Re: blank emails
I recall there being a known problem along these lines, but all I remember is that PIX was at fault. Perhaps someone else has a less faulty memory. - Original Message - From: Michael Ahlfont [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, August 13, 2001 1:34 PM Subject: RE: blank emails Yes we have a pix firewall -Original Message- From: Daniel Chenault [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, August 13, 2001 2:28 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Re: blank emails PIX involved? - Original Message - From: Michael Ahlfont [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, August 13, 2001 1:10 PM Subject: RE: blank emails No Im using outlook 2000. I believe it is something with the server because other users get this as well. -Original Message- From: Martin Blackstone [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, August 13, 2001 2:01 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: blank emails Would you happen to be using a beta of Outlook Express 6. There is a bug in there that will sometimes make messages appear blank. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of mike Sent: Monday, August 13, 2001 8:49 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: blank emails Importance: High every now and then I recieve blank emails This one is an example from [EMAIL PROTECTED] and Im pasting the header of this email. Anybody else have this problem? Received: from intm1.sparklist.com by mail.sbrco.com with SMTP (Microsoft Exchange Internet Mail Service Version 5.0.1457.7) id QWM2DNYM; Mon, 13 Aug 2001 10:44:47 -0400 XX swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.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: moving/renaming user.
...an email address for which the Exchange Server isn't authoritative. - Original Message - From: Tom Meunier [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, August 13, 2001 5:04 PM Subject: RE: moving/renaming user. oh yeah. you could also tell him to try logging in as [EMAIL PROTECTED] on your owa server. although I've never tried this with an email address that the exchange server isn't authoritative for. (prepositions are great for ending sentences with.) -Original Message- From: Tom Meunier Posted At: Monday, August 13, 2001 4:44 PM Posted To: MSExchange Mailing List Conversation: moving/renaming user. Subject: RE: moving/renaming user. Sounds like his userid and Exchange alias are now different, so he'll need to log into OWA using DOMAIN\userid\alias format. Domainname\JoeUserOld\JoeUser or whatever it is. Huh. Maybe I got that backwards. Maybe it needs to be Domainname\joeuser\joeuserold now. I can't remember. These assumptions are based upon Exchange 5.5. I'd make different assumptions if you had Exchange 2000. -tom -Original Message- From: Tom Gray [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Posted At: Monday, August 13, 2001 4:28 PM Posted To: MSExchange Mailing List Conversation: moving/renaming user. Subject: moving/renaming user. Ok, this must be obvious and I'm just missing a step JoeUser works 25% here (cdl.unc.edu) and 75% at another department (med.unc.edu). That other dept is NOT using exhange and is NOT part of our NT network. (sigh) We are using Exchange 5.5 sp4. JoeUser used to have other mail forwarded here. So [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- joeuser Now Joeuser wants to use med.unc.edu email (don't ask me why, but I have to do it) but: 1) must access old email box on my server using owa 2) must have [EMAIL PROTECTED] forward to [EMAIL PROTECTED] So I did the following: 1) renamed joeuser to joeuser.old removed all occurences of joeuser from my dist-lists (DL's) made [EMAIL PROTECTED] the default reply smtp address deleted [EMAIL PROTECTED] from the reply smtp address 2) created new custom recepient, internet address joeuser which forwards to [EMAIL PROTECTED] tested this on friday and it seemed to work well. Was able to send mail from America online to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and it went to [EMAIL PROTECTED] when I sent mail from Outlook to joeuser it went to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Today he got new mail on my server (joeuser). He claims he can't get into OWA now. (how does he know he got new mail on my server if he can't get into OWA? He had a friend email him and he didn't get it. When I checked joeuser.old there WAS new mail) What am I doing wrong? Have I horribly complicated an easy task? After you finish laughing please enlighten me! Tom Gray, CCNA, CBE Network Engineer All Kinds of Minds The Center for Development and Learning University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill Internet: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ATT Net: (919)960- _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.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: distribution list
What does your Exchange administrator say? - Original Message - From: Aristotle Zoulas [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, August 14, 2001 11:06 AM Subject: distribution list Exchange 5.5. I neeed to take someone off a distribution list. Where can I do This. TIA. _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.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: New mail notification port(s)
It has more to do with the client side than the server side. The range on the client can be closed down but one then runs the risk of causing other services to fail. This is nothing new. Open an ftp connection to a server somewhere and take a netmon trace. Your packets are going out to port 21 but what's coming back is just some random port 1024. - Original Message - From: missy koslosky [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, August 14, 2001 9:31 PM Subject: Re: New mail notification port(s) Lemme guess... You work for an ASP, or a company that wants to at least host some Exchange services... It's completely random, from what MS has said in the past. And there's no way to un-randomize it, and it can't be changed. Apparently the three lines (whatever) of code that control this were too hard to rewrite for E2K too... Missy - Original Message - From: Kevin Derby [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, August 14, 2001 7:24 PM Subject: New mail notification port(s) Does anyone know the theory behind the randomization of new mail notification ports? I understand that it can be anywhere between 1024 and 65k. Is that one for each client, picked randomly from what's unused, or is there something else to it? Kevin _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.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: New mail notification port(s)
Exchange uses UDP for new mail notifications which most routers have blocked by default. (psst: read the FAQ) - Original Message - From: Kevin Derby [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, August 14, 2001 10:58 PM Subject: Re: New mail notification port(s) Um, no. There's no new mail notify over our Cisco VPN system, but we have another legacy system that allows those packets through. I'm trying to do research so my network guys have something to work with. Kevin - Original Message - From: missy koslosky [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, August 14, 2001 7:31 PM Subject: Re: New mail notification port(s) Lemme guess... You work for an ASP, or a company that wants to at least host some Exchange services... It's completely random, from what MS has said in the past. And there's no way to un-randomize it, and it can't be changed. Apparently the three lines (whatever) of code that control this were too hard to rewrite for E2K too... Missy - Original Message - From: Kevin Derby [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, August 14, 2001 7:24 PM Subject: New mail notification port(s) Does anyone know the theory behind the randomization of new mail notification ports? I understand that it can be anywhere between 1024 and 65k. Is that one for each client, picked randomly from what's unused, or is there something else to it? Kevin _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.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: Netscape and IMAP
Starting point: http://developer.netscape.com/docs/manuals/security/sslin/contents.htm - Original Message - From: Joshua M. Folcik [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, August 15, 2001 12:49 PM Subject: Netscape and IMAP This has been a bit of a problem for me (environment where not everybody is running a windows operating system 3%), how do I connect netscape to the imap virtual server without using basic authentication? So far the only client that works with the virtual server I have setup is outlook and outlook express because they support integrated windows authentication. Has anyone found a solution to this? If SSL is required, does the cleartext password go through ssl, or does ssl when used only run after the user has been authenticated, because if all I need to do is use basic authentication with SSL if that actually is safe then I'm fine with that. Thanks Josh Folcik _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.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: entries in outbound IMS queue - host unreachable
It means the remote host is, er, unreachable. That is to say: the destination domain was located and resolved in DNS but the server can't be reached/isn't responding. - Original Message - From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, August 15, 2001 2:07 PM Subject: entries in outbound IMS queue - host unreachable exchange 5.5 sp3, nt4 sp6 we were using our ISP's mail relay then we changes ISPs and had to use our internal DNS servers. (changed the connection tab from forward all mail to host to use dns. outbound messages awaiting delivery mail queue has entries when you look at details have [EMAIL PROTECTED] [Host unreachable]. what does this mean?? thanks in advance _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.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: Event 2125
WAG: your AV is scanning the \exchsrvr directory structure. - Original Message - From: Mike Castillo [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, August 14, 2001 2:47 PM Subject: Event 2125 On of my servers gets an an MTA database server error. A thread is unable to close a file. Can anyone help me with this? [EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.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: entries in outbound IMS queue - host unreachable
Their server is down or a router before it is fubar. 72 hours by default (configurable in the IMS; exactly where is an exercise for the reader) - Original Message - From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, August 15, 2001 2:53 PM Subject: RE: entries in outbound IMS queue - host unreachable nslookup -q=mx domain.com gives and ip address when I called my isp, they give me the same numbers tracert goes to their isp and dies when does the message in the IMS queue die and sends a message to the sender an undeliverable message??? _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Is their away to recover a users exchange folders after theydelete them?
It's not server-side. There is a hidden folder in the client that, by default, is enabled and is accessed by highlighting the Deleted Items folder and selecting Tools:Recover Items. There is an optional reg key for it as well. The other alternative is to do a restore of the last backup to a spare server and copy the mailbox to a PST. - Original Message - From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, August 15, 2001 11:41 PM Subject: RE: Is their away to recover a users exchange folders after theydelete them? I read the faq but didnt see any info on how to get exchange server side control of recovering a users mailbox even after they delete it from their deleted items folder?? -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Kevin Miller Sent: Wednesday, August 15, 2001 11:01 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Is their away to recover a users exchange folders after theydelete them? Yes.. See the FAQ link at the bottom of this email. Kevinm QWSZC, VRY+Y, NFH, SAD-VF, DERSDESDFG ~~~ More letters after my names makes Smarter. ~~~ please respond back to rent this ad space for your needs -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, August 15, 2001 7:56 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Is their away to recover a users exchange folders after they delete them? Users who have a full mapi client, such as outlook 2000, using corp workgroup setup with exchange folders only, not using pst files, if they delete their mail, then empty their deleted folders, is their away to set up exchange to catch this mail and hold it in a deleted folder temporarily in case they need it, I thought I saw this settting somewhere.. 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] _ Do You Yahoo!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.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: IMS Queue
FAQ - Original Message - From: Bowles, John L. [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, August 20, 2001 12:42 PM Subject: IMS Queue All, I have a whole bunch of emails piling up in my IMS. The Orignator of all these messages sayWith nothing in between the perenthesis. What is this telling me? And should I just axe them? Thanks, John Bowles Exchange Administrator NT Server Workstation Team Celera Genomics [EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Code red
The logfiles show the _attempt_ to infect. Symantec's scanner is broken. - Original Message - From: Chris Haaker [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, August 20, 2001 12:12 PM Subject: Re: Code red It also shows up in the logfiles for w3svc and that is the ultimate tell-tale, right? - I was thinking about how people seem to read the Bible a whole lot more as they get older, then it dawned on me...they were cramming for their finals... - - Original Message - From: Bill Kuhn - MCSE [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, August 20, 2001 1:02 PM Subject: RE: Code red Get rid of the Symantec scanner. My dead grandma has a better chance of telling you accurately whether you have Code Red. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Chris Haaker Sent: Monday, August 20, 2001 11:56 AM To: ExchangeList@swynk Subject: OT: Code red anyone have an idea that has been working with code red? I have a win2k server that was infected. I re-formatted all hard drives, re-installed OS w/SP2 built-in and patched for CR. Within about 10 minutes I was infected again according to the w3svc log and the symantec scanner for code red. disconnected from network and did same as above. Ran the patch from a floppy. re-connected to the network, ran the new MS Security scanner at: www.microsoft.com/technet/mpsa/start.asp and applied all hotfixes there as well. Note: I ran the CR hotfix and rebooted before I ever attached to the network. 1 hour later CR shows up in the w3svc log again and symantec scanner says I am infected again. Ideas? - I was thinking about how people seem to read the Bible a whole lot more as they get older, then it dawned on me...they were cramming for their finals... - _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.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: Code red
EVERYTHING gets logged. - Original Message - From: Chris Haaker [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, August 20, 2001 12:29 PM Subject: Re: Code red This appears in my log just once: 2001-08-20 16:28:41 61.187.115.20 - 172.17.1.217 80 GET /default.ida %u90 90%u6858%ucbd3%u7801%u9090%u6858%ucbd3%u7801%u9090%u6858%ucbd3%u7801%u9090%u 9090%u8190%u00c3%u0003%u8b00%u531b%u53ff%u0078%u%u00=a 200 - successful? I thought this only showed up in your logs if it *was* successful! TIA. Chris - I was thinking about how people seem to read the Bible a whole lot more as they get older, then it dawned on me...they were cramming for their finals... - - Original Message - From: Andy David [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, August 20, 2001 1:16 PM Subject: RE: Code red But he's apparently seeing it in the logs as well. Chris, What do the w3svc logs say? Is the attack successful or not? You can test your server here: http://www.eeye.com/html/Research/Tools/codered.html Andy David J Muller International -Original Message- From: Bill Kuhn - MCSE [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, August 20, 2001 1:02 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Code red Get rid of the Symantec scanner. My dead grandma has a better chance of telling you accurately whether you have Code Red. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Chris Haaker Sent: Monday, August 20, 2001 11:56 AM To: ExchangeList@swynk Subject: OT: Code red anyone have an idea that has been working with code red? I have a win2k server that was infected. I re-formatted all hard drives, re-installed OS w/SP2 built-in and patched for CR. Within about 10 minutes I was infected again according to the w3svc log and the symantec scanner for code red. disconnected from network and did same as above. Ran the patch from a floppy. re-connected to the network, ran the new MS Security scanner at: www.microsoft.com/technet/mpsa/start.asp and applied all hotfixes there as well. Note: I ran the CR hotfix and rebooted before I ever attached to the network. 1 hour later CR shows up in the w3svc log again and symantec scanner says I am infected again. Ideas? - I was thinking about how people seem to read the Bible a whole lot more as they get older, then it dawned on me...they were cramming for their finals... - _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.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: Over limits message
Read the FAQ again. - Original Message - From: Mitchell Mike [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, August 21, 2001 3:52 PM Subject: Over limits message I have read the FAQ but I did not see anything about the following: Can the message that comes out for being over your limit on your mailbox be changed? We don't do PSTs... security doesn't allow it. regards. now bombs away Mike Mitchell eMAIL System Administrator Alverno Information Services [EMAIL PROTECTED] (317) 532-7800 ext. 6211 _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.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: oh, man what a mess
