80, 443 I think?
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of rsamman
Sent: Thursday, December 04, 2003 2:04 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: What ports to open
My OWA is working from within ( locally ), but I can't access it from
home
What
OK, I'm sure this is a newbie question, but I don't even know what to
call this problem in order to look it up:
After our upgrade to Exchange 2000 from 5.5 many of our users are
experiencing a problem where they are getting undeliverable emails to
other staff members. This is definitely a
This might be a silly newbie question, but how does one go about setting
a default set of addresses in Exchange 2000 that will update all the
user accounts with something other than just [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For example, I already have it set so that all users have addresses at
@heightslibrary.org
and Collaboration
Spherion
-Original Message-
From: Matt Hoffman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, November 05, 2003 12:52 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: SMTP Addresses
This might be a silly newbie question, but how does one go about setting
a default set of addresses in Exchange 2000
Having a strange problem here where IIS won't hold on to the folder
security settings we want in place for our users. We've changed them to
Basic Authentication for the Exchange site, and Anonymous for the Public
site. Any time the server is rebooted it loses these settings and goes
back to the
a benign error:
http://support.microsoft.com/?id=259373
Neil
-Original Message-
From: Matt Hoffman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Posted At: 13 October 2003 15:11
Posted To: Swynk Exchange (30 days)
Conversation: Problems with IIS settings for Exchange and Public in
Exchange 2000
Subject
Doesn't Exchange bounce back any type of message to the originator of
the message that the account no longer exists, though? Or really, maybe
I should say shouldn't it?
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Fyodorov,
Andrey
Sent: Monday,
Hoffman
Sent: Wednesday, September 24, 2003 8:47 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: 5.5 to 2000 Transition
Hmmm... One more thing... Does the server I'm restoring to require the
same name as the old server? Not just the same org and site?
Matt
-Original Message-
From: Matt
with the patch option? Also what was the exact error
message you get in the event log. Search on that as it may have to do
with
changing the restore in progress setting.
From: Matt Hoffman [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED
PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, September 25, 2003 11:14 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: Re: 5.5 to 2000 Transition
Is this an online or offline restore?
- Original Message -
From: Matt Hoffman [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, September 25
server's OS and SP level do not match the
production's OS and SP level. In the DR whitepaper, use the section that
refers to Single Mailbox Recovery and you should be good to go.
- Original Message -
From: Matt Hoffman [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent
W2K servers yet.
So, we're back up and running and all our users have their email.
Thanks to all who helped me out with this, and sorry for any wasted time
on your parts.
Matt
-Original Message-
From: Matt Hoffman
Sent: Thursday, September 25, 2003 11:43 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
OK, Migration to Exchange 2000 from 5.5 was a nightmare, but I managed
to get MOST of my users to transfer over. Unfortunately, 15 of the 160
did not transfer inexplicably. They now have no mailboxes. Also, even
more unfortunately, a couple of them are people who had huge mailboxes
and lost a
Gah! Sorry about hijacking that thread...
OK, Migration to Exchange 2000 from 5.5 was a nightmare, but I managed
to get MOST of my users to transfer over. Unfortunately, 15 of the 160
did not transfer inexplicably. They now have no mailboxes. Also, even
more unfortunately, a couple of them
if this is the
case.
My $0.02 (inc GST).
themolk.
-Original Message-
From: Matt Hoffman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, 25 September 2003 7:37 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Exchange 2003 RBL
OK, Migration to Exchange 2000 from 5.5 was a nightmare, but
I
.
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Matt Hoffman
Sent: Wednesday, September 24, 2003 5:48 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: 5.5 to 2000 Transition
Gah! Sorry about hijacking that thread...
OK, Migration to Exchange 2000 from 5.5 was a nightmare, but I
on it? Otherwise, slap the tape drive on the 5.5 member server.
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Matt Hoffman
Sent: Wednesday, September 24, 2003 7:47 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: 5.5 to 2000 Transition
Argh! Trying
Transition
Can you see the 5.5 server in NTBACKUP on the server with the Admin Gui
on it? Otherwise, slap the tape drive on the 5.5 member server.
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Matt Hoffman
Sent: Wednesday, September 24, 2003 7:47 PM
Hmmm... One more thing... Does the server I'm restoring to require the
same name as the old server? Not just the same org and site?
