Hi there,
I have been asked to think about a way to implent a kind of policy for
keeping emails.
Our users work per two, i.e. a scientiific officer and an assistant.
They get a lot of emails about certain projects, but after a while
emails get lost, people don't know who replied etc...
Now
VeriSign Sued Over Controversial Web Service:
An Internet search company on Thursday filed a $100 million antitrust
lawsuit against VeriSign Inc., accusing the Web address provider of
hijacking misspelled and unassigned Web addresses with a service it
launched this week.
Read more (source):
I fear that I will run out of disk space very fast on the server. They
all have 20 GB free on their workstations, how about setting up a pst
folder on their D-drives, then they can drag the mails into that one?
Kim
-Original Message-
From: Robert Moir [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent:
I agree with Robert in that the PF is a good solution although you will need
more disk space if they keep data for close to five years. What version of
MS Exchange are you running? If you are running the Standard version then
you are also limited by database size to 16GB. If you are running the
This would work of course, but they will be limited to 2GB of space for the
PST so they may run into having to have multiple PST's. Still, make sure
they know it is their responsibility to back up the files, unless you have a
system to back up your workstations.
--
From: Kim
TCP 25 - inbound SMTP mail delivery
TCP 443 - inbound HTTPS for OWA
TCP/UDP 53 - if you host your own DNS
If you want Outlook, use a VPN. The PIX will do IPSEC based VPNs and
you can use the Windows 2000 or Windows 2003 IAS (RADIUS) service to
authenticate against the AD. Or you can just do
Plus PST files can't be shared.
Adding a user to the cc line of a message /does not/ double the storage
required in the Exchange databases.
However as others have said, public folders seem like a good solution.
If I remember correctly, the standard version of Exchange can do 16GB in
the Private
I have gone as far to set it to Owner and still nothing.
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Bryon Barkley
Sent: Thursday, September 18, 2003 10:52 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: unable to send mail to Public Folder from External
Andrey:
They are there under the queues. How do I get them to go anywhere from
here?
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Fyodorov,
Andrey
Sent: Thursday, September 18, 2003 5:59 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: unable to send mail to
Why is everyone against ARCserve? I have been using ARCserve v. 9.01 to
do brick level backups and I have never have a problem with it. The
largest mailbox that I do a brick level backup on is 729megs and most of
the mailboxes are over 100megs. I have never had a failed job and I have
done
It doesn't stop key logging per se, but it renders it ineffective.
The SecurID tokens use a three factor[1] authentication system, in which the
third piece is a 6 digit, one time use code. That code is good for exactly 3
minutes, and once used cannot be used again.
Therefore, logging the
What about a product like Kvault? I'd bet Bruce[1] has some ideas, and will
chime in shortly.
--
Roger D. Seielstad - MTS MCSE MS-MVP
Sr. Systems Administrator
Inovis Inc.
[1] aka Martin Tuip
-Original Message-
From: Kim
Let's see...
Seeing as it took them 4-5 versions of the product to get it right -
starting back at least at 6.0, that is, I fail to see why they deserve
consideration.
My experience with ArcServe, which I did use for at least 2 years, is that
it does a phenominal job of backing up data. It was
Help.
I have a box running Win2k3 member of the domain and E2k3 Enterprise. I
used a client computer with Outlook 2003 to create a new public folder.
I go to the E2k3 Server, as I need to mail-enable the new public folder.
I launch Exchange's System Manager and click the + sign next to Folders
On 9/12, a list member wrote:
Same old bag of gas. IT consultants are all unprofessional except for
me.
On 9/12, an anonymous reader from San Francisco wrote a review on
Amazon.com:
The author is well known in the Microsoft Exchange community as a pompous
bag of gas
Now, I could call out this
I always recommend what is best for my customers. I guess that makes me
professional. Even though I may never have worked with the product just saw
a cool review.
From: Greg Deckler [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
First, even though these mailboxes are duplicated, is the user able to
open it ok and access all their items? If so, maybe just run the
Cleanup Agent on the old server.