The MTA is unable to determine the state (inbound, outbound) of the IMS. Thus the MTA will still deliver messages into the IMS' hidden mailbox for external delivery if certain conditions are met. Since the IMS was set to inbound only, those messages were never looked at. Not until you set it to outbound did it look at and process those messages. - Original Message - From: Jennifer Baker [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, August 23, 2001 1:24 PM Subject: RE: oh, man what a mess I understand that the IMS was setup incorrectly in this remote site. My dilemma is that 3000 messages (some 3 years old, some 5 months old) have apparently been sent after configuring the IMS correctly, (all sent outbound.) If this is true: Setting an IMS to Inbound Only in Exchange 5.5 and earlier will not keep the MTAs from routing outbound SMTP mail to the IMS server. then why did 3000 very old outbound messages get sent after setting the IMS to Outbound Only? I prefer ahfuku.com, that also works. Charma, ED. On Thu, 23 Aug 2001, Ed Crowley wrote: Jennifer, please read the list! This is discussed every so often! Setting an IMS to Inbound Only in Exchange 5.5 and earlier will not keep the MTAs from routing outbound SMTP mail to the IMS server. The way to keep that from happening is to change the Address Space so that it has but one entry of clownpenis.fart. (It has to be that exact domain. Don't ask me why.) Then the GWARTs won't try to route mail bound to valid SMTP addresses to that server. Microsoft would call this behavior by design. If it is by design then it is a severe and longstanding design flaw. Ed Crowley MCSE+Internet MVP Tech Consultant Compaq Computer Corporation All your base are belong to us. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Jennifer Baker Sent: Thursday, August 23, 2001 10:12 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: oh, man what a mess After changing a remote IMS from send only Inbound to send Outbound Only then back to Inbound only mode, many messages (3000) were sent from as far back as 1999. If the IMS is set to inbound only, would it not send undeliverables for refused connections or would it just queue the message? It seems that any other maildomain that is not hosted by the org would be sent as undeliverable yet it got queued somewhere. Anybody know where? I have other remote IMS queues that could have the same issue, but I cannot locate the queue directories on those servers. I know test it and find out...which is what got me into this mess. Also, whenever I would make the change it would tell me to restart the service. I hit ok, restarted the service, reopened the IMS properties and the apply button would be highlighted as if it never took the change. After going thru this motion several times, it would behave the same way. Hope this makes a bit of sense, I am a bit frantic at the moment. Jennifer Baker Fluke Corporation http://www.fluke.com http://www.flukenetworks.com mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.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: oh, man what a mess
Production servers are not for playing. That's what a lab is for. Is that someone still there? - Original Message - From: Jennifer Baker [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, August 23, 2001 7:41 PM Subject: Re: oh, man what a mess Someone apparently was playing with the costs in the remote site and set it to zero on 11/8/99, Complaints were received during that week, then someone set it back on 11/15/99, but did not flush the queues. A big-wig apparently sent a flame mail during that week which did not get delivered until today. He said it was one of his finer pieces of work, but the recipient wasn't his boss at the time. Oopsy. On Thu, 23 Aug 2001, Daniel Chenault wrote: The MTA is unable to determine the state (inbound, outbound) of the IMS. Thus the MTA will still deliver messages into the IMS' hidden mailbox for external delivery if certain conditions are met. Since the IMS was set to inbound only, those messages were never looked at. Not until you set it to outbound did it look at and process those messages. - Original Message - From: Jennifer Baker [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, August 23, 2001 1:24 PM Subject: RE: oh, man what a mess I understand that the IMS was setup incorrectly in this remote site. My dilemma is that 3000 messages (some 3 years old, some 5 months old) have apparently been sent after configuring the IMS correctly, (all sent outbound.) If this is true: Setting an IMS to Inbound Only in Exchange 5.5 and earlier will not keep the MTAs from routing outbound SMTP mail to the IMS server. then why did 3000 very old outbound messages get sent after setting the IMS to Outbound Only? I prefer ahfuku.com, that also works. Charma, ED. On Thu, 23 Aug 2001, Ed Crowley wrote: Jennifer, please read the list! This is discussed every so often! Setting an IMS to Inbound Only in Exchange 5.5 and earlier will not keep the MTAs from routing outbound SMTP mail to the IMS server. The way to keep that from happening is to change the Address Space so that it has but one entry of clownpenis.fart. (It has to be that exact domain. Don't ask me why.) Then the GWARTs won't try to route mail bound to valid SMTP addresses to that server. Microsoft would call this behavior by design. If it is by design then it is a severe and longstanding design flaw. Ed Crowley MCSE+Internet MVP Tech Consultant Compaq Computer Corporation All your base are belong to us. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Jennifer Baker Sent: Thursday, August 23, 2001 10:12 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: oh, man what a mess After changing a remote IMS from send only Inbound to send Outbound Only then back to Inbound only mode, many messages (3000) were sent from as far back as 1999. If the IMS is set to inbound only, would it not send undeliverables for refused connections or would it just queue the message? It seems that any other maildomain that is not hosted by the org would be sent as undeliverable yet it got queued somewhere. Anybody know where? I have other remote IMS queues that could have the same issue, but I cannot locate the queue directories on those servers. I know test it and find out...which is what got me into this mess. Also, whenever I would make the change it would tell me to restart the service. I hit ok, restarted the service, reopened the IMS properties and the apply button would be highlighted as if it never took the change. After going thru this motion several times, it would behave the same way. Hope this makes a bit of sense, I am a bit frantic at the moment. Jennifer Baker Fluke Corporation http://www.fluke.com http://www.flukenetworks.com mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Jennifer Baker Fluke Corporation http://www.fluke.com http://www.flukenetworks.com mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http
Re: oh, man what a mess
I'll forego the assault, Edna. - Original Message - From: Jennifer Baker [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, August 24, 2001 12:14 AM Subject: Re: oh, man what a mess no, he is not. I cannot judge, since I am one of those arrogant ignorant admins. I cannot seem to get out of the If it isn't broken, it doesn't have enough features yet mode. If I would have known *better* I should have checked the queues before making the change to the correct config. Beat me and call me Edna. On Thu, 23 Aug 2001, Daniel Chenault wrote: Production servers are not for playing. That's what a lab is for. Is that someone still there? - Original Message - From: Jennifer Baker [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, August 23, 2001 7:41 PM Subject: Re: oh, man what a mess Someone apparently was playing with the costs in the remote site and set it to zero on 11/8/99, Complaints were received during that week, then someone set it back on 11/15/99, but did not flush the queues. A big-wig apparently sent a flame mail during that week which did not get delivered until today. He said it was one of his finer pieces of work, but the recipient wasn't his boss at the time. Oopsy. On Thu, 23 Aug 2001, Daniel Chenault wrote: The MTA is unable to determine the state (inbound, outbound) of the IMS. Thus the MTA will still deliver messages into the IMS' hidden mailbox for external delivery if certain conditions are met. Since the IMS was set to inbound only, those messages were never looked at. Not until you set it to outbound did it look at and process those messages. - Original Message - From: Jennifer Baker [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, August 23, 2001 1:24 PM Subject: RE: oh, man what a mess I understand that the IMS was setup incorrectly in this remote site. My dilemma is that 3000 messages (some 3 years old, some 5 months old) have apparently been sent after configuring the IMS correctly, (all sent outbound.) If this is true: Setting an IMS to Inbound Only in Exchange 5.5 and earlier will not keep the MTAs from routing outbound SMTP mail to the IMS server. then why did 3000 very old outbound messages get sent after setting the IMS to Outbound Only? I prefer ahfuku.com, that also works. Charma, ED. On Thu, 23 Aug 2001, Ed Crowley wrote: Jennifer, please read the list! This is discussed every so often! Setting an IMS to Inbound Only in Exchange 5.5 and earlier will not keep the MTAs from routing outbound SMTP mail to the IMS server. The way to keep that from happening is to change the Address Space so that it has but one entry of clownpenis.fart. (It has to be that exact domain. Don't ask me why.) Then the GWARTs won't try to route mail bound to valid SMTP addresses to that server. Microsoft would call this behavior by design. If it is by design then it is a severe and longstanding design flaw. Ed Crowley MCSE+Internet MVP Tech Consultant Compaq Computer Corporation All your base are belong to us. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Jennifer Baker Sent: Thursday, August 23, 2001 10:12 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: oh, man what a mess After changing a remote IMS from send only Inbound to send Outbound Only then back to Inbound only mode, many messages (3000) were sent from as far back as 1999. If the IMS is set to inbound only, would it not send undeliverables for refused connections or would it just queue the message? It seems that any other maildomain that is not hosted by the org would be sent as undeliverable yet it got queued somewhere. Anybody know where? I have other remote IMS queues that could have the same issue, but I cannot locate the queue directories on those servers. I know test it and find out...which is what got me into this mess. Also, whenever I would make the change it would tell me to restart the service. I hit ok, restarted the service, reopened the IMS properties and the apply button would be highlighted as if it never took the change. After going thru this motion several times, it would behave the same way. Hope this makes a bit of sense, I am a bit frantic at the moment. Jennifer Baker Fluke Corporation http://www.fluke.com http://www.flukenetworks.com mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED
Re: Changing the Exchange Admin. Password (Service Account Password)
Single site? No problem at all. Just do it. - Original Message - From: Debysingh, Bruce [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, August 27, 2001 11:49 AM Subject: Changing the Exchange Admin. Password (Service Account Password) Hello All, I need to change the Administrator password (service account) for my Exchange Organization. I searched the archives and FAQ and got good information. Most notable is Q157780: How to Change the Service Account Password. Please advise me on any other issues I should consider before making this change. I am not opposed to opening an incident with PSS if you all believe it to be necessary. Exchange Org. Configuration: One Site Exchange 5.5 (SP3 on 3 servers and SP4 on 1 server) Mixture of Windows 2000 Advance (SP1) and Windows NT 4.0 (SP5) McAfee Group Shield for Exchange (I open a support call with NAI support) Thanks, Bruce _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.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: Changing the Exchange Admin. Password (Service Account Passwo rd)
Depends on the connector in use between the sites. If anything other than the native MTA, no problem. If the MTA, communication will fail until the sites level out. If you do all three at the same time, you'll get bindback failures for about 15-20 minutes, then all will be well. - Original Message - From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, August 27, 2001 12:00 PM Subject: RE: Changing the Exchange Admin. Password (Service Account Passwo rd) and if you have ~50 sites[1], using three different service accounts[2]? [1] a lan/wan/political thing, this. [2]A political thing, that. It might have ~50 service accounts :( Paul bcctc -Original Message- From: Daniel Chenault [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, August 27, 2001 12:55 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Re: Changing the Exchange Admin. Password (Service Account Password) Single site? No problem at all. Just do it. - Original Message - From: Debysingh, Bruce [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, August 27, 2001 11:49 AM Subject: Changing the Exchange Admin. Password (Service Account Password) Hello All, I need to change the Administrator password (service account) for my Exchange Organization. I searched the archives and FAQ and got good information. Most notable is Q157780: How to Change the Service Account Password. Please advise me on any other issues I should consider before making this change. I am not opposed to opening an incident with PSS if you all believe it to be necessary. Exchange Org. Configuration: One Site Exchange 5.5 (SP3 on 3 servers and SP4 on 1 server) Mixture of Windows 2000 Advance (SP1) and Windows NT 4.0 (SP5) McAfee Group Shield for Exchange (I open a support call with NAI support) Thanks, Bruce _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.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: New Worm on the loose
Actually I realized I had configured my browser to not allow Java scripts in the untrusted Internet zone. Silly me for configuring my browser sensibly and with security in mind. - Original Message - From: Andy David [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, August 27, 2001 5:35 PM Subject: RE: New Worm on the loose Check your hard drive for FishTaco.exe -Original Message- From: Daniel Chenault [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, August 27, 2001 6:28 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Re: New Worm on the loose I visited the site, with OLXP loaded and running. Nothing happened. Nada. Zip. No warnings, no outbound mails, nothing. - Original Message - From: Roger Seielstad [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, August 27, 2001 3:46 PM Subject: New Worm on the loose Sorry about the cross posting. We don't have a lot of specifics on it, but there appears to be a new worm on the loose. The payload is a typical Melissa-style worm, where its only action is to send mail to all members of the GAL, with the following message: Hi, how are you ? I am fine here. Please read the page http://pcControl.tripod.com/ to get some knowledge and prevent somebody hack you. Forword this mail to help all your friends too. Its plain text, and carries no executables with it, but I haven't visited the website yet. More info to follow, but there is zero information on the web about it at this point. Roger -- Roger D. Seielstad - MCSE MCT Senior Systems Administrator Peregrine Systems Atlanta, GA http://www.peregrine.com _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.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: 2 information Stores
Ex5.5 already has two information stores; one for mailboxes, one for public folders. But that is all it has; you need Ex2K to get more. - Original Message - From: James Casstevens [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, August 28, 2001 11:42 AM Subject: 2 information Stores Quick question for the list: Is it possible to have 2 separate information stores when running Exchange 5.5 or is this only possible to do in Exchange 2000. Thanks for your help. James J. Casstevens Network Administrator Napa Valley Unified School District Napa, California 94558 _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.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: Removal of First Server in Site Question.
Leave DNS alone and change the IP address of the new box to that of the old box. - Original Message - From: Pfefferkorn, Pete (PFEFFEPE) [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, August 28, 2001 1:03 PM Subject: Removal of First Server in Site Question. Exchange 5.5 SP4 We're getting ready to remove the first server from our site in the next couple of weeks. I performed all the steps as defined in Q152959. I do have one remaining question and it may be a stupid one at that. Our current system contains the following (using a,b,c,d,e to simplify): SYSTEMA - old server to be retired SYSTEMB - Exchange server for mailboxes - Routing Calculation Server SYSTEMC - Exchange server for mailboxes - Public Folders - Schedule+ Free Busy - Organizational Forms SYSTEMD - Exchange Server for Internet Mail Connector - Primary Domain Controller - OWA SYSTEME - Exchange Server for Internet Mail Connector - Backup Domain Controller - OWA Once I remove our old server from the site, I believe I should change the current DNS record for that system to point to another box. I still need to retain the MX records but I'll have to change the existing IP address. We've been using SYSTEMA.UC.EDU for a very long time, so all the users reference SYSTEMA.UC.EDU when creating profiles and such. Which system would be best to add an alias for or am I off base on this issue? Pete Pfefferkorn University of Cincinnati Center For Information Technology Services Title: Senior Network Support Specialist Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Phone: (513) 556-9076 Fax: (513) 556-2042 _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Removal of First Server in Site Question.
Ah then it doens't matter. Any server in the site can resolve the username and point the profile to the correct server when creating the profile. - Original Message - From: Pfefferkorn, Pete (PFEFFEPE) [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, August 28, 2001 1:08 PM Subject: RE: Removal of First Server in Site Question. Actually, I forgot to mention we're cutting over to a new network, so all the IP addresses are changing for all the servers. -Original Message- From: Daniel Chenault [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, August 28, 2001 2:03 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Re: Removal of First Server in Site Question. Leave DNS alone and change the IP address of the new box to that of the old box. - Original Message - From: Pfefferkorn, Pete (PFEFFEPE) [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, August 28, 2001 1:03 PM Subject: Removal of First Server in Site Question. Exchange 5.5 SP4 We're getting ready to remove the first server from our site in the next couple of weeks. I performed all the steps as defined in Q152959. I do have one remaining question and it may be a stupid one at that. Our current system contains the following (using a,b,c,d,e to simplify): SYSTEMA - old server to be retired SYSTEMB - Exchange server for mailboxes - Routing Calculation Server SYSTEMC - Exchange server for mailboxes - Public Folders - Schedule+ Free Busy - Organizational Forms SYSTEMD - Exchange Server for Internet Mail Connector - Primary Domain Controller - OWA SYSTEME - Exchange Server for Internet Mail Connector - Backup Domain Controller - OWA Once I remove our old server from the site, I believe I should change the current DNS record for that system to point to another box. I still need to retain the MX records but I'll have to change the existing IP address. We've been using SYSTEMA.UC.EDU for a very long time, so all the users reference SYSTEMA.UC.EDU when creating profiles and such. Which system would be best to add an alias for or am I off base on this issue? Pete Pfefferkorn University of Cincinnati Center For Information Technology Services Title: Senior Network Support Specialist Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Phone: (513) 556-9076 Fax: (513) 556-2042 _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: exchange 5.5 e-mail disclaimer
FAQ - Original Message - From: Mario [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, August 28, 2001 10:50 AM Subject: exchange 5.5 e-mail disclaimer Is their a way to add a disclaimer to all internal and outgoing e-mails in Exchange 5.5 SP4. 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: Blocking Outside Mail
FAQ - Original Message - From: Milan [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, August 28, 2001 2:22 AM Subject: Blocking Outside Mail I wish to disallow certain users to send mail outside my domain. they are anly allowed to send mail messages internally. But they can receive mail from outside. How can I do this ? help me urgent.. _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.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: Removal of First Server in Site Question.
