From: Ken Cornetet [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, December 16, 2002 12:15 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: E2K front-end and back-end in different domains? 1. Maybe my testing hasn't hit all the corner cases. 2. Perhaps it won't work in a future SP or hotfix. 3. When the president of the company or the CEO is trying to use OWA, and it's broke, I don't want to call PSS and have them say Um, that's not supported - it won't work. I am very hesitant to put something in production with the knowledge that a Microsoft document has said Don't do that. I was hoping that some of the people who have implemented this have found some other documentation saying it is a blessed configuration. -Original Message- From: Ed Crowley [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, December 13, 2002 5:28 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: E2K front-end and back-end in different domains? If it works, why would you call PSS? 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 Ken Cornetet Sent: Thursday, December 12, 2002 2:26 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: E2K front-end and back-end in different domains? A while back I queried the group about putting E2K front-end servers in a different domain (but same forest) than the backend servers. A couple of people responded that they could indeed be in different domains and were in fact running that way. Based on that positive feedback, I decided to try it out in test, and lo and behold it does seem to work (very limited testing so far...). Now the weird part: While perusing the Microsoft document titled Exchange Front-end and Back-end Topology White Paper for firewall information, I found a blurb on page 16 that specifically states that back-end servers must be in the same domain as the front-end servers. I had missed that entirely in previous reads! This paper is dated July 2000. I'm hoping that this is either wrong, or outdated (superceded by a service pack perhaps?) Does anyone have any references showing that this supported? I really hate to burn a PSS call on this... _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.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: E2K front-end and back-end in different domains?
=:-) -Original Message- From: Martin Blackstone [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, December 16, 2002 12:33 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: E2K front-end and back-end in different domains? Mmmm destructing domains -Original Message- From: Hutchins, Mike [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, December 16, 2002 11:32 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: E2K front-end and back-end in different domains? Look for E2KFBTop.doc on MS website. It has destructions for hosting for multiple domains, wether they be AD domains or SMTP domains makes no difference, same theory. It will become clear. Plus, I have had a PSS call involving OWA in this org and PSS said that my topology was fine. The call was a DNS related issue. Some nuthugger put in a host file on a server in Jackson, Mississippi... -Original Message- From: Ken Cornetet [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, December 16, 2002 12:15 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: E2K front-end and back-end in different domains? 1. Maybe my testing hasn't hit all the corner cases. 2. Perhaps it won't work in a future SP or hotfix. 3. When the president of the company or the CEO is trying to use OWA, and it's broke, I don't want to call PSS and have them say Um, that's not supported - it won't work. I am very hesitant to put something in production with the knowledge that a Microsoft document has said Don't do that. I was hoping that some of the people who have implemented this have found some other documentation saying it is a blessed configuration. -Original Message- From: Ed Crowley [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, December 13, 2002 5:28 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: E2K front-end and back-end in different domains? If it works, why would you call PSS? 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 Ken Cornetet Sent: Thursday, December 12, 2002 2:26 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: E2K front-end and back-end in different domains? A while back I queried the group about putting E2K front-end servers in a different domain (but same forest) than the backend servers. A couple of people responded that they could indeed be in different domains and were in fact running that way. Based on that positive feedback, I decided to try it out in test, and lo and behold it does seem to work (very limited testing so far...). Now the weird part: While perusing the Microsoft document titled Exchange Front-end and Back-end Topology White Paper for firewall information, I found a blurb on page 16 that specifically states that back-end servers must be in the same domain as the front-end servers. I had missed that entirely in previous reads! This paper is dated July 2000. I'm hoping that this is either wrong, or outdated (superceded by a service pack perhaps?) Does anyone have any references showing that this supported? I really hate to burn a PSS call on this... _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.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: E2K front-end and back-end in different domains?
