The authentication within the LDAP service will need to be updated with the
new details. In the User Name section, enter user's name either in UPN or
Distinguished Name format, e.g.
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
or
CN=myuser,CN=Users,DC=mydomain,DC=com
Choose a suitable search base, e.g.
I've been using PerfMon for a while today to monitor our Exchange 2k
server. Every so often, for no apparent reason, %disk time for disk 1
(E:) goes up to 100% and stays there for a good 30 seconds. Disk 0
(C:,D:) stays low.
I tried doing an Advanced find for some text in all my mailbox, but
Hi,
We are running an Exch 2k server with no problems.
One of our users needs to access another OWA 2k server (of his previous
company) from within our LAN, and he can log in just fine, but for
example if he goes to his inbox, the e-mail list pane gets stuck on
'Loading'... And never loads
Why? Placing the pagefile on a separate drive sacrifices reliability for performance.
This is not normally a choice I would make on a production server.
Dennis Depp
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
On Behalf Of Andrey Fyodorov
Sent: Monday,
Got this from Trend early this morning.
Brian
Dear Everyone,
This is to inform you that we have received many inquiries about
WORM_OPASOFT.A from Japan and Taiwan
Short Description:
This network worm propagates via network shared C:\ drives.
It also has backdoor capabilities, downloading
Trend is giving this a medium risk. More than yesterdays one.
-Original Message-
From: Brian Ko [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Tuesday, October 01, 2002 5:00 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: Notification: WORM_OPASOFT
Got this from Trend early this morning.
Brian
Dear
What kind of NAT scheme are you running? Perhaps that conflicts with their
access list. Perhaps it routes screwy if both companies have the same
subnets in place. RAS works because he's either got an ISP address or he's
dialing directly into that network.
(:=
-Original Message-
From:
Without modesty, pinnacles of evolution such as ourselves are nothing.
Without humility, dazzlingly great intellects such as ourselves are
worthless.
Not wanting to sound my own horn or anything, but I'm one of the top ten
modest planet-crushing deities in the cosmos. I hate to sound like I'm
Thanks for your reply. I have not had any problems since making this big
container. I did try one foolish thing - I tried to import all these
addresses into a single outlook contacts folder. The import was going fine
for a few minutes until outlook (2002) exploded (I hope they put me back on
I actually thought about that too, I will have to ask the other
company's net admins about their setup and compare. I have a 3
192.168.x.x subnets which are routed internally.
But if it was a routing problem, nothing would work, no?
In this particular case, the user gets past the logon screen
This was covered in yesterday's dat release for NAI\Mcafee
(Groupshield).
-Original Message-
From: Martin Blackstone [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Posted At: Tuesday, October 01, 2002 8:10 AM
Posted To: List - Exchange Server List
Conversation: Notification: WORM_OPASOFT
Subject: RE:
What does every so often mean. Is there antivirus software running?
- Original Message -
From: Andrea Coppini [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, October 01, 2002 5:07 AM
Subject: 400% disk utilization!
I've been using PerfMon for a while today
When I try to publish, I get the message that I am unable to publish due to
a mapi error, I do not have owner rights. Have checked on administrator that
I have owner rights on the folder and I do. What else could be wrong?
Am using Exchange 5.5 sp4 NT4 sp6a etc.
Any ideas please,
many thanks
Actually I've just completed an installation of Razor, which is the
open-source predecessor to Cloudmark's SpamNet. Like SpamNet, Razor uses
consensus votes to determine what is and is not spam, and by using a simple
procmail script I have the software marking spam as described by the
original
Hi there
This was the information that I was looking for. I'm using the Martin
Blackstone block list (thank you very much, BTW), and I updated the AV on
Exchange.
Thanks everyone for your answers
Russell
-Original Message-
From: Durkee, Peter [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent:
Every so often = around every 1 or 2 minutes.
I found out it was the transaction log.
Transaction and IS were both on drive E: (not as per my first e-mail).
So I moved the transaction logs to drive d: and it's been fine since.
-Original Message-
From: Tony Hlabse [mailto:[EMAIL
Hi all,
I just had a quick question in regards to a content filter add on and which
would be the best to use for Exchange 5.5. Currently we are using NEMX but
I would like to explore other options. What do you all feel is the most
reliable content filter?
Thanks,
Brian
Anyone use Auto Spell (spellchecker.com)?
Back to trying to convince my anti-3rd party manager again...