It truly doesn't matter. The directory within a site is homogenuous regardless of the server's role. The load is minimal. - Original Message - From: Pfefferkorn, Pete (PFEFFEPE) [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, August 28, 2001 1:28 PM Subject: RE: Removal of First Server in Site Question. Thanks, that's kind of what I thought. Since any server can resolve, should I then point it to the primary exchange server that houses the majority of the mail accounts or would it be better to select a server with the least amount of load. I'm leaning toward SYSTEMD which is the IMC and PDC, since it will be on the same segment as the main Exchange servers. It also is our OWA access point as well. -Original Message- From: Daniel Chenault [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, August 28, 2001 2:18 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Re: Removal of First Server in Site Question. Ah then it doens't matter. Any server in the site can resolve the username and point the profile to the correct server when creating the profile. - Original Message - From: Pfefferkorn, Pete (PFEFFEPE) [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, August 28, 2001 1:08 PM Subject: RE: Removal of First Server in Site Question. Actually, I forgot to mention we're cutting over to a new network, so all the IP addresses are changing for all the servers. -Original Message- From: Daniel Chenault [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, August 28, 2001 2:03 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Re: Removal of First Server in Site Question. Leave DNS alone and change the IP address of the new box to that of the old box. - Original Message - From: Pfefferkorn, Pete (PFEFFEPE) [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, August 28, 2001 1:03 PM Subject: Removal of First Server in Site Question. Exchange 5.5 SP4 We're getting ready to remove the first server from our site in the next couple of weeks. I performed all the steps as defined in Q152959. I do have one remaining question and it may be a stupid one at that. Our current system contains the following (using a,b,c,d,e to simplify): SYSTEMA - old server to be retired SYSTEMB - Exchange server for mailboxes - Routing Calculation Server SYSTEMC - Exchange server for mailboxes - Public Folders - Schedule+ Free Busy - Organizational Forms SYSTEMD - Exchange Server for Internet Mail Connector - Primary Domain Controller - OWA SYSTEME - Exchange Server for Internet Mail Connector - Backup Domain Controller - OWA Once I remove our old server from the site, I believe I should change the current DNS record for that system to point to another box. I still need to retain the MX records but I'll have to change the existing IP address. We've been using SYSTEMA.UC.EDU for a very long time, so all the users reference SYSTEMA.UC.EDU when creating profiles and such. Which system would be best to add an alias for or am I off base on this issue? Pete Pfefferkorn University of Cincinnati Center For Information Technology Services Title: Senior Network Support Specialist Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Phone: (513) 556-9076 Fax: (513) 556-2042 _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.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: EXCH2K in an EXCH 5.5 Organization
It is not recommended to have a single site 5.5 span domains. In this context the 2K server would be considered a 5.5 server. - Original Message - From: Bowles, John L. [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, August 28, 2001 2:05 PM Subject: EXCH2K in an EXCH 5.5 Organization All, I'm trying to setup an Exchange2K box inside an Exch 5.5 Organization. Here is what I'm faced with. The E2K server is in a seperate domain from the EXCH 5.5 Org. How am I going to get that server inside the EXCH 5.5 Org? Thanks for the help. John Bowles Exchange Administrator NT Server Workstation Team Celera Genomics [EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Exchange 2000 Relay
Since they are connecting from home they presumably have an ISP. They can use the ISP's SMTP server. - Original Message - From: Alex Lazen [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, August 28, 2001 2:19 PM Subject: Exchange 2000 Relay Preventing mail relay is covered on the FAQ, but applies only to Exchange 5.5. Currently users who connect from home, get their mail via POP. I need to be able to allow them to also send mail (SMTP) but no one else. The relay settings don't seem to have any effect on the intended outcome. Is there a method, in Exchange 2000, to SMTP Authorize clients and prevent relaying for anyone else? Thanks !!! Alex Lazen Triene INC _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.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: repercussions of removing first Exchange 5.5 server from mixed si te
If you followed the Q article for removing the first server AND all clients have connected and been redirected to their new server, all is well. The only thing you may run into is if anyone had any pointers in their PF Favorites pointing to that old server. - Original Message - From: Sakti Chakravarty [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, August 28, 2001 10:57 PM Subject: repercussions of removing first Exchange 5.5 server from mixed si te Hi all, Our organisation has a single site with two Exchange 5.5 servers and one Exchange 2000 server. We're almost at the stage when we're about to remove our first Exchange 5.5 server from the site. We have moved all users from this 5.5 server onto 2000. Our Outlook 2000 clients did not need any reconfiguration to connect to the new X2K server after their mailboxes were moved, but I read somewhere that removing the 5.5 server that they originally connected to would cause client connection problems. Does anyone know of any further detail on this subject? Any help appreciated Sakti _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.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: Enterprise Calendar by Tom Howe
FAQ - Original Message - From: Saul Gonzalez To: Exchange Discussions Sent: Tuesday, August 28, 2001 7:09 PM Subject: RE: Enterprise Calendar by Tom Howe PSS? -Original Message-From: Daniel Chenault [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, August 28, 2001 4:57 PMTo: Exchange DiscussionsSubject: Re: Enterprise Calendar by Tom Howe I think that's gonna be one for PSS. - Original Message - From: Saul Gonzalez To: Exchange Discussions Sent: Tuesday, August 28, 2001 4:52 PM Subject: Enterprise Calendar by Tom Howe I have been trying to configure this and have hit a point in where I can't go further. I am receiving the following error message. Do you know what this is? IF you dont see the picture here is what the error says; Error: Object or data matching the name, range, or selection criteria was not found within the scope of this operation. (-2148217895). I get this error when I try to add the event registration to all users. I do have access to everyones calendar since I can see them and have owner permissions to them. _List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htmArchives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.aspTo unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]Exchange List admin: [EMAIL PROTECTED] _List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htmArchives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.aspTo unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]Exchange List admin: [EMAIL PROTECTED] _List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htmArchives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.aspTo unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]Exchange List admin: [EMAIL PROTECTED] _List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htmArchives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.aspTo unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]Exchange List admin: [EMAIL PROTECTED] _List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htmArchives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.aspTo unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]Exchange List admin: [EMAIL PROTECTED] _List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htmArchives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.aspTo unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]Exchange List admin: [EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.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: repercussions of removing first Exchange 5.5 server from mixe d si te
Yep. - Original Message - From: Sakti Chakravarty [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, August 29, 2001 1:22 AM Subject: RE: repercussions of removing first Exchange 5.5 server from mixe d si te Thanks Daniel, All our clients are connecting to the new server without having to change their profiles, so I just need to ensure the first X5.5 server is removed correctly, yes? Sakti -Original Message- From: Daniel Chenault [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, 29 August 2001 3:13 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Re: repercussions of removing first Exchange 5.5 server from mixed si te If you followed the Q article for removing the first server AND all clients have connected and been redirected to their new server, all is well. The only thing you may run into is if anyone had any pointers in their PF Favorites pointing to that old server. - Original Message - From: Sakti Chakravarty [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, August 28, 2001 10:57 PM Subject: repercussions of removing first Exchange 5.5 server from mixed si te Hi all, Our organisation has a single site with two Exchange 5.5 servers and one Exchange 2000 server. We're almost at the stage when we're about to remove our first Exchange 5.5 server from the site. We have moved all users from this 5.5 server onto 2000. Our Outlook 2000 clients did not need any reconfiguration to connect to the new X2K server after their mailboxes were moved, but I read somewhere that removing the 5.5 server that they originally connected to would cause client connection problems. Does anyone know of any further detail on this subject? Any help appreciated Sakti _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Exchange 5.5 admin program on windowsxp
Perhaps you also have a certian (sic) support number for help on that product? - Original Message - From: Mark Hanji [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, August 29, 2001 11:57 AM Subject: Re: Exchange 5.5 admin program on windowsxp for the first question, RTM is available for certian people :-) for the second question, this is what I am looking for. - Original Message - From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, August 29, 2001 17:36 Subject: RE: Exchange 5.5 admin program on windowsxp Is XP Pro publicly available yet? I thought it was still in beta? If it's still in beta, what do the beta support people say? -Michèle Immigration site: http://LadySun1969.tripod.com Our new 2001 Miata: http://members.cardomain.com/bpituley Tiggercam: http://www.tiggercam.co.uk - The real measure of your wealth is how much you'd be worth if you lost all your money. -- Anonymous - -Original Message- From: Mark Hanji [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, August 29, 2001 11:31 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Exchange 5.5 admin program on windowsxp Hello. I am trying to install the Exchange 5.5 admin program on windows xp pro. It tells me there are known issues with back office 4 and 4.5. the details button doesn't help allot. Can anyone please point those known issues?! 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: Internet Mail Service
Network error during host resolution appears all throughout Technet. It means that the domain was not resolveable by the DNS box the Exchange server is configured to use. - Original Message - From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, August 29, 2001 7:34 AM Subject: Internet Mail Service When I check the IMS Queue I see alot of mail messages that have been sitting in the Queue for days. The error (Network error during host resolution) I can not find any info from Technet. Any suggestions _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.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: Exporting Outlook 2000 User Profiles
Rules are stored in a hidden message in the top-level of the mailbox. They can be exported via the Rules Manager. - Original Message - From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, August 29, 2001 2:04 PM Subject: Exporting Outlook 2000 User Profiles Is their a way to export outlook2000 user profiles, rules so when you rebuild a computer or move a user you can just import their rules into Outlook instead of having to rebuild everything, we are using psts not the exchange store I dont know if that makes a difference or not... So most profiles consist of 5 to 6 Internet email accounts and a bunch of rules thanks in advance _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.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: Mailbox limit notification
FAQ - Original Message - From: Buckley, Marie (UK - London) [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, August 29, 2001 11:15 AM Subject: Mailbox limit notification Does anyone know how to change the Mailbox limit notification message that is sent automatically by the System Administrator when users exceed their storage limit Marie - IMPORTANT NOTICE. This communication contains information which is confidential and may also be privileged. It is for the exclusive use of the intended recipient(s). If you are not the intended recipient(s) please note that any form of distribution, copying or use of this communication or the information in it is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful. If you have received this communication in error, please return it with the title received in error to [EMAIL PROTECTED] then delete the email and destroy any copies of it. This communication is from Deloitte Touche whose principal office is at Stonecutter Court, 1 Stonecutter Street, London EC4A 4TR, United Kingdom. A list of partners' names is available at this address. Authorised by the Institute of Chartered Accountants in England and Wales to carry on investment business. _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.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: Database resource failure error 0xfffffc0b -an hour ago
Version and SP level. - Original Message - From: Peña, Botp [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, August 29, 2001 11:30 PM Subject: Database resource failure error 0xfc0b -an hour ago Hello Team, I just got the ff error an hour ago. I had to restart the SA to bring the server back. Error: Database resource failure error 0xfc0b occurred in function JTAB_BASE::EcUpdate while accessing the database Anyone had the same experience? Any ideas? Thank you in advance, -botp _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: How to set up exchange server
I do believe Seattle Labs' offering is little more than a SMTP daemon and a POP/IMAP daemon. I'm not exactly sure what you're trying to do here. Howzabout posting the business requirement that led to this (questionable) solution and why you think it's the way to go. - Original Message - From: Jim [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, August 30, 2001 5:07 PM Subject: How to set up exchange server Dear All: We have an Exchange server 5.5 as an internal email system. We want to use Seattle Lab mail engine. How to connect Exchange server as internal email to Seattle Lab server as external email system. Many thanks! Jim __ Do You Yahoo!? Get email alerts NEW webcam video instant messaging with Yahoo! Messenger http://im.yahoo.com _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Default Signature
I don't know of any scanners, mapi or otherwise, that can apply anything to x.400-bound messages. I can see how to do this in 2K using an event sink as that method is far richer in ability than 5.5's event service (which can only monitor an object or folder looking for four actions and take a limited number of actions). - Original Message - From: Mark Harford [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, August 31, 2001 3:41 AM Subject: RE: Default Signature There may be some mapi-based virus-scanners that can implement this type of thing if installed on the X400 bridgehead server. However they will also be a big hit on performance. Mark -Original Message- From: Daniel Chenault [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 31 August 2001 09:14 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Re: Default Signature I can't think of any easy way to do this in 5.5; maybe an event script but it won't apply only to messages going over the x.400 link. In 2K an event sink will handle it. - Original Message - From: kiran [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, August 31, 2001 2:45 AM Subject: RE: Default Signature Hi, I have gone through the FAQ and found some solution for adding FOOTER for all the outgoing mail, which i really wanted, But he has given me to use it on Internet Mail Service, but i am using exchange 5.5 in enterprise using X.400 connector, So please any one tell me how to put up FOOTER notes for all outgoing mails using this connector. Regards, kiran. At 04-47 PM 08/30/01 -0500, you wrote: FAQ. Read it. Love it. Live it. http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Drew (MOS) KWAR2001 website: www.schoolofdefence.org/kwar.html Read my Column on OUTLOOKEXCHANGE.COM: http://www.outlookexchange.com/articles/drewnicholson/default.asp Pics of Max are BACK! http://www.drewncapris.net Murphy's Technology Law #7: All great discoveries are made by mistake. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of kiran Sent: Thursday, August 30, 2001 7:58 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Default Signature Hi, I am using exchange 5.5 and want to send a default signature for all the outgoing mails from my domain. Can anyone tell me how to do this, i will be thankful in advance to do so. Regards, kiran. _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] This e-mail, and any attachment, is confidential. If you have received it in error, please delete it from your system, do not use or disclose the information in any way, and notify me immediately. The contents of this message may contain personal views which are not the views of the BBC, unless specifically stated. _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.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: A good space for the Exchange server 5.5 configuration.
The same mirror? If that mirror goes you lose everything. If put on separate mirrors, the odds are against both of them failing at the same time. For performance, the EDB files go on a striped set and the logs go on a mirrored set (doesn't need to be striped; no advantage). If you lose your EDB files, you can rebuild from the logs. If you lose your logs you're toast. - Original Message - From: Ian Midgley [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, August 31, 2001 4:27 AM Subject: RE: A good space for the Exchange server 5.5 configuration. If perfromance is not an issue (I know it's always an issue but for arguments sake...) what would be the disadvantages of putting the logs and stores together on the mirror? -Original Message- From: Ed Crowley [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 30 August 2001 19:07 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: A good space for the Exchange server 5.5 configuration. If the log drive fails, all transactions are committed to the database and Exchange shuts down. (That is in theory.) However, your point is quite valid since the log drive is also the OS drive, and if the OS drive fails, I don't trust anything to shut down right. So I would agree to mirror the OS-Log drive and put the database on the unmirrored third drive. I would also partition the OS-Log drive into two partitions (9 + 9 GB sounds fine, adjusting that one way or the other is fine, too) so that if you have some problem with backups and the logs don't get purged for a period of time it doesn't completely kill your system. Still, I'd want one more drive before I'd call this a production server, even if for only ten months. Ed Crowley MCSE+Internet MVP Tech Consultant Compaq Computer Corporation All your base are belong to us. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Osborn, Joel Sent: Thursday, August 30, 2001 5:38 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: A good space for the Exchange server 5.5 configuration. You would put the logs on an unmirrored drive? Data (that has been backed up) can be recovered. Unbacked up logs (created since the last back up) cannot. I'm not sure what the answer would be, given the drive constraints, but I would press for some more drive. I would not trust the logs to a non-redundant spindle. But I also understand the need to keep the logs and data on seperate spindles. Joel K. Osborn Information Systems Technical Specialist Wisconsin Department of Transportation [EMAIL PROTECTED] -Original Message- From: Drewski [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, August 29, 2001 8:17 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: A good space for the Exchange server 5.5 configuration. Yes. In fact, you could have just a C drive. Now, if you want to have SOME chance of recovery if the server crashes, I would do the following: 1) Format the hard drives 2) Break the RAID 5 3) Take one disk and format it as C: 4) Take the other two disks, and mirror them to create D: 5) Install the OS and Exchange on C: 6) Tell performance optimiser to put the Logs on C: and the Information Store on D:. Then, ghod forbid you lose a spindle, you can still recover. Drew (MOS) KWAR2001 website: www.schoolofdefence.org/kwar.html Read my Column on OUTLOOKEXCHANGE.COM: http://www.outlookexchange.com/articles/drewnicholson/default.asp Pics of Max are BACK! http://www.drewncapris.net ...Slide show... ...BORING... thunk Zzzz... - The Tick -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, August 29, 2001 8:03 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: A good space for the Exchange server 5.5 configuration. Hi, Drewski I am going to use this server for 10 month only, then I would upgrade the server to Exchange 2000 server. If I am running RAID 5 on all my three drives, are you saying I could just have C and D drive instead of having C, D, E, and F drives? It won't matter at all. Thanks John Shi -Original Message- From: Drewski [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, August 29, 2001 6:03 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: A good space for the Exchange server 5.5 configuration. With the set up you have, it really doesn't matter, because your partitions are either sharing physical drives, or spanning physical drives -- so if a drive fails, you'll lose everything anyway. Drew (MOS) KWAR2001 website: www.schoolofdefence.org/kwar.html Read my Column on OUTLOOKEXCHANGE.COM: http://www.outlookexchange.com/articles/drewnicholson/default.asp Pics of Max are BACK! http://www.drewncapris.net Not only does the English Language borrow words from other languages, it sometimes chases them
Re: Haiku Friday
Martin is loved by All others who try and fail Which is all of us - Original Message - From: Martin Blackstone [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, August 31, 2001 8:18 AM Subject: RE: Haiku Friday Three cups of coffee My brain must work extra hard Hell yes it is tough Was that right? Maybe I should take my haikus to the Carebear Exchange Group. That was I could get hugs for trying hard. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Mike Morrison Sent: Friday, August 31, 2001 6:12 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Haiku Friday Poorly is the word, but it was not a bad try. It ain't easy, eh? Mike Morrison NT/SMS/Exchange Administrator Ben Jerry's Homemade, Inc. -Original Message- From: Martin Blackstone [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, August 31, 2001 9:09 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Haiku Friday my first haiku try this is not an easy feat I think I did poor -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Denis Baldwin Sent: Friday, August 31, 2001 5:54 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Haiku Friday Friday it is here Haiku can begin again Send in your words now Denis Denis A. Baldwin (A+/MCP/I-Net+/Net+/CCA/CIW) Network Administrator, CAE, Inc. 810-231-9373, ext. 229 [EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Haiku Friday
Poetry gives wings To that part in all of us Dormant due to work. - Original Message - From: LSeltzer [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, August 31, 2001 8:27 AM Subject: RE: Haiku Friday Why have poetry? Must it always be funny? Was that funny? -Original Message- From: Daniel Chenault [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, August 31, 2001 9:24 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Re: Haiku Friday Haiku poetry three lines of five, seven and five syllables. Easy. - Original Message - From: Mike Morrison [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, August 31, 2001 8:12 AM Subject: RE: Haiku Friday Poorly is the word, but it was not a bad try. It ain't easy, eh? Mike Morrison NT/SMS/Exchange Administrator Ben Jerry's Homemade, Inc. -Original Message- From: Martin Blackstone [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, August 31, 2001 9:09 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Haiku Friday my first haiku try this is not an easy feat I think I did poor -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Denis Baldwin Sent: Friday, August 31, 2001 5:54 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Haiku Friday Friday it is here Haiku can begin again Send in your words now Denis Denis A. Baldwin (A+/MCP/I-Net+/Net+/CCA/CIW) Network Administrator, CAE, Inc. 810-231-9373, ext. 229 [EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] This e-mail is intended only for the addressee named above. This e-mail may contain confidential or privileged information. If you are not the named addressee, you are not authorized to retain, read, copy or disseminate this message or any part of it. In addition, you are hereby notified that any use, dissemination, distribution or reproduction of this communication is strictly prohibited. The sender of this message does not accept liability for any errors or omissions in the contents of this message that arise as a result of e-mail transmission. This message is provided for informational purposes and should not be construed as a solicitation or offer to buy or sell any securities. Please notify the sender immediately by e-mail if you have received this e-mail by mistake and delete this e-mail from your system. _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.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: IMC problem with Earthlink.net
Ya beat me to it. - Original Message - From: Andy David [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, August 31, 2001 8:41 AM Subject: RE: IMC problem with Earthlink.net So the Firewall is relaying the mail? In previous Checkpoint versions (4.x), the SMTP Server was pretty buggy. Daniel's idea that earthlink's servers may be doing a reverse lookup on the ext ip address of your firewall and its being treated as SPAM sounds like a good place to start looking. Andy David J Muller International -Original Message- From: Couch, Nate [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, August 31, 2001 9:29 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: IMC problem with Earthlink.net Andy, Here is what my firewall admin tells me. Sorry for the delay but we had problems hooking up the past few days. 1) Trust SMTP Out rule - Any source SMTP (the MS Exchange server in this case) can send to the external IP address on the firewall, which would then send it on to the destination (earthlink.net in this case). 2) Trust SMTP In rule - Any source from the internet can send SMTP requests inbound to IP address on the firewall. Regards. Nate -- From: Andy David Reply To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, August 29, 2001 13:32 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: IMC problem with Earthlink.net Yes, but what are the rules specifically? Your statement seems to imply that your firewall has something unusual setup. Andy David J Muller International -Original Message- From: Couch, Nate [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, August 29, 2001 2:13 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: IMC problem with Earthlink.net I call them rules, but this may be a misnomer. They are configuration settings on the firewall which an admin can use to filter traffic to and from the Internet. Nate -- From: Andy David Reply To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, August 29, 2001 12:41 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: IMC problem with Earthlink.net Nate, what are the rules you are referring to? 2) Based on the rules we have setup on the firewall the messages for Earthlink are leaving the firewall destined most often for mx00.earthlink.net. Andy David J Muller International -Original Message- From: Couch, Nate [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, August 29, 2001 1:30 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: IMC problem with Earthlink.net Michele, We have a Checkpoint firewall on our side. I did try contacting Earthlink and after dealing with them for a while I felt like I had passed through a gauntlet of no help. Very frustrating. Nate -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, August 29, 2001 12:14 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: IMC problem with Earthlink.net what kind of firewall? PIX? UUNet is known as a spam haven, so it's possible that this server is blocking all traffic from them. You could always use the telephone to call the admin of that box find out. -Michèle Immigration site: http://LadySun1969.tripod.com Our new 2001 Miata: http://members.cardomain.com/bpituley Tiggercam: http://www.tiggercam.co.uk - 99 percent of lawyers give the rest a bad name. - -Original Message- From: Couch, Nate [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, August 29, 2001 1:05 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: IMC problem with Earthlink.net Scenario: MS Exchange 5.5. SP4 MS Exchange/Outlook 98 for the clients. IMC through UU.NET Here is what I am encountering: 1) IMC functions fine for just about everyone we send to EXCEPT Earthlink.net 2) Based on the rules we have setup on the firewall the messages for Earthlink are leaving the firewall destined most often for mx00.earthlink.net. 3) When we send to earthlink.net addresses we get: Unable to deliver the message due to a communications error 4) Our ISP engineer and they can send email to earthlink from the firewall as a company.com address so they tell me. However, anyone from inside the firewall sending to earthlink.com gets kicked back with the above error code. 5) It seems that something on the earthlink.net side does not like whatever MS Exchange is doing to the outbound messages. Inbound works fine so far. Headers reveal that earthlink.net is using: 220 eagle EL_3_4_2 /EL_3_4_1 ESMTP EarthLink SMTP Server 6) I have checked the IMC and found no filters nor any weird configuration (I haven't changed anything on the setup for the IMC in months and this whole thing started up about four weeks ago. 7) I haven't found anything in the archives, FAQ, or Technet for the above error code (at
Re: A good space for the Exchange server 5.5 configuration.