There's a word for that attitude: paranoia. Of course, just because you're paranoid doesn't mean everybody's not out to get you. Ed Crowley MCSE+I MVP Technical Consultant hp Services There are seldom good technological solutions to behavioral problems. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Ken Cornetet Sent: Monday, December 16, 2002 12:15 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: E2K front-end and back-end in different domains? 1. Maybe my testing hasn't hit all the corner cases. 2. Perhaps it won't work in a future SP or hotfix. 3. When the president of the company or the CEO is trying to use OWA, and it's broke, I don't want to call PSS and have them say Um, that's not supported - it won't work. I am very hesitant to put something in production with the knowledge that a Microsoft document has said Don't do that. I was hoping that some of the people who have implemented this have found some other documentation saying it is a blessed configuration. -Original Message- From: Ed Crowley [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, December 13, 2002 5:28 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: E2K front-end and back-end in different domains? If it works, why would you call PSS? 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 Ken Cornetet Sent: Thursday, December 12, 2002 2:26 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: E2K front-end and back-end in different domains? A while back I queried the group about putting E2K front-end servers in a different domain (but same forest) than the backend servers. A couple of people responded that they could indeed be in different domains and were in fact running that way. Based on that positive feedback, I decided to try it out in test, and lo and behold it does seem to work (very limited testing so far...). Now the weird part: While perusing the Microsoft document titled Exchange Front-end and Back-end Topology White Paper for firewall information, I found a blurb on page 16 that specifically states that back-end servers must be in the same domain as the front-end servers. I had missed that entirely in previous reads! This paper is dated July 2000. I'm hoping that this is either wrong, or outdated (superceded by a service pack perhaps?) Does anyone have any references showing that this supported? I really hate to burn a PSS call on this... _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] __ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now. http://mailplus.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]
RE: E2K front-end and back-end in different domains?
If it works, why would you call PSS? 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 Ken Cornetet Sent: Thursday, December 12, 2002 2:26 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: E2K front-end and back-end in different domains? A while back I queried the group about putting E2K front-end servers in a different domain (but same forest) than the backend servers. A couple of people responded that they could indeed be in different domains and were in fact running that way. Based on that positive feedback, I decided to try it out in test, and lo and behold it does seem to work (very limited testing so far...). Now the weird part: While perusing the Microsoft document titled Exchange Front-end and Back-end Topology White Paper for firewall information, I found a blurb on page 16 that specifically states that back-end servers must be in the same domain as the front-end servers. I had missed that entirely in previous reads! This paper is dated July 2000. I'm hoping that this is either wrong, or outdated (superceded by a service pack perhaps?) Does anyone have any references showing that this supported? I really hate to burn a PSS call on this... _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: E2K Link Monitor Replacement
NetIQ used to do an end-to-end email ping-type test so I'd be surprised if MOM did not. I have also used Baranof software for this in the past which did a perfectly adequate job and had a Web reporting function for managerial types to look at. However any decent monitoring/management package ought to do something beyond simply monitoring MTA/SMTP queues especially if you have SLAs that require a certain minimum delivery time to be met. Mark -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 21 November 2002 21:05 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: E2K Link Monitor Replacement What monitoring tools are people using that operate like the old 5.5 Link Monitors that disappeared in E2K? Does MOM do Link Monitor tests? Thanks, John Clark Bank One Card Services [EMAIL PROTECTED] 302.282.1464 ** This transmission may contain information that is privileged, confidential and/or exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, distribution, or use of the information contained herein (including any reliance thereon) is STRICTLY PROHIBITED. If you received this transmission in error, please immediately contact the sender and destroy the material in its entirety, whether in electronic or hard copy format. 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] BBCi at http://www.bbc.co.uk/ This e-mail (and any attachments) is confidential and may contain personal views which are not the views of the BBC unless specifically stated. If you have received it in error, please delete it from your system, do not use, copy or disclose the information in any way nor act in reliance on it and notify the sender immediately. Please note that the BBC monitors e-mails sent or received. Further communication will signify your consent to this. _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: E2K Link Monitor Replacement
Use the Monitoring and Status node of ESM in E2K - Original Message - From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, November 21, 2002 4:04 PM Subject: E2K Link Monitor Replacement What monitoring tools are people using that operate like the old 5.5 Link Monitors that disappeared in E2K? Does MOM do Link Monitor tests? Thanks, John Clark Bank One Card Services [EMAIL PROTECTED] 302.282.1464 ** This transmission may contain information that is privileged, confidential and/or exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, distribution, or use of the information contained herein (including any reliance thereon) is STRICTLY PROHIBITED. If you received this transmission in error, please immediately contact the sender and destroy the material in its entirety, whether in electronic or hard copy format. 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: E2K Link Monitor Replacement
