RE: Allowing internal SMTP but not external
I believe that you could also leave the smtp addresses in tact and simply empty the address space on the IMS. Also set the IMS to inbound only. Removing the address space will stop Exchange from sending (route will be removed from the routing table) but the IMS can still receive mail. This might be easier. Mike -Original Message- From: Walden H. Leverich [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 17 December 2001 21:41 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Allowing internal SMTP but not external OK, I think I know the answer to this, but I told a customer I'd ask. I have a customer that wants to limit users from receiving email from the internet. No problem, remove the SMTP address and they won't be able to send/receive SMTP mail. However, now they have a requirement for these users to receive SMTP mail from an internal machine (AS/400 sending e-mail to local users). Short of going to the SMTP proxy (Firewall-1) and saying drop messages for user1 and user2 and user3 etc. there is no way I can see of preventing external SMTP mail while allowing internal SMTP mail. Did I miss something? -Walden Walden H Leverich III President Tech Software (516)627-3800 x11 [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.TechSoftInc.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]
OFF TOPIC (Slightly) - Surfcontrol
Is anyone currently using SurfControls Superscout E-mail filter (Or even their web filter)?? I am currently using MAILsweeper for exchange but I am currently upgrading all of our systems. I have tried the Super scout web filter but not the E-mail filter. I'm really just after an idea how good Surf control is compared to MAILsweeper. Any help much appreciated Dave -- Dave Hornby Technical Support Analyst -- _ List posting FAQ: 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]
Fwd: dir.edb troubles
Sorry if this posted the first time, but I never saw it come across the wire here. Got a problem with dir.edb here, need to see if anyone has a solution. Mail server (5.5 on NT sp 6) went down hard. Brought it back up and now the directory service won't start. I ran the eseutil program against dir, pub, and priv and only dir cam back as inconsistent. So I went to run eseutil /r /ds on the file, but it keeps looking at c:\exch... when the files are in d:\exch... I enherited this mail server when I started here so it makes me fearful when I see in the MS tech notes that the logs are hardcoded to look at c:, so my question is, is there a work around. All of the .edb files are stored in d, not in c:. I tried backing up a copy of the dsadata file, then moving that to c:. The recovery util did run, but when I moved it back to d:, it still errors out. with a 550 error I've looked on the list and several other sources and have found at least 4 different ways to possibly fix this, but I don't want to make matters worse. Tom _ List posting FAQ: 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: stripping attachments
Trend Scanmail (183) for exchange 2000, Exch 2K SP2 -Original Message- From: Chris Scharff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 18 December, 2001 4:44 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: stripping attachments AV version? Server version and SP? -Original Message- From: Kim Schotanus To: Exchange Discussions Sent: 12/17/2001 7:32 AM Subject: stripping attachments Hi, Some virus infected mails get sstripped by Trend scanmail, but users'Outlook crashes when they have the preview pane open, how can I stop this? Kim _ List posting FAQ: 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 mailboxes between recipient containers
simply so that a group of mailboxes incorrectly set up in one recipient container can be re homed in another one on the same site. What I'm trying to find out is whether this can be achieved without exporting all of the affected mailboxes to pst and then recreating tha mailboxes in the new recipients container and importing the pst's -Original Message- From: Chris Scharff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 18 December 2001 03:46 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Moving mailboxes between recipient containers To what end? -Original Message- From: Julian Lovell To: Exchange Discussions Sent: 12/17/2001 8:23 AM Subject: Moving mailboxes between recipient containers Gents, I'm trying to find a way of moving mailboxes between recipient containers in a single site. I'm running Exchange 5.5 sp4 on NT4 SP6... I do not want to just create a view _ List posting FAQ: 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] The contents of this email and any attachments may be privileged or confidential, for the exclusive use of the intended recipient(s) only and may not be disclosed or used in any way other than by the addressee(s). If you have received this email in error please advise the sender and delete from your system. Integrated Solutions Consultants Ltd are unable to guarantee the security of email content outside of our own systems where all emails and content are treated in accordance with the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000.. Further information about Integrated Solutions Consultants Ltd is available at http://www.isc.co.uk or 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]
RE: Can anyone help with these attachments?
Check that the users who cant open the attachments have a 'Temporary Internet folder' in their profile. Regards Mr Louis Joyce Computer Support Analyst Network Administrator BT Ignite eSolutions -Original Message- From: DJB [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 17 December 2001 22:07 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Can anyone help with these attachments? Can't open some Word / Excel attachments from internet??? I need to know if this could be a problem with my Exchange 5.5 sp4 database files/a setting set wrong on my exchange server to handle certain formats of attachments/or what? I can view the Word Document attachments using Quick View Plus - and their is some kind of code before and after the actual document. I have renamed the attachments everything extension I can think of but none really allows the documents to open up totally right. The documents are embeded. The error says it can't find the file but from viewing the attachment it is all there just formatted wrong. Have most trouble from just two large gov. (civil) sites that we need to correspond with. One is a college - the other is a gov. _ List posting FAQ: 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 mailboxes between recipient containers
By design, no. Regards Mr Louis Joyce Computer Support Analyst Network Administrator BT Ignite eSolutions -Original Message- From: Julian Lovell [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 18 December 2001 10:01 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Moving mailboxes between recipient containers simply so that a group of mailboxes incorrectly set up in one recipient container can be re homed in another one on the same site. What I'm trying to find out is whether this can be achieved without exporting all of the affected mailboxes to pst and then recreating tha mailboxes in the new recipients container and importing the pst's -Original Message- From: Chris Scharff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 18 December 2001 03:46 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Moving mailboxes between recipient containers To what end? -Original Message- From: Julian Lovell To: Exchange Discussions Sent: 12/17/2001 8:23 AM Subject: Moving mailboxes between recipient containers Gents, I'm trying to find a way of moving mailboxes between recipient containers in a single site. I'm running Exchange 5.5 sp4 on NT4 SP6... I do not want to just create a view _ List posting FAQ: 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] The contents of this email and any attachments may be privileged or confidential, for the exclusive use of the intended recipient(s) only and may not be disclosed or used in any way other than by the addressee(s). If you have received this email in error please advise the sender and delete from your system. Integrated Solutions Consultants Ltd are unable to guarantee the security of email content outside of our own systems where all emails and content are treated in accordance with the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000.. Further information about Integrated Solutions Consultants Ltd is available at http://www.isc.co.uk or 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: NDR's filling my mailbox
Chris, Why is it a 'stupid' option for null senders? Cheers Paul -Original Message- From: Chris Scharff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 3:51 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: NDR's filling my mailbox Well at the moment I'm unable to access an Exchange 2000 admin program to pinpoint the answer to your questions... but the null sender message filtering option is is under whatever the top object is in the admin (Global Settings?) on a message filtering tab I believe. The other option is found on the default SMTP virtual server I believe. However, I'm old and tired so my memory might be totally off. -Original Message- From: Hooks, Tim To: Exchange Discussions Sent: 12/17/2001 3:15 PM Subject: RE: NDR's filling my mailbox Thanks for your comments - where I can I find either of these options? -Original Message- From: Chris Scharff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, December 17, 2001 3:59 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: NDR's filling my mailbox It's set on the SMTP virtual server. Also it appears that you are blocking mail with a null sender. While Exchange certainly supports this option, it's a. a stupid option and b. non-RFC compliant. Chris -- Chris Scharff Senior Sales Engineer MessageOne If you can't measure, you can't manage! -Original Message- From: Hooks, Tim [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, December 17, 2001 3:04 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: NDR's filling my mailbox Hi Everyone, I recently added an Exchange 2000 server to my site and moved over all my users, Public folders, and created a new SMTP connector. I am now getting about 200 NDR messages a day. They are mostly spam sent old addresses. The last lines read The e-mail account does not exist at the organization this message was sent to. Check the e-mail address, or contact the recipient directly to find out the correct address. our_server.our domain.com #5.1.1 SMTP; 550 MAILBOX NOT FOUND or A configuration error in the e-mail system caused the message to bounce between two servers or to be forwarded between two recipients. Contact your administrator. our_server.our domain.com #5.4.6 or The format of the e-mail address is incorrect. Check the address, look up the recipient in the Address Book, or contact the recipient directly to find out the correct address. our_server.our domain.com #5.1.3 SMTP; 553 From , message blocked. Part of the problem is this - our email domain name has had 3 or 4 variations over the last five years, such that many of our users have 4 or 5 smtp addresses - [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], etc. So, email to the oldest address is not getting delivered, I seem to be unable to create any new SMTP addresses in the recipient policy that holds the highest priority. This puzzles me. The real big problem I have is that the NDR are being sent to everyone in the administrators group - very annoying. I can not find where to turn this off. The setting under the virtual smtp server, messages, forward a copy is blank and the smtp vitrual server has been restarted. Any ideas on how to get these from being delivered to the administrator's group? Thanks for your insights. Tim Hooks _ List posting FAQ: 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] ** The information contained in this message or any of its attachments may be confidential and is intended for the exclusive use of the addressee(s). Any disclosure, reproduction, distribution or other dissemination or use of this communication is strictly prohibited without the express permission of the sender. The views expressed in this email are those of the individual and not necessarily those of Sony or Sony affiliated companies. Sony email is for business use only. This email and any response may be monitored by Sony UK. (05) ** _ List posting FAQ: 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: NDR's filling my mailbox
RFC 2821 states that MTAs must accept all mails from , as they are delivery notification messages. Bouncing them, as a lot of mailers do, is not RFC compliant and a bloody nuisance :-) Cheers, Phil - Phil Randal Network Engineer Herefordshire Council Hereford, UK -Original Message- From: Hurst, Paul [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 18 December 2001 10:57 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: NDR's filling my mailbox Chris, Why is it a 'stupid' option for null senders? Cheers Paul -Original Message- From: Chris Scharff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 3:51 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: NDR's filling my mailbox Well at the moment I'm unable to access an Exchange 2000 admin program to pinpoint the answer to your questions... but the null sender message filtering option is is under whatever the top object is in the admin (Global Settings?) on a message filtering tab I believe. The other option is found on the default SMTP virtual server I believe. However, I'm old and tired so my memory might be totally off. -Original Message- From: Hooks, Tim To: Exchange Discussions Sent: 12/17/2001 3:15 PM Subject: RE: NDR's filling my mailbox Thanks for your comments - where I can I find either of these options? -Original Message- From: Chris Scharff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, December 17, 2001 3:59 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: NDR's filling my mailbox It's set on the SMTP virtual server. Also it appears that you are blocking mail with a null sender. While Exchange certainly supports this option, it's a. a stupid option and b. non-RFC compliant. Chris -- Chris Scharff Senior Sales Engineer MessageOne If you can't measure, you can't manage! -Original Message- From: Hooks, Tim [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, December 17, 2001 3:04 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: NDR's filling my mailbox Hi Everyone, I recently added an Exchange 2000 server to my site and moved over all my users, Public folders, and created a new SMTP connector. I am now getting about 200 NDR messages a day. They are mostly spam sent old addresses. The last lines read The e-mail account does not exist at the organization this message was sent to. Check the e-mail address, or contact the recipient directly to find out the correct address. our_server.our domain.com #5.1.1 SMTP; 550 MAILBOX NOT FOUND or A configuration error in the e-mail system caused the message to bounce between two servers or to be forwarded between two recipients. Contact your administrator. our_server.our domain.com #5.4.6 or The format of the e-mail address is incorrect. Check the address, look up the recipient in the Address Book, or contact the recipient directly to find out the correct address. our_server.our domain.com #5.1.3 SMTP; 553 From , message blocked. Part of the problem is this - our email domain name has had 3 or 4 variations over the last five years, such that many of our users have 4 or 5 smtp addresses - [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], etc. So, email to the oldest address is not getting delivered, I seem to be unable to create any new SMTP addresses in the recipient policy that holds the highest priority. This puzzles me. The real big problem I have is that the NDR are being sent to everyone in the administrators group - very annoying. I can not find where to turn this off. The setting under the virtual smtp server, messages, forward a copy is blank and the smtp vitrual server has been restarted. Any ideas on how to get these from being delivered to the administrator's group? Thanks for your insights. Tim Hooks _ List posting FAQ: 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] ** The information contained in this message or any of its attachments may be confidential and is intended for the exclusive use of the addressee(s). Any disclosure, reproduction, distribution or other dissemination or use of this communication is strictly prohibited without the express permission of the sender. The views expressed in this email are those of the individual and not necessarily those of Sony or Sony affiliated companies. Sony email is for business use only. This email and any response may be monitored by Sony UK. (05) **
RE: ADC Connector
Easier to rehome them than to recreate. If you bring up your second ADC whilst the first is still running then on the General Tab of each agreement you can change the server that that CA runs on. You will be prompted to retype in the connection username/password. If you are really concerned set the deletion options to catch any deletions in a csv/ldf file and then monitor those files. Having said that I have recreated them without any issues. Just check Technet first as there are some articles on this very subject. Hint - Search on Active Directory Connector in quotes. Regards Mark -Original Message- From: Varghese, Wilson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 17 December 2001 23:20 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: ADC Connector Is there an issue with recreating the ADC's after your environment is up? The DC that is hosting the ADC needs to be rebuilt but I'm wondering if this will cause issues if I recreate them on another server? Thanks, Wilson _ List posting FAQ: 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]
RE: dir.edb troubles
Check the Registry to see where the server thinks the dir.edb should be located. Then go there and make sur eit is there. It may very well be on C:. If the Dir.edb won't recover using eseutil then the only option I know of is that you restore from backup. Nate Couch EDS Messaging -- From: Tom Reply To: Exchange Discussions Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 03:39 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Fwd: dir.edb troubles Sorry if this posted the first time, but I never saw it come across the wire here. Got a problem with dir.edb here, need to see if anyone has a solution. Mail server (5.5 on NT sp 6) went down hard. Brought it back up and now the directory service won't start. I ran the eseutil program against dir, pub, and priv and only dir cam back as inconsistent. So I went to run eseutil /r /ds on the file, but it keeps looking at c:\exch... when the files are in d:\exch... I enherited this mail server when I started here so it makes me fearful when I see in the MS tech notes that the logs are hardcoded to look at c:, so my question is, is there a work around. All of the .edb files are stored in d, not in c:. I tried backing up a copy of the dsadata file, then moving that to c:. The recovery util did run, but when I moved it back to d:, it still errors out. with a 550 error I've looked on the list and several other sources and have found at least 4 different ways to possibly fix this, but I don't want to make matters worse. Tom _ List posting FAQ: 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 - unable to mount mail stores
Thanks Wilson We did lose SI of all attachments, but that did not explain size. Size also changed some 2 weeks after Exchange 2000 set up, following serious degradation in performance especially noticeable in one Public Folder contact folder which eventually did not restore form the backup. (see response to /Peter). Agree with circular logging comment thanks. Regards Rob _ List posting FAQ: 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: dir.edb troubles
I thought MS recommended not trying to fix the dir.edb using eseutil as if it drops anything you wont know what state your system will be in. If you have a backup then use it, it's going to be a lot quicker and safer. Stewart -Original Message- From: Tom [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 18 December 2001 09:39 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Fwd: dir.edb troubles Sorry if this posted the first time, but I never saw it come across the wire here. Got a problem with dir.edb here, need to see if anyone has a solution. Mail server (5.5 on NT sp 6) went down hard. Brought it back up and now the directory service won't start. I ran the eseutil program against dir, pub, and priv and only dir cam back as inconsistent. So I went to run eseutil /r /ds on the file, but it keeps looking at c:\exch... when the files are in d:\exch... I enherited this mail server when I started here so it makes me fearful when I see in the MS tech notes that the logs are hardcoded to look at c:, so my question is, is there a work around. All of the .edb files are stored in d, not in c:. I tried backing up a copy of the dsadata file, then moving that to c:. The recovery util did run, but when I moved it back to d:, it still errors out. with a 550 error I've looked on the list and several other sources and have found at least 4 different ways to possibly fix this, but I don't want to make matters worse. Tom _ List posting FAQ: 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]
RE: NDR's filling my mailbox
Cheers for the info Phil -Original Message- From: Randal, Phil [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 11:07 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: NDR's filling my mailbox RFC 2821 states that MTAs must accept all mails from , as they are delivery notification messages. Bouncing them, as a lot of mailers do, is not RFC compliant and a bloody nuisance :-) Cheers, Phil - Phil Randal Network Engineer Herefordshire Council Hereford, UK -Original Message- From: Hurst, Paul [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 18 December 2001 10:57 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: NDR's filling my mailbox Chris, Why is it a 'stupid' option for null senders? Cheers Paul -Original Message- From: Chris Scharff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 3:51 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: NDR's filling my mailbox Well at the moment I'm unable to access an Exchange 2000 admin program to pinpoint the answer to your questions... but the null sender message filtering option is is under whatever the top object is in the admin (Global Settings?) on a message filtering tab I believe. The other option is found on the default SMTP virtual server I believe. However, I'm old and tired so my memory might be totally off. -Original Message- From: Hooks, Tim To: Exchange Discussions Sent: 12/17/2001 3:15 PM Subject: RE: NDR's filling my mailbox Thanks for your comments - where I can I find either of these options? -Original Message- From: Chris Scharff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, December 17, 2001 3:59 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: NDR's filling my mailbox It's set on the SMTP virtual server. Also it appears that you are blocking mail with a null sender. While Exchange certainly supports this option, it's a. a stupid option and b. non-RFC compliant. Chris -- Chris Scharff Senior Sales Engineer MessageOne If you can't measure, you can't manage! -Original Message- From: Hooks, Tim [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, December 17, 2001 3:04 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: NDR's filling my mailbox Hi Everyone, I recently added an Exchange 2000 server to my site and moved over all my users, Public folders, and created a new SMTP connector. I am now getting about 200 NDR messages a day. They are mostly spam sent old addresses. The last lines read The e-mail account does not exist at the organization this message was sent to. Check the e-mail address, or contact the recipient directly to find out the correct address. our_server.our domain.com #5.1.1 SMTP; 550 MAILBOX NOT FOUND or A configuration error in the e-mail system caused the message to bounce between two servers or to be forwarded between two recipients. Contact your administrator. our_server.our domain.com #5.4.6 or The format of the e-mail address is incorrect. Check the address, look up the recipient in the Address Book, or contact the recipient directly to find out the correct address. our_server.our domain.com #5.1.3 SMTP; 553 From , message blocked. Part of the problem is this - our email domain name has had 3 or 4 variations over the last five years, such that many of our users have 4 or 5 smtp addresses - [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], etc. So, email to the oldest address is not getting delivered, I seem to be unable to create any new SMTP addresses in the recipient policy that holds the highest priority. This puzzles me. The real big problem I have is that the NDR are being sent to everyone in the administrators group - very annoying. I can not find where to turn this off. The setting under the virtual smtp server, messages, forward a copy is blank and the smtp vitrual server has been restarted. Any ideas on how to get these from being delivered to the administrator's group? Thanks for your insights. Tim Hooks _ List posting FAQ: 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] ** The information contained in this message or any of its attachments may be confidential and is intended for the exclusive use of the addressee(s). Any disclosure, reproduction, distribution or other dissemination or use of this communication is strictly prohibited without the express permission of the sender. The views expressed in this email are those of the individual and not necessarily those of Sony or Sony
RE: Rejoin a Exchange site