Ali
_
List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
Archives:
Not what, but who. I am the most reliable content filter for Exchange. For
only $375k (plus 125k annual maint) I'll come filter your mail.
-Original Message-
From: Cooke, Brian
To: Exchange Discussions
Sent: 10/1/2002 8:52 AM
Subject: Content Filtering
Hi all,
I just had a quick
Is there a way to setup a mailbox to catch all mail destine for a domain
that does not have a valid mailbox sort of like SMTP alais = *.domain??
_
List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
Archives:
That will do it.
- Original Message -
From: Andrea Coppini [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, October 01, 2002 8:55 AM
Subject: RE: 400% disk utilization!
Every so often = around every 1 or 2 minutes.
I found out it was the transaction log.
URLSCAN is a great tool. It helps secure your web server. If you use the Outlook Web
Access template when installing URLSCAN you should be good to go, right?
WRONG! URLSCAN wreaks havoc with OWA.
First, remember that with OWA the SUBJECT line of a mail message is the FILE NAME. So
if
There is a Microsoft KB article on just that. Can't remember the number.
-Original Message-
From: Andrea Coppini [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Tuesday, October 01, 2002 7:16 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: OWA from a client behind FW
Hi,
We are running an Exch 2k server with
Excellent that works for me.
-Original Message-
From: Chris Scharff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Tuesday, October 01, 2002 10:50 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Content Filtering
Not what, but who. I am the most reliable content filter for Exchange. For
only $375k (plus
Once you catch it what do you want to do with it?
- Original Message -
From: wade robinson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, October 01, 2002 9:53 AM
Subject: Catch all mail destine for a domain name
Is there a way to setup a mailbox to catch
There's a Q article which describes how to do this for E2K[1], for Exchange
5.5, a 3rd party product would be required.
[1] The Q article itself describes 1 particular scenario. Other more complex
scenarios would require adaptation of the code.
-Original Message-
From: wade robinson
Well once I had a broken RAID1 on the page file volume. RAID did not save me. The
server blue-screened. The RAID1 was physical. How about that for reliability?
-Original Message-
From: Dennis Depp [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Tuesday, October 01, 2002 7:46 AM
To: Exchange
Check this: Q290177
-Original Message-
From: Andrea Coppini [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Tuesday, October 01, 2002 7:16 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: OWA from a client behind FW
Hi,
We are running an Exch 2k server with no problems.
One of our users needs to access another
hm, what were the OWA guys thinking (or smoking?) when they set up
the URL's to be based on subject lines???
True. I agree with you. I thought this was a big security hazard to
begin with. I guess it's only a matter of time till someone figures out
how to exploit it
-Original
Try this if it applies. Q315515
- Original Message -
From: Andrey Fyodorov [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, October 01, 2002 10:42 AM
Subject: RE: OWA from a client behind FW
There is a Microsoft KB article on just that. Can't remember the
-Original Message-
From: Christopher Hummert [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Tuesday, October 01, 2002 12:15 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Another reason to be careful with OWA and URLSCAN
hm, what were the OWA guys thinking (or smoking?) when they set up
the URL's to
I've been using the Cloudmark's Spamnet on my system for a few weeks now,
and it just doesn't seem to do the job very well.
First of all, with my MAPI connection, The spam email is sitting there
waiting for Spamnet when I start Outlook. Spamnet won't automatically scan
new mail on start up.
Sybari Antigen for Exchange is an excellent package. We use it and are very
happy with the automatic updates and the content filtering. Also you can
create templates to distribute new changes (upgrades are free for the life
of your contract). They are releasing their Gold Package at MEC, and
You know it's configurable, right? You know there's a q-article about
that, right?
URLScan is a great tool. It helps secure my web server.
I don't use templates for squat, except as a starting point. They don't
replace a well-qualified administrator. Also, I tell my users to quit
using and
Antigen is great for virus scanning, but they have only recently gotten into content
scanning. And their content scanning is very basic so far.
-Original Message-
From: Dale Geoffrey Edwards [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Tuesday, October 01, 2002 12:54 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Have you installed or tested 7.0?
-Original Message-
From: Andrey Fyodorov [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Tuesday, October 01, 2002 10:19 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Content Filtering
Antigen is great for virus scanning, but they have only recently gotten into
content
Ive tested Vanilla Coke.