Hello John, The company I work for has a product called ExRay for Exchange which offers link monitor functionality. You can get more information at www.intellireach.com --- Greg -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, November 22, 2002 12:19 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: E2K Link Monitor Replacement What monitoring tools are people using that operate like the old 5.5 Link Monitors that disappeared in E2K? Does MOM do Link Monitor tests? Thanks, John Clark Bank One Card Services [EMAIL PROTECTED] 302.282.1464 ** This transmission may contain information that is privileged, confidential and/or exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, distribution, or use of the information contained herein (including any reliance thereon) is STRICTLY PROHIBITED. If you received this transmission in error, please immediately contact the sender and destroy the material in its entirety, whether in electronic or hard copy format. 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: E2K Link Monitor Replacement
ESM doesn't do link monitoring. Thanks, John Clark Technology Operations Manager Bank One Card Services [EMAIL PROTECTED] 302.282.1464 -Original Message- From: Tony Hlabse [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, November 26, 2002 11:32 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Re: E2K Link Monitor Replacement Use the Monitoring and Status node of ESM in E2K - Original Message - From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, November 21, 2002 4:04 PM Subject: E2K Link Monitor Replacement What monitoring tools are people using that operate like the old 5.5 Link Monitors that disappeared in E2K? Does MOM do Link Monitor tests? Thanks, John Clark Bank One Card Services [EMAIL PROTECTED] 302.282.1464 ** This transmission may contain information that is privileged, confidential and/or exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, distribution, or use of the information contained herein (including any reliance thereon) is STRICTLY PROHIBITED. If you received this transmission in error, please immediately contact the sender and destroy the material in its entirety, whether in electronic or hard copy format. 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: E2K Link Monitor Replacement
Already looking at the product Found it after I originally sent this message. So far it's missing functionality to point to a smarthost rather than use an MX lookup to send SMTP alerts. Thanks, John Clark Technology Operations Manager Bank One Card Services [EMAIL PROTECTED] 302.282.1464 -Original Message- From: zEXList [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, November 26, 2002 11:53 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: E2K Link Monitor Replacement Hello John, The company I work for has a product called ExRay for Exchange which offers link monitor functionality. You can get more information at www.intellireach.com --- Greg -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, November 22, 2002 12:19 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: E2K Link Monitor Replacement What monitoring tools are people using that operate like the old 5.5 Link Monitors that disappeared in E2K? Does MOM do Link Monitor tests? Thanks, John Clark Bank One Card Services [EMAIL PROTECTED] 302.282.1464 ** This transmission may contain information that is privileged, confidential and/or exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, distribution, or use of the information contained herein (including any reliance thereon) is STRICTLY PROHIBITED. If you received this transmission in error, please immediately contact the sender and destroy the material in its entirety, whether in electronic or hard copy format. 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: E2K stops getting mail when LDAP down
that was it, duh. -Original Message- From: McBee, Jim [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, November 21, 2002 9:06 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: E2K stops getting mail when LDAP down Are you running E2K SP2 or SP3 (you should be). Pre-SP2 was not as good as automatically switching over to another global catalog. And Mike is right, both domain controllers must be global catalogs if you want redundancy for Exchange 2000. HTH, Jim -Original Message- From: Dan Aalberg [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Posted At: Wednesday, November 20, 2002 11:16 AM Posted To: Exchange Technical Mailing List Conversation: E2K stops getting mail when LDAP down Subject: E2K stops getting mail when LDAP down Hi All, been a while since I wrote the list. I have an issue with an E2K server (in a cluster). When the main AD controller goes down, the E2K server stops receiving email. There are two LDAP servers in the domain and both look to be configured correctly, i.e., replicating, configured in DNS, etc Shouldn't E2K server realize the main LDAP server is down and try the next? what am I missing. thanks in advance. Dan Aalberg Network Administrator visit http://web1/helpdesk for assistance. the light at the end of the tunnel provided by BNSF _ List posting FAQ: http://www.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: E2K stops getting mail when LDAP down
Which was it? -Original Message- From: Dan Aalberg [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, November 22, 2002 10:06 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: E2K stops getting mail when LDAP down that was it, duh. -Original Message- From: McBee, Jim [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, November 21, 2002 9:06 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: E2K stops getting mail when LDAP down Are you running E2K SP2 or SP3 (you should be). Pre-SP2 was not as good as automatically switching over to another global catalog. And Mike is right, both domain controllers must be global catalogs if you want redundancy for Exchange 2000. HTH, Jim -Original Message- From: Dan Aalberg [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Posted At: Wednesday, November 20, 2002 11:16 AM Posted To: Exchange Technical Mailing List Conversation: E2K stops getting mail when LDAP down Subject: E2K stops getting mail when LDAP down Hi All, been a while since I wrote the list. I have an issue with an E2K server (in a cluster). When the main AD controller goes down, the E2K server stops receiving email. There are two LDAP servers in the domain and both look to be configured correctly, i.e., replicating, configured in DNS, etc Shouldn't E2K server realize the main LDAP server is down and try the next? what am I missing. thanks in advance. Dan Aalberg Network Administrator visit http://web1/helpdesk for assistance. the light at the end of the tunnel provided by BNSF _ List posting FAQ: http://www.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: E2K stops getting mail when LDAP down