Yes, there is. In my world of support, though, lost data == unacceptable. - Original Message - From: Drewski [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, August 31, 2001 8:45 AM Subject: RE: A good space for the Exchange server 5.5 configuration. I thought that if you lost the logs, there was a procedure to at least restore the data in the Stores? Yeah, you lose anything that wasn't committed, of course, but can't you recover something? Drew (MOS) KWAR2001 website: www.schoolofdefence.org/kwar.html Read my Column on OUTLOOKEXCHANGE.COM: http://www.outlookexchange.com/articles/drewnicholson/default.asp Pics of Max are BACK! http://www.drewncapris.net Puns are for children, not groan readers. -Original Message- From: Daniel Chenault [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 31 August 2001 11:09 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Re: A good space for the Exchange server 5.5 configuration. The same mirror? If that mirror goes you lose everything. If put on separate mirrors, the odds are against both of them failing at the same time. For performance, the EDB files go on a striped set and the logs go on a mirrored set (doesn't need to be striped; no advantage). If you lose your EDB files, you can rebuild from the logs. If you lose your logs you're toast. - Original Message - From: Ian Midgley [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, August 31, 2001 4:27 AM Subject: RE: A good space for the Exchange server 5.5 configuration. If perfromance is not an issue (I know it's always an issue but for arguments sake...) what would be the disadvantages of putting the logs and stores together on the mirror? -Original Message- From: Ed Crowley [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 30 August 2001 19:07 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: A good space for the Exchange server 5.5 configuration. If the log drive fails, all transactions are committed to the database and Exchange shuts down. (That is in theory.) However, your point is quite valid since the log drive is also the OS drive, and if the OS drive fails, I don't trust anything to shut down right. So I would agree to mirror the OS-Log drive and put the database on the unmirrored third drive. I would also partition the OS-Log drive into two partitions (9 + 9 GB sounds fine, adjusting that one way or the other is fine, too) so that if you have some problem with backups and the logs don't get purged for a period of time it doesn't completely kill your system. Still, I'd want one more drive before I'd call this a production server, even if for only ten months. Ed Crowley MCSE+Internet MVP Tech Consultant Compaq Computer Corporation All your base are belong to us. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Osborn, Joel Sent: Thursday, August 30, 2001 5:38 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: A good space for the Exchange server 5.5 configuration. You would put the logs on an unmirrored drive? Data (that has been backed up) can be recovered. Unbacked up logs (created since the last back up) cannot. I'm not sure what the answer would be, given the drive constraints, but I would press for some more drive. I would not trust the logs to a non-redundant spindle. But I also understand the need to keep the logs and data on seperate spindles. Joel K. Osborn Information Systems Technical Specialist Wisconsin Department of Transportation [EMAIL PROTECTED] -Original Message- From: Drewski [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, August 29, 2001 8:17 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: A good space for the Exchange server 5.5 configuration. Yes. In fact, you could have just a C drive. Now, if you want to have SOME chance of recovery if the server crashes, I would do the following: 1) Format the hard drives 2) Break the RAID 5 3) Take one disk and format it as C: 4) Take the other two disks, and mirror them to create D: 5) Install the OS and Exchange on C: 6) Tell performance optimiser to put the Logs on C: and the Information Store on D:. Then, ghod forbid you lose a spindle, you can still recover. Drew (MOS) KWAR2001 website: www.schoolofdefence.org/kwar.html Read my Column on OUTLOOKEXCHANGE.COM: http://www.outlookexchange.com/articles/drewnicholson/default.asp Pics of Max are BACK! http://www.drewncapris.net ...Slide show... ...BORING... thunk Zzzz... - The Tick -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, August 29, 2001 8:03 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: A good space for the Exchange
Re: A good space for the Exchange server 5.5 configuration.
Five nines is sufficient... - Original Message - From: Drewski [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, August 31, 2001 8:57 AM Subject: RE: A good space for the Exchange server 5.5 configuration. right, ok. I hear ya, Mr. 999... :p Drew (MOS) KWAR2001 website: www.schoolofdefence.org/kwar.html Read my Column on OUTLOOKEXCHANGE.COM: http://www.outlookexchange.com/articles/drewnicholson/default.asp Pics of Max are BACK! http://www.drewncapris.net Million to one chances crop up nine times out of ten. - Granny Weatherwax -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Daniel Chenault Sent: Friday, August 31, 2001 8:47 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Re: A good space for the Exchange server 5.5 configuration. Yes, there is. In my world of support, though, lost data == unacceptable. - Original Message - From: Drewski [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, August 31, 2001 8:45 AM Subject: RE: A good space for the Exchange server 5.5 configuration. I thought that if you lost the logs, there was a procedure to at least restore the data in the Stores? Yeah, you lose anything that wasn't committed, of course, but can't you recover something? Drew (MOS) KWAR2001 website: www.schoolofdefence.org/kwar.html Read my Column on OUTLOOKEXCHANGE.COM: http://www.outlookexchange.com/articles/drewnicholson/default.asp Pics of Max are BACK! http://www.drewncapris.net Puns are for children, not groan readers. -Original Message- From: Daniel Chenault [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 31 August 2001 11:09 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Re: A good space for the Exchange server 5.5 configuration. The same mirror? If that mirror goes you lose everything. If put on separate mirrors, the odds are against both of them failing at the same time. For performance, the EDB files go on a striped set and the logs go on a mirrored set (doesn't need to be striped; no advantage). If you lose your EDB files, you can rebuild from the logs. If you lose your logs you're toast. - Original Message - From: Ian Midgley [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, August 31, 2001 4:27 AM Subject: RE: A good space for the Exchange server 5.5 configuration. If perfromance is not an issue (I know it's always an issue but for arguments sake...) what would be the disadvantages of putting the logs and stores together on the mirror? [maartined] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Haiku Friday
Exchange admin, Dan Is not. A tech support geek Is his daily job - Original Message - From: Soysal, Serdar [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, August 31, 2001 9:45 AM Subject: RE: Haiku Friday It is good to see So much talent in this list Exchange Admins Rule! We bring light to all We help economy grow Exchange Admins Rule! PS: My poetry is So very cheesy at best Don't know why I try S./ -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, August 31, 2001 10:28 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Haiku Friday Poetry gives wings Are you sure about that Dan Red Bull would argue Ken Powell Systems Administrator Clark County Office of Budget and Information Services (OBIS) Vancouver, Washington [EMAIL PROTECTED] Voice: (360) 397-6121 x4658 Fax:(360) 759-6001 -Original Message- From: Daniel Chenault [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, August 31, 2001 6:37 AM To: Exchange 5.5 List Subject: Re: Haiku Friday Poetry gives wings To that part in all of us Dormant due to work. - Original Message - From: LSeltzer [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, August 31, 2001 8:27 AM Subject: RE: Haiku Friday Why have poetry? Must it always be funny? Was that funny? -Original Message- From: Daniel Chenault [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, August 31, 2001 9:24 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Re: Haiku Friday Haiku poetry three lines of five, seven and five syllables. Easy. - Original Message - From: Mike Morrison [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, August 31, 2001 8:12 AM Subject: RE: Haiku Friday Poorly is the word, but it was not a bad try. It ain't easy, eh? Mike Morrison NT/SMS/Exchange Administrator Ben Jerry's Homemade, Inc. -Original Message- From: Martin Blackstone [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, August 31, 2001 9:09 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Haiku Friday my first haiku try this is not an easy feat I think I did poor -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Denis Baldwin Sent: Friday, August 31, 2001 5:54 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Haiku Friday Friday it is here Haiku can begin again Send in your words now Denis Denis A. Baldwin (A+/MCP/I-Net+/Net+/CCA/CIW) Network Administrator, CAE, Inc. 810-231-9373, ext. 229 [EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] This e-mail is intended only for the addressee named above. This e-mail may contain confidential or privileged information. If you are not the named addressee, you are not authorized to retain, read, copy or disseminate this message or any part of it. In addition, you are hereby notified that any use, dissemination, distribution or reproduction of this communication is strictly prohibited. The sender of this message does not accept liability for any errors or omissions in the contents of this message that arise as a result of e-mail transmission. This message is provided for informational purposes and should not be construed as a solicitation or offer to buy or sell any securities. Please notify the sender immediately by e-mail if you have received this e-mail by mistake and delete this e-mail from your system. _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp
Re: OWA access denied.
Free drinks at MEC will do. ;) - Original Message - From: Soysal, Serdar [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, August 31, 2001 1:56 PM Subject: RE: OWA access denied. applause way to go Dan. Woohoo!! Bravoo! /applause -Original Message- From: Daniel Chenault [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, August 31, 2001 12:29 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Re: OWA access denied. Damn, am I good or what? A shot from the hip and hit the target dead center. preening, waiting for applause - Original Message - From: Pfefferkorn, Pete (PFEFFEPE) [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, August 31, 2001 11:18 AM Subject: RE: OWA access denied. Great John, Looked over Q244850 and that seems to be the ticket. It even gives you the registry hack to change the server who has the directory information. Thanks again! -Original Message- From: John Allhiser [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, August 31, 2001 12:01 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: OWA access denied. If that is the case, and it probably is, then Q244850, and Q248081 may help. John Allhiser MCSE CCNA Network Engineer Business Men's Assurance -Original Message- From: Pfefferkorn, Pete (PFEFFEPE) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, August 31, 2001 11:05 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: OWA access denied. Interesting. I hope someone can clarify how this works. I wonder if there is a way of changing that when a system is down and your waiting on parts and support to show up. -Original Message- From: Daniel Chenault [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, August 31, 2001 10:18 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Re: OWA access denied. I'm not positive on this (far from being an OWA guru) but remember when you installed OWA and it asked for a server in the site? I'm betting this downed server is the one you put in and that gets hardcoded as the directory server for the OWA server. Server unavailable == permission denied. Just a WAG. - Original Message - From: Pfefferkorn, Pete (PFEFFEPE) [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, August 31, 2001 9:18 AM Subject: OWA access denied. Exchange 5.5 SP4 We lost one of our main Exchange server this morning and are awaiting hardware support to come in. One curious items is that when we connect to the OWA through one of the other servers that are still up...they users cannot log in. If they go directly to the system that houses their mail and put in Domain\Username they can then access. Any ideas why this may occur? Pete Pfefferkorn University of Cincinnati Center For Information Technology Services Title: Senior Network Support Specialist Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Phone: (513) 556-9076 Fax: (513) 556-2042 _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource
Re: Adding Message to all outgoing email
When you joined the list, you _did_ get a link to the FAQ, right? - Original Message - From: Patrick Hudson [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, August 31, 2001 10:31 AM Subject: Adding Message to all outgoing email Can someone please tell me how to add a message to all outgoing email. I work for a hospital and we need to add a confidentiality statement to all outgoing email. Thank you Patrick Hudson Salem Community Hospital [EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.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: Fax server - What is the best solution?
Well, best is a subjective term. I've heard good reports on OmFax. - Original Message - From: Gordon Olson [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, September 04, 2001 3:14 PM Subject: RE: Fax server - What is the best solution? Missy, I actually looked at that, I even have my printed copy of the FAQ. I was just wondering what people were using here on the fourm. There is so mnay different ones that it gets sort of confusing. Gordon -Original Message- From: missy koslosky [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, September 04, 2001 12:27 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Re: Fax server - What is the best solution? I'd suggest checking the handy-dandy FAQ at http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm. It's so good I even memorized the URL. Missy - Original Message - From: Gordon Olson [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, September 04, 2001 3:18 PM Subject: Fax server - What is the best solution? I would like to get your opinion on what you feel is the best Fax Solution. We are Running Exchange 5.5 SP4 and no plans to move to Exchange 2000 until May 2002. We have a Terminal Server \ Citrix XP enviroment using Outlook 2000. We have 52 remote locations and would like a Fax solution that would use Outlook, what do you suggest? TIA Gordon _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.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: Fax server - What is the best solution?