Is this the first server in the site? If so be sure to read through the Technet articles about removing same. Nate Couch EDS Messaging -- From: Ed Crowley Reply To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 00:11 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: Rejoin a Exchange site You should be able to. Delete the server from both Server Manager and from Exchange Administrator and allow appropriate replication time before reinstalling. Ed Crowley MCSE+I MVP Tech Consultant Compaq Computer There are seldom good technological solutions to behavioral problems. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Phillip Yan Sent: Thursday, December 13, 2001 3:49 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Rejoin a Exchange site Exchange 5.5 SP4 I want to delete a Exchange server from a site and rebuild it, and let it rejoin the site. Can I use the same computer name and same IP address as it was? Is there any concerns? I was told the best practice would be giving a new name because other Exchange servers would take a while to flush their cache. Thanks, Phillip Yan _ List posting FAQ: 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 please
Changed the exchange iis website to anonymous now I get page can not be displayed even when I change it back I get nothing. -Original Message- From: Peter Szabo [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, December 17, 2001 9:06 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Re: Help please Ronald, If your external address for your owa is tahoe.ss-pca.com/exchange then you have an authentication problem on your OWA server, nothing to do with your proxy or PIX. for a proxy server or a pix f/w http is http is http. period. On your OWA server diasble any other authentication but Basic. If I remember correctly internaly users can access OWA, yes ? /Peter - Original Message - From: Don Ely [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, December 17, 2001 8:47 PM Subject: RE: Help please Have you turned up syslog on your PIX to watch the traffic? What do the logs say (both Proxy and the PIX)? My money says your issue resides in there. D It was when I found out I could make mistakes that I knew I was on to something. -Ornette Coleman -Original Message- From: Ronald Mazzotta [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, December 17, 2001 5:14 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please Yes that article has been followed to the letter. I apologize for the ms reference so could we get back to this. It is becoming increasingly frustrating. It SHOULD work. -Original Message- From: Tom Meunier [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, December 17, 2001 4:52 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please 1. Your MX record has no bearing on the issue - that's solely for mail routing. You need to worry about where your A record (or CNAME if that's how you're doing it) points. 2. I'm still kind of waiting for you to say that you've followed Q276388 to the letter. Whether OWA 5.5 works through proxy has nothing to do with whether OWA 2000 does; they are nowhere NEAR being the same product. -Original Message- From: Ronald Mazzotta [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Posted At: Monday, December 17, 2001 02:54 PM Posted To: MSExchange Mailing List Conversation: Help please Subject: RE: Help please Yeah sorry. My mx record is exchange.domain.com. when a user enters exchange.domain.com/exchange they hit the proxy. Proxy is set up to redirect any requests for this address to the internal exchange address. This is as per M$. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, December 17, 2001 3:56 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please Upgrade to version 6.0 IOS. Use the Static Port commands to redirect users to the internal OWA site instead of your Proxy Server first. This works even if your using a DMZ card. Also, can you clarify redirect my MX record exchange server address to the server? Also... How many valid static IP's to you have? Is your DNS hosted external or internal? When you upgraded did you change any of the static IP information? -Original Message- From: Ronald Mazzotta [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, December 17, 2001 2:41 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Help please I tried this on the exchange 2000 list and got very little information. I have a setup as follows: Pix Firewall--Proxy serv/IIS server--internal network containing exchange. We have had exchange 5.5 and OWA running in this config for some time. We have recently upgraded to Exchange2000 and are now having a problem connecting with owa 2000. When going to the owa site a login box comes up to log into exchange BUT it comes up three times then says access denied. I have the IIS/proxy web publishing set to redirect my MX record exchange server address to the server but can never log in. If anyone got ANY ideas I would greatly appreciate it. Ron _ List posting FAQ: 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:
RE: stripping attachments
Did this behavior happen prior to the application of E2K SP2? -Original Message- From: Kim Schotanus To: Exchange Discussions Sent: 12/18/2001 4:07 AM Subject: RE: stripping attachments Trend Scanmail (183) for exchange 2000, Exch 2K SP2 -Original Message- From: Chris Scharff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 18 December, 2001 4:44 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: stripping attachments AV version? Server version and SP? -Original Message- From: Kim Schotanus To: Exchange Discussions Sent: 12/17/2001 7:32 AM Subject: stripping attachments Hi, Some virus infected mails get sstripped by Trend scanmail, but users'Outlook crashes when they have the preview pane open, how can I stop this? Kim _ List posting FAQ: 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 mailboxes between recipient containers
It can be done by upgrading to Exchange 2000 where recipient containers no longer exist in the context that you currently think of them. You say you don't want to use views, so w/o an upgrade you're stuck with deletion and recreation to 'move' the mailboxes in question. -Original Message- From: Julian Lovell To: Exchange Discussions Sent: 12/18/2001 4:01 AM Subject: RE: Moving mailboxes between recipient containers simply so that a group of mailboxes incorrectly set up in one recipient container can be re homed in another one on the same site. What I'm trying to find out is whether this can be achieved without exporting all of the affected mailboxes to pst and then recreating tha mailboxes in the new recipients container and importing the pst's -Original Message- From: Chris Scharff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 18 December 2001 03:46 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Moving mailboxes between recipient containers To what end? -Original Message- From: Julian Lovell To: Exchange Discussions Sent: 12/17/2001 8:23 AM Subject: Moving mailboxes between recipient containers Gents, I'm trying to find a way of moving mailboxes between recipient containers in a single site. I'm running Exchange 5.5 sp4 on NT4 SP6... I do not want to just create a view _ List posting FAQ: 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: OFF TOPIC (Slightly) - Surfcontrol
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 I have no experience with Surfcontrol's E-mail filter, but I can tell that there Superscout webfilter product has some serious issues.. It can be bypassed with easily.. This bug was brought to their attention, released to the Bugtraq comunity and still never fixed.. If their E-mail filter is at all similar in quality, I would stear clear.. ~John just my $.o2 - -Original Message- From: David Hornby [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 3:20 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: OFF TOPIC (Slightly) - Surfcontrol Is anyone currently using SurfControls Superscout E-mail filter (Or even their web filter)?? I am currently using MAILsweeper for exchange but I am currently upgrading all of our systems. I have tried the Super scout web filter but not the E-mail filter. I'm really just after an idea how good Surf control is compared to MAILsweeper. Any help much appreciated Dave - -- Dave Hornby Technical Support Analyst - -- _ List posting FAQ: 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] -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: PGPfreeware 7.0.3 for non-commercial use http://www.pgp.com iQA/AwUBPB9LorlMSqGNvpxoEQIjNQCg+9NW7769jjRGMlSy7cWYAbzZgPYAnRg7 8kWO09T73KijFc0ScXLQ0cyh =S/7G -END PGP SIGNATURE- _ List posting FAQ: 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 please
Basic authentication. /Peter - Original Message - From: Ronald Mazzotta [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 8:07 AM Subject: RE: Help please Changed the exchange iis website to anonymous now I get page can not be displayed even when I change it back I get nothing. -Original Message- From: Peter Szabo [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, December 17, 2001 9:06 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Re: Help please Ronald, If your external address for your owa is tahoe.ss-pca.com/exchange then you have an authentication problem on your OWA server, nothing to do with your proxy or PIX. for a proxy server or a pix f/w http is http is http. period. On your OWA server diasble any other authentication but Basic. If I remember correctly internaly users can access OWA, yes ? /Peter - Original Message - From: Don Ely [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, December 17, 2001 8:47 PM Subject: RE: Help please Have you turned up syslog on your PIX to watch the traffic? What do the logs say (both Proxy and the PIX)? My money says your issue resides in there. D It was when I found out I could make mistakes that I knew I was on to something. -Ornette Coleman -Original Message- From: Ronald Mazzotta [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, December 17, 2001 5:14 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please Yes that article has been followed to the letter. I apologize for the ms reference so could we get back to this. It is becoming increasingly frustrating. It SHOULD work. -Original Message- From: Tom Meunier [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, December 17, 2001 4:52 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please 1. Your MX record has no bearing on the issue - that's solely for mail routing. You need to worry about where your A record (or CNAME if that's how you're doing it) points. 2. I'm still kind of waiting for you to say that you've followed Q276388 to the letter. Whether OWA 5.5 works through proxy has nothing to do with whether OWA 2000 does; they are nowhere NEAR being the same product. -Original Message- From: Ronald Mazzotta [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Posted At: Monday, December 17, 2001 02:54 PM Posted To: MSExchange Mailing List Conversation: Help please Subject: RE: Help please Yeah sorry. My mx record is exchange.domain.com. when a user enters exchange.domain.com/exchange they hit the proxy. Proxy is set up to redirect any requests for this address to the internal exchange address. This is as per M$. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, December 17, 2001 3:56 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please Upgrade to version 6.0 IOS. Use the Static Port commands to redirect users to the internal OWA site instead of your Proxy Server first. This works even if your using a DMZ card. Also, can you clarify redirect my MX record exchange server address to the server? Also... How many valid static IP's to you have? Is your DNS hosted external or internal? When you upgraded did you change any of the static IP information? -Original Message- From: Ronald Mazzotta [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, December 17, 2001 2:41 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Help please I tried this on the exchange 2000 list and got very little information. I have a setup as follows: Pix Firewall--Proxy serv/IIS server--internal network containing exchange. We have had exchange 5.5 and OWA running in this config for some time. We have recently upgraded to Exchange2000 and are now having a problem connecting with owa 2000. When going to the owa site a login box comes up to log into exchange BUT it comes up three times then says access denied. I have the IIS/proxy web publishing set to redirect my MX record exchange server address to the server but can never log in. If anyone got ANY ideas I would greatly appreciate it. Ron _ List posting FAQ: 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
RE: stripping attachments
Doesn't Scan Mail allow you to replace the attached infected message with a replacement text file? I just upgraded and I though I saw that feature. -Original Message- From: Chris Scharff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 8:40 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: stripping attachments Did this behavior happen prior to the application of E2K SP2? -Original Message- From: Kim Schotanus To: Exchange Discussions Sent: 12/18/2001 4:07 AM Subject: RE: stripping attachments Trend Scanmail (183) for exchange 2000, Exch 2K SP2 -Original Message- From: Chris Scharff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 18 December, 2001 4:44 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: stripping attachments AV version? Server version and SP? -Original Message- From: Kim Schotanus To: Exchange Discussions Sent: 12/17/2001 7:32 AM Subject: stripping attachments Hi, Some virus infected mails get sstripped by Trend scanmail, but users'Outlook crashes when they have the preview pane open, how can I stop this? Kim _ List posting FAQ: 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]
Off topic: ScanMail AVAPI notifications and tracing?
Exchange 5.5 SP4, ScanMail 3.52 We upgraded to ScanMail 3.52 and are running in both AVAPI and MAPI mode. I understand that running AVAPI, you lose the sender/recipient information for viruses caught in the log files. I'm a little confused on my testing on how notification works. I sent a test virus to a mailbox on our system and I did not receive a notification that I sent a infected message. The recipient, on the other hand, did receive a message from my account and had a text file entitled Virus1_Detected_and_Removed_virusname.txt. Shouldn't I have received a message as well. I have the real time scan set to send message to sender,recipient,administrator. One other question. Since I do not get the actual sender notifications in the log files now, I cannot determine where/who may be triggering an outbreak. Since the recipient gets a attachment with the Virus1x.txt message is there a way to track this through the MTA tracking log files. Is there a diagnostic key on the MTA that will include the attachment name sent on messages? Pete Pfefferkorn Senior Systems Engineer/Mail Administrator University of Cincinnati 51 Goodman Street Cincinnati, OH 45221 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]
RE: Help please
Woops. Thanks. OK I did that and it has the same result. Pops up the login box repeatedly. -Original Message- From: Peter Szabo [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 9:13 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Re: Help please Basic authentication. /Peter - Original Message - From: Ronald Mazzotta [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 8:07 AM Subject: RE: Help please Changed the exchange iis website to anonymous now I get page can not be displayed even when I change it back I get nothing. -Original Message- From: Peter Szabo [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, December 17, 2001 9:06 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Re: Help please Ronald, If your external address for your owa is tahoe.ss-pca.com/exchange then you have an authentication problem on your OWA server, nothing to do with your proxy or PIX. for a proxy server or a pix f/w http is http is http. period. On your OWA server diasble any other authentication but Basic. If I remember correctly internaly users can access OWA, yes ? /Peter - Original Message - From: Don Ely [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, December 17, 2001 8:47 PM Subject: RE: Help please Have you turned up syslog on your PIX to watch the traffic? What do the logs say (both Proxy and the PIX)? My money says your issue resides in there. D It was when I found out I could make mistakes that I knew I was on to something. -Ornette Coleman -Original Message- From: Ronald Mazzotta [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, December 17, 2001 5:14 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please Yes that article has been followed to the letter. I apologize for the ms reference so could we get back to this. It is becoming increasingly frustrating. It SHOULD work. -Original Message- From: Tom Meunier [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, December 17, 2001 4:52 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please 1. Your MX record has no bearing on the issue - that's solely for mail routing. You need to worry about where your A record (or CNAME if that's how you're doing it) points. 2. I'm still kind of waiting for you to say that you've followed Q276388 to the letter. Whether OWA 5.5 works through proxy has nothing to do with whether OWA 2000 does; they are nowhere NEAR being the same product. -Original Message- From: Ronald Mazzotta [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Posted At: Monday, December 17, 2001 02:54 PM Posted To: MSExchange Mailing List Conversation: Help please Subject: RE: Help please Yeah sorry. My mx record is exchange.domain.com. when a user enters exchange.domain.com/exchange they hit the proxy. Proxy is set up to redirect any requests for this address to the internal exchange address. This is as per M$. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, December 17, 2001 3:56 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please Upgrade to version 6.0 IOS. Use the Static Port commands to redirect users to the internal OWA site instead of your Proxy Server first. This works even if your using a DMZ card. Also, can you clarify redirect my MX record exchange server address to the server? Also... How many valid static IP's to you have? Is your DNS hosted external or internal? When you upgraded did you change any of the static IP information? -Original Message- From: Ronald Mazzotta [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, December 17, 2001 2:41 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Help please I tried this on the exchange 2000 list and got very little information. I have a setup as follows: Pix Firewall--Proxy serv/IIS server--internal network containing exchange. We have had exchange 5.5 and OWA running in this config for some time. We have recently upgraded to Exchange2000 and are now having a problem connecting with owa 2000. When going to the owa site a login box comes up to log into exchange BUT it comes up three times then says access denied. I have the IIS/proxy web publishing set to redirect my MX record exchange server address to the server but can never log in. If anyone got ANY ideas I would greatly appreciate it. Ron _ List posting FAQ: 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]
RE: Help please
Q292723? -Original Message- From: Ronald Mazzotta [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Posted At: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 8:43 AM Posted To: MSExchange Mailing List Conversation: Help please Subject: RE: Help please Woops. Thanks. OK I did that and it has the same result. Pops up the login box repeatedly. -Original Message- From: Peter Szabo [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 9:13 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Re: Help please Basic authentication. /Peter - Original Message - From: Ronald Mazzotta [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 8:07 AM Subject: RE: Help please Changed the exchange iis website to anonymous now I get page can not be displayed even when I change it back I get nothing. -Original Message- From: Peter Szabo [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, December 17, 2001 9:06 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Re: Help please Ronald, If your external address for your owa is tahoe.ss-pca.com/exchange then you have an authentication problem on your OWA server, nothing to do with your proxy or PIX. for a proxy server or a pix f/w http is http is http. period. On your OWA server diasble any other authentication but Basic. If I remember correctly internaly users can access OWA, yes ? /Peter - Original Message - From: Don Ely [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, December 17, 2001 8:47 PM Subject: RE: Help please Have you turned up syslog on your PIX to watch the traffic? What do the logs say (both Proxy and the PIX)? My money says your issue resides in there. D It was when I found out I could make mistakes that I knew I was on to something. -Ornette Coleman -Original Message- From: Ronald Mazzotta [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, December 17, 2001 5:14 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please Yes that article has been followed to the letter. I apologize for the ms reference so could we get back to this. It is becoming increasingly frustrating. It SHOULD work. -Original Message- From: Tom Meunier [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, December 17, 2001 4:52 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please 1. Your MX record has no bearing on the issue - that's solely for mail routing. You need to worry about where your A record (or CNAME if that's how you're doing it) points. 2. I'm still kind of waiting for you to say that you've followed Q276388 to the letter. Whether OWA 5.5 works through proxy has nothing to do with whether OWA 2000 does; they are nowhere NEAR being the same product. -Original Message- From: Ronald Mazzotta [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Posted At: Monday, December 17, 2001 02:54 PM Posted To: MSExchange Mailing List Conversation: Help please Subject: RE: Help please Yeah sorry. My mx record is exchange.domain.com. when a user enters exchange.domain.com/exchange they hit the proxy. Proxy is set up to redirect any requests for this address to the internal exchange address. This is as per M$. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, December 17, 2001 3:56 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please Upgrade to version 6.0 IOS. Use the Static Port commands to redirect users to the internal OWA site instead of your Proxy Server first. This works even if your using a DMZ card. Also, can you clarify redirect my MX record exchange server address to the server? Also... How many valid static IP's to you have? Is your DNS hosted external or internal? When you upgraded did you change any of the static IP information? -Original Message- From: Ronald Mazzotta [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, December 17, 2001 2:41 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Help please I tried this on the exchange 2000 list and got very little information. I have a setup as follows: Pix Firewall--Proxy serv/IIS server--internal network containing exchange. We have had exchange 5.5 and OWA running in this config for some time. We have recently upgraded to Exchange2000 and are now having a problem connecting with owa 2000. When going to the owa site a login box comes up to log into exchange BUT it comes up three times then says access denied. I have the IIS/proxy web publishing set to redirect my MX record exchange server address to the server but can never log in. If anyone got ANY ideas I would greatly appreciate it. Ron _ List posting FAQ: 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 please