Are you running E2K SP2 or SP3 (you should be). Pre-SP2 was not as good as automatically switching over to another global catalog. And Mike is right, both domain controllers must be global catalogs if you want redundancy for Exchange 2000. HTH, Jim -Original Message- From: Dan Aalberg [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Posted At: Wednesday, November 20, 2002 11:16 AM Posted To: Exchange Technical Mailing List Conversation: E2K stops getting mail when LDAP down Subject: E2K stops getting mail when LDAP down Hi All, been a while since I wrote the list. I have an issue with an E2K server (in a cluster). When the main AD controller goes down, the E2K server stops receiving email. There are two LDAP servers in the domain and both look to be configured correctly, i.e., replicating, configured in DNS, etc Shouldn't E2K server realize the main LDAP server is down and try the next? what am I missing. thanks in advance. Dan Aalberg Network Administrator visit http://web1/helpdesk for assistance. the light at the end of the tunnel provided by BNSF _ List posting FAQ: http://www.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: E2K migration
No pitfalls other than you can't actually do it that way. -Original Message- From: Bennett, Joshua [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, November 21, 2002 10:58 AM To: Exchange Discussions Got a question for you all. In the planning stages of a E2K migration from 5.5 SP4. My question is, do you need an ADC if you join your existing 5.5 ORG with your E2K server in a new site and are there any pitfalls to doing it this way?? _ List posting FAQ: http://www.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: E2K migration
Why couldn't you if you are in mixed-mode? -Original Message- From: Chris Scharff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, November 21, 2002 12:07 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: E2K migration No pitfalls other than you can't actually do it that way. -Original Message- From: Bennett, Joshua [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, November 21, 2002 10:58 AM To: Exchange Discussions Got a question for you all. In the planning stages of a E2K migration from 5.5 SP4. My question is, do you need an ADC if you join your existing 5.5 ORG with your E2K server in a new site and are there any pitfalls to doing it this way?? _ List posting FAQ: http://www.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: E2K migration
You can't join a 5.5 Org to an E2K server. You can join an E2K server to an existing 5.5 ORG, but only if you have the ADC installed first. Hunter -Original Message- From: Bennett, Joshua [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, November 21, 2002 11:28 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: E2K migration Why couldn't you if you are in mixed-mode? -Original Message- From: Chris Scharff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, November 21, 2002 12:07 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: E2K migration No pitfalls other than you can't actually do it that way. -Original Message- From: Bennett, Joshua [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, November 21, 2002 10:58 AM To: Exchange Discussions Got a question for you all. In the planning stages of a E2K migration from 5.5 SP4. My question is, do you need an ADC if you join your existing 5.5 ORG with your E2K server in a new site and are there any pitfalls to doing it this way?? _ List posting FAQ: http://www.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: E2K migration
In order to install Exchange 2000 into an Exchange 5.5 org it needs to be installed into an existing Exchange 5.5 site. And as you've already determined, in order to install into an Exchange 5.5 site, an ADC needs to be installed. Begin at any point along this circle, and in the end you'll wind up where you started. And ultimately, even if one could install Exchange into its own site, there's no theoretical reason I can come upon with which would eliminate the need for an ADC. What in your migration planning has made elimination of the ADC an object of consideration? -Original Message- From: Bennett, Joshua [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, November 21, 2002 12:28 PM To: Exchange Discussions Why couldn't you if you are in mixed-mode? -Original Message- From: Chris Scharff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, November 21, 2002 12:07 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: E2K migration No pitfalls other than you can't actually do it that way. -Original Message- From: Bennett, Joshua [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, November 21, 2002 10:58 AM To: Exchange Discussions Got a question for you all. In the planning stages of a E2K migration from 5.5 SP4. My question is, do you need an ADC if you join your existing 5.5 ORG with your E2K server in a new site and are there any pitfalls to doing it this way?? _ List posting FAQ: http://www.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: E2K migration
