CYA. Document everything so when the ducks come quacking you can pick them
off one by one.
-Original Message-
From: James Liddil [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Friday, October 04, 2002 10:00 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: Policy issue
I seem to be facing resistance from
Why not set limits on the individual mailboxes and leave the management up
to the mailbox owners as they get full?
John J. Steniger
-Original Message-
From: James Liddil [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Friday, October 04, 2002 10:00 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: Policy
04, 2002 10:37 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Policy issue
Why not set limits on the individual mailboxes and leave the
management up to the mailbox owners as they get full?
John J. Steniger
-Original Message-
From: James Liddil [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED
: James Liddil [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Friday, October 04, 2002 11:18 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Policy issue
Because that would require that a policy be put in place to
force mail (or
even just inbox) limits. I can't get the powers that be to
even let the
server do
so and
stated earlier document as much as possible to cover your as$ and support
your argument.
- Original Message -
From: James Liddil [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, October 04, 2002 10:18 AM
Subject: RE: Policy issue
Because that would
-
From: Chris Scharff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Friday, October 04, 2002 12:33 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Policy issue
It's unlikely that you or the system itself has the ability
to delete mail in accordance with a well written retention
policy (no offense, I've been
I think you have some lawyers that are not quite up to snuff on this topic.
You could do their homework for them, but of course that would be practicing
law.
You should have a policy. They should be highly motivated to have you
delete any and all old digital data (especially mail) that you
year
tape rotation). Sorry, I don't think it's an efficient use of someone that
talented and it's too prone to human error.
-Original Message-
From: James Liddil [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Friday, October 04, 2002 11:57 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Policy issue
PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, October 04, 2002 11:57 AM
Subject: RE: Policy issue
Our lawyer is quite familiar with our business and what we do. Not to
defend
lawyers or anything. They are well versed in the 21CFR11 and FDA issues we
face along with the legal implications of having no policy as we do
don't want to spend a week or more manually going through our IS with a
lawyer looking over my shoulder.
Jim
-Original Message-
From: Chris Scharff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Friday, October 04, 2002 1:44 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Policy issue
Well, I'd join
04, 2002 1:00 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Policy issue
I agree. So if I read right you are suggesting this should
be a completely automated process. So I should buy into a
KVS type solution or does messageone have something. :-).
I'd be happy to use the Mailbox Manager
:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Friday, October 04, 2002 2:00 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Policy issue
I agree. So if I read right you are suggesting this should be a completely
automated process. So I should buy into a KVS type solution or does
messageone have something. :-). I'd
Buhler!
-Original Message-
From: Schwartz, Jim [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Friday, October 04, 2002 2:32 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Policy issue
There is a fairly good white paper on this subject here:
http://www.ferris.com/
Look for White Paper: Email Archiving
13 matches
Mail list logo