Upgrade to 6.0 IOS -Original Message- From: Don Ely [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, December 17, 2001 9:07 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please I can't recall some great examples off hand, but I remember a time where the PIX would to funny things to the network traffic as it passed in either direction. Tended to time things out and make stuff not work. D The true test of character is not how much we know how to do, but how we behave when we don't know what to do. -John Holt -Original Message- From: Peter Szabo [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, December 17, 2001 6:26 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Re: Help please Don, I'm not too familiar with PIX but I know the problem with esmtp and pix , but never heard of any with http. Ronald, The easiet way to make sure is not the pix, connect your laptop to the segment bethwin the pix and your proxy and try to connect to OWA. If it is working, call Ci$co. /Peter - Original Message - From: Don Ely [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, December 17, 2001 9:06 PM Subject: RE: Help please That's another theory too... However, on the PIX there are some strange occurrences that would not pass some HTTP traffic correctly. Not always, but I've seen it. D Ignorance: It's amazing how much easier it is for a team to work together when no one has any idea where they're going. - - http://www.despair.com -Original Message- From: Peter Szabo [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, December 17, 2001 6:06 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Re: Help please Ronald, If your external address for your owa is tahoe.ss-pca.com/exchange then you have an authentication problem on your OWA server, nothing to do with your proxy or PIX. for a proxy server or a pix f/w http is http is http. period. On your OWA server diasble any other authentication but Basic. If I remember correctly internaly users can access OWA, yes ? /Peter - Original Message - From: Don Ely [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, December 17, 2001 8:47 PM Subject: RE: Help please Have you turned up syslog on your PIX to watch the traffic? What do the logs say (both Proxy and the PIX)? My money says your issue resides in there. D It was when I found out I could make mistakes that I knew I was on to something. -Ornette Coleman -Original Message- From: Ronald Mazzotta [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, December 17, 2001 5:14 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please Yes that article has been followed to the letter. I apologize for the ms reference so could we get back to this. It is becoming increasingly frustrating. It SHOULD work. -Original Message- From: Tom Meunier [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, December 17, 2001 4:52 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please 1. Your MX record has no bearing on the issue - that's solely for mail routing. You need to worry about where your A record (or CNAME if that's how you're doing it) points. 2. I'm still kind of waiting for you to say that you've followed Q276388 to the letter. Whether OWA 5.5 works through proxy has nothing to do with whether OWA 2000 does; they are nowhere NEAR being the same product. -Original Message- From: Ronald Mazzotta [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Posted At: Monday, December 17, 2001 02:54 PM Posted To: MSExchange Mailing List Conversation: Help please Subject: RE: Help please Yeah sorry. My mx record is exchange.domain.com. when a user enters exchange.domain.com/exchange they hit the proxy. Proxy is set up to redirect any requests for this address to the internal exchange address. This is as per M$. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, December 17, 2001 3:56 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please Upgrade to version 6.0 IOS. Use the Static Port commands to redirect users to the internal OWA site instead of your Proxy Server first. This works even if your using a DMZ card. Also, can you clarify redirect my MX record exchange server address to the server? Also... How many valid static IP's to you have? Is your DNS hosted external or internal? When you upgraded did you change any of the static IP information? -Original Message- From: Ronald Mazzotta [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, December 17, 2001 2:41 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Help please I tried this on the exchange 2000 list and got very little information. I have a setup as follows: Pix Firewall--Proxy serv/IIS server--internal network containing exchange. We have had exchange 5.5 and OWA running in
Exchange Problems
Had a local user send a message out this morning to a Mailing List. Open the message being sent, the sender received a message from the System Administrator for the DL, and each individual user. The NDR is stated below. ESIT Team on 12/18/01 7:41 AM The message was undelivered because the specified recipient postal address was incorrect MSEXCH:MSExchangeIS:FINLAY-NATION:MAIL-MO-1 Any help would be greatly appreciated in helping me get an understanding as to why this happened. My exchange servers are NT 4.0 SP 6a, Exchange 5.5 sp4 Chris _ List posting FAQ: 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: stripping attachments
You do't want to do that. Cheers Paul Standards are like toothbrushes, everybody agrees you should have one, but no one wants to use yours -Original Message- From: Pfefferkorn, Pete (PFEFFEPE) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 2:17 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: stripping attachments Doesn't Scan Mail allow you to replace the attached infected message with a replacement text file? I just upgraded and I though I saw that feature. -Original Message- From: Chris Scharff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 8:40 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: stripping attachments Did this behavior happen prior to the application of E2K SP2? -Original Message- From: Kim Schotanus To: Exchange Discussions Sent: 12/18/2001 4:07 AM Subject: RE: stripping attachments Trend Scanmail (183) for exchange 2000, Exch 2K SP2 -Original Message- From: Chris Scharff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 18 December, 2001 4:44 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: stripping attachments AV version? Server version and SP? -Original Message- From: Kim Schotanus To: Exchange Discussions Sent: 12/17/2001 7:32 AM Subject: stripping attachments Hi, Some virus infected mails get sstripped by Trend scanmail, but users'Outlook crashes when they have the preview pane open, how can I stop this? Kim _ List posting FAQ: 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] ** The information contained in this message or any of its attachments may be confidential and is intended for the exclusive use of the addressee(s). Any disclosure, reproduction, distribution or other dissemination or use of this communication is strictly prohibited without the express permission of the sender. The views expressed in this email are those of the individual and not necessarily those of Sony or Sony affiliated companies. Sony email is for business use only. This email and any response may be monitored by Sony UK. (04) ** _ List posting FAQ: 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 Problems
Check Q260198 -Original Message- From: Callan, Chris [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 10:07 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Exchange Problems Had a local user send a message out this morning to a Mailing List. Open the message being sent, the sender received a message from the System Administrator for the DL, and each individual user. The NDR is stated below. ESIT Team on 12/18/01 7:41 AM The message was undelivered because the specified recipient postal address was incorrect MSEXCH:MSExchangeIS:FINLAY-NATION:MAIL-MO-1 Any help would be greatly appreciated in helping me get an understanding as to why this happened. My exchange servers are NT 4.0 SP 6a, Exchange 5.5 sp4 Chris _ List posting FAQ: 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: calendar hangs after January 23 2002
giggle. thanks to all who replied. for info outlook 2000 behaved the same. I've told her to delete the offending appointments via OWA and get rid of her hideous backlog of appointments. Harriet -Original Message- From: Ed Crowley [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 6:12 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: calendar hangs after January 23 2002 You have to upgrade to Outlook 2002. Outlook 97 is not W2.002K compliant. Ed Crowley MCSE+I MVP Tech Consultant Compaq Computer There are seldom good technological solutions to behavioral problems. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Wood, Harriet [CCS] Sent: Thursday, December 13, 2001 4:38 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: calendar hangs after January 23 2002 We have exchange 5.5 sp4 on NT sp6a. Users have outlook 97 One of them when any attempt to access her calendar after January 23 2002 is made hangs up totally, outlook.exe running at 100%. That's select that day, select the month of January select the week of whatever. Or later Testing shows it's the user mailbox not the machine/profile Anyone seen this? She has a LOT of appointments going back to 1998. calendar folder shows as a little over 1 meg in size. any advice gratefully received, Harriet _ List posting FAQ: 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: stripping attachments
Why not? I'm curious; bad experiences? It's working fine for me here. My people are even afraid to open the virus_detected_and_removed.txt file. I'm so proud. :) -Original Message- From: Hurst, Paul [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 9:14 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: stripping attachments You do't want to do that. Cheers Paul Standards are like toothbrushes, everybody agrees you should have one, but no one wants to use yours -Original Message- From: Pfefferkorn, Pete (PFEFFEPE) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 2:17 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: stripping attachments Doesn't Scan Mail allow you to replace the attached infected message with a replacement text file? I just upgraded and I though I saw that feature. -Original Message- From: Chris Scharff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 8:40 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: stripping attachments Did this behavior happen prior to the application of E2K SP2? -Original Message- From: Kim Schotanus To: Exchange Discussions Sent: 12/18/2001 4:07 AM Subject: RE: stripping attachments Trend Scanmail (183) for exchange 2000, Exch 2K SP2 -Original Message- From: Chris Scharff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 18 December, 2001 4:44 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: stripping attachments AV version? Server version and SP? -Original Message- From: Kim Schotanus To: Exchange Discussions Sent: 12/17/2001 7:32 AM Subject: stripping attachments Hi, Some virus infected mails get sstripped by Trend scanmail, but users'Outlook crashes when they have the preview pane open, how can I stop this? Kim _ List posting FAQ: 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] ** The information contained in this message or any of its attachments may be confidential and is intended for the exclusive use of the addressee(s). Any disclosure, reproduction, distribution or other dissemination or use of this communication is strictly prohibited without the express permission of the sender. The views expressed in this email are those of the individual and not necessarily those of Sony or Sony affiliated companies. Sony email is for business use only. This email and any response may be monitored by Sony UK. (04) ** _ List posting FAQ: 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: Allowing internal SMTP but not external
After re-reading the problem I have to agree. I should have read the entire message. I missed the part about being able to receive internal smtp mail. This will only work if the users are located on the GC. -Original Message- From: Ed Crowley [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 12:12 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Allowing internal SMTP but not external No, there's not. If you know the ugly fully-qualified-object-name-SMTP-address, you can send anyone SMTP mail. Period. There's no way in Exchange to block that. However, nobody need know that, and the address is so ugly that nobody would try to use it unless someone sent out mail from a mailbox that didn't have an SMTP address and that's what got used as the reply address. The best answer was already given, and that was to create an e-mail domain internally that's illegal (unroutable) on the Internet, such as [EMAIL PROTECTED] Ed Crowley MCSE+I MVP Tech Consultant Compaq Computer There are seldom good technological solutions to behavioral problems. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, December 17, 2001 3:08 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Allowing internal SMTP but not external Hmm. Well there is an option on each mailbox that you can setup the mailbox so that they only receive mail from internal users. I thought this was what you were requesting. -Original Message- From: Walden H. Leverich [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, December 17, 2001 4:59 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Allowing internal SMTP but not external Interesting idea. I'm still able to send, but I (obviously?) can't receive from the outside and that may be good enough. BTW, I'm on EX5.5 Thanks, -Walden Walden H Leverich III President Tech Software (516)627-3800 x11 [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.TechSoftInc.com -Original Message- From: Tom Meunier [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, December 17, 2001 16:55 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Allowing internal SMTP but not external I'm wondering if you could give them an invalid SMTP address, that wouldn't route externally. [EMAIL PROTECTED] or something. Works with Exchange 2000 but you didn't mention if you were using E2k or 5.5. -Original Message- From: Walden H. Leverich [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Posted At: Monday, December 17, 2001 03:41 PM Posted To: MSExchange Mailing List Conversation: Allowing internal SMTP but not external Subject: Allowing internal SMTP but not external OK, I think I know the answer to this, but I told a customer I'd ask. I have a customer that wants to limit users from receiving email from the internet. No problem, remove the SMTP address and they won't be able to send/receive SMTP mail. However, now they have a requirement for these users to receive SMTP mail from an internal machine (AS/400 sending e-mail to local users). Short of going to the SMTP proxy (Firewall-1) and saying drop messages for user1 and user2 and user3 etc. there is no way I can see of preventing external SMTP mail while allowing internal SMTP mail. Did I miss something? -Walden Walden H Leverich III President Tech Software (516)627-3800 x11 [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.TechSoftInc.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] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives:
RE: Help please
Can't upgrade to 6.0. cisco will not allow me to dl it as I only have 16mb in my router. Also, tom I have verified that information. Thanks. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 10:11 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please Upgrade to 6.0 IOS -Original Message- From: Don Ely [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, December 17, 2001 9:07 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please I can't recall some great examples off hand, but I remember a time where the PIX would to funny things to the network traffic as it passed in either direction. Tended to time things out and make stuff not work. D The true test of character is not how much we know how to do, but how we behave when we don't know what to do. -John Holt -Original Message- From: Peter Szabo [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, December 17, 2001 6:26 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Re: Help please Don, I'm not too familiar with PIX but I know the problem with esmtp and pix , but never heard of any with http. Ronald, The easiet way to make sure is not the pix, connect your laptop to the segment bethwin the pix and your proxy and try to connect to OWA. If it is working, call Ci$co. /Peter - Original Message - From: Don Ely [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, December 17, 2001 9:06 PM Subject: RE: Help please That's another theory too... However, on the PIX there are some strange occurrences that would not pass some HTTP traffic correctly. Not always, but I've seen it. D Ignorance: It's amazing how much easier it is for a team to work together when no one has any idea where they're going. - - http://www.despair.com -Original Message- From: Peter Szabo [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, December 17, 2001 6:06 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Re: Help please Ronald, If your external address for your owa is tahoe.ss-pca.com/exchange then you have an authentication problem on your OWA server, nothing to do with your proxy or PIX. for a proxy server or a pix f/w http is http is http. period. On your OWA server diasble any other authentication but Basic. If I remember correctly internaly users can access OWA, yes ? /Peter - Original Message - From: Don Ely [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, December 17, 2001 8:47 PM Subject: RE: Help please Have you turned up syslog on your PIX to watch the traffic? What do the logs say (both Proxy and the PIX)? My money says your issue resides in there. D It was when I found out I could make mistakes that I knew I was on to something. -Ornette Coleman -Original Message- From: Ronald Mazzotta [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, December 17, 2001 5:14 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please Yes that article has been followed to the letter. I apologize for the ms reference so could we get back to this. It is becoming increasingly frustrating. It SHOULD work. -Original Message- From: Tom Meunier [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, December 17, 2001 4:52 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please 1. Your MX record has no bearing on the issue - that's solely for mail routing. You need to worry about where your A record (or CNAME if that's how you're doing it) points. 2. I'm still kind of waiting for you to say that you've followed Q276388 to the letter. Whether OWA 5.5 works through proxy has nothing to do with whether OWA 2000 does; they are nowhere NEAR being the same product. -Original Message- From: Ronald Mazzotta [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Posted At: Monday, December 17, 2001 02:54 PM Posted To: MSExchange Mailing List Conversation: Help please Subject: RE: Help please Yeah sorry. My mx record is exchange.domain.com. when a user enters exchange.domain.com/exchange they hit the proxy. Proxy is set up to redirect any requests for this address to the internal exchange address. This is as per M$. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, December 17, 2001 3:56 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please Upgrade to version 6.0 IOS. Use the Static Port commands to redirect users to the internal OWA site instead of your Proxy Server first. This works even if your using a DMZ card. Also, can you clarify redirect my MX record exchange server address to the server? Also... How many valid static IP's to you have? Is your DNS hosted external or internal? When you upgraded did you change any of the static IP information? -Original Message- From: Ronald Mazzotta [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday,
no OWA after info store rebuild
I had posted this before and didn't get any help (a very perplexing problem to say the least) but I have found out some more specifics so I'll try again. I rebuilt the info store by using exmerge to export all mailboxes to .pst's, created a new priv.edb, and imported back from the pst's. About half of the accounts now can't use OWA. They get failed to get inbox after logging in. I thought it was outlook related but that's not it. I found I could fix the problem by not importing back the associated folder messages. Exmerge says the associated folder messages are used to store folder rules, views etc. Here is where the problem is, if I don't import these associated messages back in the accounts that don't work start working again. Of course these accounts lose all their rules and views and who knows what else. I would like to be the Hero here instead of a Bum so now my question is, can anyone elaborate on just what these associated messages are, or can you point me to a resource. What I want to do is access these messages programmatically and see if I can do anything with them. Any ideas? (constructive ones I mean :-) _ List posting FAQ: 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: Off topic: ScanMail AVAPI notifications and tracing?
I'm running only MAPI mode and I can't get the notifications to come to me either. When I try a test at the server I get a MAPI error. I installed an old Exchange mapi client and that didn't help. I made sure there was a valid scanmail profile on the server and that didn't help. Trend wanted me to install a bunch of debug stuff on the server and that isn't going to happen since it's a beastly cluster (ugh) and now we're in freeze anyway. -Original Message- From: Pfefferkorn, Pete (PFEFFEPE) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 8:50 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Off topic: ScanMail AVAPI notifications and tracing? Exchange 5.5 SP4, ScanMail 3.52 We upgraded to ScanMail 3.52 and are running in both AVAPI and MAPI mode. I understand that running AVAPI, you lose the sender/recipient information for viruses caught in the log files. I'm a little confused on my testing on how notification works. I sent a test virus to a mailbox on our system and I did not receive a notification that I sent a infected message. The recipient, on the other hand, did receive a message from my account and had a text file entitled Virus1_Detected_and_Removed_virusname.txt. Shouldn't I have received a message as well. I have the real time scan set to send message to sender,recipient,administrator. One other question. Since I do not get the actual sender notifications in the log files now, I cannot determine where/who may be triggering an outbreak. Since the recipient gets a attachment with the Virus1x.txt message is there a way to track this through the MTA tracking log files. Is there a diagnostic key on the MTA that will include the attachment name sent on messages? Pete Pfefferkorn Senior Systems Engineer/Mail Administrator University of Cincinnati 51 Goodman Street Cincinnati, OH 45221 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: Help please
That doesnt make any sense. Download the file to a server running tftp. Tftp the image to your router? -Original Message- From: Ronald Mazzotta [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 9:13 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please Can't upgrade to 6.0. cisco will not allow me to dl it as I only have 16mb in my router. Also, tom I have verified that information. Thanks. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 10:11 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please Upgrade to 6.0 IOS -Original Message- From: Don Ely [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, December 17, 2001 9:07 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please I can't recall some great examples off hand, but I remember a time where the PIX would to funny things to the network traffic as it passed in either direction. Tended to time things out and make stuff not work. D The true test of character is not how much we know how to do, but how we behave when we don't know what to do. -John Holt -Original Message- From: Peter Szabo [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, December 17, 2001 6:26 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Re: Help please Don, I'm not too familiar with PIX but I know the problem with esmtp and pix , but never heard of any with http. Ronald, The easiet way to make sure is not the pix, connect your laptop to the segment bethwin the pix and your proxy and try to connect to OWA. If it is working, call Ci$co. /Peter - Original Message - From: Don Ely [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, December 17, 2001 9:06 PM Subject: RE: Help please That's another theory too... However, on the PIX there are some strange occurrences that would not pass some HTTP traffic correctly. Not always, but I've seen it. D Ignorance: It's amazing how much easier it is for a team to work together when no one has any idea where they're going. - - http://www.despair.com -Original Message- From: Peter Szabo [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, December 17, 2001 6:06 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Re: Help please Ronald, If your external address for your owa is tahoe.ss-pca.com/exchange then you have an authentication problem on your OWA server, nothing to do with your proxy or PIX. for a proxy server or a pix f/w http is http is http. period. On your OWA server diasble any other authentication but Basic. If I remember correctly internaly users can access OWA, yes ? /Peter - Original Message - From: Don Ely [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, December 17, 2001 8:47 PM Subject: RE: Help please Have you turned up syslog on your PIX to watch the traffic? What do the logs say (both Proxy and the PIX)? My money says your issue resides in there. D It was when I found out I could make mistakes that I knew I was on to something. -Ornette Coleman -Original Message- From: Ronald Mazzotta [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, December 17, 2001 5:14 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please Yes that article has been followed to the letter. I apologize for the ms reference so could we get back to this. It is becoming increasingly frustrating. It SHOULD work. -Original Message- From: Tom Meunier [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, December 17, 2001 4:52 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please 1. Your MX record has no bearing on the issue - that's solely for mail routing. You need to worry about where your A record (or CNAME if that's how you're doing it) points. 2. I'm still kind of waiting for you to say that you've followed Q276388 to the letter. Whether OWA 5.5 works through proxy has nothing to do with whether OWA 2000 does; they are nowhere NEAR being the same product. -Original Message- From: Ronald Mazzotta [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Posted At: Monday, December 17, 2001 02:54 PM Posted To: MSExchange Mailing List Conversation: Help please Subject: RE: Help please Yeah sorry. My mx record is exchange.domain.com. when a user enters exchange.domain.com/exchange they hit the proxy. Proxy is set up to redirect any requests for this address to the internal exchange address. This is as per M$. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, December 17, 2001 3:56 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please Upgrade to version 6.0 IOS. Use the Static Port commands to redirect users to the internal OWA site instead of your Proxy Server first. This works even if your using a DMZ card. Also, can you clarify redirect my MX record exchange server address to the server?