There is a lot (and I mean a LOT) of legacy crap (for the lack of a better term) that we do not want to carry to E2K. We where looking to just export mailboxes to PST and re-import. However, the more I look at it, there does not seem to be any way to avoid using an ADC unless we just do a complete, at once, cut-over to E2K. -Original Message- From: Chris Scharff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, November 21, 2002 1:40 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: E2K migration In order to install Exchange 2000 into an Exchange 5.5 org it needs to be installed into an existing Exchange 5.5 site. And as you've already determined, in order to install into an Exchange 5.5 site, an ADC needs to be installed. Begin at any point along this circle, and in the end you'll wind up where you started. And ultimately, even if one could install Exchange into its own site, there's no theoretical reason I can come upon with which would eliminate the need for an ADC. What in your migration planning has made elimination of the ADC an object of consideration? -Original Message- From: Bennett, Joshua [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, November 21, 2002 12:28 PM To: Exchange Discussions Why couldn't you if you are in mixed-mode? -Original Message- From: Chris Scharff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, November 21, 2002 12:07 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: E2K migration No pitfalls other than you can't actually do it that way. -Original Message- From: Bennett, Joshua [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, November 21, 2002 10:58 AM To: Exchange Discussions Got a question for you all. In the planning stages of a E2K migration from 5.5 SP4. My question is, do you need an ADC if you join your existing 5.5 ORG with your E2K server in a new site and are there any pitfalls to doing it this way?? _ List posting FAQ: http://www.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: E2K migration
I apologize if I worded things incorrectly. That is what I meant. We have a 5.5 ORG that we are going to install a E2K server in a new site in the 5.5 ORG to eventually replace the 5.5 environment with. -Original Message- From: Coleman, Hunter [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, November 21, 2002 1:41 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: E2K migration You can't join a 5.5 Org to an E2K server. You can join an E2K server to an existing 5.5 ORG, but only if you have the ADC installed first. Hunter -Original Message- From: Bennett, Joshua [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, November 21, 2002 11:28 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: E2K migration Why couldn't you if you are in mixed-mode? -Original Message- From: Chris Scharff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, November 21, 2002 12:07 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: E2K migration No pitfalls other than you can't actually do it that way. -Original Message- From: Bennett, Joshua [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, November 21, 2002 10:58 AM To: Exchange Discussions Got a question for you all. In the planning stages of a E2K migration from 5.5 SP4. My question is, do you need an ADC if you join your existing 5.5 ORG with your E2K server in a new site and are there any pitfalls to doing it this way?? _ List posting FAQ: http://www.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: E2K migration
That's not entirely true (that you have to cut over all at once). However, cleaning up legacy crap before putting the migration into motion is an extremely sound initial step. If cutover is not immediate then information needs to be replicated between the systems and that replication should be as crap free as possible. -Original Message- From: Bennett, Joshua [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, November 21, 2002 12:50 PM To: Exchange Discussions There is a lot (and I mean a LOT) of legacy crap (for the lack of a better term) that we do not want to carry to E2K. We where looking to just export mailboxes to PST and re-import. However, the more I look at it, there does not seem to be any way to avoid using an ADC unless we just do a complete, at once, cut-over to E2K. -Original Message- From: Chris Scharff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, November 21, 2002 1:40 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: E2K migration In order to install Exchange 2000 into an Exchange 5.5 org it needs to be installed into an existing Exchange 5.5 site. And as you've already determined, in order to install into an Exchange 5.5 site, an ADC needs to be installed. Begin at any point along this circle, and in the end you'll wind up where you started. And ultimately, even if one could install Exchange into its own site, there's no theoretical reason I can come upon with which would eliminate the need for an ADC. What in your migration planning has made elimination of the ADC an object of consideration? -Original Message- From: Bennett, Joshua [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, November 21, 2002 12:28 PM To: Exchange Discussions Why couldn't you if you are in mixed-mode? -Original Message- From: Chris Scharff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, November 21, 2002 12:07 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: E2K migration No pitfalls other than you can't actually do it that way. -Original Message- From: Bennett, Joshua [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, November 21, 2002 10:58 AM To: Exchange Discussions Got a question for you all. In the planning stages of a E2K migration from 5.5 SP4. My question is, do you need an ADC if you join your existing 5.5 ORG with your E2K server in a new site and are there any pitfalls to doing it this way?? _ List posting FAQ: http://www.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: E2K migration