-Original Message-
From: Baker, Jennifer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Tuesday, October 01, 2002 1:21 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Content Filtering
Have you installed or tested 7.0?
-Original Message-
From: Andrey Fyodorov
I was going to but haven't had a chance yet. I guess I need to take a look at it.
-Original Message-
From: Baker, Jennifer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Tuesday, October 01, 2002 1:21 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Content Filtering
Have you installed or tested 7.0?
Yes you do. I expect a full report on my desk by 8am tomorrow.
-Original Message-
From: Andrey Fyodorov [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Tuesday, October 01, 2002 10:33 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Content Filtering
I was going to but haven't had a chance yet. I guess I
You forgot the quack.
There have been numerous discussions regarding content filtering and how it
works. Decide what you are willing to risk in lost mail, or additional
manpower resources versus what you are trying to accomplish. Then go find
the tool that meets those requirements.
Looking a
Somebody's Nemx banned my mail because it violdated a policy. I've
checked my language, and it all seems pretty polite. I wonder if it flagged
the word Spam. Do these filter-rules writers really think that the word
spam is going to be prominently featured in UCE messages?
Dr. Evil is
OK. I just installed it and took a look. Content filtering seems to be the same as in
version 6.5
First of all it only scans message subject lines. You give it a word to look for and
it scans. If it finds a message with that word in the subject it can purge that
message or quarantine it.
Thanks, I haven't had the chance to check it out.
I think we may roll our own SMTP content filter for the W2K SMTP Service
that is modeled much like SPAM Assassin.
Or I would like to get my hands on that RBL blocking script that Siegfried
has been working on.
-Original Message-
From:
AOL 7.0? Of course. Remember that chat we had on AOL the other night?
-Original Message-
From: Baker, Jennifer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Tuesday, October 01, 2002 10:21 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Content Filtering
Have you installed or tested 7.0?
-Original
Quack quack it is sir.
-Original Message-
From: Schwartz, Jim [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Tuesday, October 01, 2002 10:46 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Content Filtering
You forgot the quack.
There have been numerous discussions regarding content filtering and how it
Hello,
I have had a few employees say that emails from Yahoo.com are bouncing.
The sender (a Yahoo account) is receiving the following message from Yahoo
(see below). Has anyone else seen similar errors? I have done a search
of TechNet and have come up with nothing. A Google search
Antigen has scanned the message body since the previous v6.5. Here is a
direct quote from Sybari:
Both Antigen 6.5 and 7.0 both provide the ability to scan the
message body for viruses at both the SMTP/IMC and the Exchange Store. We
have provided this as an option to enable/disable at
Well, you've also munged the headers sufficiently so as to make
troubleshooting neigh unto impossible. However if x.x.x.x corresponds to
bigbird1.cubist.com or bigbird3.terragenco.uk, your issue would appear to be
unrelated to Exchange.
-Original Message-
From: Steve I [mailto:[EMAIL
yes, URLSCAN is configurable. And by allowing those patterns (and others) to get
thru, you are weakening your security. And, unlike you, I cannot possibly attempt to
force people sending us email to conform to not using %, in a subject line or a
period at the end of a subject -- How do you
I've seen URLScan fail when a user who's last name was POL to allow this
user to open up his mailbox. POL is an extension that is normally blocked.
--
Martin Tuip
MVP Exchange
Exchange2000 List owner
www.exchange-mail.org
www.sharepointserver.com
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Hi.
You didn't help me.
You don't have too.
- Original Message -
From: Great Cthulhu Jones [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Sunday, September 29, 2002 11:40 PM
Subject: RE: IS 70GB and growing
The best thing to do is get the two departments
Hi.
It may be some one you know.
- Original Message -
From: Ed Crowley [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, September 30, 2002 6:39 PM
Subject: RE: IS 70GB and growing
Heaven help the consultant Hanji hires.
Ed Crowley MCSE+Internet MVP
That's applies to virus scanning not content filtering.
-Original Message-
From: Dale Geoffrey Edwards [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Tuesday, October 01, 2002 11:29 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Content Filtering
Antigen has scanned the message body since the previous
You're so vain.
I bet you thought that post was about you.
-Original Message-
From: Mark Hanji [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Tuesday, October 01, 2002 3:58 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: Re: IS 70GB and growing
Hi.
You didn't help me.
You don't have too.
-
No, I am sorry that you are wrong. This applies to content filtering as
well. I may have misread the first email, thinking they were talking about
virus scanning, but Antigen does do CF on the subject line AND body of the
emails and attachments.