RE: Help please
What version are you on now? -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 9:21 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please That doesnt make any sense. Download the file to a server running tftp. Tftp the image to your router? -Original Message- From: Ronald Mazzotta [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 9:13 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please Can't upgrade to 6.0. cisco will not allow me to dl it as I only have 16mb in my router. Also, tom I have verified that information. Thanks. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 10:11 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please Upgrade to 6.0 IOS -Original Message- From: Don Ely [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, December 17, 2001 9:07 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please I can't recall some great examples off hand, but I remember a time where the PIX would to funny things to the network traffic as it passed in either direction. Tended to time things out and make stuff not work. D The true test of character is not how much we know how to do, but how we behave when we don't know what to do. -John Holt -Original Message- From: Peter Szabo [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, December 17, 2001 6:26 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Re: Help please Don, I'm not too familiar with PIX but I know the problem with esmtp and pix , but never heard of any with http. Ronald, The easiet way to make sure is not the pix, connect your laptop to the segment bethwin the pix and your proxy and try to connect to OWA. If it is working, call Ci$co. /Peter - Original Message - From: Don Ely [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, December 17, 2001 9:06 PM Subject: RE: Help please That's another theory too... However, on the PIX there are some strange occurrences that would not pass some HTTP traffic correctly. Not always, but I've seen it. D Ignorance: It's amazing how much easier it is for a team to work together when no one has any idea where they're going. - - http://www.despair.com -Original Message- From: Peter Szabo [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, December 17, 2001 6:06 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Re: Help please Ronald, If your external address for your owa is tahoe.ss-pca.com/exchange then you have an authentication problem on your OWA server, nothing to do with your proxy or PIX. for a proxy server or a pix f/w http is http is http. period. On your OWA server diasble any other authentication but Basic. If I remember correctly internaly users can access OWA, yes ? /Peter - Original Message - From: Don Ely [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, December 17, 2001 8:47 PM Subject: RE: Help please Have you turned up syslog on your PIX to watch the traffic? What do the logs say (both Proxy and the PIX)? My money says your issue resides in there. D It was when I found out I could make mistakes that I knew I was on to something. -Ornette Coleman -Original Message- From: Ronald Mazzotta [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, December 17, 2001 5:14 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please Yes that article has been followed to the letter. I apologize for the ms reference so could we get back to this. It is becoming increasingly frustrating. It SHOULD work. -Original Message- From: Tom Meunier [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, December 17, 2001 4:52 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please 1. Your MX record has no bearing on the issue - that's solely for mail routing. You need to worry about where your A record (or CNAME if that's how you're doing it) points. 2. I'm still kind of waiting for you to say that you've followed Q276388 to the letter. Whether OWA 5.5 works through proxy has nothing to do with whether OWA 2000 does; they are nowhere NEAR being the same product. -Original Message- From: Ronald Mazzotta [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Posted At: Monday, December 17, 2001 02:54 PM Posted To: MSExchange Mailing List Conversation: Help please Subject: RE: Help please Yeah sorry. My mx record is exchange.domain.com. when a user enters exchange.domain.com/exchange they hit the proxy. Proxy is set up to redirect any requests for this address to the internal exchange address. This is as per M$. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, December 17, 2001 3:56 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please Upgrade to version 6.0 IOS. Use the Static Port commands to redirect users to the
RE: Help please
Router??? I thought you said you have a PIX. They have much more than 16MB, well, not much more, but at least 32MB. D Arrogance: The Best Leaders Inspire by Example. When that's not an option, brute intimidation works pretty well too. - - http://www.despair.com -Original Message- From: Ronald Mazzotta [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 7:13 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please Can't upgrade to 6.0. cisco will not allow me to dl it as I only have 16mb in my router. Also, tom I have verified that information. Thanks. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 10:11 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please Upgrade to 6.0 IOS -Original Message- From: Don Ely [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, December 17, 2001 9:07 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please I can't recall some great examples off hand, but I remember a time where the PIX would to funny things to the network traffic as it passed in either direction. Tended to time things out and make stuff not work. D The true test of character is not how much we know how to do, but how we behave when we don't know what to do. -John Holt -Original Message- From: Peter Szabo [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, December 17, 2001 6:26 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Re: Help please Don, I'm not too familiar with PIX but I know the problem with esmtp and pix , but never heard of any with http. Ronald, The easiet way to make sure is not the pix, connect your laptop to the segment bethwin the pix and your proxy and try to connect to OWA. If it is working, call Ci$co. /Peter - Original Message - From: Don Ely [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, December 17, 2001 9:06 PM Subject: RE: Help please That's another theory too... However, on the PIX there are some strange occurrences that would not pass some HTTP traffic correctly. Not always, but I've seen it. D Ignorance: It's amazing how much easier it is for a team to work together when no one has any idea where they're going. - - http://www.despair.com -Original Message- From: Peter Szabo [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, December 17, 2001 6:06 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Re: Help please Ronald, If your external address for your owa is tahoe.ss-pca.com/exchange then you have an authentication problem on your OWA server, nothing to do with your proxy or PIX. for a proxy server or a pix f/w http is http is http. period. On your OWA server diasble any other authentication but Basic. If I remember correctly internaly users can access OWA, yes ? /Peter - Original Message - From: Don Ely [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, December 17, 2001 8:47 PM Subject: RE: Help please Have you turned up syslog on your PIX to watch the traffic? What do the logs say (both Proxy and the PIX)? My money says your issue resides in there. D It was when I found out I could make mistakes that I knew I was on to something. -Ornette Coleman -Original Message- From: Ronald Mazzotta [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, December 17, 2001 5:14 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please Yes that article has been followed to the letter. I apologize for the ms reference so could we get back to this. It is becoming increasingly frustrating. It SHOULD work. -Original Message- From: Tom Meunier [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, December 17, 2001 4:52 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please 1. Your MX record has no bearing on the issue - that's solely for mail routing. You need to worry about where your A record (or CNAME if that's how you're doing it) points. 2. I'm still kind of waiting for you to say that you've followed Q276388 to the letter. Whether OWA 5.5 works through proxy has nothing to do with whether OWA 2000 does; they are nowhere NEAR being the same product. -Original Message- From: Ronald Mazzotta [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Posted At: Monday, December 17, 2001 02:54 PM Posted To: MSExchange Mailing List Conversation: Help please Subject: RE: Help please Yeah sorry. My mx record is exchange.domain.com. when a user enters exchange.domain.com/exchange they hit the proxy. Proxy is set up to redirect any requests for this address to the internal exchange address. This is as per M$. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, December 17, 2001 3:56 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please Upgrade to version 6.0 IOS. Use the Static Port commands to redirect users to the internal OWA site instead of your Proxy Server
RE: Help please
Sorry PIX. And according to cisco and show ver I have 16mb. I would install it but cisco wont even let me dl it off their site. -Original Message- From: Don Ely [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 10:18 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please Router??? I thought you said you have a PIX. They have much more than 16MB, well, not much more, but at least 32MB. D Arrogance: The Best Leaders Inspire by Example. When that's not an option, brute intimidation works pretty well too. - - http://www.despair.com -Original Message- From: Ronald Mazzotta [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 7:13 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please Can't upgrade to 6.0. cisco will not allow me to dl it as I only have 16mb in my router. Also, tom I have verified that information. Thanks. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 10:11 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please Upgrade to 6.0 IOS -Original Message- From: Don Ely [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, December 17, 2001 9:07 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please I can't recall some great examples off hand, but I remember a time where the PIX would to funny things to the network traffic as it passed in either direction. Tended to time things out and make stuff not work. D The true test of character is not how much we know how to do, but how we behave when we don't know what to do. -John Holt -Original Message- From: Peter Szabo [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, December 17, 2001 6:26 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Re: Help please Don, I'm not too familiar with PIX but I know the problem with esmtp and pix , but never heard of any with http. Ronald, The easiet way to make sure is not the pix, connect your laptop to the segment bethwin the pix and your proxy and try to connect to OWA. If it is working, call Ci$co. /Peter - Original Message - From: Don Ely [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, December 17, 2001 9:06 PM Subject: RE: Help please That's another theory too... However, on the PIX there are some strange occurrences that would not pass some HTTP traffic correctly. Not always, but I've seen it. D Ignorance: It's amazing how much easier it is for a team to work together when no one has any idea where they're going. - - http://www.despair.com -Original Message- From: Peter Szabo [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, December 17, 2001 6:06 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Re: Help please Ronald, If your external address for your owa is tahoe.ss-pca.com/exchange then you have an authentication problem on your OWA server, nothing to do with your proxy or PIX. for a proxy server or a pix f/w http is http is http. period. On your OWA server diasble any other authentication but Basic. If I remember correctly internaly users can access OWA, yes ? /Peter - Original Message - From: Don Ely [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, December 17, 2001 8:47 PM Subject: RE: Help please Have you turned up syslog on your PIX to watch the traffic? What do the logs say (both Proxy and the PIX)? My money says your issue resides in there. D It was when I found out I could make mistakes that I knew I was on to something. -Ornette Coleman -Original Message- From: Ronald Mazzotta [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, December 17, 2001 5:14 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please Yes that article has been followed to the letter. I apologize for the ms reference so could we get back to this. It is becoming increasingly frustrating. It SHOULD work. -Original Message- From: Tom Meunier [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, December 17, 2001 4:52 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please 1. Your MX record has no bearing on the issue - that's solely for mail routing. You need to worry about where your A record (or CNAME if that's how you're doing it) points. 2. I'm still kind of waiting for you to say that you've followed Q276388 to the letter. Whether OWA 5.5 works through proxy has nothing to do with whether OWA 2000 does; they are nowhere NEAR being the same product. -Original Message- From: Ronald Mazzotta [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Posted At: Monday, December 17, 2001 02:54 PM Posted To: MSExchange Mailing List Conversation: Help please Subject: RE: Help please Yeah sorry. My mx record is exchange.domain.com. when a user enters exchange.domain.com/exchange they hit the proxy. Proxy is set up to redirect any requests for this address to the internal exchange address. This is as per M$. -Original Message-
RE: Help please
Version 5.3(5) -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 10:22 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please What version are you on now? -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 9:21 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please That doesnt make any sense. Download the file to a server running tftp. Tftp the image to your router? -Original Message- From: Ronald Mazzotta [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 9:13 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please Can't upgrade to 6.0. cisco will not allow me to dl it as I only have 16mb in my router. Also, tom I have verified that information. Thanks. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 10:11 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please Upgrade to 6.0 IOS -Original Message- From: Don Ely [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, December 17, 2001 9:07 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please I can't recall some great examples off hand, but I remember a time where the PIX would to funny things to the network traffic as it passed in either direction. Tended to time things out and make stuff not work. D The true test of character is not how much we know how to do, but how we behave when we don't know what to do. -John Holt -Original Message- From: Peter Szabo [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, December 17, 2001 6:26 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Re: Help please Don, I'm not too familiar with PIX but I know the problem with esmtp and pix , but never heard of any with http. Ronald, The easiet way to make sure is not the pix, connect your laptop to the segment bethwin the pix and your proxy and try to connect to OWA. If it is working, call Ci$co. /Peter - Original Message - From: Don Ely [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, December 17, 2001 9:06 PM Subject: RE: Help please That's another theory too... However, on the PIX there are some strange occurrences that would not pass some HTTP traffic correctly. Not always, but I've seen it. D Ignorance: It's amazing how much easier it is for a team to work together when no one has any idea where they're going. - - http://www.despair.com -Original Message- From: Peter Szabo [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, December 17, 2001 6:06 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Re: Help please Ronald, If your external address for your owa is tahoe.ss-pca.com/exchange then you have an authentication problem on your OWA server, nothing to do with your proxy or PIX. for a proxy server or a pix f/w http is http is http. period. On your OWA server diasble any other authentication but Basic. If I remember correctly internaly users can access OWA, yes ? /Peter - Original Message - From: Don Ely [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, December 17, 2001 8:47 PM Subject: RE: Help please Have you turned up syslog on your PIX to watch the traffic? What do the logs say (both Proxy and the PIX)? My money says your issue resides in there. D It was when I found out I could make mistakes that I knew I was on to something. -Ornette Coleman -Original Message- From: Ronald Mazzotta [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, December 17, 2001 5:14 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please Yes that article has been followed to the letter. I apologize for the ms reference so could we get back to this. It is becoming increasingly frustrating. It SHOULD work. -Original Message- From: Tom Meunier [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, December 17, 2001 4:52 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please 1. Your MX record has no bearing on the issue - that's solely for mail routing. You need to worry about where your A record (or CNAME if that's how you're doing it) points. 2. I'm still kind of waiting for you to say that you've followed Q276388 to the letter. Whether OWA 5.5 works through proxy has nothing to do with whether OWA 2000 does; they are nowhere NEAR being the same product. -Original Message- From: Ronald Mazzotta [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Posted At: Monday, December 17, 2001 02:54 PM Posted To: MSExchange Mailing List Conversation: Help please Subject: RE: Help please Yeah sorry. My mx record is exchange.domain.com. when a user enters exchange.domain.com/exchange they hit the proxy. Proxy is set up to redirect any requests for this address to the internal exchange address. This is as per M$. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
RE: Help please
Do you not have a CCO login? D Pretension: The downside of being better than everyone else is that people tend to assume you're pretentious. - - http://www.despair.com -Original Message- From: Ronald Mazzotta [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 7:19 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please Sorry PIX. And according to cisco and show ver I have 16mb. I would install it but cisco wont even let me dl it off their site. -Original Message- From: Don Ely [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 10:18 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please Router??? I thought you said you have a PIX. They have much more than 16MB, well, not much more, but at least 32MB. D Arrogance: The Best Leaders Inspire by Example. When that's not an option, brute intimidation works pretty well too. - - http://www.despair.com -Original Message- From: Ronald Mazzotta [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 7:13 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please Can't upgrade to 6.0. cisco will not allow me to dl it as I only have 16mb in my router. Also, tom I have verified that information. Thanks. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 10:11 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please Upgrade to 6.0 IOS -Original Message- From: Don Ely [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, December 17, 2001 9:07 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please I can't recall some great examples off hand, but I remember a time where the PIX would to funny things to the network traffic as it passed in either direction. Tended to time things out and make stuff not work. D The true test of character is not how much we know how to do, but how we behave when we don't know what to do. -John Holt -Original Message- From: Peter Szabo [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, December 17, 2001 6:26 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Re: Help please Don, I'm not too familiar with PIX but I know the problem with esmtp and pix , but never heard of any with http. Ronald, The easiet way to make sure is not the pix, connect your laptop to the segment bethwin the pix and your proxy and try to connect to OWA. If it is working, call Ci$co. /Peter - Original Message - From: Don Ely [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, December 17, 2001 9:06 PM Subject: RE: Help please That's another theory too... However, on the PIX there are some strange occurrences that would not pass some HTTP traffic correctly. Not always, but I've seen it. D Ignorance: It's amazing how much easier it is for a team to work together when no one has any idea where they're going. - - http://www.despair.com -Original Message- From: Peter Szabo [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, December 17, 2001 6:06 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Re: Help please Ronald, If your external address for your owa is tahoe.ss-pca.com/exchange then you have an authentication problem on your OWA server, nothing to do with your proxy or PIX. for a proxy server or a pix f/w http is http is http. period. On your OWA server diasble any other authentication but Basic. If I remember correctly internaly users can access OWA, yes ? /Peter - Original Message - From: Don Ely [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, December 17, 2001 8:47 PM Subject: RE: Help please Have you turned up syslog on your PIX to watch the traffic? What do the logs say (both Proxy and the PIX)? My money says your issue resides in there. D It was when I found out I could make mistakes that I knew I was on to something. -Ornette Coleman -Original Message- From: Ronald Mazzotta [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, December 17, 2001 5:14 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please Yes that article has been followed to the letter. I apologize for the ms reference so could we get back to this. It is becoming increasingly frustrating. It SHOULD work. -Original Message- From: Tom Meunier [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, December 17, 2001 4:52 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please 1. Your MX record has no bearing on the issue - that's solely for mail routing. You need to worry about where your A record (or CNAME if that's how you're doing it) points. 2. I'm still kind of waiting for you to say that you've followed Q276388 to the letter. Whether OWA 5.5 works through proxy has nothing to do with whether OWA 2000 does; they are nowhere NEAR being the same product. -Original Message- From: Ronald Mazzotta [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Posted At: Monday, December 17, 2001 02:54 PM Posted To: MSExchange Mailing
RE: Help please
Which model of the PIX do you have? D Ideas pull the trigger, but instinct loads the gun. -Don Marquis -Original Message- From: Ronald Mazzotta [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 7:21 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please Version 5.3(5) -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 10:22 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please What version are you on now? -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 9:21 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please That doesnt make any sense. Download the file to a server running tftp. Tftp the image to your router? -Original Message- From: Ronald Mazzotta [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 9:13 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please Can't upgrade to 6.0. cisco will not allow me to dl it as I only have 16mb in my router. Also, tom I have verified that information. Thanks. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 10:11 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please Upgrade to 6.0 IOS -Original Message- From: Don Ely [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, December 17, 2001 9:07 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please I can't recall some great examples off hand, but I remember a time where the PIX would to funny things to the network traffic as it passed in either direction. Tended to time things out and make stuff not work. D The true test of character is not how much we know how to do, but how we behave when we don't know what to do. -John Holt -Original Message- From: Peter Szabo [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, December 17, 2001 6:26 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Re: Help please Don, I'm not too familiar with PIX but I know the problem with esmtp and pix , but never heard of any with http. Ronald, The easiet way to make sure is not the pix, connect your laptop to the segment bethwin the pix and your proxy and try to connect to OWA. If it is working, call Ci$co. /Peter - Original Message - From: Don Ely [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, December 17, 2001 9:06 PM Subject: RE: Help please That's another theory too... However, on the PIX there are some strange occurrences that would not pass some HTTP traffic correctly. Not always, but I've seen it. D Ignorance: It's amazing how much easier it is for a team to work together when no one has any idea where they're going. - - http://www.despair.com -Original Message- From: Peter Szabo [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, December 17, 2001 6:06 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Re: Help please Ronald, If your external address for your owa is tahoe.ss-pca.com/exchange then you have an authentication problem on your OWA server, nothing to do with your proxy or PIX. for a proxy server or a pix f/w http is http is http. period. On your OWA server diasble any other authentication but Basic. If I remember correctly internaly users can access OWA, yes ? /Peter - Original Message - From: Don Ely [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, December 17, 2001 8:47 PM Subject: RE: Help please Have you turned up syslog on your PIX to watch the traffic? What do the logs say (both Proxy and the PIX)? My money says your issue resides in there. D It was when I found out I could make mistakes that I knew I was on to something. -Ornette Coleman -Original Message- From: Ronald Mazzotta [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, December 17, 2001 5:14 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please Yes that article has been followed to the letter. I apologize for the ms reference so could we get back to this. It is becoming increasingly frustrating. It SHOULD work. -Original Message- From: Tom Meunier [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, December 17, 2001 4:52 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please 1. Your MX record has no bearing on the issue - that's solely for mail routing. You need to worry about where your A record (or CNAME if that's how you're doing it) points. 2. I'm still kind of waiting for you to say that you've followed Q276388 to the letter. Whether OWA 5.5 works through proxy has nothing to do with whether OWA 2000 does; they are nowhere NEAR being the same product. -Original Message- From: Ronald Mazzotta [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Posted At: Monday, December 17, 2001 02:54 PM Posted To: MSExchange Mailing List Conversation: Help please Subject: RE: Help please Yeah sorry. My mx record is exchange.domain.com. when a user enters
RE: Off topic: ScanMail AVAPI notifications and tracing?
Under Notification, Real Time Scan, You need to put your name in ScanMail Administrators. Then you will get emails whenever a virus is nailed. As for the other with the AVAPI, this is a limitation of the AVAPI. My suggestion would be to use Scanmail 3.7x which uses ESE based scanning. -Original Message- From: Pfefferkorn, Pete (PFEFFEPE) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 6:50 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Off topic: ScanMail AVAPI notifications and tracing? Exchange 5.5 SP4, ScanMail 3.52 We upgraded to ScanMail 3.52 and are running in both AVAPI and MAPI mode. I understand that running AVAPI, you lose the sender/recipient information for viruses caught in the log files. I'm a little confused on my testing on how notification works. I sent a test virus to a mailbox on our system and I did not receive a notification that I sent a infected message. The recipient, on the other hand, did receive a message from my account and had a text file entitled Virus1_Detected_and_Removed_virusname.txt. Shouldn't I have received a message as well. I have the real time scan set to send message to sender,recipient,administrator. One other question. Since I do not get the actual sender notifications in the log files now, I cannot determine where/who may be triggering an outbreak. Since the recipient gets a attachment with the Virus1x.txt message is there a way to track this through the MTA tracking log files. Is there a diagnostic key on the MTA that will include the attachment name sent on messages? Pete Pfefferkorn Senior Systems Engineer/Mail Administrator University of Cincinnati 51 Goodman Street Cincinnati, OH 45221 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: Help please