Joshua, you can migrate from E55 to E2K without installing the ADC. However, the mechanics of it are very different from the Traditional migration. What you are looking at is a Clean and Pristine migration. The nuts and bolts of this are: 1. Install E2K server into a new Exchange organization that is completely distinct from your E55 organization 2. Coexistence can be achieved via the use of SMTP or X.400 and directory coexistence can be achieved via imports/exports. If you are looking at achieving better coexistence such as the support of calendar/free busy information or public folders, then you will probably need to look at the resource kit utilities or a product such as our Furnace product, which is designed to do the coexistence piece. 3. You now can export mailboxes using the Exchange Migration Wizard and import them into your new organization. I posted a ton of information about the issues with Clean and Pristine versus Traditional migrations on another thread a couple weeks ago. If you want more information, let me know and I'll dig it up for you. Clean and Pristine migrations involve more work than Traditional migrations, but they definitely allow you to clean up the crap and not have to deal with the ADC. There are pros and cons each way, but many large organizations that have been migrating to E2K have chosen the Clean and Pristine route, for exactly the reasons you mention. There is a lot (and I mean a LOT) of legacy crap (for the lack of a better term) that we do not want to carry to E2K. We where looking to just export mailboxes to PST and re-import. However, the more I look at it, there does not seem to be any way to avoid using an ADC unless we just do a complete, at once, cut-over to E2K. -Original Message- From: Chris Scharff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, November 21, 2002 1:40 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: E2K migration In order to install Exchange 2000 into an Exchange 5.5 org it needs to be installed into an existing Exchange 5.5 site. And as you've already determined, in order to install into an Exchange 5.5 site, an ADC needs to be installed. Begin at any point along this circle, and in the end you'll wind up where you started. And ultimately, even if one could install Exchange into its own site, there's no theoretical reason I can come upon with which would eliminate the need for an ADC. What in your migration planning has made elimination of the ADC an object of consideration? -Original Message- From: Bennett, Joshua [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, November 21, 2002 12:28 PM To: Exchange Discussions Why couldn't you if you are in mixed-mode? -Original Message- From: Chris Scharff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, November 21, 2002 12:07 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: E2K migration No pitfalls other than you can't actually do it that way. -Original Message- From: Bennett, Joshua [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, November 21, 2002 10:58 AM To: Exchange Discussions Got a question for you all. In the planning stages of a E2K migration from 5.5 SP4. My question is, do you need an ADC if you join your existing 5.5 ORG with your E2K server in a new site and are there any pitfalls to doing it this way?? _ List posting FAQ: http://www.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: E2K stops getting mail when LDAP down
Is the other server a GC also? -Original Message- From: Dan Aalberg [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, November 20, 2002 2:16 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: E2K stops getting mail when LDAP down Hi All, been a while since I wrote the list. I have an issue with an E2K server (in a cluster). When the main AD controller goes down, the E2K server stops receiving email. There are two LDAP servers in the domain and both look to be configured correctly, i.e., replicating, configured in DNS, etc Shouldn't E2K server realize the main LDAP server is down and try the next? what am I missing. thanks in advance. Dan Aalberg Network Administrator visit http://web1/helpdesk for assistance. the light at the end of the tunnel provided by BNSF _ List posting FAQ: http://www.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: E2K stops getting mail when LDAP down
What SP have you installed? 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 Dan Aalberg Sent: Wednesday, November 20, 2002 1:16 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: E2K stops getting mail when LDAP down Hi All, been a while since I wrote the list. I have an issue with an E2K server (in a cluster). When the main AD controller goes down, the E2K server stops receiving email. There are two LDAP servers in the domain and both look to be configured correctly, i.e., replicating, configured in DNS, etc Shouldn't E2K server realize the main LDAP server is down and try the next? what am I missing. thanks in advance. Dan Aalberg Network Administrator visit http://web1/helpdesk for assistance. the light at the end of the tunnel provided by BNSF _ List posting FAQ: http://www.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: e2k owa and virus scanners
It should not be harmful, but there are never any guarantees. Ed Crowley MCSE+Internet MVP kcCC+I Tech Consultant hp Services Protecting the world from PSTs and Bricked Backups! -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:bounce-exchange-94760;ls.swynk.com] On Behalf Of Jonathan Beeler Sent: Wednesday, October 30, 2002 12:31 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: e2k owa and virus scanners We are setting up a new owa box for e2k. Of course, the security people want a virus scanner. Since the server is configured as a front-end server, and we don't have any of the Exchange services that run the databases running (priv and pub) if I configure a virus scanner to skip the database files, could this be harmful to the Exchange server in anyway? _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:leave-exchange;ls.swynk.com Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:leave-exchange;ls.swynk.com Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: E2K: automatic address list creation
Can be??? -- Roger D. Seielstad - MCSE Sr. Systems Administrator Inovis - Formerly Harbinger and Extricity Atlanta, GA -Original Message- From: Kevin Miller [mailto:Kevinm;wlkmmas.org] Sent: Tuesday, October 22, 2002 7:43 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: E2K: automatic address list creation I can be a tool... --Kevinm M, WLKMMAS, Exchange MVP, And Beyond -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:bounce-exchange-98850;ls.swynk.com] On Behalf Of Chris Scharff Sent: Tuesday, October 22, 2002 3:22 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: E2K: automatic address list creation Given enough $ there's a tool to do everything. -Original Message- From: Uso [mailto:usofwd;gmx.net] Sent: Tuesday, October 22, 2002 3:49 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: E2K: automatic address list creation Hi, is there a way to create a hierarchal address list view similar to Exchange 5.5 Address Book views? I have a list of over 10,000 Contacts of our sister companies that we had viewed in Exchange 5.5 in view like: Company Name - Site - Department - Divison I can't find a way to do that automatically in E2K, I have to create each container separately. Is there a third party tool that can do that? Regards Uso _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:leave-exchange;ls.swynk.com Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:leave-exchange;ls.swynk.com Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:leave-exchange;ls.swynk.com Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:leave-exchange;ls.swynk.com Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: E2K: automatic address list creation