Another suggestion might be to try and move the mailbox back. It should
error out, and may remove the orphaned item for you.
Forgive me for arguing, but I believe the time alloted for guessing that
third factor is even less than indicated below. Of course, by token, I am
referring to what RSA calls a keyfob. Is that what you are referring to
as well?
Here is what I understand to be the process, from reading the
Off the top of my head - ExMerge is one way. Set the INI file and give
it the list of mailboxes and let it rip in batch mode via an AT
schedule. ExMerge has a pretty good manual that explains all these
things.
Another way is to use Exchange's own Mailbox Manager. Just create a
recipient policy
Hello,
Veritas 9 - were using version 8 and getting the same problem.
Exchange 5.5, NT4 SP6a
We can not seem to get better then 100 MB / minute backing up the
Exchange servers. using the Exchange agent. Many nights lately it is
much worse.
The NICs and ports on the switch have all be set to
Mailbox cleanup agent will do it as well, I believe.
--
Roger D. Seielstad - MTS MCSE MS-MVP
Sr. Systems Administrator
Inovis Inc.
-Original Message-
From: Fyodorov, Andrey [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, September
What tape drive are you using?
- Original Message -
From: Jasa, Ken [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, September 19, 2003 10:48 AM
Subject: Not using BLB, But getting really slow backups.
Hello,
Veritas 9 - were using version 8 and getting the
Hang on - this is tape drive settings. Give me a few to find the stuff
we used, and I'll post. We were getting really slow results as well.
We are now well over 500-600mb/min for File, and 700-800mb/min for
Exchange.
Ben Winzenz
Network Engineer
Gardner White
(317) 581-1580 ext 418
Check to see if the public folder actually has a replica on the server.
Maybe it somehow got orphaned.
Another possibility is that the PF's e-mail address may have a duplicate
somewhere.
Also - do you have multiple Exchange servers? If so, do they all have
public folders? Is the PF hierarchy
OK - here is what I have. IIRC, the priority setting and the tape drive
firmware were the 2 biggest things. I would do all of these though.
Obviously, the drivers are firmware will depend on your tape drive. We
have SDLT drives.
Modifications made:
1. Placed each Adaptec LP160 SCSI card
Go to ESM, browse to information store/Mailboxes, right click on the
Maiboxes and select Run Cleanup Agent. Better now?
-Original Message-
From: Mitchell Mike [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, September 18, 2003 6:30 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Cc: Duncan Scott
Subject: Mailbox
Actually, you've got the system down correctly.
However, the slack time is +/- 1 minute, so you really get 3 minutes per
code.
--
Roger D. Seielstad - MTS MCSE MS-MVP
Sr. Systems Administrator
Inovis Inc.
-Original Message-
Hi,
if you want to open ports for your users to be able to send mail you have
to open the following ports:
SMTP (inbound/outbound mail): 25
(optional POP3 / IMAP4)
pop3: 110 (insecure, password sniffer possible)
or use 995 if you prefer to use ssl
Imap4: 143 (insecure) of use 993 foor imap4 ssl
Hi
Why don't you make a new outlook session (Mapi) and check the mapi profile
to see what server your client connects to. If it connects to the new
server (which it should) then you're ok. if it's not, then you have a AD
replication problem.
another question for you; did you also move/replicated
Hi, I have a serious problem at the moment.
I had moved files from c:\exchsrv\imcdata\in to another disk to save up
some space. When I after that rebooted the server will not start again.
All that comes up is the memory count, and option to hit F2,F10 and F12.
It looks like it will not find the
We are using a Compaq TL891DLX Minilibrary with 2 DLT 40/80 drives.
We were getting backup speeds of around 350MB / Min at one point.