I've got news fer ya bud; Ive known Ed for several years now, hoisted more than a couple of beers with him and he still gets sarcastic with me. I think most would consider me a list insider (if such a thing existed). - Original Message - From: Rocky Stefano [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, September 04, 2001 11:38 PM Subject: RE: Fax server - What is the best solution? I know you did. Heaven forbid should you side with an outsider on something as touchy as this without at least a hint of sarcasm :) -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Ed Crowley Sent: September 5, 2001 12:31 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Fax server - What is the best solution? Read, actually, although I pretty much tuned out about 1/3 of the way through. Ed Crowley MCSE+Internet MVP Tech Consultant Compaq Computer Corporation (soon to be HP) All your base are belong to us. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Rocky Stefano Sent: Tuesday, September 04, 2001 6:13 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Fax server - What is the best solution? I'm going to expect that anyways but I'd figure someone would listen. You did smirk -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Ed Crowley Sent: September 4, 2001 9:08 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Fax server - What is the best solution? I'm not saying your point is groundless, but it would have probably been best had you drafted that memo, then pressed Delete. You'd have felt better and you'd have not incited a flame war. Ed Crowley MCSE+Internet MVP Tech Consultant Compaq Computer Corporation (soon to be HP) All your base are belong to us. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Rocky Stefano Sent: Tuesday, September 04, 2001 5:39 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Fax server - What is the best solution? C'mon Chris, What you are telling me is that you are advocating the use of the list NOT for Exchange discussions (because a newbie might ask dumb questions) but rather for the stupid and ENDLESS conversations about bloody tacos and which hole in my body produces the most gas? How about some haiku Friday? I have no problem listening to that endless drivel all day or most of the drivel out of the list all week and its gang but please don't tell me that someone can't ask a question just because its partially covered by a FAQ. Almost every question asked on this list could be answered with some well done research off the net. People use lists because they are useful for getting the information they need quick without a lot of research. Once they have narrowed their choices down from list responses then they can do their own homework. Every companies website (for exchange faxing) will tell you that theirs is the best. Let's not forget the 100 or so FAQU responses to people's questions about something legitimate. How is someone to know if a solution is problematic or not without soliciting the help of the list? Regards -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Scharff, Chris Sent: September 4, 2001 5:09 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Fax server - What is the best solution? The topic has been discussed ad nauseum. Rather than turn a discussion list into a re-hash list, those who were strong advocates of their products made arguments for inclusion of their product in the FAQ.. and in some cases exclusion of their products from the FAQ. Of course the FAQ is a living growing thing, so if someone had something more intelligent to add than I've been using X for 3 days now in my home lab and really like it it might be added to the FAQ as well. If Gordon had asked if anyone knew of a fax product which offered a unique subset of features then perhaps calling FAQ would have been in error. What do you feel is the best fax solution however is at least 6 hours of solid reading in the archives. * Chris Scharff[EMAIL PROTECTED]www.swinc.com Simpler-Webb, Inc. Austin, TX +1-512-322-0071 * -Original Message- From: Rocky Stefano [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, September 04, 2001 3:45 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Fax server - What is the best solution? What's the point of a discussion list then? -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Ed Crowley Sent: September 4, 2001 4:34 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Fax server - What is the best solution? It gets no less confusing when everyone chimes in with
Re: Instant Messaging: install problem
You are one step away from killing your Ex2000 installation. - Original Message - From: Cassani Alexio [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, September 05, 2001 12:42 PM Subject: RE: Instant Messaging: install problem Ok, so first I need to change it, as now the Exchange service account is the System Local. Thanks for the help. -Original Message- From: Don Ely [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: mercoledì 5 settembre 2001 19.46 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Instant Messaging: install problem He means logon to the E2K server as the Exchange service account and then run your install. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Cassani Alexio Sent: Wednesday, September 05, 2001 10:39 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Instant Messaging: install problem What do you mean? -Original Message- From: Kevin Miller [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: mercoledì 5 settembre 2001 19.38 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Instant Messaging: install problem Try It as the service account for exchange. That will fix all of your rights issues. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Cassani Alexio Sent: Wednesday, September 05, 2001 11:27 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Instant Messaging: install problem Hi, I'm tryiing to install Instant Messaging Service in a server running Win2000 sp2 Exch2000 Ent. I've performed the installation process using a Terminal Service session, and logging on with my administrator account (member of domain admins and enterprise admins groups). At the end of the setup process, I've got an error (OxC0070005) and I need to cancel the setup. In the log file I've found some info about this problem: [16:56:18] CAtomIM::ScAddRegistryKeys (K:\admin\src\udog\exsetdata\components\im\a_im.cxx:230) Error code 0XC0070005 (5): Access is denied. . . . [16:56:18] Service = '' CBaseServiceAtom::ScAdd (K:\admin\src\udog\setupbase\basecomp\basesvcatom.cxx:196) Error code 0XC0070005 (5): Access is denied. . . . [16:56:19] CComExchSetupComponent::Install (K:\admin\src\udog\BO\comboifaces.cxx:668) Error code 0XC0070005 (5): Access is denied. Anyone can help me? TIA Alexio Cassani _ List posting FAQ: http://www.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!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.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: Service Pack 4
There are some post-SP4 fixes that you should consider. I suggest contacting MS PSS to check on their applicability to your own environment. I think playboy.com can afford the cost of the call (though I would as the engineer to refund the call). - Original Message - From: Grewal, Raj [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, September 05, 2001 1:32 PM Subject: Service Pack 4 Hello all, We are going to apply Service Pack 4 to all of our Exchange Servers this weekend. Has anyone had any issues after applying the Service Pack?? Thank you all in advance Raj Grewal, MCSE, CNE5, CNA4.11, Network+ Network Analyst Playboy Enterprises, Inc. (312) 751-8000 _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.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: third party client can't send email to external address!?
From the little bit below, no error message, I'd guess your Exchange IMS is set to not relay. - Original Message - From: Jeremy [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, September 05, 2001 2:56 PM Subject: third party client can't send email to external address!? Hi, We have an Exchange 5.5 and Microsoft Outlook as a client. We have a couple of users that uses Purchasing Net on their PC . This software has the ability to send out an email directly to our exchange server , then our email server should take care of the rest. It works internally ,but externally it doesn't . _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.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: First Exchange Server
There's more to it than that. Check Technet for the article called how to remove the first exchange server in a site. - Original Message - From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, September 05, 2001 2:17 PM Subject: First Exchange Server We had an old ALR server that we installed exchange on for testing a year ago. Subsequently, we got a newer server after we decided to go with exchange. We then took down that old server and now its been problems ever since. After some research we found something about the first server being the Key Management server. Something like the FSMO DC in win2k. Replication doesn't take place effectively now and we can't remove that server from the site. Any suggestions? _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.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: Win2k Server Password recovery!
I think you better call PSS on this one. - Original Message - From: Anthony L. Sollars [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, September 05, 2001 5:48 PM Subject: Win2k Server Password recovery! I have a win2k SP2 that I migrated from an NT4 domain to an AD domain today, now when I try and logon onto either domain I get an error stating that the computer accoutn in the primary domain is either corrupt or the password is incorrect. When I first logon to the AD domain and I have to change my password it says I do not have permission to change the password. 10 other machines have been successfully migrated, but his one server is being a pain. Now I cannpt even logon to the machine AT ALL. Somehow even the local admins password has been corrupted. Any help is appreciated ALso any pointers on forcefully resetting the admin password on the box. Anthony L. Sollars Sightward (Formerly Applied Inference) System/Network Administrator (425) 688-9921 - Voice (425) 241-6562 - Cell (425) 467-1006 - Fax [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.sightward.com When I was a child, I spake as a child, I understood as a child, I thought as a child: but when I became a man, I put away childish things. - Corinthians I 13:11 _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.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: The Internet Mail Service requires DNS domain name...............
it requires a hostname AND a domain name in the two separate boxes. It will also require a DNS server. - Original Message - From: Van Huissteden, Adriaan [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, September 05, 2001 10:26 PM Subject: The Internet Mail Service requires DNS domain name... Hi, I am trying to add and Internet Main Connection, but I am getting the following message: The Internet Mail Service requires DNS domain name to be configured on 'Servername'. To configure the domain name, use the network icon in the control panel on 'servername', or select another server? What is going on? It all looks ok? Thanks Adriaan Van Huissteden Network Administrator Connect Credit Union Phone: (03) 6233 0660 _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.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: MTA Problems with Exchange 5.5 sp4
SP4 modified the schema of the databases. You did make a backup before upgrading to SP4, right? - Original Message - From: Nizar El-Assaad [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, September 06, 2001 12:04 PM Subject: RE: MTA Problems with Exchange 5.5 sp4 Thank you Serdar for the reply, and yes both sides are at sp4. Regarding reverting back to sp3, does it actually work to restore on sp3 whereas the latest backup was made after the upgrade to sp4? According to MS PSS, you should install the same service packs before restoring. Best Regards Nizar El-Assaad -Original Message- From: Soysal, Serdar [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, September 06, 2001 7:29 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: MTA Problems with Exchange 5.5 sp4 Did you upgrade both sides to SP4? Did you make any other changes after the SP4 upgrade? As far as falling back to SP3, I'm afraid you'll have to restore from backup. Exchange won't allow you to reinstall SP3 on top of SP4 or uninstall SP4. S/ -Original Message- From: Nizar El-Assaad [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, September 06, 2001 12:20 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: MTA Problems with Exchange 5.5 sp4 Already did. I even tried to change it and assign a new port on both sides. There is no use. Best Regards Nizar El-Assaad -Original Message- From: Soysal, Serdar [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, September 06, 2001 7:16 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: MTA Problems with Exchange 5.5 sp4 I'm assuming that the MTA static port assignment was done through a registry change. Verify that it's still there. SP4 may have overwritten it. S -Original Message- From: Nizar El-Assaad [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, September 06, 2001 10:57 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: MTA Problems with Exchange 5.5 sp4 Hello all I have two Exchange 5.5 sites with one server in each site (Windows NT Server 4.0/sp6a, Exchange 5.5/sp3 on both servers). I am using Exchange behind Proxy 2.0 in one site, and in order to make inter-site communication possible, I had to assign a fixed TCP port for the MTA (I am using port 6000). It was working fine, until I upgraded from sp3 to sp4. Since then, messages are stuck in the MTA queue, and I get error messages every 10 minutes that say: An RPC communications error occurred. Unable to bind over RPC. Locality Table (LTAB) index: 4, NT/MTA error code: 1753. Comms error 1753, Bind error 0, Remote Server Name TOM [MAIN BASE 1 500 %10] (14) I had this same problem in the first place (with Exchange sp3) before I assigned a static TCP port for the MTA (because of MS Proxy), and the solution was to assign this static port. Is there a way to fix this problem? And if not, can I revert back to sp3? Best Regards Nizar El-Assaad _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.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: x400 connector?
That's not an error. That's nothing more than an encapsulated address. You're gonna have to get more specific here. - Original Message - From: Jim [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, September 06, 2001 11:55 AM Subject: RE: x400 connector? This is the error(or encapsulated addresses ) which supposed not to show on recipient side. IMCEAEX [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] --- [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: What receipt? You still haven't posted the errors. http://www.ultratech-llc.com/Personal/Files/?File=~MoreInfo.TXT -Michèle Immigration site: http://LadySun1969.tripod.com Our new 2001 Miata: http://members.cardomain.com/bpituley Tiggercam: http://www.tiggercam.co.uk - WARNING: The consumption of alcohol may lead you to believe you are invisible. - -Original Message- From: Jim [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, September 06, 2001 12:50 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: x400 connector? Suppose no encapsulated addresses shown in the receipt. Why? --- [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: and what are the errors? Those are just encapsulated addresses down there, not error messages. -Michèle Immigration site: http://LadySun1969.tripod.com Our new 2001 Miata: http://members.cardomain.com/bpituley Tiggercam: http://www.tiggercam.co.uk - FOR GREAT JUSTICE! - -Original Message- From: Soysal, Serdar [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, September 06, 2001 12:36 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: x400 connector? Ummm No psychics here. When do you get these errors? Are these in the event log? NDR? Pop-up window? S. -Original Message- From: Jim [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, September 06, 2001 12:33 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: x400 connector? We use Exchange server 5.5 as an internal mail system and Seattle Lab mail as our external email. Our users use Outlook98 as clients. Somehow we always get some errors: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; But if we upgrade to Outlook 2000, it will be fine. Please help. Thanks! __ Do You Yahoo!? Get email alerts NEW webcam video instant messaging with Yahoo! Messenger http://im.yahoo.com _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.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!? Get email alerts NEW webcam video instant messaging with Yahoo! Messenger http://im.yahoo.com _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] __ Do You Yahoo!? Get email alerts NEW webcam video instant messaging with Yahoo! Messenger http://im.yahoo.com _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp
Re: Secure Email over the Internet between to Exchange Servers (5 .5)
There is an article on Technet on how to set it up. Search on iis ims key -Original Message- From: James Barry [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, September 06, 2001 3:15 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Re: Secure Email over the Internet between to Exchange Servers (5.5) They don't want to spend the money and they don't need full access to all resources. I am getting some sporadic info that it can be done with the Internet Mail Service but IIS has to be installed and a Key has to be generated for each server. I am looking for some concrete info on how it can be done or if it can. _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.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: Secure Email over the Internet between to Exchange Servers (5 .5)
Fast, cheap, easy Pick two - Original Message - From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, September 06, 2001 3:03 PM Subject: RE: Secure Email over the Internet between to Exchange Servers (5 .5) Since they're only lawyers, they probably don't have a lot of money to spend. =) On Thu, 6 Sep 2001 15:47:13 -0400 , Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: So they want it free, and the want it quick. Let me guess. It has to be really really GOOD, too? I would search the net for a freeware PGP prgrams. Something might fit. -Jim -Original Message- From: James Barry [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, September 06, 2001 3:15 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Re: Secure Email over the Internet between to Exchange Servers (5.5) They don't want to spend the money and they don't need full access to all resources. I am getting some sporadic info that it can be done with the Internet Mail Service but IIS has to be installed and a Key has to be generated for each server. I am looking for some concrete info on how it can be done or if it can. _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.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: Private IS corruption...
Yeah, PSS is a good call at this point. FYI: -1018 errors are always hardware errors in the disk subsystem. - Original Message - From: Benjamin Winzenz [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, September 06, 2001 2:49 PM Subject: RE: Private IS corruption... How about calling PSS? They are supposed to be pretty good at fixing problemsIt may or may not produce a quicker result, but I'm betting you would be able to get some first-hand instruction on using some of the repair utilities. Ben Winzenz, MCSE Network/Systems Administrator Peregrine Systems, Inc. -Original Message- From: Robert Ayers [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, September 06, 2001 11:03 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Private IS corruption... Hi everybody! My Private Information Store was corrupted by a RAID array problem. I have repaired the drive array, and restored my last backup of the IS, however, the IS corruption persists. I get -1018 errors, and Outlook clients have periodic troubles moving or deleting messages. I have tried ESEUTIL and ISINTEG, but they fail with JetDatabase read/verify errors. I have tried everything to repair this IS and admit defeat. I have one idea on how to work around this and would like your input/opinion of this idea. I propose to: 1) set up a temporary Exchange server in the same site 2) move the mailboxes to the new server 3) delete the corrupted PRIV.EDB from the original server and let the system create a fresh one 4) move the Mailboxes back to the original server/fresh IS 5) take down the temporary server Do you think that will work? and/or can you think of anything else to do? Thanks, Rob Ayers _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.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: Send mail to multiple distribution lists
I'm assuming the CR represents an internet user, the mail going out the IMS. If so, this is by design and expected. - Original Message - From: Phillip Yan [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, September 06, 2001 6:28 PM Subject: Send mail to multiple distribution lists Exchange 5.5 SP4 A custom recipient is a member of DL1 and a member of DL2. If I send a message to both DL1 and DL2, the custom recipient would receive two copies of the message. Other non-custom recipients (Mailboxes) just receive one copy. I want the custom recipient being able to receive only one copy of message when sending to multiple distribution lists. Is there a fix for this? Thanks, Phillip Yan PMC-Sierra _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: How Do I Turn on outt of ofice on other users mail box!
That'll work just fine. - Original Message - From: Atkinson, Daniel [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, September 07, 2001 3:28 AM Subject: RE: How Do I Turn on outt of ofice on other users mail box! Subject: RE: How Do I Turn on outt of ofice on other users mail box! log in to their mailbox on OWA and set it? dan. _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.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: inbound message crashed IMC and Information Store
Depends on why the message crashed the store (the content conversion engine is in the store, not the IMS). It is not outside the realm of possibility that you have unwittingly come across an untested MIME format. As Lore said, find the message itself and parse through it. The MIME RFCs are 1521 and 1522. - Original Message - From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, September 07, 2001 11:40 AM Subject: RE: inbound message crashed IMC and Information Store Thanks everyone for your help. My question really is: can I prevent this in the future? Rebooting the box took care of the problem, so I don't see any need to call PSS. But I don't like the idea that a bad message can take the IMS down. Any suggestions? -Original Message- From: Hunter, Lori [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, September 07, 2001 8:18 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: inbound message crashed IMC and Information Store I have SP4 and this happens here occasionally. The event log gives you the exact file name of the offending message. Search for it, delete it or move it, start the IMS, you're back in business. You can open the message in notepad if you really want to make sure it gets delivered. Or you can blindly whack it away if you've just gotten off a boat, had a few beers, and really just want to go home. Guess which method I use. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, September 06, 2001 6:50 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: inbound message crashed IMC and Information Store Exchange 5.5 SP4, NT 4 SP6a Today the IMS on one of our Exchange servers puked. It seems that a malformed incoming message caused the IMS to die, in turn causing the Information Store to die. My users started having problems connecting to the server, so I looked in the event log and found the following errors (see below). Rebooting the box took care of the problem and now it's happy, but I'd like to get a better idea of what happened - especially because this exact scenario happened on another of our Exchange servers about a week ago. Article #Q293288 in the MS KB seems to describe exactly what happened. But, article #Q278320 indicates that this problem was fixed in SP4, which we have. (I also checked the version #'s for the pertinent files, and they are definitely all at SP4.) I've poked around in various newsgroups and the knowledge base and haven't found anything helpful. I realise that this isn't much information to go on. If anyone has any insights, I would be very grateful. Or, if you happen to know which utility is used to look at messages in the BAD folder, that would be great. -Kirsten Petersen Event ID: 4182 An error was returned from the messaging software the Internet Mail Service uses to process messages on the Microsoft Exchange Server. As a result, the message in spool file PKLPP9YR will be retried when the server is restarted. Event ID: 3039 The error 0x80040115 was encountered while trying to communicate with the message store. An attempt to refresh the connection will be made. If not successful, the service will be shut down. Event ID: 4116 An error was returned from the messaging software the Internet Mail Service uses to process messages on the Microsoft Exchange Server. It is possible that the piece of mail being processed at the time will be returned to the sender as a failed delivery instead of being delivered. The message will be moved to the BAD folder, if possible, and the error is not a temporary error. Otherwise it will be retried when the service is restarted. Use the appropriate utilities found in the SUPPORT directory of your Exchange CD to view and manipulate messages that have been moved to the BAD folder. Event ID: 4094 The error 0x8004011d occurred while trying to refresh network connections to the Information Store. The Internet Mail Service is being shut down. Event ID: 4102 A serious error has occurred while trying to send mail into the Exchange Information Store. The Internet Mail Service is being shut down. Event ID: 270 A permanent error has occurred with Entity blah blah blah...=MICROSOFT PRIVATE MDB. Entity is a Message Object is a Normal Priority Message. Object: 0600015E. Message ID: blah blah blah ... Content length: 4767, External Trace information (first 100 bytes) = blah blah blah..., PDU dump reference 250 [MTA SUBMIT 17 74] (14) Event ID: 4182 An error was returned from the messaging software the Internet Mail Service uses to process messages on the Microsoft Exchange Server. As a result, the message in spool file PKLPP9YS will be retried when the server is restarted. Event ID: 3039 The error 0x80040115 was encountered while trying to communicate with the message store. An attempt to refresh the connection will be made. If not successful, the service will be shut down.