Yes I have a cco login that's where it blocks me. Pix 515 Web site says that it comes with 16mb but 6.0 requires 32mb I really appreciate all the help. -Original Message- From: Don Ely [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 10:25 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please Which model of the PIX do you have? D Ideas pull the trigger, but instinct loads the gun. -Don Marquis -Original Message- From: Ronald Mazzotta [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 7:21 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please Version 5.3(5) -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 10:22 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please What version are you on now? -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 9:21 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please That doesnt make any sense. Download the file to a server running tftp. Tftp the image to your router? -Original Message- From: Ronald Mazzotta [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 9:13 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please Can't upgrade to 6.0. cisco will not allow me to dl it as I only have 16mb in my router. Also, tom I have verified that information. Thanks. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 10:11 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please Upgrade to 6.0 IOS -Original Message- From: Don Ely [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, December 17, 2001 9:07 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please I can't recall some great examples off hand, but I remember a time where the PIX would to funny things to the network traffic as it passed in either direction. Tended to time things out and make stuff not work. D The true test of character is not how much we know how to do, but how we behave when we don't know what to do. -John Holt -Original Message- From: Peter Szabo [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, December 17, 2001 6:26 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Re: Help please Don, I'm not too familiar with PIX but I know the problem with esmtp and pix , but never heard of any with http. Ronald, The easiet way to make sure is not the pix, connect your laptop to the segment bethwin the pix and your proxy and try to connect to OWA. If it is working, call Ci$co. /Peter - Original Message - From: Don Ely [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, December 17, 2001 9:06 PM Subject: RE: Help please That's another theory too... However, on the PIX there are some strange occurrences that would not pass some HTTP traffic correctly. Not always, but I've seen it. D Ignorance: It's amazing how much easier it is for a team to work together when no one has any idea where they're going. - - http://www.despair.com -Original Message- From: Peter Szabo [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, December 17, 2001 6:06 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Re: Help please Ronald, If your external address for your owa is tahoe.ss-pca.com/exchange then you have an authentication problem on your OWA server, nothing to do with your proxy or PIX. for a proxy server or a pix f/w http is http is http. period. On your OWA server diasble any other authentication but Basic. If I remember correctly internaly users can access OWA, yes ? /Peter - Original Message - From: Don Ely [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, December 17, 2001 8:47 PM Subject: RE: Help please Have you turned up syslog on your PIX to watch the traffic? What do the logs say (both Proxy and the PIX)? My money says your issue resides in there. D It was when I found out I could make mistakes that I knew I was on to something. -Ornette Coleman -Original Message- From: Ronald Mazzotta [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, December 17, 2001 5:14 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please Yes that article has been followed to the letter. I apologize for the ms reference so could we get back to this. It is becoming increasingly frustrating. It SHOULD work. -Original Message- From: Tom Meunier [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, December 17, 2001 4:52 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please 1. Your MX record has no bearing on the issue - that's solely for mail routing. You need to worry about where your A record (or CNAME if that's how you're doing it) points. 2. I'm still kind of waiting for you to say that you've followed Q276388 to the letter. Whether OWA 5.5 works through proxy has nothing to do with whether OWA 2000 does; they are nowhere NEAR being the same
RE: stripping attachments
Generates a lot of Helpdesk calls from users that report that they have an attachment in a Email that has reference to Viruses (they never read the email properly). Cheers Paul Standards are like toothbrushes, everybody agrees you should have one, but no one wants to use yours -Original Message- From: Hunter, Lori [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 3:17 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: stripping attachments Why not? I'm curious; bad experiences? It's working fine for me here. My people are even afraid to open the virus_detected_and_removed.txt file. I'm so proud. :) -Original Message- From: Hurst, Paul [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 9:14 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: stripping attachments You do't want to do that. Cheers Paul Standards are like toothbrushes, everybody agrees you should have one, but no one wants to use yours -Original Message- From: Pfefferkorn, Pete (PFEFFEPE) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 2:17 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: stripping attachments Doesn't Scan Mail allow you to replace the attached infected message with a replacement text file? I just upgraded and I though I saw that feature. -Original Message- From: Chris Scharff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 8:40 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: stripping attachments Did this behavior happen prior to the application of E2K SP2? -Original Message- From: Kim Schotanus To: Exchange Discussions Sent: 12/18/2001 4:07 AM Subject: RE: stripping attachments Trend Scanmail (183) for exchange 2000, Exch 2K SP2 -Original Message- From: Chris Scharff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 18 December, 2001 4:44 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: stripping attachments AV version? Server version and SP? -Original Message- From: Kim Schotanus To: Exchange Discussions Sent: 12/17/2001 7:32 AM Subject: stripping attachments Hi, Some virus infected mails get sstripped by Trend scanmail, but users'Outlook crashes when they have the preview pane open, how can I stop this? Kim _ List posting FAQ: 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] ** The information contained in this message or any of its attachments may be confidential and is intended for the exclusive use of the addressee(s). Any disclosure, reproduction, distribution or other dissemination or use of this communication is strictly prohibited without the express permission of the sender. The views expressed in this email are those of the individual and not necessarily those of Sony or Sony affiliated companies. Sony email is for business use only. This email and any response may be monitored by Sony UK. (04) ** _ List posting FAQ: 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] ** The information contained in this message or any of its attachments may be confidential and is intended for the exclusive use of the addressee(s). Any disclosure, reproduction, distribution or other dissemination or use of this communication is strictly prohibited without the express permission of the sender. The views expressed in this email are those of the individual and not necessarily those of Sony or Sony affiliated companies. Sony email is for business use only. This email and any response may be monitored by Sony UK. (05) ** _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL
RE: Help please
Its funny. I can not redirect and websites to internal servers. I am beginning to think this is a proxy problem. -Original Message- From: Don Ely [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 10:18 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please Router??? I thought you said you have a PIX. They have much more than 16MB, well, not much more, but at least 32MB. D Arrogance: The Best Leaders Inspire by Example. When that's not an option, brute intimidation works pretty well too. - - http://www.despair.com -Original Message- From: Ronald Mazzotta [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 7:13 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please Can't upgrade to 6.0. cisco will not allow me to dl it as I only have 16mb in my router. Also, tom I have verified that information. Thanks. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 10:11 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please Upgrade to 6.0 IOS -Original Message- From: Don Ely [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, December 17, 2001 9:07 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please I can't recall some great examples off hand, but I remember a time where the PIX would to funny things to the network traffic as it passed in either direction. Tended to time things out and make stuff not work. D The true test of character is not how much we know how to do, but how we behave when we don't know what to do. -John Holt -Original Message- From: Peter Szabo [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, December 17, 2001 6:26 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Re: Help please Don, I'm not too familiar with PIX but I know the problem with esmtp and pix , but never heard of any with http. Ronald, The easiet way to make sure is not the pix, connect your laptop to the segment bethwin the pix and your proxy and try to connect to OWA. If it is working, call Ci$co. /Peter - Original Message - From: Don Ely [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, December 17, 2001 9:06 PM Subject: RE: Help please That's another theory too... However, on the PIX there are some strange occurrences that would not pass some HTTP traffic correctly. Not always, but I've seen it. D Ignorance: It's amazing how much easier it is for a team to work together when no one has any idea where they're going. - - http://www.despair.com -Original Message- From: Peter Szabo [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, December 17, 2001 6:06 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Re: Help please Ronald, If your external address for your owa is tahoe.ss-pca.com/exchange then you have an authentication problem on your OWA server, nothing to do with your proxy or PIX. for a proxy server or a pix f/w http is http is http. period. On your OWA server diasble any other authentication but Basic. If I remember correctly internaly users can access OWA, yes ? /Peter - Original Message - From: Don Ely [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, December 17, 2001 8:47 PM Subject: RE: Help please Have you turned up syslog on your PIX to watch the traffic? What do the logs say (both Proxy and the PIX)? My money says your issue resides in there. D It was when I found out I could make mistakes that I knew I was on to something. -Ornette Coleman -Original Message- From: Ronald Mazzotta [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, December 17, 2001 5:14 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please Yes that article has been followed to the letter. I apologize for the ms reference so could we get back to this. It is becoming increasingly frustrating. It SHOULD work. -Original Message- From: Tom Meunier [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, December 17, 2001 4:52 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please 1. Your MX record has no bearing on the issue - that's solely for mail routing. You need to worry about where your A record (or CNAME if that's how you're doing it) points. 2. I'm still kind of waiting for you to say that you've followed Q276388 to the letter. Whether OWA 5.5 works through proxy has nothing to do with whether OWA 2000 does; they are nowhere NEAR being the same product. -Original Message- From: Ronald Mazzotta [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Posted At: Monday, December 17, 2001 02:54 PM Posted To: MSExchange Mailing List Conversation: Help please Subject: RE: Help please Yeah sorry. My mx record is exchange.domain.com. when a user enters exchange.domain.com/exchange they hit the proxy. Proxy is set up to redirect any requests for this address to the internal exchange address. This is as per M$. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL
RE: Help please
That's why I wanted you to check the logs on both Proxy and the PIX. Somewhere there's something not passing traffic correctly... D Overconfidence: Before you attempt to beat the odds, be sure you can survive the odds beating you. - - http://www.despair.com -Original Message- From: Ronald Mazzotta [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 7:31 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please Its funny. I can not redirect and websites to internal servers. I am beginning to think this is a proxy problem. -Original Message- From: Don Ely [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 10:18 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please Router??? I thought you said you have a PIX. They have much more than 16MB, well, not much more, but at least 32MB. D Arrogance: The Best Leaders Inspire by Example. When that's not an option, brute intimidation works pretty well too. - - http://www.despair.com -Original Message- From: Ronald Mazzotta [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 7:13 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please Can't upgrade to 6.0. cisco will not allow me to dl it as I only have 16mb in my router. Also, tom I have verified that information. Thanks. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 10:11 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please Upgrade to 6.0 IOS -Original Message- From: Don Ely [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, December 17, 2001 9:07 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please I can't recall some great examples off hand, but I remember a time where the PIX would to funny things to the network traffic as it passed in either direction. Tended to time things out and make stuff not work. D The true test of character is not how much we know how to do, but how we behave when we don't know what to do. -John Holt -Original Message- From: Peter Szabo [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, December 17, 2001 6:26 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Re: Help please Don, I'm not too familiar with PIX but I know the problem with esmtp and pix , but never heard of any with http. Ronald, The easiet way to make sure is not the pix, connect your laptop to the segment bethwin the pix and your proxy and try to connect to OWA. If it is working, call Ci$co. /Peter - Original Message - From: Don Ely [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, December 17, 2001 9:06 PM Subject: RE: Help please That's another theory too... However, on the PIX there are some strange occurrences that would not pass some HTTP traffic correctly. Not always, but I've seen it. D Ignorance: It's amazing how much easier it is for a team to work together when no one has any idea where they're going. - - http://www.despair.com -Original Message- From: Peter Szabo [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, December 17, 2001 6:06 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Re: Help please Ronald, If your external address for your owa is tahoe.ss-pca.com/exchange then you have an authentication problem on your OWA server, nothing to do with your proxy or PIX. for a proxy server or a pix f/w http is http is http. period. On your OWA server diasble any other authentication but Basic. If I remember correctly internaly users can access OWA, yes ? /Peter - Original Message - From: Don Ely [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, December 17, 2001 8:47 PM Subject: RE: Help please Have you turned up syslog on your PIX to watch the traffic? What do the logs say (both Proxy and the PIX)? My money says your issue resides in there. D It was when I found out I could make mistakes that I knew I was on to something. -Ornette Coleman -Original Message- From: Ronald Mazzotta [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, December 17, 2001 5:14 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please Yes that article has been followed to the letter. I apologize for the ms reference so could we get back to this. It is becoming increasingly frustrating. It SHOULD work. -Original Message- From: Tom Meunier [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, December 17, 2001 4:52 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please 1. Your MX record has no bearing on the issue - that's solely for mail routing. You need to worry about where your A record (or CNAME if that's how you're doing it) points. 2. I'm still kind of waiting for you to say that you've followed Q276388 to the letter. Whether OWA 5.5 works through proxy has nothing to do with whether OWA 2000 does; they are nowhere NEAR being the same product. -Original Message- From: Ronald Mazzotta [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Posted At:
RE: Help please
I will have to call cisco as per starting logs. I am not that secure enough about the proper way of turning the loggin up. As for proxy I am attempting that now. -Original Message- From: Don Ely [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 10:37 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please That's why I wanted you to check the logs on both Proxy and the PIX. Somewhere there's something not passing traffic correctly... D Overconfidence: Before you attempt to beat the odds, be sure you can survive the odds beating you. - - http://www.despair.com -Original Message- From: Ronald Mazzotta [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 7:31 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please Its funny. I can not redirect and websites to internal servers. I am beginning to think this is a proxy problem. -Original Message- From: Don Ely [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 10:18 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please Router??? I thought you said you have a PIX. They have much more than 16MB, well, not much more, but at least 32MB. D Arrogance: The Best Leaders Inspire by Example. When that's not an option, brute intimidation works pretty well too. - - http://www.despair.com -Original Message- From: Ronald Mazzotta [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 7:13 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please Can't upgrade to 6.0. cisco will not allow me to dl it as I only have 16mb in my router. Also, tom I have verified that information. Thanks. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 10:11 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please Upgrade to 6.0 IOS -Original Message- From: Don Ely [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, December 17, 2001 9:07 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please I can't recall some great examples off hand, but I remember a time where the PIX would to funny things to the network traffic as it passed in either direction. Tended to time things out and make stuff not work. D The true test of character is not how much we know how to do, but how we behave when we don't know what to do. -John Holt -Original Message- From: Peter Szabo [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, December 17, 2001 6:26 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Re: Help please Don, I'm not too familiar with PIX but I know the problem with esmtp and pix , but never heard of any with http. Ronald, The easiet way to make sure is not the pix, connect your laptop to the segment bethwin the pix and your proxy and try to connect to OWA. If it is working, call Ci$co. /Peter - Original Message - From: Don Ely [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, December 17, 2001 9:06 PM Subject: RE: Help please That's another theory too... However, on the PIX there are some strange occurrences that would not pass some HTTP traffic correctly. Not always, but I've seen it. D Ignorance: It's amazing how much easier it is for a team to work together when no one has any idea where they're going. - - http://www.despair.com -Original Message- From: Peter Szabo [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, December 17, 2001 6:06 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Re: Help please Ronald, If your external address for your owa is tahoe.ss-pca.com/exchange then you have an authentication problem on your OWA server, nothing to do with your proxy or PIX. for a proxy server or a pix f/w http is http is http. period. On your OWA server diasble any other authentication but Basic. If I remember correctly internaly users can access OWA, yes ? /Peter - Original Message - From: Don Ely [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, December 17, 2001 8:47 PM Subject: RE: Help please Have you turned up syslog on your PIX to watch the traffic? What do the logs say (both Proxy and the PIX)? My money says your issue resides in there. D It was when I found out I could make mistakes that I knew I was on to something. -Ornette Coleman -Original Message- From: Ronald Mazzotta [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, December 17, 2001 5:14 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please Yes that article has been followed to the letter. I apologize for the ms reference so could we get back to this. It is becoming increasingly frustrating. It SHOULD work. -Original Message- From: Tom Meunier [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, December 17, 2001 4:52 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please 1. Your MX record has no bearing on the issue - that's solely for mail routing. You need to worry about where your A record (or CNAME if that's how you're doing it) points.
RE: Off topic: ScanMail AVAPI notifications and tracing?
I get the administrative notifications. I'm talking about a user that sends an infected message. He does not recieve a notification that he sent an infected message. Only the recipient receives a message. -Original Message- From: Martin Blackstone [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 10:31 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Off topic: ScanMail AVAPI notifications and tracing? Under Notification, Real Time Scan, You need to put your name in ScanMail Administrators. Then you will get emails whenever a virus is nailed. As for the other with the AVAPI, this is a limitation of the AVAPI. My suggestion would be to use Scanmail 3.7x which uses ESE based scanning. -Original Message- From: Pfefferkorn, Pete (PFEFFEPE) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 6:50 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Off topic: ScanMail AVAPI notifications and tracing? Exchange 5.5 SP4, ScanMail 3.52 We upgraded to ScanMail 3.52 and are running in both AVAPI and MAPI mode. I understand that running AVAPI, you lose the sender/recipient information for viruses caught in the log files. I'm a little confused on my testing on how notification works. I sent a test virus to a mailbox on our system and I did not receive a notification that I sent a infected message. The recipient, on the other hand, did receive a message from my account and had a text file entitled Virus1_Detected_and_Removed_virusname.txt. Shouldn't I have received a message as well. I have the real time scan set to send message to sender,recipient,administrator. One other question. Since I do not get the actual sender notifications in the log files now, I cannot determine where/who may be triggering an outbreak. Since the recipient gets a attachment with the Virus1x.txt message is there a way to track this through the MTA tracking log files. Is there a diagnostic key on the MTA that will include the attachment name sent on messages? Pete Pfefferkorn Senior Systems Engineer/Mail Administrator University of Cincinnati 51 Goodman Street Cincinnati, OH 45221 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]
RE: Off topic: ScanMail AVAPI notifications and tracing?
That could also be another limitation of the AVAPI, but I cant remember -Original Message- From: Pfefferkorn, Pete (PFEFFEPE) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 7:45 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Off topic: ScanMail AVAPI notifications and tracing? I get the administrative notifications. I'm talking about a user that sends an infected message. He does not recieve a notification that he sent an infected message. Only the recipient receives a message. -Original Message- From: Martin Blackstone [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 10:31 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Off topic: ScanMail AVAPI notifications and tracing? Under Notification, Real Time Scan, You need to put your name in ScanMail Administrators. Then you will get emails whenever a virus is nailed. As for the other with the AVAPI, this is a limitation of the AVAPI. My suggestion would be to use Scanmail 3.7x which uses ESE based scanning. -Original Message- From: Pfefferkorn, Pete (PFEFFEPE) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 6:50 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Off topic: ScanMail AVAPI notifications and tracing? Exchange 5.5 SP4, ScanMail 3.52 We upgraded to ScanMail 3.52 and are running in both AVAPI and MAPI mode. I understand that running AVAPI, you lose the sender/recipient information for viruses caught in the log files. I'm a little confused on my testing on how notification works. I sent a test virus to a mailbox on our system and I did not receive a notification that I sent a infected message. The recipient, on the other hand, did receive a message from my account and had a text file entitled Virus1_Detected_and_Removed_virusname.txt. Shouldn't I have received a message as well. I have the real time scan set to send message to sender,recipient,administrator. One other question. Since I do not get the actual sender notifications in the log files now, I cannot determine where/who may be triggering an outbreak. Since the recipient gets a attachment with the Virus1x.txt message is there a way to track this through the MTA tracking log files. Is there a diagnostic key on the MTA that will include the attachment name sent on messages? Pete Pfefferkorn Senior Systems Engineer/Mail Administrator University of Cincinnati 51 Goodman Street Cincinnati, OH 45221 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: Help please
OK, let us know what you find. D DOS 6: Because there aren't enough problems in the world already. -Original Message- From: Ronald Mazzotta [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 7:37 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please I will have to call cisco as per starting logs. I am not that secure enough about the proper way of turning the loggin up. As for proxy I am attempting that now. -Original Message- From: Don Ely [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 10:37 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please That's why I wanted you to check the logs on both Proxy and the PIX. Somewhere there's something not passing traffic correctly... D Overconfidence: Before you attempt to beat the odds, be sure you can survive the odds beating you. - - http://www.despair.com -Original Message- From: Ronald Mazzotta [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 7:31 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please Its funny. I can not redirect and websites to internal servers. I am beginning to think this is a proxy problem. -Original Message- From: Don Ely [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 10:18 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please Router??? I thought you said you have a PIX. They have much more than 16MB, well, not much more, but at least 32MB. D Arrogance: The Best Leaders Inspire by Example. When that's not an option, brute intimidation works pretty well too. - - http://www.despair.com -Original Message- From: Ronald Mazzotta [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 7:13 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please Can't upgrade to 6.0. cisco will not allow me to dl it as I only have 16mb in my router. Also, tom I have verified that information. Thanks. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 10:11 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please Upgrade to 6.0 IOS -Original Message- From: Don Ely [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, December 17, 2001 9:07 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please I can't recall some great examples off hand, but I remember a time where the PIX would to funny things to the network traffic as it passed in either direction. Tended to time things out and make stuff not work. D The true test of character is not how much we know how to do, but how we behave when we don't know what to do. -John Holt -Original Message- From: Peter Szabo [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, December 17, 2001 6:26 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Re: Help please Don, I'm not too familiar with PIX but I know the problem with esmtp and pix , but never heard of any with http. Ronald, The easiet way to make sure is not the pix, connect your laptop to the segment bethwin the pix and your proxy and try to connect to OWA. If it is working, call Ci$co. /Peter - Original Message - From: Don Ely [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, December 17, 2001 9:06 PM Subject: RE: Help please That's another theory too... However, on the PIX there are some strange occurrences that would not pass some HTTP traffic correctly. Not always, but I've seen it. D Ignorance: It's amazing how much easier it is for a team to work together when no one has any idea where they're going. - - http://www.despair.com -Original Message- From: Peter Szabo [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, December 17, 2001 6:06 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Re: Help please Ronald, If your external address for your owa is tahoe.ss-pca.com/exchange then you have an authentication problem on your OWA server, nothing to do with your proxy or PIX. for a proxy server or a pix f/w http is http is http. period. On your OWA server diasble any other authentication but Basic. If I remember correctly internaly users can access OWA, yes ? /Peter - Original Message - From: Don Ely [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, December 17, 2001 8:47 PM Subject: RE: Help please Have you turned up syslog on your PIX to watch the traffic? What do the logs say (both Proxy and the PIX)? My money says your issue resides in there. D It was when I found out I could make mistakes that I knew I was on to something. -Ornette Coleman -Original Message- From: Ronald Mazzotta [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, December 17, 2001 5:14 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please Yes that article has been followed to the letter. I apologize for the ms reference so could we get back to this. It is becoming increasingly frustrating. It SHOULD work. -Original Message- From: Tom Meunier [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday,
RE: stripping attachments
OK, I guess one man's meat is another man's poison. I actually like that they get scared and call in. I MUCH prefer that scenario to the scenario at ADS whereby the CEO and VP of IT repeatedly launch virii such as love letter and melissa because they stubbornly refuse to purchase any antivirus for their mail. -Original Message- From: Hurst, Paul [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 9:37 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: stripping attachments Generates a lot of Helpdesk calls from users that report that they have an attachment in a Email that has reference to Viruses (they never read the email properly). Cheers Paul Standards are like toothbrushes, everybody agrees you should have one, but no one wants to use yours -Original Message- From: Hunter, Lori [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 3:17 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: stripping attachments Why not? I'm curious; bad experiences? It's working fine for me here. My people are even afraid to open the virus_detected_and_removed.txt file. I'm so proud. :) -Original Message- From: Hurst, Paul [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 9:14 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: stripping attachments You do't want to do that. Cheers Paul Standards are like toothbrushes, everybody agrees you should have one, but no one wants to use yours -Original Message- From: Pfefferkorn, Pete (PFEFFEPE) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 2:17 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: stripping attachments Doesn't Scan Mail allow you to replace the attached infected message with a replacement text file? I just upgraded and I though I saw that feature. -Original Message- From: Chris Scharff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 8:40 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: stripping attachments Did this behavior happen prior to the application of E2K SP2? -Original Message- From: Kim Schotanus To: Exchange Discussions Sent: 12/18/2001 4:07 AM Subject: RE: stripping attachments Trend Scanmail (183) for exchange 2000, Exch 2K SP2 -Original Message- From: Chris Scharff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 18 December, 2001 4:44 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: stripping attachments AV version? Server version and SP? -Original Message- From: Kim Schotanus To: Exchange Discussions Sent: 12/17/2001 7:32 AM Subject: stripping attachments Hi, Some virus infected mails get sstripped by Trend scanmail, but users'Outlook crashes when they have the preview pane open, how can I stop this? Kim _ List posting FAQ: 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] ** The information contained in this message or any of its attachments may be confidential and is intended for the exclusive use of the addressee(s). Any disclosure, reproduction, distribution or other dissemination or use of this communication is strictly prohibited without the express permission of the sender. The views expressed in this email are those of the individual and not necessarily those of Sony or Sony affiliated companies. Sony email is for business use only. This email and any response may be monitored by Sony UK. (04) ** _ List posting FAQ: 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] ** The information contained in this message or any of its attachments may be confidential and is intended for the exclusive use of the addressee(s). Any disclosure, reproduction, distribution or other dissemination or use of this communication is strictly prohibited without the express permission of the sender. The views expressed in this email are those of the