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Andy David
Sent: Friday, September 19, 2003 9:53 AM
To: Exchange
Hello all,
I have a serious problem. I deleted files out of the c:/exchsrv/imcdata/in
archive. After this I reebooted the server. Now it will not boot up. All I
get is that I can choose between F2,F10,F12. But that takes me nowhere. The
computer locks up due to not finding the harddisks.. that
With Veritas, you want to make sure hardware compression is enabled and play
with the buffer and block sizes a bit under the device options.
I think the default is 32K.
- Original Message -
From: Jasa, Ken [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday,
Thanks, Andy.
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Andy David
Sent: Friday, September 19, 2003 10:16 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
With Veritas, you want to make sure hardware compression is enabled and
play with the buffer and block sizes a
I told him to say that.
-Original Message-
From: Jasa, Ken [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, September 19, 2003 8:20 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Not using BLB, But getting really slow backups.
Thanks, Andy.
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
You may have inadvertantly deleted some files in the root of your c drive.
I would advise doing an repair install of your OS.
John Parker, MCSE
IS Admin.
Senior Technical Specialist
Digital Display Systems.
Alpha Video
7711 Computer Ave.
Edina, MN. 55435
952-896-9898 Local
800-388-0008 Watts
I am looking for some light reading/information to confirm the behaviour
with using OST's over a WAN link.
I have a remote office that connects to the main office over a 128k VPN
connection. This pipe is shared between 5 other users, including all their
internet traffic, so can get pretty slow at
I am looking at my default SMTP virtual server queue under protocols in
the ex. 2000 system manager and I am seeing something that looks like
this
Radiologycorp.com - sprint.com (SMTP connector - Remote delivery)
Radiologycorp.com - xxzz1.com (SMTP connector - Remote delivery)
Radiologycorp.com -
Those guys are PERFECT candidates for Outlook 2003 with Cache Mode.
-Original Message-
From: Gavin Hall [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, September 19, 2003 8:37 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: Use of OST's over WAN
I am looking for some light reading/information to confirm
Most likely those are NDRs. Spammers were probably sending stuff to you,
caused NDRs to be generated back to them and now the NDRs are sitting in
the queues and can't be delivered because (surprise!) spammers used
bogus From addresses.
You should be able to get an idea of what those messages are
And if you don't care then just go ahead and delete them.
Nate Couch
EDS Messaging
--
From: Fyodorov, Andrey
Reply To: Exchange Discussions
Sent: Friday, September 19, 2003 10:42 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Exchange 2000 server - smtp queue
Configure Outlook to work-offline always or let them choose the mode when
starting Outlook. When Outlook is off-line, it will always refer to the
OST.
Outlook 2003 with cached mode will improve this, but for now, this is a
pretty good option.
Aaron
-Original Message-
From: Gavin Hall
Thanks I picked up on Martin's reference to Outlook 2003, currently looking
into it.
I realise that Outlook will always refer to the OST when Offline, but what
about when it's online? I'm sure I read a newsgroup article (Which I now
can't find) that when in online mode, Outlook looks in the OST
I had this same problem moving from an NT4/EX55 server to a new WIN2k/EX55
server using move mailbox. After backing up the affected mailboxes with
EXMERGE, I tried moving one back to the old server. If I remember
correctly, the move mailbox function saw the bogus empty mailbox on the old
server
Do the manufacturers deliberately make their products perform poorly so
that later one would have to waste time looking for the latest firmware?
-Original Message-
From: Ben Winzenz [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, September 19, 2003 10:58 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject:
Oh well, I think I've found the answer to my question, no Outlook doesn't
use the OST as a local cache when online mode:-
http://tinyurl.com/nybp
Thanks for the heads-up for Outlook 2003 though, this will be my saviour :-)
cheers
Gavin
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
I cant say one way or another. I never use offline mode.
However with OL2003 in cache mode, it will always use the cached mail.
-Original Message-
From: Gavin Hall [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, September 19, 2003 9:03 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Use of OST's over
Has anyone ran Exchange in a SAN, and were there any issues with it? I've
always had a raid array attached to it which could be the same thing but did
not know if there were any major differences? Any help would be appreciate
it.