Re: third party client can't send email to external address!?
Did you add the IP as allowed or restricted? There is a whitepaper on MS' site on the IMS and relaying. - Original Message - From: Jeremy [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, September 07, 2001 1:05 PM Subject: RE: third party client can't send email to external address!? We have an Exchange 5.5 and Microsoft Outlook as a client. We have a couple of users that uses Purchasing Net on their PC . This software has the ability to send out an email directly to our exchange server , then our email server should take care of the rest. It works internally ,but externally it doesn't . One suggested that to do Relaying which I did ,On the routing restritions page, which is located under the routing tab of the IMS properties page, I added the IP addresses of the client PC and server that has the third party software thats trying to send outside mail. . Stop and re-start Message Transfer Agent and Internet Mail Service. Tested it, now we are getting an error RELAYING is Prohibited on the log file on the client (Purchasing Net Server). I hope I provided enough info. Unfortunately I have to get this resolved without spending any companies money. to continue a thread please summarize the thought again or call p s s I know it sucks but hey WTH --steve I'm kind a desperate. Can somebody help me get this resolved. _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.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: CDO 1.2.1 memory leak, Using GetNext()
You'd be best served by reporting this to Microsoft via PSS.
- Original Message -
From: Will Somervell [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, September 07, 2001 2:23 PM
Subject: CDO 1.2.1 memory leak, Using GetNext()
I can't eliminate a memory leak : While looping through the Inbox
Message list using GetFirst() .. GetNext()
I'm developing a Visual C++ application on NT Workstation 4.0
I tried using Purify to help debug this: it showed about a 500 byte leak
in GetNext() for every extra message beyond the 1st one (i.e., I get no
leaks when there's only 1 message in the inbox, but there seems to be a
leak for every call to GetNext() ). The Task manager indicates a growth
of about 4K for every pass through the Inbox.
This is not acceptable for our operating conditions.
I have a while (messages) loop embedded in a forever loop. I sleep a
user-specified delay between every loop cycle.
My purpose for the forever loop is to continuously monitor the inbox for
messages which come from various sources at random times.
I also tried the code from Knowledge base article Q171429 with the same
result. They use essentially the same logic, except they don't have the
forever loop. I close all the CDO objects, but do not logout or
disconnect the MAPI session each pass. Maybe I should do this
periodically?
==
A modified excerpt from the KB Q171429 article:
for (;;)
{
// Create pointer to the Inbox Folder
FolderPtr pFolder = pSession-Inbox;
// Create pointer to the Messages Collection
MessagesPtr pMessages = pFolder-Messages;
// Acquire pointer and set properties of the MessageFilter
MessageFilterPtr pMsgFilt = pMessages-Filter;
pMsgFilt-Unread = (bool)TRUE;
// Get the first Message object after filter is applied
pAMessage = pMessages-GetFirst();
// Process contents of Folder
while (pAMessage != NULL)
{
// Display Properties
wprintf (L%s::,
(const unsigned short *)
pAMessage-Subject.bstrVal);
// Get next Message
pAMessage = NULL;
pAMessage = pMessages-GetNext();
}
cout endl flush;
// Destroy the reference to the Inbox, Messages Collection,
// MessageFilter, and Message then reaquire them
pFolder = NULL;
pMessages = NULL;
pMsgFilt = NULL;
pAMessage = NULL;
cout Iteration # ++i endl flush;
Sleep (5000);
}
==
Any ideas or insights would be greatly appreciated.
Also, what's the syntax to set the TimeLast property in a MessageFilter,
in C++? I don't believe this works:
pMsgFltr-TimeLast = 12/25/00;
Thanks for any help,
Will
_
List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp
To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
_
List posting FAQ: http://www.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: Isinteg
You have to tell it which tests to run. And if you don't know, then don't run it. - Original Message - From: Smith Thomas Contr 911 SPTG/SC [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, September 07, 2001 2:09 PM Subject: Isinteg Hello I would like to know what is the correct way of performing the Exchange utility Isinteg. I have tried to run it and it will go back to the option switches.I wanted to check the Information store for errors. I am running Exchange 5.5.. The command i use is C:\EXCHSRVR\BIN isinteg -pri -fix. 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: Forcing users to use only our exchange server for mail
Well, pop mail doesn't come in anywhere except the client. The client sends using SMTP and does this via relaying. So you're saying you can scan mail that is being bounced off the external IMS interface? - Original Message - From: Monahon, Gregory [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, September 07, 2001 3:36 PM Subject: RE: Forcing users to use only our exchange server for mail Okay, different management style here. We are scanning all our pop mail coming into the organization for viruses and spam content so it's not really a concern. We prefer to foster a healthy working relationship with our customers. We are winning our POP battle through attrition and the method I described below. IT is also gaining the respect of our users, something that was missing before the new regime was installed and changed the process. It depends what important to you, and maybe how big ones ego is. Cheers. -Original Message- From: Soysal, Serdar [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, September 07, 2001 3:16 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Forcing users to use only our exchange server for mail I disagree. When your users are using external POP3 mail that's not under your control, it voids all of your virus/content filtering/etc. etc. protection you've employed. He's exactly right on what he wants to do. S. -Original Message- From: Monahon, Gregory [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, September 07, 2001 12:11 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Forcing users to use only our exchange server for mail You may be going about it wrong. Instead of forcing users off POP and pissing off the user base, aggressively promote the advantages of Exchange combined with the Outlook for scheduling, calendaring, list services, OWA, backups etc. As the company and managers begin to realize the benefits of these value added solutions, you may begin to see some changes. When the POP users dwindle down to a cranky few, then you pull out the baseball bat. Revolutions usually begin quietly. Greg -Original Message- From: Bob Sadler [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, September 07, 2001 11:53 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Forcing users to use only our exchange server for mail And if you block POP3 in your firewall, it means your employees or administration can't pick up their email at home. Bob -Original Message- From: Waters, Jeff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, September 07, 2001 10:34 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Forcing users to use only our exchange server for mail But that is only about 25% of the battle, you also need to stop port 80 email as well, and there are only about a million of those. Jeffrey R. Waters Senior Systems Engineer Information Technology, Hanover County -Original Message- From: Erik Sojka [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, September 07, 2001 11:48 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Forcing users to use only our exchange server for mail Firewall? Block the POP3 port. -Original Message- From: James Casstevens [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, September 07, 2001 11:44 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Forcing users to use only our exchange server for mail Is there a way to prevent users from using (for example) AOL or any other 3rd party POP3 mail clients. We want to force our users to use only our exchange server for their e-mail. Can this be done? _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe:
Re: Forcing users to use only our exchange server for mail
How do you enforce scanning the desktops (I assume you mean something is loading like CA InoculateIt)? What's to keep Joe User from disabling it? - Original Message - From: Monahon, Gregory [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, September 07, 2001 4:14 PM Subject: RE: Forcing users to use only our exchange server for mail We scan incoming and outgoing and the IMCs. We scan the desktops, servers, and the mail store. We'll catch it one way or the other. -Original Message- From: Daniel Chenault [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, September 07, 2001 4:54 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Re: Forcing users to use only our exchange server for mail Well, pop mail doesn't come in anywhere except the client. The client sends using SMTP and does this via relaying. So you're saying you can scan mail that is being bounced off the external IMS interface? - Original Message - From: Monahon, Gregory [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, September 07, 2001 3:36 PM Subject: RE: Forcing users to use only our exchange server for mail Okay, different management style here. We are scanning all our pop mail coming into the organization for viruses and spam content so it's not really a concern. We prefer to foster a healthy working relationship with our customers. We are winning our POP battle through attrition and the method I described below. IT is also gaining the respect of our users, something that was missing before the new regime was installed and changed the process. It depends what important to you, and maybe how big ones ego is. Cheers. -Original Message- From: Soysal, Serdar [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, September 07, 2001 3:16 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Forcing users to use only our exchange server for mail I disagree. When your users are using external POP3 mail that's not under your control, it voids all of your virus/content filtering/etc. etc. protection you've employed. He's exactly right on what he wants to do. S. -Original Message- From: Monahon, Gregory [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, September 07, 2001 12:11 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Forcing users to use only our exchange server for mail You may be going about it wrong. Instead of forcing users off POP and pissing off the user base, aggressively promote the advantages of Exchange combined with the Outlook for scheduling, calendaring, list services, OWA, backups etc. As the company and managers begin to realize the benefits of these value added solutions, you may begin to see some changes. When the POP users dwindle down to a cranky few, then you pull out the baseball bat. Revolutions usually begin quietly. Greg -Original Message- From: Bob Sadler [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, September 07, 2001 11:53 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Forcing users to use only our exchange server for mail And if you block POP3 in your firewall, it means your employees or administration can't pick up their email at home. Bob -Original Message- From: Waters, Jeff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, September 07, 2001 10:34 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Forcing users to use only our exchange server for mail But that is only about 25% of the battle, you also need to stop port 80 email as well, and there are only about a million of those. Jeffrey R. Waters Senior Systems Engineer Information Technology, Hanover County -Original Message- From: Erik Sojka [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, September 07, 2001 11:48 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Forcing users to use only our exchange server for mail Firewall? Block the POP3 port. -Original Message- From: James Casstevens [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, September 07, 2001 11:44 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Forcing users to use only our exchange server for mail Is there a way to prevent users from using (for example) AOL or any other 3rd party POP3 mail clients. We want to force our users to use only our exchange server for their e-mail. Can this be done? _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange
Re: Forcing users to use only our exchange server for mail
I'm running InoculateIT here and at work. It doesn't take much to figure out that right-clicking an object generally brings up a menu. Right-clicking InoculateIT does so and at the bottom it says Exit. Users aren't necessarily stupid ignoramuses; they usually know enough to get around and enough to get themselves in trouble yet not enough to get themselves out of trouble. - Original Message - From: Don Ely [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, September 07, 2001 4:43 PM Subject: RE: Forcing users to use only our exchange server for mail What?!?!?! A user might actually be smart enough to do that? ;o) Golly gee... -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Daniel Chenault Sent: Friday, September 07, 2001 2:38 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Re: Forcing users to use only our exchange server for mail How do you enforce scanning the desktops (I assume you mean something is loading like CA InoculateIt)? What's to keep Joe User from disabling it? - Original Message - From: Monahon, Gregory [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, September 07, 2001 4:14 PM Subject: RE: Forcing users to use only our exchange server for mail We scan incoming and outgoing and the IMCs. We scan the desktops, servers, and the mail store. We'll catch it one way or the other. -Original Message- From: Daniel Chenault [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, September 07, 2001 4:54 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Re: Forcing users to use only our exchange server for mail Well, pop mail doesn't come in anywhere except the client. The client sends using SMTP and does this via relaying. So you're saying you can scan mail that is being bounced off the external IMS interface? - Original Message - From: Monahon, Gregory [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, September 07, 2001 3:36 PM Subject: RE: Forcing users to use only our exchange server for mail Okay, different management style here. We are scanning all our pop mail coming into the organization for viruses and spam content so it's not really a concern. We prefer to foster a healthy working relationship with our customers. We are winning our POP battle through attrition and the method I described below. IT is also gaining the respect of our users, something that was missing before the new regime was installed and changed the process. It depends what important to you, and maybe how big ones ego is. Cheers. -Original Message- From: Soysal, Serdar [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, September 07, 2001 3:16 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Forcing users to use only our exchange server for mail I disagree. When your users are using external POP3 mail that's not under your control, it voids all of your virus/content filtering/etc. etc. protection you've employed. He's exactly right on what he wants to do. S. -Original Message- From: Monahon, Gregory [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, September 07, 2001 12:11 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Forcing users to use only our exchange server for mail You may be going about it wrong. Instead of forcing users off POP and pissing off the user base, aggressively promote the advantages of Exchange combined with the Outlook for scheduling, calendaring, list services, OWA, backups etc. As the company and managers begin to realize the benefits of these value added solutions, you may begin to see some changes. When the POP users dwindle down to a cranky few, then you pull out the baseball bat. Revolutions usually begin quietly. Greg -Original Message- From: Bob Sadler [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, September 07, 2001 11:53 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Forcing users to use only our exchange server for mail And if you block POP3 in your firewall, it means your employees or administration can't pick up their email at home. Bob -Original Message- From: Waters, Jeff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, September 07, 2001 10:34 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Forcing users to use only our exchange server for mail But that is only about 25% of the battle, you also need to stop port 80 email as well, and there are only about a million of those. Jeffrey R. Waters Senior Systems Engineer Information Technology, Hanover County -Original Message- From: Erik Sojka [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, September 07, 2001 11:48 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Forcing users to use only our exchange server for mail
Re: Forcing users to use only our exchange server for mail
Cool. - Original Message - From: Anthony L. Sollars [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, September 07, 2001 4:49 PM Subject: RE: Forcing users to use only our exchange server for mail Norton ANtivirus Corporate Edition Prevents the users from disabling it, they can't even turn off the service. If they to change my forced settings or disabling the antivirus service they are prompted for an administrative password. MUHAHAHHAHAHANAV has worked flawlessly from day one and I have never had to hardly touch it. -Original Message- From: Daniel Chenault [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, September 07, 2001 2:38 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Re: Forcing users to use only our exchange server for mail How do you enforce scanning the desktops (I assume you mean something is loading like CA InoculateIt)? What's to keep Joe User from disabling it? - Original Message - From: Monahon, Gregory [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, September 07, 2001 4:14 PM Subject: RE: Forcing users to use only our exchange server for mail We scan incoming and outgoing and the IMCs. We scan the desktops, servers, and the mail store. We'll catch it one way or the other. -Original Message- From: Daniel Chenault [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, September 07, 2001 4:54 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Re: Forcing users to use only our exchange server for mail Well, pop mail doesn't come in anywhere except the client. The client sends using SMTP and does this via relaying. So you're saying you can scan mail that is being bounced off the external IMS interface? - Original Message - From: Monahon, Gregory [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, September 07, 2001 3:36 PM Subject: RE: Forcing users to use only our exchange server for mail Okay, different management style here. We are scanning all our pop mail coming into the organization for viruses and spam content so it's not really a concern. We prefer to foster a healthy working relationship with our customers. We are winning our POP battle through attrition and the method I described below. IT is also gaining the respect of our users, something that was missing before the new regime was installed and changed the process. It depends what important to you, and maybe how big ones ego is. Cheers. -Original Message- From: Soysal, Serdar [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, September 07, 2001 3:16 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Forcing users to use only our exchange server for mail I disagree. When your users are using external POP3 mail that's not under your control, it voids all of your virus/content filtering/etc. etc. protection you've employed. He's exactly right on what he wants to do. S. -Original Message- From: Monahon, Gregory [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, September 07, 2001 12:11 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Forcing users to use only our exchange server for mail You may be going about it wrong. Instead of forcing users off POP and pissing off the user base, aggressively promote the advantages of Exchange combined with the Outlook for scheduling, calendaring, list services, OWA, backups etc. As the company and managers begin to realize the benefits of these value added solutions, you may begin to see some changes. When the POP users dwindle down to a cranky few, then you pull out the baseball bat. Revolutions usually begin quietly. Greg -Original Message- From: Bob Sadler [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, September 07, 2001 11:53 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Forcing users to use only our exchange server for mail And if you block POP3 in your firewall, it means your employees or administration can't pick up their email at home. Bob -Original Message- From: Waters, Jeff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, September 07, 2001 10:34 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Forcing users to use only our exchange server for mail But that is only about 25% of the battle, you also need to stop port 80 email as well, and there are only about a million of those. Jeffrey R. Waters Senior Systems Engineer Information Technology, Hanover County -Original Message- From: Erik Sojka [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, September 07, 2001 11:48 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Forcing users to use only our exchange server for mail Firewall? Block the POP3 port. -Original Message- From: James Casstevens [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday
Re: Send to no more than 25 at a time...