Matt
-Original Message-
From: Matt Hoffman
Sent: Wednesday, September 24, 2003 8:44 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: 5.5 to 2000 Transition
I
OK,
I'm just about to upgrade from Exchange 5.5 to Exchange 2000 tomorrow. I've
installed a secondary copy of Exchange 2000 in my AD domain. The plan was
to do a swing upgrade and migrate all users and mailboxes over to the
secondary copy of Exchange and then change my add my 5.5 box into the
Anyone know how (or if) you can fix a situation where the ADC was not
installed first before ForestPrep and DomainPrep were run?
Basically we cannot get the Public Folders to replicate because there's no
ability to set up an intersite connection.
Thanks,
Matt
Anyone know how (or if) you can fix a situation where the ADC was not
installed first before ForestPrep and DomainPrep were run?
Basically we cannot get the Public Folders to replicate because there's no
ability to set up an intersite connection.
Thanks,
Matt
don't want to do all my software
assignment through the Users - some stuff really needs to be set up to
install at the Computer level.
Thanks in advance for any assistance,
Matt Hoffman
_
List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com
Argh!
Sorry about this, I meant to send it to the NT list. But, of course, if any
of you can help... ;)
Matt
-Original Message-
From: Matt Hoffman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, September 17, 2003 11:00 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: Computer GPO software
I want to know who I can call to make sure I'm getting my proper kickbacks.
That's money I'm losing out on Deckler!
Matt
-Original Message-
From: Ed Crowley [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Saturday, September 13, 2003 1:54 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Deckler wrote a book?!?
Well, to look at your point about a Pfizer certification, don't mechanics
have different certifications based on what type of automobiles they work
on? I believe there's a Ford certification and something else... I'm not
real knowledgable on the subject.
Matt
-Original Message-
From:
Hmmm. Oddly enough, I would have figured it to be the other way round; that
any person who attempts to keep me from being able to do my job freely with
no complications was a capitalist wage-slave owner, but's that's just my
particular set of thoughts...
Matt
-Original Message-
From:
Hear hear. It's not like IT professionals are politicians taking kickbacks
and getting thousands and thousands of dollars in gift money. Doctors need
a code of ethics because of the nature of their career-path; it's so
amazingly easy to ruin someone's life as a doctor (or save it, of course).
This is just a problem when sending emails? Not when opening emails?
-Original Message-
From: Christopher Henry [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, September 12, 2003 11:47 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: Exchange or Outlook slow
I have a problem that is affecting two users
I know this is a bit off-topic, but what are you folks using to keep your
Outlook/Office installations up to date? Since there's no automatic
updates, and SUS supposedly doesn't support office updates... Are you using
third-party tools?
Thanks,
Matt
Does anyone else have this same setup and have you experienced any problems
with upgrading to Win2K SP 4?
Windows 2000, SP3 with all hotfixes, Exchange 5.5 SP 4
I'm just wondering about any major issues with Win2K SP4 interfering with
Exchange that anyone else has experienced.
Thanks,
Matt
had to
rebuild a server. Microsoft tech said there was going to be patch soon.
john
-Original Message-
From: Matt Hoffman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, September 10, 2003 1:26 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: Win2k SP 4 with Exchange 5.5
Does anyone else have this same
Bah. Helpful you are not - so says Yoda.
-Original Message-
From: Martin Blackstone [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, September 10, 2003 4:39 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Win2k SP 4 with Exchange 5.5
Yes
-Original Message-
From: Matt Hoffman [mailto
the domains. It will cause you great distress further down the
road.
Jeff
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Matt Hoffman Posted
At: Friday, August 22, 2003 12:50 PM Posted To: Exchange Discussion List
Conversation: Replication and Schema problem
Administrator
Inovis Inc.
-Original Message-
From: Matt Hoffman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, August 25, 2003 12:38 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Replication and Schema problem
Well, it already has. We just haven't been able to figure it out yet.
Likely
-Original Message-
From: Matt Hoffman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Posted At: Monday, August 25, 2003 12:19 PM
Posted To: Exchange (Swynk)
Conversation: Replication and Schema problem
Subject: RE: Replication and Schema problem
Hah! OK, I was wondering about whether we needed to be set up as a Global
-
From: Matt Hoffman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, August 25, 2003 1:19 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Replication and Schema problem
Hah! OK, I was wondering about whether we needed to be set
up as a Global
Catalog. I was seeing that that was not set up when looking
Hopefully someone on this list will have a suggestion as to what to do with
this problem:
Upgrading from NT 4.0 domain/Exch. 5.5 - SP4 to AD with Exch 2000.
The domain in question is not the root domain for the forest, but ForestPrep
has been run successfully in the root. This particular
Sr. Systems Administrator
Inovis Inc.