Thanks,
Mario
Clarification Windows 2000 and Exchange 5.5
-Original Message-
From: Rosales, Mario
Sent: Friday, September 19, 2003 11:17 AM
To: 'Exchange Discussions'
Subject: Exchange and SAN
Has anyone ran Exchange in a SAN, and were there any issues with it? I've
always had a raid array attached
We run Exchange 5.5 on a HP SAN with our own DR solution. This is signed off
by Microsoft PSS. I believe MS support Exchange on a SAN but not a NAS.
Regards,
Paul
-Original Message-
From: Rosales, Mario [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 19 September 2003 17:19
To: Exchange Discussions
Was it this:
http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;en-us;317050
Please be specific with error messages.
Regards, Michael
-Original Message-
From: D. Froster [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, September 19, 2003 6:39 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: Exchange sever
Those are the outbound queues.
-Original Message-
From: Henry, Christopher M. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, September 19, 2003 9:45 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: Exchange 2000 server - smtp queue
I am looking at my default SMTP virtual server queue under protocols in
Yup yup
-Original Message-
From: Martin Blackstone [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, September 19, 2003 9:37 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Use of OST's over WAN
Those guys are PERFECT candidates for Outlook 2003 with Cache Mode.
-Original Message-
From: Gavin
Try using the Advanced Find
Look for Note type items (or whatever)
Delete it from the FIND window.
Nikki
-Original Message-
From: Parrnelli GS11 Ben T [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, September 17, 2003 12:50 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: Unable to delete calendar item
We have an exchange 2k server with 800 users, roughly 71 gb private store
running on an HP MSA1000 and it works great. I would even venture to say
that it runs better than it did on the local drives.
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
We run Exchange 5.5 on an IBM SAN, no issues here. But you might want to
make sure that you have the right hardware behind it or performance will
suffer.
Paulie
-Original Message-
From: Rosales, Mario [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, September 19, 2003 12:19 PM
To: Exchange
Thanks Martin for the help anyway.
cheers
Gavin
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Martin
Blackstone
Sent: 19 September 2003 17:09
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Use of OST's over WAN
I cant say one way or another. I never use offline
I have run into this in a couple of situations. One where we had a cluster
communicating to a SAN and the other where we had a single member server
talking to a SAN. In both cases I have seen network communications problems
result in the IS shutting down because the SA can't talk to it. In the
Huh? I accept it as pretty much de facto that most manufacturers
release firmware revisions to correct certain problems. If they
researched every possible problem and fixed it before being released, it
would never get released. They fix problems many times as customers
report a problem (or send
Hi all:
I had posted this to the E2K list and no one seemed to know how
to do this.
In Exchange 5.5, you could configure a SYSTEM address for the System
Administrator on one of the mailboxes and whenever anyone managed to
reply to a notification message from the System Administrator,
Do you have Jim McBee's 24seven book handy?
I believe its covered in there.
- Original Message -
From: McBee, Jim [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, September 19, 2003 1:07 PM
Subject: Replying to messages from System Administrator
Hi all:
I had
I'm about to start a programming project, integrating some custom in house application
with Exchange. At the moment, we're using Exchange 2000, but at some point we'll
upgrade to Exchange 2003. There seems to be a lot of ways to integrate Exchange (CDO,
CDOEX, ADO, DAV) Does anyone have any
I've not examined the system for several years (I'm just a happy user
now, not and admin), but at least at one time SecurID would accept the
current code (of course),one code behind or one ahead for a total window
of 3 minutes as Roger notes.
If the gadget's clock had drifted to more than one
As long as you don't buy into the great white lie of SAN's, you're golden.
That lie is that there's no performance hit created by taking a single large
array and carving it into a bunch of LUNs - there's a physics issue there.
Other than that, its just a bunch of disks, just like the SCSI
I thought NetApp only made NAS boxes, not SANs.
Oh, yeah - snapshots don't work, but a local backup to disk (with NTBackup)
would most likely smoke.