RE: Help please
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 I have a Pix 515 that I run 6.1 on.. I thought they only shipper with 32mb as a minimum.. You should be able to download IOS versions with a valid cco, regardless of what PIX model you have.. ~John - -Original Message- From: Ronald Mazzotta [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 10:28 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please Yes I have a cco login that's where it blocks me. Pix 515 Web site says that it comes with 16mb but 6.0 requires 32mb I really appreciate all the help. - -Original Message- From: Don Ely [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 10:25 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please Which model of the PIX do you have? D Ideas pull the trigger, but instinct loads the gun. -Don Marquis - -Original Message- From: Ronald Mazzotta [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 7:21 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please Version 5.3(5) - -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 10:22 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please What version are you on now? - -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 9:21 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please That doesnt make any sense. Download the file to a server running tftp. Tftp the image to your router? - -Original Message- From: Ronald Mazzotta [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 9:13 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please Can't upgrade to 6.0. cisco will not allow me to dl it as I only have 16mb in my router. Also, tom I have verified that information. Thanks. - -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 10:11 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please Upgrade to 6.0 IOS - -Original Message- From: Don Ely [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, December 17, 2001 9:07 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please I can't recall some great examples off hand, but I remember a time where the PIX would to funny things to the network traffic as it passed in either direction. Tended to time things out and make stuff not work. D The true test of character is not how much we know how to do, but how we behave when we don't know what to do. -John Holt - -Original Message- From: Peter Szabo [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, December 17, 2001 6:26 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Re: Help please Don, I'm not too familiar with PIX but I know the problem with esmtp and pix , but never heard of any with http. Ronald, The easiet way to make sure is not the pix, connect your laptop to the segment bethwin the pix and your proxy and try to connect to OWA. If it is working, call Ci$co. /Peter - - Original Message - From: Don Ely [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, December 17, 2001 9:06 PM Subject: RE: Help please That's another theory too... However, on the PIX there are some strange occurrences that would not pass some HTTP traffic correctly. Not always, but I've seen it. D Ignorance: It's amazing how much easier it is for a team to work together when no one has any idea where they're going. - - http://www.despair.com -Original Message- From: Peter Szabo [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, December 17, 2001 6:06 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Re: Help please Ronald, If your external address for your owa is tahoe.ss-pca.com/exchange then you have an authentication problem on your OWA server, nothing to do with your proxy or PIX. for a proxy server or a pix f/w http is http is http. period. On your OWA server diasble any other authentication but Basic. If I remember correctly internaly users can access OWA, yes ? /Peter - Original Message - From: Don Ely [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, December 17, 2001 8:47 PM Subject: RE: Help please Have you turned up syslog on your PIX to watch the traffic? What do the logs say (both Proxy and the PIX)? My money says your issue resides in there. D It was when I found out I could make mistakes that I knew I was on to something. -Ornette Coleman -Original Message- From: Ronald Mazzotta [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, December 17, 2001 5:14 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please Yes that article has been followed to the letter. I apologize for the ms reference so could we get back to this. It is becoming increasingly frustrating. It SHOULD work. -Original Message- From: Tom Meunier [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, December 17, 2001 4:52 PM To:
RE: stripping attachments
::Context Alert:: -Original Message- From: Hunter, Lori [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 7:51 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: stripping attachments OK, I guess one man's meat is another man's poison. I actually like that they get scared and call in. I MUCH prefer that scenario to the scenario at ADS whereby the CEO and VP of IT repeatedly launch virii such as love letter and melissa because they stubbornly refuse to purchase any antivirus for their mail. -Original Message- From: Hurst, Paul [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 9:37 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: stripping attachments Generates a lot of Helpdesk calls from users that report that they have an attachment in a Email that has reference to Viruses (they never read the email properly). Cheers Paul Standards are like toothbrushes, everybody agrees you should have one, but no one wants to use yours -Original Message- From: Hunter, Lori [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 3:17 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: stripping attachments Why not? I'm curious; bad experiences? It's working fine for me here. My people are even afraid to open the virus_detected_and_removed.txt file. I'm so proud. :) -Original Message- From: Hurst, Paul [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 9:14 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: stripping attachments You do't want to do that. Cheers Paul Standards are like toothbrushes, everybody agrees you should have one, but no one wants to use yours -Original Message- From: Pfefferkorn, Pete (PFEFFEPE) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 2:17 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: stripping attachments Doesn't Scan Mail allow you to replace the attached infected message with a replacement text file? I just upgraded and I though I saw that feature. -Original Message- From: Chris Scharff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 8:40 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: stripping attachments Did this behavior happen prior to the application of E2K SP2? -Original Message- From: Kim Schotanus To: Exchange Discussions Sent: 12/18/2001 4:07 AM Subject: RE: stripping attachments Trend Scanmail (183) for exchange 2000, Exch 2K SP2 -Original Message- From: Chris Scharff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 18 December, 2001 4:44 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: stripping attachments AV version? Server version and SP? -Original Message- From: Kim Schotanus To: Exchange Discussions Sent: 12/17/2001 7:32 AM Subject: stripping attachments Hi, Some virus infected mails get sstripped by Trend scanmail, but users'Outlook crashes when they have the preview pane open, how can I stop this? Kim _ List posting FAQ: 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] ** The information contained in this message or any of its attachments may be confidential and is intended for the exclusive use of the addressee(s). Any disclosure, reproduction, distribution or other dissemination or use of this communication is strictly prohibited without the express permission of the sender. The views expressed in this email are those of the individual and not necessarily those of Sony or Sony affiliated companies. Sony email is for business use only. This email and any response may be monitored by Sony UK. (04) ** _ List posting FAQ: 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] ** The information contained in this message or any of its attachments may be confidential and is intended for the exclusive use of the addressee(s). Any disclosure,
RE: Help please
Ronald, the 16MB you see is for the flash memory, not the RAM. I just looked on their site. You should have at least 32MB of RAM in there. http://www.cisco.com/univercd/cc/td/doc/pcat/fw.htm D Ideas pull the trigger, but instinct loads the gun. -Don Marquis -Original Message- From: King, John [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 7:56 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 I have a Pix 515 that I run 6.1 on.. I thought they only shipper with 32mb as a minimum.. You should be able to download IOS versions with a valid cco, regardless of what PIX model you have.. ~John - -Original Message- From: Ronald Mazzotta [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 10:28 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please Yes I have a cco login that's where it blocks me. Pix 515 Web site says that it comes with 16mb but 6.0 requires 32mb I really appreciate all the help. - -Original Message- From: Don Ely [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 10:25 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please Which model of the PIX do you have? D Ideas pull the trigger, but instinct loads the gun. -Don Marquis - -Original Message- From: Ronald Mazzotta [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 7:21 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please Version 5.3(5) - -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 10:22 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please What version are you on now? - -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 9:21 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please That doesnt make any sense. Download the file to a server running tftp. Tftp the image to your router? - -Original Message- From: Ronald Mazzotta [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 9:13 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please Can't upgrade to 6.0. cisco will not allow me to dl it as I only have 16mb in my router. Also, tom I have verified that information. Thanks. - -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 10:11 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please Upgrade to 6.0 IOS - -Original Message- From: Don Ely [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, December 17, 2001 9:07 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please I can't recall some great examples off hand, but I remember a time where the PIX would to funny things to the network traffic as it passed in either direction. Tended to time things out and make stuff not work. D The true test of character is not how much we know how to do, but how we behave when we don't know what to do. -John Holt - -Original Message- From: Peter Szabo [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, December 17, 2001 6:26 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Re: Help please Don, I'm not too familiar with PIX but I know the problem with esmtp and pix , but never heard of any with http. Ronald, The easiet way to make sure is not the pix, connect your laptop to the segment bethwin the pix and your proxy and try to connect to OWA. If it is working, call Ci$co. /Peter - - Original Message - From: Don Ely [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, December 17, 2001 9:06 PM Subject: RE: Help please That's another theory too... However, on the PIX there are some strange occurrences that would not pass some HTTP traffic correctly. Not always, but I've seen it. D Ignorance: It's amazing how much easier it is for a team to work together when no one has any idea where they're going. - - http://www.despair.com -Original Message- From: Peter Szabo [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, December 17, 2001 6:06 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Re: Help please Ronald, If your external address for your owa is tahoe.ss-pca.com/exchange then you have an authentication problem on your OWA server, nothing to do with your proxy or PIX. for a proxy server or a pix f/w http is http is http. period. On your OWA server diasble any other authentication but Basic. If I remember correctly internaly users can access OWA, yes ? /Peter - Original Message - From: Don Ely [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, December 17, 2001 8:47 PM Subject: RE: Help please Have you turned up syslog on your PIX to watch the traffic? What do the logs say (both Proxy and the PIX)? My money says your issue resides in there. D It was when I found out I could make mistakes that I knew I was on to something. -Ornette Coleman -Original Message- From: Ronald Mazzotta
RE: stripping attachments
I like to look at it this way, the lesser of two evils. On the one hand it is more work for me to have to pull items from quarantine. On the other hand, it is even MORE work for me to rid the entire network of a virus. Far better for the users to get a message letting them know something came for them, and that it was quarantined for some reason, than to blindly move attachments to their mailboxes. They can then request the file and as long as it is not of viral nature and moderately work related we then give it to them. Because of this the users trust the IS department more, and I can block pretty much all attachments, including the incoming Word Excel documents with the macros too. How does that old adage go? Fool me once shame on you, fool me twice shame on me.. Fool me three times I better find something else to do. Something like that. -Original Message- From: Hunter, Lori [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 7:51 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: stripping attachments OK, I guess one man's meat is another man's poison. I actually like that they get scared and call in. I MUCH prefer that scenario to the scenario at ADS whereby the CEO and VP of IT repeatedly launch virii such as love letter and melissa because they stubbornly refuse to purchase any antivirus for their mail. -Original Message- From: Hurst, Paul [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 9:37 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: stripping attachments Generates a lot of Helpdesk calls from users that report that they have an attachment in a Email that has reference to Viruses (they never read the email properly). Cheers Paul Standards are like toothbrushes, everybody agrees you should have one, but no one wants to use yours -Original Message- From: Hunter, Lori [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 3:17 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: stripping attachments Why not? I'm curious; bad experiences? It's working fine for me here. My people are even afraid to open the virus_detected_and_removed.txt file. I'm so proud. :) -Original Message- From: Hurst, Paul [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 9:14 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: stripping attachments You do't want to do that. Cheers Paul Standards are like toothbrushes, everybody agrees you should have one, but no one wants to use yours -Original Message- From: Pfefferkorn, Pete (PFEFFEPE) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 2:17 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: stripping attachments Doesn't Scan Mail allow you to replace the attached infected message with a replacement text file? I just upgraded and I though I saw that feature. -Original Message- From: Chris Scharff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 8:40 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: stripping attachments Did this behavior happen prior to the application of E2K SP2? -Original Message- From: Kim Schotanus To: Exchange Discussions Sent: 12/18/2001 4:07 AM Subject: RE: stripping attachments Trend Scanmail (183) for exchange 2000, Exch 2K SP2 -Original Message- From: Chris Scharff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 18 December, 2001 4:44 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: stripping attachments AV version? Server version and SP? -Original Message- From: Kim Schotanus To: Exchange Discussions Sent: 12/17/2001 7:32 AM Subject: stripping attachments Hi, Some virus infected mails get sstripped by Trend scanmail, but users'Outlook crashes when they have the preview pane open, how can I stop this? Kim _ List posting FAQ: 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] ** The information contained in this message or any of its attachments may be confidential and is intended for the exclusive use of the addressee(s). Any disclosure, reproduction, distribution or other dissemination or use of this communication is strictly prohibited without the express permission of the sender. The views expressed in this email are those of the individual and not necessarily those of Sony or Sony affiliated companies. Sony email is for business use only. This email and any response may be monitored by Sony UK. (04)
RE: Help please
When accessing the site this is what is in the proxy log 2001-12-18 15:51:12 63.17.150.119 - 172.16.1.1 80 GET /scripts/proxy/w3proxy.dll 038b0008,+http://tahoe/exchange/USA/ 200 Mozilla/4.0+(compatible;+MSIE+6.0;+Windows+NT+5.1;+Q312461) tahoe is the internal exchange server. -Original Message- From: Don Ely [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 10:45 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please OK, let us know what you find. D DOS 6: Because there aren't enough problems in the world already. -Original Message- From: Ronald Mazzotta [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 7:37 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please I will have to call cisco as per starting logs. I am not that secure enough about the proper way of turning the loggin up. As for proxy I am attempting that now. -Original Message- From: Don Ely [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 10:37 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please That's why I wanted you to check the logs on both Proxy and the PIX. Somewhere there's something not passing traffic correctly... D Overconfidence: Before you attempt to beat the odds, be sure you can survive the odds beating you. - - http://www.despair.com -Original Message- From: Ronald Mazzotta [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 7:31 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please Its funny. I can not redirect and websites to internal servers. I am beginning to think this is a proxy problem. -Original Message- From: Don Ely [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 10:18 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please Router??? I thought you said you have a PIX. They have much more than 16MB, well, not much more, but at least 32MB. D Arrogance: The Best Leaders Inspire by Example. When that's not an option, brute intimidation works pretty well too. - - http://www.despair.com -Original Message- From: Ronald Mazzotta [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 7:13 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please Can't upgrade to 6.0. cisco will not allow me to dl it as I only have 16mb in my router. Also, tom I have verified that information. Thanks. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 10:11 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please Upgrade to 6.0 IOS -Original Message- From: Don Ely [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, December 17, 2001 9:07 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please I can't recall some great examples off hand, but I remember a time where the PIX would to funny things to the network traffic as it passed in either direction. Tended to time things out and make stuff not work. D The true test of character is not how much we know how to do, but how we behave when we don't know what to do. -John Holt -Original Message- From: Peter Szabo [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, December 17, 2001 6:26 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Re: Help please Don, I'm not too familiar with PIX but I know the problem with esmtp and pix , but never heard of any with http. Ronald, The easiet way to make sure is not the pix, connect your laptop to the segment bethwin the pix and your proxy and try to connect to OWA. If it is working, call Ci$co. /Peter - Original Message - From: Don Ely [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, December 17, 2001 9:06 PM Subject: RE: Help please That's another theory too... However, on the PIX there are some strange occurrences that would not pass some HTTP traffic correctly. Not always, but I've seen it. D Ignorance: It's amazing how much easier it is for a team to work together when no one has any idea where they're going. - - http://www.despair.com -Original Message- From: Peter Szabo [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, December 17, 2001 6:06 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Re: Help please Ronald, If your external address for your owa is tahoe.ss-pca.com/exchange then you have an authentication problem on your OWA server, nothing to do with your proxy or PIX. for a proxy server or a pix f/w http is http is http. period. On your OWA server diasble any other authentication but Basic. If I remember correctly internaly users can access OWA, yes ? /Peter - Original Message - From: Don Ely [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, December 17, 2001 8:47 PM Subject: RE: Help please Have you turned up syslog on your PIX to watch the traffic? What do the logs say (both Proxy and the PIX)? My money says your issue resides in there. D It was when I found out I could make mistakes that I knew I was on to something. -Ornette Coleman
RE: stripping attachments
I never quarantine. If it breaks the rules, it is deleted. I'm not screwing around with that crap. The users know what is not allowed. As for notifications, I want my users to see them. I want them to know who is sending infected files so they can be wary of them. -Original Message- From: Akerlund, Scott [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 8:01 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: stripping attachments I like to look at it this way, the lesser of two evils. On the one hand it is more work for me to have to pull items from quarantine. On the other hand, it is even MORE work for me to rid the entire network of a virus. Far better for the users to get a message letting them know something came for them, and that it was quarantined for some reason, than to blindly move attachments to their mailboxes. They can then request the file and as long as it is not of viral nature and moderately work related we then give it to them. Because of this the users trust the IS department more, and I can block pretty much all attachments, including the incoming Word Excel documents with the macros too. How does that old adage go? Fool me once shame on you, fool me twice shame on me.. Fool me three times I better find something else to do. Something like that. -Original Message- From: Hunter, Lori [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 7:51 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: stripping attachments OK, I guess one man's meat is another man's poison. I actually like that they get scared and call in. I MUCH prefer that scenario to the scenario at ADS whereby the CEO and VP of IT repeatedly launch virii such as love letter and melissa because they stubbornly refuse to purchase any antivirus for their mail. -Original Message- From: Hurst, Paul [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 9:37 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: stripping attachments Generates a lot of Helpdesk calls from users that report that they have an attachment in a Email that has reference to Viruses (they never read the email properly). Cheers Paul Standards are like toothbrushes, everybody agrees you should have one, but no one wants to use yours -Original Message- From: Hunter, Lori [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 3:17 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: stripping attachments Why not? I'm curious; bad experiences? It's working fine for me here. My people are even afraid to open the virus_detected_and_removed.txt file. I'm so proud. :) -Original Message- From: Hurst, Paul [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 9:14 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: stripping attachments You do't want to do that. Cheers Paul Standards are like toothbrushes, everybody agrees you should have one, but no one wants to use yours -Original Message- From: Pfefferkorn, Pete (PFEFFEPE) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 2:17 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: stripping attachments Doesn't Scan Mail allow you to replace the attached infected message with a replacement text file? I just upgraded and I though I saw that feature. -Original Message- From: Chris Scharff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 8:40 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: stripping attachments Did this behavior happen prior to the application of E2K SP2? -Original Message- From: Kim Schotanus To: Exchange Discussions Sent: 12/18/2001 4:07 AM Subject: RE: stripping attachments Trend Scanmail (183) for exchange 2000, Exch 2K SP2 -Original Message- From: Chris Scharff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 18 December, 2001 4:44 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: stripping attachments AV version? Server version and SP? -Original Message- From: Kim Schotanus To: Exchange Discussions Sent: 12/17/2001 7:32 AM Subject: stripping attachments Hi, Some virus infected mails get sstripped by Trend scanmail, but users'Outlook crashes when they have the preview pane open, how can I stop this? Kim _ List posting FAQ: 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] ** The information contained in this message or any of its attachments may be confidential and is intended for the exclusive use of the addressee(s). Any
Archive process
I have a user who was recently migrated to Win2K about 4 months ago. She's pretty sure she's been using Outlook2K all along. She has a 133MB .pst file. But, when you open the file, all the folders she archived are empty. I ran scanpst on it. The scan found no errors, 50 folders and only 3 files. How can this be?? I verified her archive path. What else should I be looking at to explain a large archive file, but with no contents?? 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]
RE: Help please
Is the 63.x.x.x address the client address or what? What shows up in the logs when you try to pass authentication? D A computer lets you make more mistakes faster than any invention in human history - with the possible exceptions of handguns and tequila. -Mitch Ratcliffe, Technology Review -Original Message- From: Ronald Mazzotta [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 7:57 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please When accessing the site this is what is in the proxy log 2001-12-18 15:51:12 63.17.150.119 - 172.16.1.1 80 GET /scripts/proxy/w3proxy.dll 038b0008,+http://tahoe/exchange/USA/ 200 Mozilla/4.0+(compatible;+MSIE+6.0;+Windows+NT+5.1;+Q312461) tahoe is the internal exchange server. -Original Message- From: Don Ely [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 10:45 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please OK, let us know what you find. D DOS 6: Because there aren't enough problems in the world already. -Original Message- From: Ronald Mazzotta [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 7:37 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please I will have to call cisco as per starting logs. I am not that secure enough about the proper way of turning the loggin up. As for proxy I am attempting that now. -Original Message- From: Don Ely [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 10:37 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please That's why I wanted you to check the logs on both Proxy and the PIX. Somewhere there's something not passing traffic correctly... D Overconfidence: Before you attempt to beat the odds, be sure you can survive the odds beating you. - - http://www.despair.com -Original Message- From: Ronald Mazzotta [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 7:31 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please Its funny. I can not redirect and websites to internal servers. I am beginning to think this is a proxy problem. -Original Message- From: Don Ely [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 10:18 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please Router??? I thought you said you have a PIX. They have much more than 16MB, well, not much more, but at least 32MB. D Arrogance: The Best Leaders Inspire by Example. When that's not an option, brute intimidation works pretty well too. - - http://www.despair.com -Original Message- From: Ronald Mazzotta [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 7:13 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please Can't upgrade to 6.0. cisco will not allow me to dl it as I only have 16mb in my router. Also, tom I have verified that information. Thanks. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 10:11 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please Upgrade to 6.0 IOS -Original Message- From: Don Ely [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, December 17, 2001 9:07 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please I can't recall some great examples off hand, but I remember a time where the PIX would to funny things to the network traffic as it passed in either direction. Tended to time things out and make stuff not work. D The true test of character is not how much we know how to do, but how we behave when we don't know what to do. -John Holt -Original Message- From: Peter Szabo [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, December 17, 2001 6:26 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Re: Help please Don, I'm not too familiar with PIX but I know the problem with esmtp and pix , but never heard of any with http. Ronald, The easiet way to make sure is not the pix, connect your laptop to the segment bethwin the pix and your proxy and try to connect to OWA. If it is working, call Ci$co. /Peter - Original Message - From: Don Ely [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, December 17, 2001 9:06 PM Subject: RE: Help please That's another theory too... However, on the PIX there are some strange occurrences that would not pass some HTTP traffic correctly. Not always, but I've seen it. D Ignorance: It's amazing how much easier it is for a team to work together when no one has any idea where they're going. - - http://www.despair.com -Original Message- From: Peter Szabo [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, December 17, 2001 6:06 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Re: Help please Ronald, If your external address for your owa is tahoe.ss-pca.com/exchange then you have an authentication problem on your OWA server, nothing to do with your proxy or PIX. for a proxy server or a pix f/w http is http is http. period. On your OWA server diasble any other authentication but Basic. If I remember correctly internaly users can access OWA, yes