From my perspective, you're making this real hard. Inform the students that they can use any mailbox they want, but as far as the university is concerned official communications from staff and faculty are delivered to their Exchange mailbox. It is the student's responsibility to keep up with this information. Problem solved. If they complain let them know that this is how the real world works. Adjust. - Original Message - From: Greg Eytcheson [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, September 10, 2001 2:41 PM Subject: Send to no more than 25 at a time... Exchange 2000 SP1, Windows 2000 SP2, GFI Mail Essentials 2000 (latest build), Dell PowerEdge 2550, dual P-III 733, 2GB RAM. Dear Exchange Guru's and Goddesses: Q: Is there a way to get Exchange to limit the number of recipients per message for a specific remote domain? More specifically, break a message with more than x number of recipients into multiple messages. If so, how? Explanation: This year, I allowed students to choose whether to use their own email address (mail enabled account) or an account on our system (mailbox enabled account). All students, regardless of their choice of accounts, are added to the All Students group, allowing the staff to send announcements as necessary. This works great except for one thing: messages sent to All Students always get an NDR with every Hotmail user listed. So, I ask Hotmail support why that might be happening and this is their reply: I understand how inconvenient it is on your part but I would like to inform you that we have only a limit of 25 recipients per messages. Great. If you try to include more than 25 Hotmail recipients in a single message, Hotmail will reject the entire message. So, I need a way to have Exchange break up the message into multiple messages with only 25 recipients per each when addressed to a Hotmail address. Any ideas? Other solutions? My only idea at this time is to create several Hotmail Users #x type groups, and then assign up to 25 Hotmail users per group to each of these groups, and add these groups to the All Students group. This is way more hands-on than I want to get on this; the rest of the process is completely automated. If I am to be FAQ'ed here, please point to a specific page. I have searched the FAQ, Slipstick, groups.google.com, northernlight.com, etc. and have found nothing that relates to this problem. Thank you, Greg _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.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: When Does Microsoft Recommend Defrag of Exchange IS?
There is no such Microsoft recommendation. The decision as to when to do an offline defrag is purely the customer's decision. - Original Message - From: Derrick Stevenson [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, September 10, 2001 1:23 PM Subject: When Does Microsoft Recommend Defrag of Exchange IS? Does anyone know the White Space:Data Ratio @ which Microsoft recommends running Defrag (eseutil /d) on your Exchange 5.5 Enterprise Server? Also, do you have a TechNet/KB article number that supports that figure? I have a 21GB Information Store which includes 2GB of white space on a 35GB RAID 5 partition, and would like to convince my manager that a defrag CAN POSITIVELY WAIT 'til our next scheduled maintenance period which is 3 months away. Thx in Advance! -Derrick __ Do You Yahoo!? Get email alerts NEW webcam video instant messaging with Yahoo! Messenger http://im.yahoo.com _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Information store limited to 16 GB ???
I know some Portuguese... but my passport is out of date. Eu sei algum portuguese... mas meu passport realiza-se fora da data. - Original Message - From: Great Cthulhu Jones [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, September 10, 2001 9:34 PM Subject: RE: Information store limited to 16 GB ??? DUDE! This guy's in BRAZIL! You don't want to TS in. You want him to fly you down there. And pay you in American dollars. (:= Great Cthulhu Jones CEO, R'lyeh Consulting http://www.zzzptm.com/cthulhu http://www.bad-managers.com -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Laercio_SantosJr@Intervale Sent: Monday, September 10, 2001 8:53 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Re: Information store limited to 16 GB ??? 17Gb and I'm not running enterprise yet... Can I install it over the current instalation of the standard version ? I can call you if you don't mind and try to explain you the problem... Laercio Santos Jr [EMAIL PROTECTED] - Original Message - From: Kevin Miller [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, September 10, 2001 10:50 PM Subject: RE: Information store limited to 16 GB ??? Is that how much is on the Drive ??? Or how big the priv.ebd file is when the store is not mounted? If it is 17 megs then you are already running enterprise and don't need to do anything. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Laercio_SantosJr@Intervale Sent: Monday, September 10, 2001 9:43 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Re: Information store limited to 16 GB ??? 17.777Mb big and there is 4Gb free (but I can free more 17Gb deleting my just made backup) I've just found my Exchange Server 5.5 Enterprise... Is there any considerations about updating an existing instalation ?? Laercio Santos Jr - Original Message - From: Martin Blackstone [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, September 10, 2001 10:29 PM Subject: RE: Information store limited to 16 GB ??? How big is it now? How much white space do you have in the IS? How much spare HD space do you have on the server? -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Kevin Miller Sent: Monday, September 10, 2001 6:27 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Information store limited to 16 GB ??? Also before hand check the application logs to see if there is any white space there to recover. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Kevin Miller Sent: Monday, September 10, 2001 9:25 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Information store limited to 16 GB ??? If you really really really HAVE To yes you can. MAKE SURE you have a good backup. Run Eseutil /d. before you run this I would read up some on doing this. If you have never done this before it might be worth a few hundred dollars to hire a consultant. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Laercio_SantosJr@Intervale Sent: Monday, September 10, 2001 9:11 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Re: Information store limited to 16 GB ??? Can I compact it so I can get some time to install the enterprise edition ??? HELP ! TKS Laercio Santos Jr - Original Message - From: Andy David [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, September 10, 2001 8:56 PM Subject: RE: Information store limited to 16 GB ??? The standard has that limitation yes. (And prior to 5.5 , so did the Enterprise version) Don't ignore it. -Original Message- From: Laercio_SantosJr@Intervale [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, September 10, 2001 7:41 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Information store limited to 16 GB ??? Is there a limitation of the information store database size ??? Is it 16Gb ??? What happens when I ignore it ??? Do I burn in hell till the end of time ??? Laercio Santos Jr _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives:
RE: Analysis (was: Terrible disasters...)
I beg to differ with your narrow analysis. For the US, this is the first time since 1812 that the civilian population has been under attack. It is the first time since 1941 that the US has been overtly attacked in an obvious act of war (I fail to find any other words to describe the actions of this morning). For the world, we have witnessed that a relatively small group of individuals can hold the world at hostage; that is unparalled in all of human history. Wall Street is shut down as is the Exchange in London. Between those two exchanges are the vast bulk of the world's business dealings. Everything is shut down. Imagine that you, as in individual, just found that you cannot access your cash, your bank accounts and that your home has just collapsed. Yes, there has been speculation for years that such a thing could happen. It is no longer speculation; it is fact. I note that your employer is based in Massachusetts; it is not outside the realm of possibility that you have customers, friends, relatives involved in this massacre. I am, quite frankly, totally unable to understand how you could not be struck with horror and revulsion at what has happened to us as a people, as a nation and as a point of time. I will NOT join you in saying this is nothing but a demonstration of vulnerability; this was the cold-blooded, calculated murder of tens of thousands of civilians, non-combatants in whatever war these aggressors think they are fighting. At this moment (tomorrow I may feel calmer) I am of the opinion that anyone who voices such namby-pamby it's only... as you have below is an apologist who is, at the very least, emotionally aligned with the soon-to-be-corpses who perpetrated this monstrous crime. -Original Message- From: Benjamin Scott [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, September 11, 2001 10:16 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Analysis (was: Terrible disasters...) On Tue, 11 Sep 2001, John Allhiser wrote: If we step back a moment from the horrific events happening, we realize that the world has changed abruptly this morning. I hate to be callous, but the only thing that has changed is public perception. People have been pointing out how vulnerable a crowded city is to any kind of attack or disaster for decades. People have been pointing out how vulnerable the USA is to terrorist attack for at least twenty years. No analyst in this field would be surprised that this occurred. -- Ben Scott [EMAIL PROTECTED] | The opinions expressed in this message are those of the author and do | not | necessarily represent the views or policy of any other person, | entity or | organization. All information is provided without | warranty of any kind. | _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.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: Antivirus and Backups
brick-level backup is a bad idea. The throughput is bad no matter what you do. - Original Message - From: Barber Tom [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, September 12, 2001 8:02 AM Subject: Antivirus and Backups We're currently running NAV for Exchange 2.13 and I must say the product stinks. I have Exchange 5.5 on a W2K Advanced Server box. I'm trying to backup individual mailboxes using Backup Exec 8.5, with the Exchange add-on. Horrible throughput. Went to Symantec's unbelievably-unhelpful web site, where it was suggested I use MAPI mode only instead of VAPI/MAPI mode. I made the change to MAPI. I have now received an email which contains a virus. Looks as though MAPI doesn't work too well. Also, the backups have done better, but are still extremely slow. My question is - what is everyone else out there using for antivirus and/or backup? I know there are some other vendors out there...I'm looking for a good solution that includes auto-updates, allows me to use Backup Exec for individual mailboxes (at a decent speed), and actually WORKS! Any recommendations or advice would be appreciated. -Tom Barber Systems Manager Alfred State College _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.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: Changeing Exchange Service Account..Help!!!
There is an article on changing the service account. It is not supported on multi-server sites. I do know of persons who have done it in multi-server sites but it is problematic and may not work. I dont' have the article number handy, sorry. - Original Message - From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, September 11, 2001 7:50 PM Subject: Changeing Exchange Service Account..Help!!! Need help with the following... I have 28 sites under one ORG. Each site has a Site connector and Dir rep btwn us (Dallas) and the site. We (Dallas) are the hub for all mail. Locally I have 2 user server 2 bridgeheads and 2 gateways. I have a mixed mode environment (Exchange 5.5 and 2000). All Local server run on Win 2k with Exchange 5.5 and Exchange 2000. My question is... I need to change the service account on the servers. The domain the service account is running from needs to be brought down. Does anyone know a way to do this without uninstalling and reinstalling each box? We are not all in one domain... Each remote site is in its own domain with a 2 way trust. Each site connector is run by the service account as well. Any help would be much appreciated. Denise _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.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: MOSMWNMTK+Prophecy
Oh, ick. I was mildly giggling until I got to the part about Chris. Oh, ick... I REALLY didn't need that image! - Original Message - From: Great Cthulhu Jones [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, September 12, 2001 10:52 PM Subject: RE: MOSMWNMTK+Prophecy Let's see a photo of you all over your Exchange server like a donkey on a waffle. Bonus points if you're wearing a pink sundress with matching hat. Yet more bonus points if you send a pic of Chris Scharff wearing a pink sundress with matching hat. (:= -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Kevin Miller Sent: Wednesday, September 12, 2001 10:48 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: MOSMWNMTK+Prophecy Does he demand oral polishing?? I was thinking maybe more with very fine rags and some cleaners??? : -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Ed Crowley Sent: Wednesday, September 12, 2001 11:40 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: MOSMWNMTK+Prophecy I ain't no nephridium kisser. Ed Crowley MCSE+Internet MVP Tech Consultant Compaq Computer Corporation (soon to be HP) All your base are belong to us. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Kevin Miller Sent: Wednesday, September 12, 2001 8:34 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: MOSMWNMTK+Prophecy Maybe some tentacle polishing?? -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Great Cthulhu Jones Sent: Wednesday, September 12, 2001 11:15 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: MOSMWNMTK+Prophecy That reminds me. I need to update your MOSMWNMTK standings. I think you'll be pleasantly surprised. (:= -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Ed Crowley Sent: Wednesday, September 12, 2001 10:09 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: OT -- Nostradamus' prediction on WW3: And Kennedy and Lincoln both have seven letters. Ed Crowley MCSE+Internet MVP Tech Consultant Compaq Computer Corporation (soon to be HP) All your base are belong to us. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Bill Hankins Sent: Wednesday, September 12, 2001 1:24 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: OT -- Nostradamus' prediction on WW3: I'm sure many of you have seen this already, but I thought it was a little interesting. Nostradamus' prediction on WW3: In the year of the new century and nine months, From the sky will come a great King of Terror... The sky will burn at forty-five degrees. Fire approaches the great new city... In the city of York there will be a great collapse, 2 twin brothers torn apart by chaos while the fortress falls the great leader will succumb third big war will begin when the big city is burning - NOSTRADAMUS He said this will be bigger than the previous two. 2001 is the first year of the new century and this is the 9th month. New York is located at the 41st degree Latitude. Bill Hankins Senior Network Engineer iCorps Technologies _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.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!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ Do You Yahoo!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.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:
Re: [FBC] NY American Red Cross wish list
Be aware that Microsoft has already addressed some of the list: http://www.microsoft.com/presspass/press/2001/sep01/09-12AttackDonationPr.as p - Original Message - From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, September 13, 2001 10:45 AM Subject: FW: [FBC] NY American Red Cross wish list Just got this from my local geek list. Sure we can all come up with something... -Original Message- Subject: [FBC] NY American Red Cross wish list Following is the list of equipment that the Red Cross needs for its field workers and expanded Emergency Operations Centers. They also need certified Citrix engineers. 40 IBM computers and laptops (with NICs) Monitors (With Desktops) ANY STORAGE SOLUTIONS 25 10/100 hubs (8+ Ports) 100 Cat5 cables (All lengths) 50 Power strips Any IBM-compatible memory Any 3Com Wireless NIC cards and LAN products 30 Desktop-size UPSs 15 Laserjet printers (HP 1100 or faster) and printer supplies 20 External Zip Drives and Disks Any diskettes and R/W CDs 5 External CD burners 5 Duplex Document Scanners 25 Extension Cords Any Colored tie wraps Any Velcro cable wraps 50 Citrix client licenses 12 PCMCIA LAN cards for IBM P20 Thinkpads (preferably 3Com) (In addition to those in the new PCs) 50 MS-Exchange CALs 35 MS-SQL CALs 50 MS-Office Professional licenses 15 PC Anywhere licenses DSL Lines PDAs with wireless capacity AND SERVICE NEXTEL cell phones and service If you can help, please do at least one of the following: - contact Dorothy Webman, Resource Coordinator in NY, at 917.549.7037 or [EMAIL PROTECTED] - contact Joe Leo, Asst IT Director for the Red Cross, at 212-875-2409 or [EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Exchange 5.5 SP4, Event ID:3038 -IMC Warning in Event Log
Disable your AV and contact the AV company. - Original Message - From: RSangha [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, September 13, 2001 5:34 PM Subject: Exchange 5.5 SP4, Event ID:3038 -IMC Warning in Event Log Here's the entire error message: An attempt to remove processed messages from the outbound store queue has failed. The removal will be retried later. If the messages are not removed before the service is shut down, the mail will be resent at service startup causing duplicate mail. Please help figure out why this is showing up. How to fix it. _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: TCO - Linux vs. Exchange
Depending on the scope of the engagement, you might could get me for a little less than that. - Original Message - From: Lefkovics, William [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, September 13, 2001 7:00 PM Subject: RE: TCO - Linux vs. Exchange That's a great commercial! I have a problem with support costing $990,000 for the Exchange/Intel platform and $0 for the Linux one. Should I read it closer? I mean, I could hire 1100 Hanjis or one Chenault at that rate! William -Original Message- From: Bob Razler [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, September 13, 2001 4:36 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: TCO - Linux vs. Exchange Hello: I am not advocating either side. I am just providing this as some related reading for Exchange Admins. Maybe you can even comment on it and let the rest of us know if you disagree with it and why. http://consultingtimes.com/Serverheist.html Bob _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.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: Unknown character type...
Yeah, that's the one I wrote I believe. ;) - Original Message - From: Bourque Daniel [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, September 14, 2001 8:07 PM Subject: RE: Unknown character type... Thank you. I just find Q184772 - « Internet Messages Received in Raw Form » that point to the same answer -Message d'origine- De: Daniel Chenault [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Date: 14 septembre, 2001 19:34 À: Exchange Discussions Objet: Re: Unknown character type... The only thing you can do is create a registry entry with names of x-unknown, X-Unknown, X_UNKNOWN, and so on, and map it to US-ASCII. It's nothing but a band-aid though. The sender is violating the MIME RFC by using an invalid character set. Other than the hacking described, you're powerless. - Original Message - From: Bourque Daniel [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, September 14, 2001 5:25 PM Subject: Unknown character type... From time to time, I am receiving msg that the IMC can't convert and send as an attachment. I understand that it don't know how to convert a specific character set but this is annoying to me and my users are afraid it's a virus or whatever... The last one had that in the header: Message-ID: Pine.GSO.4.30.0109140820001.14641-10@mail MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=X-UNKNOWN Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE It seem that charset=X-UNKNOWN is the problem. Any idea on what to do so that at least those e-mail are convert to US-ASCII? Daniel Bourque Analyste - Centre d'Assistance Technique [EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.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: Using Outlook 2000 Exchange service through a firewall
FAQ 3.24 - Original Message - From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, September 16, 2001 6:32 PM Subject: Using Outlook 2000 Exchange service through a firewall Without setting up a vpn, does anyone know what ports would need to be opened to use the Exchange service in Outlook 2000 to get email to flow through a firewall?? Thanks IA _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.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: New Exchange Admin Questions
As others have already answered your immediate questions, I won't bother repeating. 1. Read the FAQ (link at the bottom of this message) 2. Get a book on Exchange (anything by Tony Redmond or Paul Robichaux appropriate to the version you're running) - Original Message - From: Kevin Bachelder [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, September 17, 2001 8:05 AM Subject: New Exchange Admin Questions Hello, I have just recently inherited a small (25+ users) Exchange server that I will be responsible for. I have some basic understanding of Exchange but I was looking for any suggestions or recommendations on what basic maintenance things I should be doing on a regular basis. The server is backup up each night using Backup Exec with the Exchange agent. Thanks in advance, Kevin -- Kevin Bachelder Microsoft Certified Systems Engineer - Windows NT 4.0 (MCSE) Microsoft Certified Professional - Windows 2000 (MCP) Citrix Certified Administrator (CCA) CompTIA A+ Certified Computer Repair Technician (A+) _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.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: disaster recovery practice?