--
Roger D. Seielstad - MTS MCSE MS-MVP
Sr. Systems Administrator
Inovis Inc.
It really is a cool system.
We're currently using it for VPN access and front ending OWA, and we're
playing with it and some Cisco Aironet wireless devices - requiring SecurID
authentication before you get onto the wireless network.
--
Anything newer than a F840 is a NAS/SAN. It's a traditional NAS and you
can have block level access to a LUN via FC, just like a traditonal
SAN. It would be like taking an EMC and sticking a Ethernet NIC on it.
Also anything newer than the 800 series gives you iSCSI for free. It
will be
Ken / Roger,
I know it's OT, but I have a quick question for you two.
We don't have a VPN option here, but we have ~50 users using the tokens for
dial-in. Occasionally, their tokens will get out of sync and of course,
lock them out after three successive tries. As Ken indicated, if the user
I'll kindly ask you to get off of my soapbox.
My favorite one I've heard lately: Well, it uses fiber to attach to the SAN
so it's much faster for Exchange.
-Original Message-
From: Roger Seielstad [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, September 19, 2003 2:50 PM
To: Exchange
I am sorry. What is ESM? I do not believe I have every used it?
-Original Message-
From: Fyodorov, Andrey [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, September 19, 2003 9:59 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Mailbox moves completed, but
Go to ESM, browse to information
That would be the Exchange System Manager. The same thing you probably
used to move the mailboxes.
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Mitchell Mike
Sent: Friday, September 19, 2003 3:50 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Mailbox moves
We are on Exchange 5.5. I used the Exchange Administrator
-Original Message-
From: Woodruff, Michael [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, September 19, 2003 2:58 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Mailbox moves completed, but
That would be the Exchange System Manager.
Well, it appears that a number of individuals from this list have chosen
to engage in childish and cowardly ad hominem attacks on myself and
Achieving Process Profitability: Building the IT Profit Center without
ever even reading a single page of it. I have been in contact with
Amazon.com so these
I accept. Being a relatively new member to this list, I believe an
impartial review of this publication is within my abilities.
Thank you,
Mitchell D. Lawrence
**Good|Cheap|Fast (Pick Two)**
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Greg Deckler
I'll take you up on it.
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Greg Deckler
Sent: Friday, September 19, 2003 3:23 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: A CHALLENGE to the List
Well, it appears that a number of individuals from this list have
Send it on, I'll return it at my own expense once I am done lest one
consider that I took compensation in form of a free book and tainted my
review as a result.
Chris Scharff
9420 Research Blvd
Suite 330
Austin, TX 78759
-Original Message-
From: Greg Deckler [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sure, I love a challenge.
Regards, Michael Henry
-Original Message-
From: Greg Deckler [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, September 19, 2003 3:23 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: A CHALLENGE to the List
Well, it appears that a number of individuals from this list have chosen
I will definitely take you up!
-Original Message-
From: Greg Deckler [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, September 19, 2003 2:23 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: A CHALLENGE to the List
Well, it appears that a number of individuals from this list have chosen
to engage in
I am game. My review will be impartial since I have bothered reading your
previous posts.
- Scott Weston -
-Original Message-
From: Greg Deckler [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, September 19, 2003 3:23 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: A CHALLENGE to the List
Well, it
Deal
-Original Message-
From: Greg Deckler [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, September 19, 2003 4:23 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: A CHALLENGE to the List
Well, it appears that a number of individuals from this list have chosen to
engage in childish and cowardly ad hominem
I accept your offer Mr. Deckler.
John Parker, MCSE
IS Admin.
Senior Technical Specialist
Digital Display Systems.
Alpha Video
7711 Computer Ave.
Edina, MN. 55435
952-896-9898 Local
800-388-0008 Watts
952-896-9899 Fax
612-804-8769 Cell
952-841-3327 Direct
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Be excellent to each
Now THAT is funny.