RE: Archive process
You should run scanpst about 3 times. Then delete the PST and tell the user PST=BAD -Original Message- From: Farquharson, Andrea [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 8:09 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Archive process I have a user who was recently migrated to Win2K about 4 months ago. She's pretty sure she's been using Outlook2K all along. She has a 133MB .pst file. But, when you open the file, all the folders she archived are empty. I ran scanpst on it. The scan found no errors, 50 folders and only 3 files. How can this be?? I verified her archive path. What else should I be looking at to explain a large archive file, but with no contents?? 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: Help please
Logging is fairly straight forward. Telnet to device and add the following lines logging on logging timestamp logging trap errors logging history errors logging facility 7 logging host inside (internal_ip) Your logging host inside needs to be running compliant software. Complaint defined as listening on TCP Port 1468 and UDP 514. I can recommend the PIX Firewall Syslog Server. Download from Cisco Website. Install on a local machine. -Original Message- From: Don Ely [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 9:45 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please OK, let us know what you find. D DOS 6: Because there aren't enough problems in the world already. -Original Message- From: Ronald Mazzotta [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 7:37 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please I will have to call cisco as per starting logs. I am not that secure enough about the proper way of turning the loggin up. As for proxy I am attempting that now. -Original Message- From: Don Ely [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 10:37 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please That's why I wanted you to check the logs on both Proxy and the PIX. Somewhere there's something not passing traffic correctly... D Overconfidence: Before you attempt to beat the odds, be sure you can survive the odds beating you. - - http://www.despair.com -Original Message- From: Ronald Mazzotta [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 7:31 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please Its funny. I can not redirect and websites to internal servers. I am beginning to think this is a proxy problem. -Original Message- From: Don Ely [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 10:18 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please Router??? I thought you said you have a PIX. They have much more than 16MB, well, not much more, but at least 32MB. D Arrogance: The Best Leaders Inspire by Example. When that's not an option, brute intimidation works pretty well too. - - http://www.despair.com -Original Message- From: Ronald Mazzotta [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 7:13 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please Can't upgrade to 6.0. cisco will not allow me to dl it as I only have 16mb in my router. Also, tom I have verified that information. Thanks. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 10:11 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please Upgrade to 6.0 IOS -Original Message- From: Don Ely [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, December 17, 2001 9:07 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please I can't recall some great examples off hand, but I remember a time where the PIX would to funny things to the network traffic as it passed in either direction. Tended to time things out and make stuff not work. D The true test of character is not how much we know how to do, but how we behave when we don't know what to do. -John Holt -Original Message- From: Peter Szabo [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, December 17, 2001 6:26 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Re: Help please Don, I'm not too familiar with PIX but I know the problem with esmtp and pix , but never heard of any with http. Ronald, The easiet way to make sure is not the pix, connect your laptop to the segment bethwin the pix and your proxy and try to connect to OWA. If it is working, call Ci$co. /Peter - Original Message - From: Don Ely [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, December 17, 2001 9:06 PM Subject: RE: Help please That's another theory too... However, on the PIX there are some strange occurrences that would not pass some HTTP traffic correctly. Not always, but I've seen it. D Ignorance: It's amazing how much easier it is for a team to work together when no one has any idea where they're going. - - http://www.despair.com -Original Message- From: Peter Szabo [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, December 17, 2001 6:06 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Re: Help please Ronald, If your external address for your owa is tahoe.ss-pca.com/exchange then you have an authentication problem on your OWA server, nothing to do with your proxy or PIX. for a proxy server or a pix f/w http is http is http. period. On your OWA server diasble any other authentication but Basic. If I remember correctly internaly users can access OWA, yes ? /Peter - Original Message - From: Don Ely [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, December 17, 2001 8:47 PM Subject: RE: Help please Have you turned up syslog on your PIX to watch the traffic? What do the logs say (both Proxy and the PIX)? My
RE: Archive process
A. It's a PST file, things can be just because. B. A single item which is 132.9MB would explain a PST file which was 133MB with only 5 items. C. Simply restore the PST file from the last known good backup. Chris -- Chris Scharff Senior Sales Engineer MessageOne If you can't measure, you can't manage! -Original Message- From: Farquharson, Andrea [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 10:09 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Archive process I have a user who was recently migrated to Win2K about 4 months ago. She's pretty sure she's been using Outlook2K all along. She has a 133MB .pst file. But, when you open the file, all the folders she archived are empty. I ran scanpst on it. The scan found no errors, 50 folders and only 3 files. How can this be?? I verified her archive path. What else should I be looking at to explain a large archive file, but with no contents?? 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: Help please
Perzactly. However, one must be careful as Level 7 is the highest level and generates the most traffic, so one must ensure to decrease logging when done researching. On another note, a good security admin has logging turned on already to watch the inbound/outbound traffic in an effort to thwart hack attempts and such. D Windows 95: 32-bit extensions and a graphical shell for a 16-bit patch to an 8-bit operating system originally coded for a 4-bit microprocessor, written by a 2-bit company that can't stand for 1 bit of competition. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 8:12 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please Logging is fairly straight forward. Telnet to device and add the following lines logging on logging timestamp logging trap errors logging history errors logging facility 7 logging host inside (internal_ip) Your logging host inside needs to be running compliant software. Complaint defined as listening on TCP Port 1468 and UDP 514. I can recommend the PIX Firewall Syslog Server. Download from Cisco Website. Install on a local machine. -Original Message- From: Don Ely [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 9:45 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please OK, let us know what you find. D DOS 6: Because there aren't enough problems in the world already. -Original Message- From: Ronald Mazzotta [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 7:37 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please I will have to call cisco as per starting logs. I am not that secure enough about the proper way of turning the loggin up. As for proxy I am attempting that now. -Original Message- From: Don Ely [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 10:37 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please That's why I wanted you to check the logs on both Proxy and the PIX. Somewhere there's something not passing traffic correctly... D Overconfidence: Before you attempt to beat the odds, be sure you can survive the odds beating you. - - http://www.despair.com -Original Message- From: Ronald Mazzotta [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 7:31 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please Its funny. I can not redirect and websites to internal servers. I am beginning to think this is a proxy problem. -Original Message- From: Don Ely [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 10:18 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please Router??? I thought you said you have a PIX. They have much more than 16MB, well, not much more, but at least 32MB. D Arrogance: The Best Leaders Inspire by Example. When that's not an option, brute intimidation works pretty well too. - - http://www.despair.com -Original Message- From: Ronald Mazzotta [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 7:13 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please Can't upgrade to 6.0. cisco will not allow me to dl it as I only have 16mb in my router. Also, tom I have verified that information. Thanks. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 10:11 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please Upgrade to 6.0 IOS -Original Message- From: Don Ely [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, December 17, 2001 9:07 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please I can't recall some great examples off hand, but I remember a time where the PIX would to funny things to the network traffic as it passed in either direction. Tended to time things out and make stuff not work. D The true test of character is not how much we know how to do, but how we behave when we don't know what to do. -John Holt -Original Message- From: Peter Szabo [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, December 17, 2001 6:26 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Re: Help please Don, I'm not too familiar with PIX but I know the problem with esmtp and pix , but never heard of any with http. Ronald, The easiet way to make sure is not the pix, connect your laptop to the segment bethwin the pix and your proxy and try to connect to OWA. If it is working, call Ci$co. /Peter - Original Message - From: Don Ely [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, December 17, 2001 9:06 PM Subject: RE: Help please That's another theory too... However, on the PIX there are some strange occurrences that would not pass some HTTP traffic correctly. Not always, but I've seen it. D Ignorance: It's amazing how much easier it is for a team to work together when no one has any idea where they're going. - - http://www.despair.com -Original Message- From: Peter Szabo [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, December 17, 2001 6:06 PM To:
RE: Help please
That's all I see in the log for that access point. Although I just set up another internal web site to try redirection with and I get the same problem so I would guess that the proxy or pix are the prob not the exchange server. Yes that ip is a dialup client -Original Message- From: Don Ely [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 11:08 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please Is the 63.x.x.x address the client address or what? What shows up in the logs when you try to pass authentication? D A computer lets you make more mistakes faster than any invention in human history - with the possible exceptions of handguns and tequila. -Mitch Ratcliffe, Technology Review -Original Message- From: Ronald Mazzotta [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 7:57 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please When accessing the site this is what is in the proxy log 2001-12-18 15:51:12 63.17.150.119 - 172.16.1.1 80 GET /scripts/proxy/w3proxy.dll 038b0008,+http://tahoe/exchange/USA/ 200 Mozilla/4.0+(compatible;+MSIE+6.0;+Windows+NT+5.1;+Q312461) tahoe is the internal exchange server. -Original Message- From: Don Ely [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 10:45 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please OK, let us know what you find. D DOS 6: Because there aren't enough problems in the world already. -Original Message- From: Ronald Mazzotta [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 7:37 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please I will have to call cisco as per starting logs. I am not that secure enough about the proper way of turning the loggin up. As for proxy I am attempting that now. -Original Message- From: Don Ely [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 10:37 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please That's why I wanted you to check the logs on both Proxy and the PIX. Somewhere there's something not passing traffic correctly... D Overconfidence: Before you attempt to beat the odds, be sure you can survive the odds beating you. - - http://www.despair.com -Original Message- From: Ronald Mazzotta [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 7:31 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please Its funny. I can not redirect and websites to internal servers. I am beginning to think this is a proxy problem. -Original Message- From: Don Ely [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 10:18 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please Router??? I thought you said you have a PIX. They have much more than 16MB, well, not much more, but at least 32MB. D Arrogance: The Best Leaders Inspire by Example. When that's not an option, brute intimidation works pretty well too. - - http://www.despair.com -Original Message- From: Ronald Mazzotta [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 7:13 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please Can't upgrade to 6.0. cisco will not allow me to dl it as I only have 16mb in my router. Also, tom I have verified that information. Thanks. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 10:11 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please Upgrade to 6.0 IOS -Original Message- From: Don Ely [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, December 17, 2001 9:07 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please I can't recall some great examples off hand, but I remember a time where the PIX would to funny things to the network traffic as it passed in either direction. Tended to time things out and make stuff not work. D The true test of character is not how much we know how to do, but how we behave when we don't know what to do. -John Holt -Original Message- From: Peter Szabo [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, December 17, 2001 6:26 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Re: Help please Don, I'm not too familiar with PIX but I know the problem with esmtp and pix , but never heard of any with http. Ronald, The easiet way to make sure is not the pix, connect your laptop to the segment bethwin the pix and your proxy and try to connect to OWA. If it is working, call Ci$co. /Peter - Original Message - From: Don Ely [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, December 17, 2001 9:06 PM Subject: RE: Help please That's another theory too... However, on the PIX there are some strange occurrences that would not pass some HTTP traffic correctly. Not always, but I've seen it. D Ignorance: It's amazing how much easier it is for a team to work together when no one has any idea where they're going. - - http://www.despair.com -Original Message- From: Peter Szabo [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, December 17, 2001 6:06 PM
RE: Help please
Are you using an host headers on your IIS Server? -Original Message- From: Don Ely [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 10:08 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please Is the 63.x.x.x address the client address or what? What shows up in the logs when you try to pass authentication? D A computer lets you make more mistakes faster than any invention in human history - with the possible exceptions of handguns and tequila. -Mitch Ratcliffe, Technology Review -Original Message- From: Ronald Mazzotta [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 7:57 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please When accessing the site this is what is in the proxy log 2001-12-18 15:51:12 63.17.150.119 - 172.16.1.1 80 GET /scripts/proxy/w3proxy.dll 038b0008,+http://tahoe/exchange/USA/ 200 Mozilla/4.0+(compatible;+MSIE+6.0;+Windows+NT+5.1;+Q312461) tahoe is the internal exchange server. -Original Message- From: Don Ely [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 10:45 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please OK, let us know what you find. D DOS 6: Because there aren't enough problems in the world already. -Original Message- From: Ronald Mazzotta [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 7:37 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please I will have to call cisco as per starting logs. I am not that secure enough about the proper way of turning the loggin up. As for proxy I am attempting that now. -Original Message- From: Don Ely [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 10:37 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please That's why I wanted you to check the logs on both Proxy and the PIX. Somewhere there's something not passing traffic correctly... D Overconfidence: Before you attempt to beat the odds, be sure you can survive the odds beating you. - - http://www.despair.com -Original Message- From: Ronald Mazzotta [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 7:31 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please Its funny. I can not redirect and websites to internal servers. I am beginning to think this is a proxy problem. -Original Message- From: Don Ely [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 10:18 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please Router??? I thought you said you have a PIX. They have much more than 16MB, well, not much more, but at least 32MB. D Arrogance: The Best Leaders Inspire by Example. When that's not an option, brute intimidation works pretty well too. - - http://www.despair.com -Original Message- From: Ronald Mazzotta [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 7:13 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please Can't upgrade to 6.0. cisco will not allow me to dl it as I only have 16mb in my router. Also, tom I have verified that information. Thanks. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 10:11 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please Upgrade to 6.0 IOS -Original Message- From: Don Ely [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, December 17, 2001 9:07 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please I can't recall some great examples off hand, but I remember a time where the PIX would to funny things to the network traffic as it passed in either direction. Tended to time things out and make stuff not work. D The true test of character is not how much we know how to do, but how we behave when we don't know what to do. -John Holt -Original Message- From: Peter Szabo [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, December 17, 2001 6:26 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Re: Help please Don, I'm not too familiar with PIX but I know the problem with esmtp and pix , but never heard of any with http. Ronald, The easiet way to make sure is not the pix, connect your laptop to the segment bethwin the pix and your proxy and try to connect to OWA. If it is working, call Ci$co. /Peter - Original Message - From: Don Ely [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, December 17, 2001 9:06 PM Subject: RE: Help please That's another theory too... However, on the PIX there are some strange occurrences that would not pass some HTTP traffic correctly. Not always, but I've seen it. D Ignorance: It's amazing how much easier it is for a team to work together when no one has any idea where they're going. - - http://www.despair.com -Original Message- From: Peter Szabo [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, December 17, 2001 6:06 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Re: Help please Ronald, If your external address for your owa is tahoe.ss-pca.com/exchange then you have an authentication problem on your OWA server, nothing to do
RE: Help please
Yes it is set to the server name -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 11:19 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please Are you using an host headers on your IIS Server? -Original Message- From: Don Ely [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 10:08 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please Is the 63.x.x.x address the client address or what? What shows up in the logs when you try to pass authentication? D A computer lets you make more mistakes faster than any invention in human history - with the possible exceptions of handguns and tequila. -Mitch Ratcliffe, Technology Review -Original Message- From: Ronald Mazzotta [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 7:57 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please When accessing the site this is what is in the proxy log 2001-12-18 15:51:12 63.17.150.119 - 172.16.1.1 80 GET /scripts/proxy/w3proxy.dll 038b0008,+http://tahoe/exchange/USA/ 200 Mozilla/4.0+(compatible;+MSIE+6.0;+Windows+NT+5.1;+Q312461) tahoe is the internal exchange server. -Original Message- From: Don Ely [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 10:45 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please OK, let us know what you find. D DOS 6: Because there aren't enough problems in the world already. -Original Message- From: Ronald Mazzotta [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 7:37 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please I will have to call cisco as per starting logs. I am not that secure enough about the proper way of turning the loggin up. As for proxy I am attempting that now. -Original Message- From: Don Ely [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 10:37 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please That's why I wanted you to check the logs on both Proxy and the PIX. Somewhere there's something not passing traffic correctly... D Overconfidence: Before you attempt to beat the odds, be sure you can survive the odds beating you. - - http://www.despair.com -Original Message- From: Ronald Mazzotta [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 7:31 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please Its funny. I can not redirect and websites to internal servers. I am beginning to think this is a proxy problem. -Original Message- From: Don Ely [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 10:18 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please Router??? I thought you said you have a PIX. They have much more than 16MB, well, not much more, but at least 32MB. D Arrogance: The Best Leaders Inspire by Example. When that's not an option, brute intimidation works pretty well too. - - http://www.despair.com -Original Message- From: Ronald Mazzotta [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 7:13 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please Can't upgrade to 6.0. cisco will not allow me to dl it as I only have 16mb in my router. Also, tom I have verified that information. Thanks. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 10:11 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please Upgrade to 6.0 IOS -Original Message- From: Don Ely [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, December 17, 2001 9:07 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please I can't recall some great examples off hand, but I remember a time where the PIX would to funny things to the network traffic as it passed in either direction. Tended to time things out and make stuff not work. D The true test of character is not how much we know how to do, but how we behave when we don't know what to do. -John Holt -Original Message- From: Peter Szabo [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, December 17, 2001 6:26 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Re: Help please Don, I'm not too familiar with PIX but I know the problem with esmtp and pix , but never heard of any with http. Ronald, The easiet way to make sure is not the pix, connect your laptop to the segment bethwin the pix and your proxy and try to connect to OWA. If it is working, call Ci$co. /Peter - Original Message - From: Don Ely [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, December 17, 2001 9:06 PM Subject: RE: Help please That's another theory too... However, on the PIX there are some strange occurrences that would not pass some HTTP traffic correctly. Not always, but I've seen it. D Ignorance: It's amazing how much easier it is for a team to work together when no one has any idea where they're going. - - http://www.despair.com -Original Message- From: Peter Szabo [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, December 17, 2001 6:06 PM To:
RE: stripping attachments
Exactamente!! How do you think I know that the CEO and the VP of IT at ADS are lusers? -Original Message- From: Martin Blackstone [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 10:03 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: stripping attachments I never quarantine. If it breaks the rules, it is deleted. I'm not screwing around with that crap. The users know what is not allowed. As for notifications, I want my users to see them. I want them to know who is sending infected files so they can be wary of them. -Original Message- From: Akerlund, Scott [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 8:01 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: stripping attachments I like to look at it this way, the lesser of two evils. On the one hand it is more work for me to have to pull items from quarantine. On the other hand, it is even MORE work for me to rid the entire network of a virus. Far better for the users to get a message letting them know something came for them, and that it was quarantined for some reason, than to blindly move attachments to their mailboxes. They can then request the file and as long as it is not of viral nature and moderately work related we then give it to them. Because of this the users trust the IS department more, and I can block pretty much all attachments, including the incoming Word Excel documents with the macros too. How does that old adage go? Fool me once shame on you, fool me twice shame on me.. Fool me three times I better find something else to do. Something like that. -Original Message- From: Hunter, Lori [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 7:51 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: stripping attachments OK, I guess one man's meat is another man's poison. I actually like that they get scared and call in. I MUCH prefer that scenario to the scenario at ADS whereby the CEO and VP of IT repeatedly launch virii such as love letter and melissa because they stubbornly refuse to purchase any antivirus for their mail. -Original Message- From: Hurst, Paul [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 9:37 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: stripping attachments Generates a lot of Helpdesk calls from users that report that they have an attachment in a Email that has reference to Viruses (they never read the email properly). Cheers Paul Standards are like toothbrushes, everybody agrees you should have one, but no one wants to use yours -Original Message- From: Hunter, Lori [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 3:17 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: stripping attachments Why not? I'm curious; bad experiences? It's working fine for me here. My people are even afraid to open the virus_detected_and_removed.txt file. I'm so proud. :) -Original Message- From: Hurst, Paul [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 9:14 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: stripping attachments You do't want to do that. Cheers Paul Standards are like toothbrushes, everybody agrees you should have one, but no one wants to use yours -Original Message- From: Pfefferkorn, Pete (PFEFFEPE) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 2:17 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: stripping attachments Doesn't Scan Mail allow you to replace the attached infected message with a replacement text file? I just upgraded and I though I saw that feature. -Original Message- From: Chris Scharff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 8:40 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: stripping attachments Did this behavior happen prior to the application of E2K SP2? -Original Message- From: Kim Schotanus To: Exchange Discussions Sent: 12/18/2001 4:07 AM Subject: RE: stripping attachments Trend Scanmail (183) for exchange 2000, Exch 2K SP2 -Original Message- From: Chris Scharff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 18 December, 2001 4:44 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: stripping attachments AV version? Server version and SP? -Original Message- From: Kim Schotanus To: Exchange Discussions Sent: 12/17/2001 7:32 AM Subject: stripping attachments Hi, Some virus infected mails get sstripped by Trend scanmail, but users'Outlook crashes when they have the preview pane open, how can I stop this? Kim _ List posting FAQ: 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
Off topic: EXPLORER.EXE 100% CPU
This is going to be a little off topic, but I thought I would post it in case someone ran into it as well. I have ScanMail moving infected files. One of the files that was moved into the \VIRUS area was a FUN.MP3 that is listed as a short cut. I cannot delete due to a sharing violation (believe ScanMail still has locked). Once you try to delete or look at the attributes, your NT workstation jumps up to 100% CPU utilization for EXPLORER. Even disconnecting the mapped drive does not clear EXPLORER.EXE and the only way to get your workstation back is to reboot. I duplicated this on 3 NT workstations. Two running NT 4.0 sp6a one running sp5. Took me 3 days to determine what was causing my workstation to go crazy. I sure won't clear the areas from the server console. I can just see me killing the box! Pete Pfefferkorn Senior Systems Engineer/Mail Administrator University of Cincinnati 51 Goodman Street Cincinnati, OH 45221 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]
RE: Off topic: ScanMail AVAPI notifications and tracing?