Since two machines on a network can't have the same name, it would seem obvious that the recovery server has to be on a separate network, eh? - Original Message - From: Stevens, Dave [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, September 17, 2001 10:25 AM Subject: disaster recovery practice? Today, I decided to be a good exchange mail administrator and practice a mailbox recovery using my recovery server. I have already built the recovery server, same SP's and fixes, did NOT join the site, but used same names. I have done this before with no problem. I put the tape in, catalog'd it, and then started the restore (by the way, following step by step with the whitepaper!)however I soon started getting calls about a mail problem. It turns out all the services had stopped on the real mail server, same one as the one I was doing the restore. It turns out that during the restore, the recovery server started writing Directory Service transaction logs on the real server and this threw off the chronological order of the logs which caused the services to fail..we ended up renaming the logs to get them in order and everything is back up... did I miss something or did someone fail to tell me that the recovery server should not be on the network at the time of the restore? _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.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: God Bless America (way OT)
Uh... Martin? Could I ask a little favor of ya...? Would you... uh... blow my horn? - Original Message - From: Martin Blackstone [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, September 17, 2001 4:40 PM Subject: RE: God Bless America (way OT) SHUT UP!!! LEAVE ME ALONE!!! -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Barry Patterson Sent: Monday, September 17, 2001 2:42 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: God Bless America (way OT) I be blowing anyone else's horn. Freudian slip? HAHA -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Martin Blackstone Sent: Monday, September 17, 2001 4:37 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: God Bless America (way OT) Ok. Let me make myself very clear The only horn I will blow is any horn that Michèle may need blown (as long as she doesn't point at Brian). Other than that, I be blowing anyone else's horn. Thankyouverymuch -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Lefkovics, William Sent: Monday, September 17, 2001 2:34 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: God Bless America (way OT) I assured you, I said whew the loudest. -Original Message- From: Barry Patterson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, September 17, 2001 2:33 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: God Bless America (way OT) When I first saw your reply I thought you had replied to William! Whew... -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Martin Blackstone Sent: Monday, September 17, 2001 4:27 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: God Bless America (way OT) Ill do it for you -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, September 17, 2001 8:13 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: God Bless America (way OT) *blush* I didn't want to blow my own horn, as it were -Michèle Immigration site: http://LadySun1969.tripod.com Our new 2001 Miata: http://members.cardomain.com/bpituley Tiggercam: http://www.tiggercam.co.uk - I like you. You remind me of when I was young and stupid. - -Original Message- From: Schwartz, Jim [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, September 14, 2001 3:57 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: God Bless America (way OT) That's because she's a minion of CJ. A MOS +BP no less. _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.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: HELP! Exchange Server 5.5 Disapearing E-mails
ah... it works on some and not others. There's a foothold. Turn on archiving on the IMS. Identify a message that did successfully deliver and one that did not. Find them in the \imcdata\in\archive directory. Parse them out to see what is different between them. Check your logs for any errors from the IMS about a message with the same ID as the one in the archives directory that didn't get delivered. - Original Message - From: Matthew Dulak [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, September 18, 2001 11:47 PM Subject: RE: HELP! Exchange Server 5.5 Disapearing E-mails Hi Stepehn, We have no problems with our internal e-mail, to the best of our knowledge it happens with or without attachments, we use a Unix mail-relay box and logs show all e-mails coming in. The senders receive nothing at all. Btw this doesn't happen to every e-mail. Kind Regards Matthew Dulak -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Stephen Mynhier Sent: Wednesday, 19 September 2001 2:01 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: HELP! Exchange Server 5.5 Disapearing E-mails Any problems at all with the internal messages? Is this only affecting internet email with attachments? Is there a firewall b/t your server and the internet? Do the external senders receive a Non-Delivery Report? Or nothing at all? Stephen -Original Message- From: Matthew Dulak [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, September 18, 2001 10:10 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: HELP! Exchange Server 5.5 Disapearing E-mails My Apologies. I have been told that we are running a single server, NT4 SP6a with Exchange 5.5 SP4. There isn't any AV s/w on the server Kind Regards Matthew Dulak Matthew Dulak IT Support Vision Systems Limited 495 Blackburn Road Mt Waverley VIC 3149 ph:03 9211 7034 email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] IMPORTANT - This email and any attachments may be confidential. Any retransmissions, dissemination or other use of these materials by persons or entities other than the intended recipient is prohibited. If received in error, please contact us and delete all copies. Before opening or using attachments, check them for viruses and defects. Our liability is limited to resupplying any affected attachments. [Any representations or opinions expressed in this e.mail are those of the individual sender, and not necessarily those of Vision Systems Limited]. - -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Scharff, Chris Sent: Wednesday, 19 September 2001 11:45 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: HELP! Exchange Server 5.5 Disapearing E-mails What SP on the server? Any AV software running (if the answer is Yes, GroupShield... stop reading now)? If not, is this the only Exchange server in the Org? Is this happening to other Exchange servers as well? -Original Message- From: Matthew Dulak To: Exchange Discussions Sent: 9/18/2001 6:17 PM Subject: HELP! Exchange Server 5.5 Disapearing E-mails Hi all, Firstly let me introduce myself. I'm an aspiring sysadmin in Australia currently doing PC support but slowly creeping into the fun stuff. We have a problem with Exchange 5.5 Svr in that it is receiving emails from external sources and delivering them to the mailboxes according to the IMC logs. However the messages are not showing up in any of the cues nor obviously the mailboxes. An offline compaction has been suggested but we a trying to avoid this until a long weekend due to the down time involved in backup and compaction. Would anybody have any possible suggestions as to alternative courses of action??? Thanks in advance. Kind Regards Matthew Dulak Matthew Dulak IT Support Vision Systems Limited 495 Blackburn Road Mt Waverley VIC 3149 ph:03 9211 7034 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] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List
Re: Problems with new site.
I recall reading a KB article that NDS for NT breaks a BDC's ability to do pass-through authentication. Sorry I can't remember the number and the facts may be slightly incorrect, but the description jives with what's in my (fallible human) memory. Call MS about this one. - Original Message - From: Bean, Rick [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, September 19, 2001 9:29 AM Subject: Problems with new site. Hello again, Thanks for all the help on setting up the new site. I set it up on Monday, and have encountered a problem I can't seem to find any info on. We have a BDC at the remote office. The office connects with an ISDN line. We have a site connector and Directory replication connector between the sites. Both sites are in the same organization. Everything on both servers looks normal. Each server is running Ex 5.5 SP4 The problem is that the all the new mailboxes (except the first mailbox created for the local guy who will be administrating the server) get an invalid credentials when trying to log in with outlook. There passwords and usernames have been checked and double checked. If they try to us OWA it can not get there inbox (but it can get the admin's). The log on locally right is granted to all domain users. All the users computers have the Microsoft client and outlook 2000. Other things that may be involved: We are a NetWare Shop so we have NDS for NT on both our PDC and the BDC (like Novell recommends) and it is working OK. The servers are NT4.0 SP6a Has anyone else seen this problem before? Any help is appreciated. Everything looks good so I am stumped. Thanks -Rick AN ASIDE: I don't think it is a rights issue on the domain. I added on of the problemed user into the Domain Admin group and tried to log into OWA and still got the error Unable to get Inbox. The only account on that server that works is the one for their admin. He can do everything normally? Weird. -- -- Rick Bean [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://grove.ufl.edu/~rickb Network Administrator: UF Dept. of Ob/Gyn -- -- _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.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: Message REJECTED due to incorrect configuration
Most likely the other server is doing a reverse lookup and requires a) a fully-qualifed domain name and b) that the supplied name lookup in reverse to match the IP address of the machine identifying itself as such. - Original Message - From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, September 19, 2001 3:58 AM Subject: Message REJECTED due to incorrect configuration hi all! i have one exchange server 5.5 with sp5. this server connects to a mail relay where webshield smtp is installed and where all mail from/to the outside world comes/goes. today i received a message from other mail server (external) like this: Message REJECTED due to incorrect configuration of YOUR mail server. Your mail server is incorrectly configured and this has caused your mail to be rejected. Reject Reason: HELO greeting is incorrect: 504 need fully-qualified hostname. The name which your mail server uses to identify itself is NOT a Fully Qualified Domain Name (FQDN) resolvable by the DNS and thus we have rejected your message. To ensure that mail sent to our mail server arrives correctly please ensure your configuration is correct. this never happened before (at least, i have no knowledge of anything similar ever happened) and nothing was changed in the config of the exchange server or the mail relay. ok... my question is: where do i configure this? can someone help? thanks a lot _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.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: email addresses
Yes, there is. It's outlined in the FAQ. Read it, live it, love it. - Original Message - From: Stevens, Dave [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, September 20, 2001 2:48 PM Subject: RE: email addresses supposedly there is a place to add a secondary smtp address with the excel export... -Original Message- From: Kevin Miller [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, September 20, 2001 2:19 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: email addresses Do it by hand on the user level.. Or if you are 5.5 export out do it in excel then import back. Kevinm WLKMMAS, UCC+WCA ~~~ All spelling and Factual errors are the fault of Bob Barker ~~~ This space has been rented by: Http://www.tiggercam.co.uk For all your tigger needs You 2 can rent this space if you need it. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Mark G. Squires Sent: Thursday, September 20, 2001 2:31 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: email addresses Hi, I wonder if anyone can help me. Does anyone know how to add extra addresses, I have set up exchange, we have multiple domain names pointing at our server and i have managed to get exchange to add an smtp address for each of them with the recipients initials (that is what i have set their alias to) but i want to add additional addresses without losing the old ones, like [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] without having to go through the email address section of users and adding them manually, anyone know how i can do this. Many thanks Mark Squires [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.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!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: SMTP;452 4.4.5 Insufficient disk space;try later
The S. Korea server is, well, out of disk space. Nothing you can do about that. - Original Message - From: Brian Ko [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, September 21, 2001 1:51 PM Subject: SMTP;452 4.4.5 Insufficient disk space;try later Hello! Has anyone run into this SMTP error? One of our user is trying to send an e-mail to a server in South Korea. Fri, 21 Sep 2001 06:01:52 -0500 (DST) Temporary error returned by SMTP partner. smtp;452 4.4.5 Insufficient disk space; try again later 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: Customizing OWA 2000
OWA is really just a collection of HTML files. Edit them as you would any other HTML file. Only difference is ASP is not used in the 2K version. - Original Message - From: Tony [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, September 25, 2001 5:41 PM Subject: Customizing OWA 2000 In old Exchange 5.5 OWA you could edit the ASP files to customize the look of OWA to change the look to meet your Companies needs. ie company logo etc. Does anybody know where/how that is done in Exchange 2000. _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Good Exchange sources...
And any book by Robichaux or Redmond. - Original Message - From: Martin Tuip [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, September 26, 2001 1:49 PM Subject: Re: Good Exchange sources... www.slipstick.com www.microsoft.com/exchange http://support.microsoft.com http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm www.cdolive.com www.exchange-mail.org -- Martin Tuip MVP Exchange Exchange2000 List owner www.exchange-mail.org www.sharepointserver.com -- - Original Message - From: Cook, David A. [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, September 26, 2001 7:46 PM Subject: Good Exchange sources... I posted to this list for the first time today but didn't ask one of the most important questions a new admin always has. What are the good sources for Exchange information? I was an SMS administrator and I knew of so many good resources but now I feel lost. I know Microsoft and Swynk but point me to some other good resources for information and troubleshooting. Thanks for the help. Dave Cook Desktop Administrator Kutak Rock, LLP 402-231-8352 [EMAIL PROTECTED] ## The information contained in this electronic mail transmission (including any accompanying attachments) is intended solely for its authorized recipient(s), and may be confidential and/or legally privileged. If you are not an intended recipient, or responsible for delivering some or all of this transmission to an intended recipient, you have received this transmission in error and are hereby notified that you are strictly prohibited from reading, copying, printing, distributing or disclosing any of the information contained in it. In that event, please contact us immediately by telephone (402)346-6000 or by electronic mail at [EMAIL PROTECTED] and delete the original and all copies of this transmission (including any attachments) without reading or saving in any manner. 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: 550 relay denied mail not local (HELP!!!)
I can still support MSMail in my sleep, but from the below this doens't seem like an MSMail problem. Just straight out SMTP. Not enough detail to pursue though. - Original Message - From: Stephen Mynhier [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, September 26, 2001 6:49 PM Subject: RE: 550 relay denied mail not local (HELP!!!) I think that Microsoft might still have someone supporting MSMail, but they might need to schedule a callback for you so that someone can go to the retirement home to get him. -Original Message- From: Jim To: Exchange Discussions Sent: 9/26/01 10:40 AM Subject: 550 relay denied mail not local (HELP!!!) I am still running yes MSMAIL(not my fault)Anyway, I intermittently get the 550 relay denied mail not local. my post office sits behind a TFS gateway attached directly to the internet with a legal assigned IP address. My ISP says this message has nothing to with our DNS zone and their servers and maint. of them. But like I said some times it will work for a specific email address and then later get this message for the same address. I am not pointing to my ISP's email server in my gateway or knowingly trying to relay through anyone. If you have any ideas please let me know. I am getting tired of beating myself in the head. Thanks, Jim _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.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: List server
FAQ 3.15 - Original Message - From: Brent Miller [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, October 01, 2001 7:02 PM Subject: Re: List server Does anyone know how to make exchange into a list server? _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.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: MEC next year
Sturgis, South Dakota. And it's been rescheduled to coincide with the annaul Harley motorcycle run. - Original Message - From: Doug Hampshire [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, October 05, 2001 10:43 AM Subject: MEC next year Okay, I missed the keynotes [1] so I never heard where MEC is supposed to be next year. Since they usually announce it during the final keynote [2], did anyone pick up its proposed location? [1] They are inconveniently scheduled during my sleeping time. [2] This one always falls the morning after the Compaq party [3], I can pretty much guarantee I'll never be at that one [3] Andy and I OD'd on Fish Tacos. _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.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: 3499 (000B099C) network error during host resolution
restest /? It's a really simple little app. All it does is a DNS MX/A record lookup just like the SMTP mailer does. - Original Message - From: Scott Roussel [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, October 24, 2001 10:37 AM Subject: RE: 3499 (000B099C) network error during host resolution Can you suggest a location to get some documentation on the restest utility? _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.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: No Mail in the IMC or MTA
Configure your antivirus to not scan any of the \exchsrvr directories, most notably the \mtadata and \imcdata directories. - Original Message - From: Erik Vesneski [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, October 23, 2001 2:37 PM Subject: No Mail in the IMC or MTA Hi folks: I seem to have some serious outbound email issues. It is taking several hours at times and then not long at all for email to get out to another domain. Yes, I know how email works and what has to happen with DNS, etc however when I see no email in the IMC or the MTA queues I start to worry. There are no entries in the logs for the server nor are there any bounce backs from recipients. It is very difficult to troubleshoot. Has anyone seen this before and if so what have they had to do? I am currently going through the Technet articles that have any relevance to my issue but it seems pretty thin. Thank you, Erik L. Vesneski Internal Network Manager Epicentric, Inc. _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.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: Fragmentation in mail database
Yes, this scenario is one that calls for running offline defragmentation. - Original Message - From: Davinder Gupta [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, October 25, 2001 1:09 PM Subject: Fragmentation in mail database We just setup a new mail server and I have been moving bunch of mailboxes to new mail server. As a result of this, the old mail server has tons of empty space and needs to be defragged. IS this something normal to do? Or is there any other to accomplish the same thing? Thanks Davinder _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.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: pop with xchange5.5
FAQ - Original Message - From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, October 30, 2001 3:32 AM Subject: pop with xchange5.5 Hi everyone, I'm not sure but I guess that this item already 've been answered before, but I can not find the solution in this huge box of information (support.microsoft, swynk,..) What I have: a mailbox (isp) What I want: I like to pop all the mail from the mailbox by exchange and distributed it on the exchange server. Can I do it and how? Many thanks guys Kurt _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.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: IMC Errors
Configure your file-based AV to not scan the \exchsrvr directory structure. - Original Message - From: Niki Blowfield [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, November 05, 2001 8:07 AM Subject: IMC Errors Dear All, We have been getting the following error messages in Event Viewer on our Exchange Server 5.5 SP3; Event ID 4128 Failure setting file attributes on file E:\exchsrvr\imcdata\in\WFBRQJQS. The error code returned was The system cannot find the file specified. . This is an unexpected error and the IMS is shutting down. Followed by; Event ID 4093 The error code 2 was returned when trying to remove the spool file E:\exchsrvr\imcdata\in\WFBRQJQS. This file may cause duplicate mail to be sent when the server is restarted. These are happening quite often, many times a day. Technet lists nothing for that error message. Our mail server was recently used (abused) for anonymous mail relaying, which has now been disabled. However, our IMCDATA folder is now 1.6gb, and I don't know if this is related to the enormous amounts of mail relayed, or indeed the problem in Event Viewer. Any ideas? Thanks in advance Nik _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