Geoff...
-Original Message-
From:
... what I am missing?
- Original Message -
From: Andy David [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, October 01, 2002 9:04 PM
Subject: RE: IS 70GB and growing
You're so vain.
I bet you thought that post was about you.
-Original
GCs doe not use 389. They use 3268
See
http://www.microsoft.com/WINDOWS2000/techinfo/reskit/en/Distrib/dsbc_nar_bsa
d.htm
-Original Message-
From: Tony Hlabse [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Monday, September 30, 2002 3:42 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: Re: LDAP Issues
Remember
Hi.
I think I am missing something.
As far as I understand, if I install second exchange server in the site, I
will get a new priv.edb.
If I move mailbox to that server, I will loose SIS between servers.
So, if a message is sent to 4 mailbox's on one server, and 9 mailboxes on
second server,
I
Deersoft's coming out with an Exchange2000-integrated version of
SpamAssassin.
http://www.deersoft.com/collateral/
I think it's still in its beta cycle.
-Original Message-
From: Baker, Jennifer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Posted At: Tuesday, October 01, 2002 01:20 PM
Posted To:
The key words are for viruses.
Antigen is the best solution in my humble opinion for virus scanning.
But they are only now getting into content scanning. And the Help file in Antigen 6.5
and 7.0 indicates that the content scanning is only done on subject lines.
Actually when you go to the
No I'm not. There may be a plugin for 7.0 that will have this functionality
though. It could be here as soon as the 1st quarter of next year.
-Original Message-
From: Dale Geoffrey Edwards [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Tuesday, October 01, 2002 12:06 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Cook it and eat it
-Original Message-
From: Tony Hlabse [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Tuesday, October 01, 2002 11:49 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: Re: Catch all mail destine for a domain name
Once you catch it what do you want to do with it?
- Original Message -
Oh boy getting late in the day.
- Original Message -
From: Andrey Fyodorov [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, October 01, 2002 2:26 PM
Subject: RE: Catch all mail destine for a domain name
Cook it and eat it
-Original Message-
From:
SIS is maintained per database, not per server. So in moving users between
databases SIS is maintained on a per database basis. When, how and where you
should opt for additional servers, databases or storage groups is not a
universal formula which can be applied unilaterally. Based on the
Hello.
I have been told that Exchange 5.5 with IS bigger than 50G is VERY bad.
It means there is big chance the IS won't start after restart.
I am wondering if this is true, meaning, this is an undocument limitation,
and should I be afraid to have IS above 70G?
The IS is on EMC. The server
Undocumented limitation? Unlikely. Exchange advice from someone woefully
incompetent. Undoubtedly. Have you been taking Exchange advice from Amit?
-Original Message-
From: Mark Hanji [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Tuesday, October 01, 2002 3:36 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
What good is this full text indexing?
I mean it IS a great feature that allows for fast searches and it looks impressive as
it runs and finds search strings in messages and attachments. But what good is it if
you can only search for an exact word?
Thanks everyone who responded to my this problem. I'm using GC at port 3268 . Here are
the error messages I get :
If I use base search c=us , I get Operation Error
If I use base search DC=mydomain,DC=com , I get LDAP Referral Received and than No
search Result found errors.
I have been
RUN will find run, running, ran, runs, etc.
It's way fast, too.
And it's free.
-Original Message-
From: Andrey Fyodorov [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Posted At: Tuesday, October 01, 2002 02:43 PM
Posted To: MSExchange Mailing List
Conversation: Exchange 2000 full text indexing
RUN ED RUN!
-Original Message-
From: Mark Hanji [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Tuesday, October 01, 2002 4:00 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: Re: IS 70GB and growing
Hi.
It may be some one you know.
- Original Message -
From: Ed Crowley [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To:
I know that someone was taking about antigen 7.0 earlier in this thread.
Looks like sybari has the RC for public evaluation up now:
http://www.sybari.com/download/eval.asp
-Chris
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Baker, Jennifer
Sent:
I wish they allowed wildcard searching though. Or regular expressions.
-Original Message-
From: Tom Meunier [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Tuesday, October 01, 2002 4:19 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Exchange 2000 full text indexing
RUN will find run, running, ran, runs,
That's the one I tested earlier today.