I find him most useful. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:bounce-exchange-104116;ls.swynk.com] On Behalf Of Roger Seielstad Sent: Wednesday, October 23, 2002 4:24 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: E2K: automatic address list creation Can be??? -- Roger D. Seielstad - MCSE Sr. Systems Administrator Inovis - Formerly Harbinger and Extricity Atlanta, GA -Original Message- From: Kevin Miller [mailto:Kevinm;wlkmmas.org] Sent: Tuesday, October 22, 2002 7:43 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: E2K: automatic address list creation I can be a tool... --Kevinm M, WLKMMAS, Exchange MVP, And Beyond -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:bounce-exchange-98850;ls.swynk.com] On Behalf Of Chris Scharff Sent: Tuesday, October 22, 2002 3:22 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: E2K: automatic address list creation Given enough $ there's a tool to do everything. -Original Message- From: Uso [mailto:usofwd;gmx.net] Sent: Tuesday, October 22, 2002 3:49 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: E2K: automatic address list creation Hi, is there a way to create a hierarchal address list view similar to Exchange 5.5 Address Book views? I have a list of over 10,000 Contacts of our sister companies that we had viewed in Exchange 5.5 in view like: Company Name - Site - Department - Divison I can't find a way to do that automatically in E2K, I have to create each container separately. Is there a third party tool that can do that? Regards Uso _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:leave-exchange;ls.swynk.com Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:leave-exchange;ls.swynk.com Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:leave-exchange;ls.swynk.com Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:leave-exchange;ls.swynk.com Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:leave-exchange;ls.swynk.com Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: E2K: automatic address list creation
Given enough $ there's a tool to do everything. -Original Message- From: Uso [mailto:usofwd;gmx.net] Sent: Tuesday, October 22, 2002 3:49 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: E2K: automatic address list creation Hi, is there a way to create a hierarchal address list view similar to Exchange 5.5 Address Book views? I have a list of over 10,000 Contacts of our sister companies that we had viewed in Exchange 5.5 in view like: Company Name - Site - Department - Divison I can't find a way to do that automatically in E2K, I have to create each container separately. Is there a third party tool that can do that? Regards Uso _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:leave-exchange;ls.swynk.com Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:leave-exchange;ls.swynk.com Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: E2K: automatic address list creation
I can be a tool... --Kevinm M, WLKMMAS, Exchange MVP, And Beyond -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:bounce-exchange-98850;ls.swynk.com] On Behalf Of Chris Scharff Sent: Tuesday, October 22, 2002 3:22 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: E2K: automatic address list creation Given enough $ there's a tool to do everything. -Original Message- From: Uso [mailto:usofwd;gmx.net] Sent: Tuesday, October 22, 2002 3:49 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: E2K: automatic address list creation Hi, is there a way to create a hierarchal address list view similar to Exchange 5.5 Address Book views? I have a list of over 10,000 Contacts of our sister companies that we had viewed in Exchange 5.5 in view like: Company Name - Site - Department - Divison I can't find a way to do that automatically in E2K, I have to create each container separately. Is there a third party tool that can do that? Regards Uso _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:leave-exchange;ls.swynk.com Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:leave-exchange;ls.swynk.com Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:leave-exchange;ls.swynk.com Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: E2K FE/BE setup
I am running them in 6 different domains (BE that is), no problems so far. -Original Message- From: Ken Cornetet [mailto:Ken.Cornetet;kimball.com] Sent: Thursday, October 17, 2002 9:09 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: E2K FE/BE setup Do E2K front-end servers have to be in the same domain as the back-end servers? I've been through the FE/BE paper, but I don't see the answer... Anyone running FE servers in a different domain than the BE? Problems? Issues? _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:leave-exchange;ls.swynk.com Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:leave-exchange;ls.swynk.com Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: E2K FE/BE setup
As long as they are in the same forest :) -Original Message- From: Hutchins, Mike [mailto:mhutchins;amr-corp.com] Sent: Thursday, October 17, 2002 11:31 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: E2K FE/BE setup I am running them in 6 different domains (BE that is), no problems so far. -Original Message- From: Ken Cornetet [mailto:Ken.Cornetet;kimball.com] Sent: Thursday, October 17, 2002 9:09 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: E2K FE/BE setup Do E2K front-end servers have to be in the same domain as the back-end servers? I've been through the FE/BE paper, but I don't see the answer... Anyone running FE servers in a different domain than the BE? Problems? Issues? _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:leave-exchange;ls.swynk.com Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:leave-exchange;ls.swynk.com Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:leave-exchange;ls.swynk.com Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: E2K FE/BE setup