-Original Message-
From: Matt Hoffman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, August 22, 2003 12:11 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: Replication and Schema problem
Hopefully someone on this list will have a suggestion as to
what to do
I'm beginning the process of an in-place upgrade from Exchange 5.5 SP4 to
Exchange 2000, and I wanted to make sure I had the right ideas about how to
go about this.
1. I downloaded the In-Place Upgrade Whitepaper from Microsoft. Is this a
definitive document or is there something in the
. Understanding then can mean the
difference between a failed or successful upgrade.
- Peter
-Original Message-
From: Matt Hoffman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, August 11, 2003 8:49 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: Upgrade from Exchange 5.5 SP4 to Exch. 2000
I'm beginning
reading the E2K3 help,
I'd strongly recommend migration to it over E2K.
From: Matt Hoffman [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Mon, 11 Aug 2003 12:37:33 -0400
To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: Upgrade from Exchange 5.5 SP4 to Exch. 2000
to you or you want to ask a specific question,
please don't hesitate to ask.
I used the MS White Paper on In-place Upgrades.
Samantha
-Original Message-
From: Matt Hoffman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, August 11, 2003 12:38 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Upgrade from
You need to have as many CALs (client access licenses) as you do users who
will connect. As far as I know each user must have their own CAL. Terminal
Services works the way you're suggesting, but not this.
You might not be able to buy a 5.5 CAL anymore... You may have to buy
Exchange 2000
, that it all depends on who you talk to and that you
should always direct licensing questions to your Microsoft representative.
Paul Chinnery
Network Administrator
Mem Med Ctr
-Original Message-
From: Matt Hoffman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, June 26, 2003 11:42 AM
To: Exchange
We used to use Netscape's mail server back when it was free for educational
use. At the time, we did have a closed relay system, but since our server
wouldn't respond with a 550, we got blacklisted. It took us quite a lot of
effort to get the various Anti-relay sites to accept that we were a
-
From: Matt Hoffman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Monday, February 17, 2003 2:53 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: SMTP Routing for one internal system
I did give that a try already and I got no good results. I've even tried
telnetting into the Exchange server once having made
I'm having difficulty finding information on this either in MS's
Knowledgebase or in the various books I have:
We have routing turned on on our Exchange 5.5 box (latest SP's, etc.) but
have it set so that relaying is not allowed via the recommended method (set
for Hosts and clients with these IP
of the host to relay.
On 2/17/03 12:18, Matt Hoffman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'm having difficulty finding information on this either in MS's
Knowledgebase or in the various books I have:
We have routing turned on on our Exchange 5.5 box (latest SP's, etc.) but
have it set so that relaying
Anyone ever run into a situation where certain users are sending/receiving
only partial email messages (Exch. 5.5/SP4, on Win2000 SP2 member server)?
One user in particular sends messages out that then do not contain all the
necessary text within them. The same message can go to two different
All going Internal.
-Original Message-
From: Martin Blackstone [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Wednesday, April 10, 2002 4:33 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Lost/Partial Messages
Are these messages all going internal, or external?
-Original Message-
From: Matt
.
-Original Message-
From: Matt Hoffman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Wednesday, April 10, 2002 4:37 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Lost/Partial Messages
All going Internal.
-Original Message-
From: Martin Blackstone [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Wednesday, April 10
10, 2002 4:46 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: Re: Lost/Partial Messages
Maybe the part of the message is a pasted spreadsheet or something and the
other user does not have the appropriate software to view.
- Original Message -
From: Matt Hoffman [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange
Hello,
We're having a problem I haven't found any Q articles on...
We occasionally run email surveys... the email itself has a web form in it
that sends its input to a PERL script, which then sends the results to a
certain user. This form works correctly when accessed through Outlook, but
: Matt Hoffman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Tuesday, March 05, 2002 9:52 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: OWA and email form problems
Hello,
We're having a problem I haven't found any Q articles on...
We occasionally run email surveys... the email itself has a web form in it
that sends
cost for
TVD, plus the extra nodes we need (under 200). It really is important that
the suite be able to handle integrating well with Exchange 5.5. Especially
when it comes to attachment blocking.
Thanks much!
Matt Hoffman
_
List
Message-
From: Matt Hoffman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Thursday, January 24, 2002 11:23 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: Antivirus Suite recommendations
Hello!
Upon attempting to renew our license with NAI for our TVD suite, I've found
that the cost of renewal is significantly
Message-
From: Matt Hoffman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Thursday, January 24, 2002 11:29 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Antivirus Suite recommendations
Martin, since I have no experience with Trend, I assume that there are
similar methods for updating workstations with the latest
. I dotn think you will find a more reliable suite of
products. Every one of them is awesome.