-Original Message-
From: Christopher Hummert [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Tuesday, October 01, 2002 4:51 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Content Filtering
I know that someone was taking about antigen 7.0 earlier in this thread.
Looks
I'm currently testing MAIL MARSHAL
-Original Message-
From: Martin Blackstone [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Tuesday, October 01, 2002 2:24 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Content Filtering
Quack quack it is sir.
-Original Message-
From: Schwartz, Jim [mailto:[EMAIL
I was referring to the content filtering *plugin* for 7.0, which will not be
available until next year.
-Original Message-
From: Christopher Hummert [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Tuesday, October 01, 2002 1:51 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Content Filtering
I know that
Pfooey! I have several stores that are well over 50gb each. No problems with cycling
the store, rebooting the boxes, performing backups (and restores) etc. . .
You just have to know WTF you're doing.
Hey - didn't you once claim to be an expert in Exchange 5.5?
Darcy
-Original
Um, what?? Excuse me - no. You can change the domain membership of an Exchange 5.5
server without doing any harm to your users. Just be sure that the domain you move
your Exchange servers to trusts the domain your users are in.
Check it out - field-tested, proven method:
I'd be more worried about EMC as your storage than the size of your IS.
-Original Message-
From: Mark Hanji [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Tuesday, October 01, 2002 4:36 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: Re: IS 70GB and growing
Hello.
I have been told that Exchange 5.5 with
Then you didn't read my last paragraph.
Now read ye my full message, ye scurvy dog, or I'll keel-haul ye!
(:=
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Mark Hanji
Sent: Tuesday, October 01, 2002 2:58 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: Re: IS
Has anyone tried using the Outlook-based version of SpamAssassin?
I installed the eval copy and it is supposed to add a toolbar to Outlook. But I can't
see it.
-Original Message-
From: Tom Meunier [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Tuesday, October 01, 2002 3:23 PM
To: Exchange
Hi Everyone,
Can someone perhaps driect me to a good site or documentation that will
help me set up Exchange 2000? I have installed it all with my new
windows2000 AD domain and I can add users and things to the new domain.
I'm just not sure how to set up Exchange to receive mail properly to
Definitely not true. A 10GB database will be corrupt if someone who
doesn't know what they are doing fools with it enough. A 100GB one will
work fine as long as no one messes it up with things like regular
maintenance of ESEUTIL offline defrag or other such stuff. I would
second the concern about
Offline defrag I'm ducking look out!
--- Original Message -
From: Bubba G [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, October 01, 2002 6:13 PM
Subject: RE: IS 70GB and growing
Definitely not true. A 10GB database will be corrupt if someone who
doesn't
Pay attention to the order of those instructions.
William
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Tom Meunier
Sent: Tuesday, October 01, 2002 4:12 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Configuring Exchange 2000
These will set you right.
I have a 120 gig priv on a single 5.5 box.. Never had a problem when the
power goes out and it has to reboot.
--Kevinm M, WLKMMAS, Exchange MVP, And Beyond
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Mark Hanji
Sent: Tuesday, October 01, 2002 1:36
These will set you right.
1.) Set up a recipient policy for your new domain. Make sure the box is
checked that says This server's authoritative for this domain or
whatever it is
2.) Add MX records to your DNS for those domains.
3.) Beer.
You're lucky. No UPS?
William
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Kevin Miller
Sent: Tuesday, October 01, 2002 2:19 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: IS 70GB and growing
I have a 120 gig priv on a single 5.5 box.. Never
The server is very very strong and acts very fast
That is the first sign of problems. ;)
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Chris Scharff
Sent: Tuesday, October 01, 2002 12:42 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: IS 70GB and
Dear Everyone,
I found out that this ArGoSoft Mail Server freeware, allow remote users to
relay mail from Exchange server. Can anyone tell me how secure is it?
TIA
Cheers!
Carine
Maximise your productivity and prepare
I think there's a muppet who does this sort of thing. I saw it on Sesame
Street.
Grover: Oh! I have gotten too much SPAM on my mail server! What will I do?
(Puff of smoke and a new muppet appears)
Grover: Who are you?
Content Filter: They call me... the Content Filter. And do you know *why*
they
Mr. Content Filter sounds like he is being moved by the same hand that
moves the Count... Hmmm... I smell a conspiracy.
BG
-Original Message-
From: Great Cthulhu Jones [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Tuesday, October 01, 2002 9:58 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Content
91 matches
Mail list logo