Fact, not fiction... =:-) -Original Message- From: Andrey Fyodorov [mailto:afyodorov;innerhost.com] Sent: Thursday, October 17, 2002 10:18 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: E2K FE/BE setup As long as they are in the same forest :) -Original Message- From: Hutchins, Mike [mailto:mhutchins;amr-corp.com] Sent: Thursday, October 17, 2002 11:31 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: E2K FE/BE setup I am running them in 6 different domains (BE that is), no problems so far. -Original Message- From: Ken Cornetet [mailto:Ken.Cornetet;kimball.com] Sent: Thursday, October 17, 2002 9:09 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: E2K FE/BE setup Do E2K front-end servers have to be in the same domain as the back-end servers? I've been through the FE/BE paper, but I don't see the answer... Anyone running FE servers in a different domain than the BE? Problems? Issues? _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:leave-exchange;ls.swynk.com Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:leave-exchange;ls.swynk.com Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:leave-exchange;ls.swynk.com Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:leave-exchange;ls.swynk.com Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: E2K question
Hi There Interesting that you should ask this question - I had the same question come up recently. The way it was explained to me was this: If you do not back up all of your stores, then none of your transaction logs will be purged. So The correct answer is... 1) Disable circular logging 2) Perform full backups for all stores as often as your tape supply will allow. HTH Russell -Original Message- From: John Q Jr. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, October 14, 2002 2:18 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: E2K question Answer pelase. I think it's A. Your Exchange 2000 Server has a single storage group containing three Mailbox Stores and a Public Folder Store. You perform nightly backups that alter between a normal backup of two of the Mailbox Stores on one night and a normal backup of the other Mailbox Store and Public Folder Store on the following night. You notice that transaction log files are not being purged, and that they are now consuming nearly all available disk space. What should be done? a. Disable circular logging. b. Install a new hard disk and move the transaction log files to the new disk. c. Perform nightly incremental backups of the entire Storage Group in addition to the current backups. d. Perform differential backups of the Mailbox Stores and the Public Folder Store instead of normal backups. _ List posting FAQ: http://www.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: E2K question
Not exactly. -Original Message- From: Etts, Russell [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, October 15, 2002 10:08 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: E2K question Hi There Interesting that you should ask this question - I had the same question come up recently. The way it was explained to me was this: If you do not back up all of your stores, then none of your transaction logs will be purged. So The correct answer is... 1) Disable circular logging 2) Perform full backups for all stores as often as your tape supply will allow. HTH Russell -Original Message- From: John Q Jr. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, October 14, 2002 2:18 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: E2K question Answer pelase. I think it's A. Your Exchange 2000 Server has a single storage group containing three Mailbox Stores and a Public Folder Store. You perform nightly backups that alter between a normal backup of two of the Mailbox Stores on one night and a normal backup of the other Mailbox Store and Public Folder Store on the following night. You notice that transaction log files are not being purged, and that they are now consuming nearly all available disk space. What should be done? a. Disable circular logging. b. Install a new hard disk and move the transaction log files to the new disk. c. Perform nightly incremental backups of the entire Storage Group in addition to the current backups. d. Perform differential backups of the Mailbox Stores and the Public Folder Store instead of normal backups. _ List posting FAQ: http://www.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: E2K question
Wait a second If this is a test question, let us know next time. If you pulled this off a Microsoft test, you're in violation of the non disclosure you signed. Thanks Russell -Original Message- From: Etts, Russell [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, October 15, 2002 11:08 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: E2K question Hi There Interesting that you should ask this question - I had the same question come up recently. The way it was explained to me was this: If you do not back up all of your stores, then none of your transaction logs will be purged. So The correct answer is... 1) Disable circular logging 2) Perform full backups for all stores as often as your tape supply will allow. HTH Russell -Original Message- From: John Q Jr. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, October 14, 2002 2:18 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: E2K question Answer pelase. I think it's A. Your Exchange 2000 Server has a single storage group containing three Mailbox Stores and a Public Folder Store. You perform nightly backups that alter between a normal backup of two of the Mailbox Stores on one night and a normal backup of the other Mailbox Store and Public Folder Store on the following night. You notice that transaction log files are not being purged, and that they are now consuming nearly all available disk space. What should be done? a. Disable circular logging. b. Install a new hard disk and move the transaction log files to the new disk. c. Perform nightly incremental backups of the entire Storage Group in addition to the current backups. d. Perform differential backups of the Mailbox Stores and the Public Folder Store instead of normal backups. _ List posting FAQ: http://www.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]