-Original Message-
From: Chris Scharff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, September 19, 2003 4:28 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: A CHALLENGE to the List
Send it on, I'll return it at my own expense once I am done lest one
consider that I took
Did you try moving one back? I think that will delete the empty one and
just quit without moving it (and thus fixing the problem).
Tom
-Original Message-
From: Mitchell Mike [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, September 19, 2003 4:01 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE:
You can count me in
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Greg Deckler
Sent: Friday, September 19, 2003 3:23 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: A CHALLENGE to the List
Well, it appears that a number of individuals from this list have chosen
I accept. MSG off list for contact info
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Greg Deckler
Sent: Friday, September 19, 2003 1:23 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: A CHALLENGE to the List
Well, it appears that a number of individuals from
Tom,
That is what I finally did. I found an article on phantom mailboxes and did
as it suggested. The problem was I didn't know to use the word phantom...
Thanks for everyone's help.
Mike
-Original Message-
From: Alverson, Tom [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, September 19,
OK.
- Original Message -
From: Greg Deckler [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, September 19, 2003 3:23 PM
Subject: A CHALLENGE to the List
| Well, it appears that a number of individuals from this list have chosen
| to engage in childish and
It's a real shame that the literary world continues to be so book and
author-centric. There is no agency that enforces ethical standards
among literary reviewers and so they cannot be considered true
professionals.
grin
Sorry, couldn't resist.
-Ben-
Ben M. Schorr, MVP-OneNote, CNA, MCPx4
S!!
Our security folks wanted SecurID for wireless, but we managed to talk
them into just a userid/passwd. We told them NO ONE ELSE was using
SecurID for wireless...
-Original Message-
From: Roger Seielstad [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, September 19, 2003 1:54 PM
To:
It appears that all of the free copies have been spoken for; which is
fine. It appears that you only allow for the possibility that there are
fewer than 10-12 fair-minded individuals on this list; I would hope
that is an underestimate. Not having read it your book I have posted no
reviews of it
I couldn't tell you. Our dialup consists of dialing to what essentially
is a world-wide ISP, then firing up a Nortel VPN client. The Nortel
client is apparently pretty tightly integrated with SecurID - I'm
assuming it uses the native SecurID API for authentication.
I remember in the old days,
I'm playing around with WebDAV as a way to get data out of public folders. However, I
am unable to find a reference as to what form the URLs should take. I've seen a number
of examples, but they are almost all for individual mailboxes, and all differ. What
would be the root of the public folder
Thanks Ken.
-Original Message-
From: Ken Cornetet [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, September 19, 2003 2:55 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: OWA front end server - licensing and security
I couldn't tell you. Our dialup consists of dialing to what essentially is a
being 200% better than ArcServe 7 is like being taller than the dwarf from the austin
powers films.
-Original Message-
From: Henry, Christopher M. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Fri 19/09/2003 13:21
To: Exchange Discussions
Cc:
Yep, into it no problems. Never had a problem with it either way so I'm
pretty impartial.
Best regards
David Taylor
Network Architect
Routed Solutions
Ph : +612 8920 9652
Mo : +614 1407 2098
Email : [EMAIL PROTECTED]
WWW : www.routedsolutions.com.au
-Original Message-
From: Greg Deckler
Be sure to tell us how well the restore goes... It's not that we don't like
it because it doesn't backup; it has a serious problem with restoring...
-Original Message-
From: Henry, Christopher M. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, September 19, 2003 8:22 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
I run 2 Exchange 2000 Enterprise servers on an HP EVA2 SAN.
Each server has a 65GB IS right now and a 2GB Public IS.
16,000+ mailboxes total. I have seen no issues since migrating from our
5.5 environment 1 month ago to 2000 and moving away from direct attached
SCSI disk environment. The big
Thanks.
Regards,
Irf.
-Original Message-
From: Roger Seielstad [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, September 19, 2003 7:48 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Automatic Deletion
Mailbox cleanup agent will do it as well, I believe.
98 matches
Mail list logo