-Original Message-
From: Matt Hoffman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Thursday, January 24, 2002 11:29 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Antivirus Suite recommendations
Martin, since I
PROTECTED]]
Sent: Thursday, January 24, 2002 2:41 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Antivirus Suite recommendations
CDW...Not exactly the low cost specialists, but they always have what I
am
searching for on a moments notice.
-Original Message-
From: Matt Hoffman [mailto:[EMAIL
. We saw a similar price increase
from them while actually reducing the number of nodes. I looked at it as a
good excuse to get some good software, Antigen in our case.
-Peter
-Original Message-
From: Matt Hoffman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Thursday, January 24, 2002 11:50
Alright, I found it myself: Trend's got single-year licensing with the
second year being an additional 20%. Sheesh.
-Original Message-
From: Matt Hoffman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Thursday, January 24, 2002 3:15 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Antivirus Suite
a term license for its use.
Same with Antigen.
- Original Message -
From: Matt Hoffman [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, January 24, 2002 12:14 PM
Subject: RE: Antivirus Suite recommendations
I'm noting that CDW does have the NeaTSuite package
not buying the product. You get a term license for its use.
Same with Antigen.
- Original Message -
From: Matt Hoffman [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, January 24, 2002 12:14 PM
Subject: RE: Antivirus Suite recommendations
I'm noting
I can find no listings for this at Nai, nor can I find any listings in a
Google or Overture search. A hoax possibly?
Matt
-Original Message-
From: Ben Schorr [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Friday, January 04, 2002 2:31 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: New Virus ShakerWorld
Check this out: http://www.abuse.net/relay.html
And the info on closing your open relay:
http://www.exchangeadmin.com/Articles/Index.cfm?ArticleID=7696
-Matt
-Original Message-
From: Dustin Krysak [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Wednesday, January 02, 2002 3:36 PM
To: Exchange
So, does anyone have a strong opinion on what filtering software to use? We
haven't done anything along those lines before (hell, we didn't have
antivirus until last year). I just want to use it for blocking attachments;
we don't care about abilities relating to disclaimers or scanning for
and Information Services (OBIS)
Vancouver, Washington
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Voice: (360) 397-6121 x4658
Fax:(360) 759-6001
-Original Message-
From: Matt Hoffman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Wednesday, September 19, 2001 9:00 AM
To: Exchange 5.5 List
Subject: RE: today's admin backwards virus
So
) 397-6121 x4658
Fax:(360) 759-6001
-Original Message-
From: Matt Hoffman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Wednesday, September 19, 2001 9:00 AM
To: Exchange 5.5 List
Subject: RE: today's admin backwards virus
So, does anyone have a strong opinion on what filtering software
:(360) 759-6001
-Original Message-
From: Matt Hoffman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Wednesday, September 19, 2001 9:00 AM
To: Exchange 5.5 List
Subject: RE: today's admin backwards virus
So, does anyone have a strong opinion on what filtering software to use?
We
haven't
Look here under Removal Instructions:
http://vil.nai.com/vil/virusSummary.asp?virus_k=99209
Matt Hoffman
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Tuesday, September 18, 2001 3:47 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: New Virus / Worm ??
you got
relating to this, but I was hoping someone else might have seen
this before.
Thanks!
Matt Hoffman
_
List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch
on
scheduled into the next century, practically. I'll just try scanpst I
suppose and see if anything comes of it. Thanks!
Matt Hoffman
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Tuesday, September 18, 2001 4:35 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE
Same here, except for a few stations trying to gouge the public.
-Original Message-
From: Ben Schorr [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Wednesday, September 12, 2001 2:43 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: God Bless America
Not here - $1.89 just like yesterday and the day before
Most of downtown Cleveland is being evacuated as well. The mayor here says
that a plane that was reportedly hijacked was held here in a secured area of
the airport. The plane has been evacuated and security experts are
searching the plane now. Another plane that was also reported as being a
Haiku is nice, but
Do you not have enough work
To do on Friday?
Matt
-Original Message-
From: Denis Baldwin [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Friday, August 31, 2001 9:59 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Haiku Friday
Computers give hell
To all that dare to touch them
Goddamn
This is funny, yes
A hoot, laff, a knee slapper
I am rolling now
-Original Message-
From: LSeltzer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Friday, August 31, 2001 2:33 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Haiku Friday
ha haha haha
hahahaha ha haha
haha ha haha!
-Original
77 matches
Mail list logo