I don't use the avapi but for mapi mode that is a check box. -Original Message- From: Pfefferkorn, Pete (PFEFFEPE) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 9:45 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Off topic: ScanMail AVAPI notifications and tracing? I get the administrative notifications. I'm talking about a user that sends an infected message. He does not recieve a notification that he sent an infected message. Only the recipient receives a message. -Original Message- From: Martin Blackstone [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 10:31 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Off topic: ScanMail AVAPI notifications and tracing? Under Notification, Real Time Scan, You need to put your name in ScanMail Administrators. Then you will get emails whenever a virus is nailed. As for the other with the AVAPI, this is a limitation of the AVAPI. My suggestion would be to use Scanmail 3.7x which uses ESE based scanning. -Original Message- From: Pfefferkorn, Pete (PFEFFEPE) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 6:50 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Off topic: ScanMail AVAPI notifications and tracing? Exchange 5.5 SP4, ScanMail 3.52 We upgraded to ScanMail 3.52 and are running in both AVAPI and MAPI mode. I understand that running AVAPI, you lose the sender/recipient information for viruses caught in the log files. I'm a little confused on my testing on how notification works. I sent a test virus to a mailbox on our system and I did not receive a notification that I sent a infected message. The recipient, on the other hand, did receive a message from my account and had a text file entitled Virus1_Detected_and_Removed_virusname.txt. Shouldn't I have received a message as well. I have the real time scan set to send message to sender,recipient,administrator. One other question. Since I do not get the actual sender notifications in the log files now, I cannot determine where/who may be triggering an outbreak. Since the recipient gets a attachment with the Virus1x.txt message is there a way to track this through the MTA tracking log files. Is there a diagnostic key on the MTA that will include the attachment name sent on messages? Pete Pfefferkorn Senior Systems Engineer/Mail Administrator University of Cincinnati 51 Goodman Street Cincinnati, OH 45221 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: Off topic: ScanMail AVAPI notifications and tracing?
m Box of Checks... -Original Message- From: Hunter, Lori [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 11:23 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Off topic: ScanMail AVAPI notifications and tracing? I don't use the avapi but for mapi mode that is a check box. -Original Message- From: Pfefferkorn, Pete (PFEFFEPE) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 9:45 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Off topic: ScanMail AVAPI notifications and tracing? I get the administrative notifications. I'm talking about a user that sends an infected message. He does not recieve a notification that he sent an infected message. Only the recipient receives a message. -Original Message- From: Martin Blackstone [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 10:31 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Off topic: ScanMail AVAPI notifications and tracing? Under Notification, Real Time Scan, You need to put your name in ScanMail Administrators. Then you will get emails whenever a virus is nailed. As for the other with the AVAPI, this is a limitation of the AVAPI. My suggestion would be to use Scanmail 3.7x which uses ESE based scanning. -Original Message- From: Pfefferkorn, Pete (PFEFFEPE) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 6:50 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Off topic: ScanMail AVAPI notifications and tracing? Exchange 5.5 SP4, ScanMail 3.52 We upgraded to ScanMail 3.52 and are running in both AVAPI and MAPI mode. I understand that running AVAPI, you lose the sender/recipient information for viruses caught in the log files. I'm a little confused on my testing on how notification works. I sent a test virus to a mailbox on our system and I did not receive a notification that I sent a infected message. The recipient, on the other hand, did receive a message from my account and had a text file entitled Virus1_Detected_and_Removed_virusname.txt. Shouldn't I have received a message as well. I have the real time scan set to send message to sender,recipient,administrator. One other question. Since I do not get the actual sender notifications in the log files now, I cannot determine where/who may be triggering an outbreak. Since the recipient gets a attachment with the Virus1x.txt message is there a way to track this through the MTA tracking log files. Is there a diagnostic key on the MTA that will include the attachment name sent on messages? Pete Pfefferkorn Senior Systems Engineer/Mail Administrator University of Cincinnati 51 Goodman Street Cincinnati, OH 45221 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] -- The information contained in this email message is privileged and confidential information intended only for the use of the individual or entity to whom it is addressed. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copy of this message is strictly prohibited. If you have received this email in error, please immediately notify Veronis, Suhler Associates, Inc. by telephone, fax, or email and delete the message. 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]
RE: Help please
I think I've got it! What there should be an address translation from the 172.16.1.1 (private address) to a Public address. You're trying to route a non-routable address to the outside. I don't know about proxy, but the PIX is telling you to fsck off. That 172 address HAS to be routed to a routable IP address! D Those who deny freedom to others deserve it not for themselves. -Abraham Lincoln -Original Message- From: Ronald Mazzotta [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 8:12 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please That's all I see in the log for that access point. Although I just set up another internal web site to try redirection with and I get the same problem so I would guess that the proxy or pix are the prob not the exchange server. Yes that ip is a dialup client -Original Message- From: Don Ely [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 11:08 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please Is the 63.x.x.x address the client address or what? What shows up in the logs when you try to pass authentication? D A computer lets you make more mistakes faster than any invention in human history - with the possible exceptions of handguns and tequila. -Mitch Ratcliffe, Technology Review -Original Message- From: Ronald Mazzotta [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 7:57 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please When accessing the site this is what is in the proxy log 2001-12-18 15:51:12 63.17.150.119 - 172.16.1.1 80 GET /scripts/proxy/w3proxy.dll 038b0008,+http://tahoe/exchange/USA/ 200 Mozilla/4.0+(compatible;+MSIE+6.0;+Windows+NT+5.1;+Q312461) tahoe is the internal exchange server. -Original Message- From: Don Ely [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 10:45 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please OK, let us know what you find. D DOS 6: Because there aren't enough problems in the world already. -Original Message- From: Ronald Mazzotta [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 7:37 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please I will have to call cisco as per starting logs. I am not that secure enough about the proper way of turning the loggin up. As for proxy I am attempting that now. -Original Message- From: Don Ely [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 10:37 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please That's why I wanted you to check the logs on both Proxy and the PIX. Somewhere there's something not passing traffic correctly... D Overconfidence: Before you attempt to beat the odds, be sure you can survive the odds beating you. - - http://www.despair.com -Original Message- From: Ronald Mazzotta [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 7:31 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please Its funny. I can not redirect and websites to internal servers. I am beginning to think this is a proxy problem. -Original Message- From: Don Ely [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 10:18 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please Router??? I thought you said you have a PIX. They have much more than 16MB, well, not much more, but at least 32MB. D Arrogance: The Best Leaders Inspire by Example. When that's not an option, brute intimidation works pretty well too. - - http://www.despair.com -Original Message- From: Ronald Mazzotta [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 7:13 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please Can't upgrade to 6.0. cisco will not allow me to dl it as I only have 16mb in my router. Also, tom I have verified that information. Thanks. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 10:11 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please Upgrade to 6.0 IOS -Original Message- From: Don Ely [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, December 17, 2001 9:07 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please I can't recall some great examples off hand, but I remember a time where the PIX would to funny things to the network traffic as it passed in either direction. Tended to time things out and make stuff not work. D The true test of character is not how much we know how to do, but how we behave when we don't know what to do. -John Holt -Original Message- From: Peter Szabo [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, December 17, 2001 6:26 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Re: Help please Don, I'm not too familiar with PIX but I know the problem with esmtp and pix , but never heard of any with http. Ronald, The easiet way to make sure is not the pix, connect your laptop to the segment bethwin the pix and your proxy and try to connect to OWA. If it is working, call Ci$co. /Peter - Original Message - From: Don
RE: stripping attachments
IMHO, It is better not to have an attachment but a message in the original email telling them that there was a virus in an attachment, rather then let them open unexpected named attachment in the Email (we ask users never to open unexpected or named attachments they don't expect). Cheers Paul Standards are like toothbrushes, everybody agrees you should have one, but no one wants to use yours -Original Message- From: Akerlund, Scott [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 4:01 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: stripping attachments I like to look at it this way, the lesser of two evils. On the one hand it is more work for me to have to pull items from quarantine. On the other hand, it is even MORE work for me to rid the entire network of a virus. Far better for the users to get a message letting them know something came for them, and that it was quarantined for some reason, than to blindly move attachments to their mailboxes. They can then request the file and as long as it is not of viral nature and moderately work related we then give it to them. Because of this the users trust the IS department more, and I can block pretty much all attachments, including the incoming Word Excel documents with the macros too. How does that old adage go? Fool me once shame on you, fool me twice shame on me.. Fool me three times I better find something else to do. Something like that. -Original Message- From: Hunter, Lori [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 7:51 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: stripping attachments OK, I guess one man's meat is another man's poison. I actually like that they get scared and call in. I MUCH prefer that scenario to the scenario at ADS whereby the CEO and VP of IT repeatedly launch virii such as love letter and melissa because they stubbornly refuse to purchase any antivirus for their mail. -Original Message- From: Hurst, Paul [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 9:37 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: stripping attachments Generates a lot of Helpdesk calls from users that report that they have an attachment in a Email that has reference to Viruses (they never read the email properly). Cheers Paul Standards are like toothbrushes, everybody agrees you should have one, but no one wants to use yours -Original Message- From: Hunter, Lori [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 3:17 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: stripping attachments Why not? I'm curious; bad experiences? It's working fine for me here. My people are even afraid to open the virus_detected_and_removed.txt file. I'm so proud. :) -Original Message- From: Hurst, Paul [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 9:14 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: stripping attachments You do't want to do that. Cheers Paul Standards are like toothbrushes, everybody agrees you should have one, but no one wants to use yours -Original Message- From: Pfefferkorn, Pete (PFEFFEPE) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 2:17 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: stripping attachments Doesn't Scan Mail allow you to replace the attached infected message with a replacement text file? I just upgraded and I though I saw that feature. -Original Message- From: Chris Scharff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 8:40 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: stripping attachments Did this behavior happen prior to the application of E2K SP2? -Original Message- From: Kim Schotanus To: Exchange Discussions Sent: 12/18/2001 4:07 AM Subject: RE: stripping attachments Trend Scanmail (183) for exchange 2000, Exch 2K SP2 -Original Message- From: Chris Scharff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 18 December, 2001 4:44 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: stripping attachments AV version? Server version and SP? -Original Message- From: Kim Schotanus To: Exchange Discussions Sent: 12/17/2001 7:32 AM Subject: stripping attachments Hi, Some virus infected mails get sstripped by Trend scanmail, but users'Outlook crashes when they have the preview pane open, how can I stop this? Kim _ List posting FAQ: 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] ** The information
Re: Help please
Ronald, Can you login to OWA from your internal network ? /Peter - Original Message - From: Ronald Mazzotta [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 11:13 AM Subject: RE: Help please Yes it is set to the server name -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 11:19 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please Are you using an host headers on your IIS Server? -Original Message- From: Don Ely [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 10:08 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please Is the 63.x.x.x address the client address or what? What shows up in the logs when you try to pass authentication? D A computer lets you make more mistakes faster than any invention in human history - with the possible exceptions of handguns and tequila. -Mitch Ratcliffe, Technology Review -Original Message- From: Ronald Mazzotta [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 7:57 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please When accessing the site this is what is in the proxy log 2001-12-18 15:51:12 63.17.150.119 - 172.16.1.1 80 GET /scripts/proxy/w3proxy.dll 038b0008,+http://tahoe/exchange/USA/ 200 Mozilla/4.0+(compatible;+MSIE+6.0;+Windows+NT+5.1;+Q312461) tahoe is the internal exchange server. -Original Message- From: Don Ely [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 10:45 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please OK, let us know what you find. D DOS 6: Because there aren't enough problems in the world already. -Original Message- From: Ronald Mazzotta [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 7:37 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please I will have to call cisco as per starting logs. I am not that secure enough about the proper way of turning the loggin up. As for proxy I am attempting that now. -Original Message- From: Don Ely [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 10:37 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please That's why I wanted you to check the logs on both Proxy and the PIX. Somewhere there's something not passing traffic correctly... D Overconfidence: Before you attempt to beat the odds, be sure you can survive the odds beating you. - - http://www.despair.com -Original Message- From: Ronald Mazzotta [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 7:31 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please Its funny. I can not redirect and websites to internal servers. I am beginning to think this is a proxy problem. -Original Message- From: Don Ely [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 10:18 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please Router??? I thought you said you have a PIX. They have much more than 16MB, well, not much more, but at least 32MB. D Arrogance: The Best Leaders Inspire by Example. When that's not an option, brute intimidation works pretty well too. - - http://www.despair.com -Original Message- From: Ronald Mazzotta [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 7:13 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please Can't upgrade to 6.0. cisco will not allow me to dl it as I only have 16mb in my router. Also, tom I have verified that information. Thanks. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 10:11 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please Upgrade to 6.0 IOS -Original Message- From: Don Ely [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, December 17, 2001 9:07 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please I can't recall some great examples off hand, but I remember a time where the PIX would to funny things to the network traffic as it passed in either direction. Tended to time things out and make stuff not work. D The true test of character is not how much we know how to do, but how we behave when we don't know what to do. -John Holt -Original Message- From: Peter Szabo [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, December 17, 2001 6:26 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Re: Help please Don, I'm not too familiar with PIX but I know the problem with esmtp and pix , but never heard of any with http. Ronald, The easiet way to make sure is not the pix, connect your laptop to the segment bethwin the pix and your proxy and try to connect to OWA. If it is working, call Ci$co. /Peter - Original Message - From: Don Ely [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, December 17, 2001 9:06 PM Subject: RE: Help please That's another theory too... However, on the PIX there are some strange occurrences that would not pass some HTTP traffic correctly. Not always, but I've seen it. D Ignorance: It's amazing
RE: Help please
Yes, he can. I think his translation from pub address to priv and back to pub is screwed somewhere along the lines. D A TV can insult your intelligence, but nothing rubs it in like a computer. -Original Message- From: Peter Szabo [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 8:27 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Re: Help please Ronald, Can you login to OWA from your internal network ? /Peter - Original Message - From: Ronald Mazzotta [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 11:13 AM Subject: RE: Help please Yes it is set to the server name -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 11:19 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please Are you using an host headers on your IIS Server? -Original Message- From: Don Ely [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 10:08 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please Is the 63.x.x.x address the client address or what? What shows up in the logs when you try to pass authentication? D A computer lets you make more mistakes faster than any invention in human history - with the possible exceptions of handguns and tequila. -Mitch Ratcliffe, Technology Review -Original Message- From: Ronald Mazzotta [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 7:57 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please When accessing the site this is what is in the proxy log 2001-12-18 15:51:12 63.17.150.119 - 172.16.1.1 80 GET /scripts/proxy/w3proxy.dll 038b0008,+http://tahoe/exchange/USA/ 200 Mozilla/4.0+(compatible;+MSIE+6.0;+Windows+NT+5.1;+Q312461) tahoe is the internal exchange server. -Original Message- From: Don Ely [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 10:45 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please OK, let us know what you find. D DOS 6: Because there aren't enough problems in the world already. -Original Message- From: Ronald Mazzotta [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 7:37 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please I will have to call cisco as per starting logs. I am not that secure enough about the proper way of turning the loggin up. As for proxy I am attempting that now. -Original Message- From: Don Ely [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 10:37 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please That's why I wanted you to check the logs on both Proxy and the PIX. Somewhere there's something not passing traffic correctly... D Overconfidence: Before you attempt to beat the odds, be sure you can survive the odds beating you. - - http://www.despair.com -Original Message- From: Ronald Mazzotta [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 7:31 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please Its funny. I can not redirect and websites to internal servers. I am beginning to think this is a proxy problem. -Original Message- From: Don Ely [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 10:18 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please Router??? I thought you said you have a PIX. They have much more than 16MB, well, not much more, but at least 32MB. D Arrogance: The Best Leaders Inspire by Example. When that's not an option, brute intimidation works pretty well too. - - http://www.despair.com -Original Message- From: Ronald Mazzotta [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 7:13 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please Can't upgrade to 6.0. cisco will not allow me to dl it as I only have 16mb in my router. Also, tom I have verified that information. Thanks. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 10:11 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please Upgrade to 6.0 IOS -Original Message- From: Don Ely [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, December 17, 2001 9:07 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please I can't recall some great examples off hand, but I remember a time where the PIX would to funny things to the network traffic as it passed in either direction. Tended to time things out and make stuff not work. D The true test of character is not how much we know how to do, but how we behave when we don't know what to do. -John Holt -Original Message- From: Peter Szabo [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, December 17, 2001 6:26 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Re: Help please Don, I'm not too familiar with PIX but I know the problem with esmtp and pix , but never heard of any with http. Ronald, The easiet way to make sure is not the pix, connect your laptop to the segment bethwin the pix and your proxy and try to connect to OWA. If it is working, call Ci$co. /Peter -
RE: Help please
I have an inside outside mapping from that ip to the public ip 208.253.38.123 which is the outside ip of the pix -Original Message- From: Don Ely [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 11:20 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please I think I've got it! What there should be an address translation from the 172.16.1.1 (private address) to a Public address. You're trying to route a non-routable address to the outside. I don't know about proxy, but the PIX is telling you to fsck off. That 172 address HAS to be routed to a routable IP address! D Those who deny freedom to others deserve it not for themselves. -Abraham Lincoln -Original Message- From: Ronald Mazzotta [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 8:12 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please That's all I see in the log for that access point. Although I just set up another internal web site to try redirection with and I get the same problem so I would guess that the proxy or pix are the prob not the exchange server. Yes that ip is a dialup client -Original Message- From: Don Ely [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 11:08 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please Is the 63.x.x.x address the client address or what? What shows up in the logs when you try to pass authentication? D A computer lets you make more mistakes faster than any invention in human history - with the possible exceptions of handguns and tequila. -Mitch Ratcliffe, Technology Review -Original Message- From: Ronald Mazzotta [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 7:57 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please When accessing the site this is what is in the proxy log 2001-12-18 15:51:12 63.17.150.119 - 172.16.1.1 80 GET /scripts/proxy/w3proxy.dll 038b0008,+http://tahoe/exchange/USA/ 200 Mozilla/4.0+(compatible;+MSIE+6.0;+Windows+NT+5.1;+Q312461) tahoe is the internal exchange server. -Original Message- From: Don Ely [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 10:45 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please OK, let us know what you find. D DOS 6: Because there aren't enough problems in the world already. -Original Message- From: Ronald Mazzotta [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 7:37 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please I will have to call cisco as per starting logs. I am not that secure enough about the proper way of turning the loggin up. As for proxy I am attempting that now. -Original Message- From: Don Ely [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 10:37 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please That's why I wanted you to check the logs on both Proxy and the PIX. Somewhere there's something not passing traffic correctly... D Overconfidence: Before you attempt to beat the odds, be sure you can survive the odds beating you. - - http://www.despair.com -Original Message- From: Ronald Mazzotta [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 7:31 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please Its funny. I can not redirect and websites to internal servers. I am beginning to think this is a proxy problem. -Original Message- From: Don Ely [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 10:18 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please Router??? I thought you said you have a PIX. They have much more than 16MB, well, not much more, but at least 32MB. D Arrogance: The Best Leaders Inspire by Example. When that's not an option, brute intimidation works pretty well too. - - http://www.despair.com -Original Message- From: Ronald Mazzotta [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 7:13 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please Can't upgrade to 6.0. cisco will not allow me to dl it as I only have 16mb in my router. Also, tom I have verified that information. Thanks. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 10:11 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please Upgrade to 6.0 IOS -Original Message- From: Don Ely [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, December 17, 2001 9:07 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please I can't recall some great examples off hand, but I remember a time where the PIX would to funny things to the network traffic as it passed in either direction. Tended to time things out and make stuff not work. D The true test of character is not how much we know how to do, but how we behave when we don't know what to do. -John Holt -Original Message- From: Peter Szabo [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, December 17, 2001 6:26 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Re: Help please Don, I'm not too familiar with PIX but I know the problem
RE: Help please
Yes internal works fine. -Original Message- From: Peter Szabo [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 11:27 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Re: Help please Ronald, Can you login to OWA from your internal network ? /Peter - Original Message - From: Ronald Mazzotta [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 11:13 AM Subject: RE: Help please Yes it is set to the server name -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 11:19 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please Are you using an host headers on your IIS Server? -Original Message- From: Don Ely [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 10:08 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please Is the 63.x.x.x address the client address or what? What shows up in the logs when you try to pass authentication? D A computer lets you make more mistakes faster than any invention in human history - with the possible exceptions of handguns and tequila. -Mitch Ratcliffe, Technology Review -Original Message- From: Ronald Mazzotta [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 7:57 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please When accessing the site this is what is in the proxy log 2001-12-18 15:51:12 63.17.150.119 - 172.16.1.1 80 GET /scripts/proxy/w3proxy.dll 038b0008,+http://tahoe/exchange/USA/ 200 Mozilla/4.0+(compatible;+MSIE+6.0;+Windows+NT+5.1;+Q312461) tahoe is the internal exchange server. -Original Message- From: Don Ely [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 10:45 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please OK, let us know what you find. D DOS 6: Because there aren't enough problems in the world already. -Original Message- From: Ronald Mazzotta [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 7:37 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please I will have to call cisco as per starting logs. I am not that secure enough about the proper way of turning the loggin up. As for proxy I am attempting that now. -Original Message- From: Don Ely [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 10:37 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please That's why I wanted you to check the logs on both Proxy and the PIX. Somewhere there's something not passing traffic correctly... D Overconfidence: Before you attempt to beat the odds, be sure you can survive the odds beating you. - - http://www.despair.com -Original Message- From: Ronald Mazzotta [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 7:31 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please Its funny. I can not redirect and websites to internal servers. I am beginning to think this is a proxy problem. -Original Message- From: Don Ely [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 10:18 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please Router??? I thought you said you have a PIX. They have much more than 16MB, well, not much more, but at least 32MB. D Arrogance: The Best Leaders Inspire by Example. When that's not an option, brute intimidation works pretty well too. - - http://www.despair.com -Original Message- From: Ronald Mazzotta [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 7:13 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please Can't upgrade to 6.0. cisco will not allow me to dl it as I only have 16mb in my router. Also, tom I have verified that information. Thanks. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 10:11 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please Upgrade to 6.0 IOS -Original Message- From: Don Ely [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, December 17, 2001 9:07 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please I can't recall some great examples off hand, but I remember a time where the PIX would to funny things to the network traffic as it passed in either direction. Tended to time things out and make stuff not work. D The true test of character is not how much we know how to do, but how we behave when we don't know what to do. -John Holt -Original Message- From: Peter Szabo [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, December 17, 2001 6:26 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Re: Help please Don, I'm not too familiar with PIX but I know the problem with esmtp and pix , but never heard of any with http. Ronald, The easiet way to make sure is not the pix, connect your laptop to the segment bethwin the pix and your proxy and try to connect to OWA. If it is working, call Ci$co. /Peter - Original Message - From: Don Ely [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, December 17, 2001 9:06 PM Subject: RE: Help please
RE: Help please
Nope, if that is the address of the PIX, it won't work. Do a sh xlate at the prompt on the PIX. You should have a statically defined Pub address that points to your priv address. D I only regret that I have but one life to lose for my country. -Nathan Hale -Original Message- From: Ronald Mazzotta [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 8:23 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please I have an inside outside mapping from that ip to the public ip 208.253.38.123 which is the outside ip of the pix -Original Message- From: Don Ely [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 11:20 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please I think I've got it! What there should be an address translation from the 172.16.1.1 (private address) to a Public address. You're trying to route a non-routable address to the outside. I don't know about proxy, but the PIX is telling you to fsck off. That 172 address HAS to be routed to a routable IP address! D Those who deny freedom to others deserve it not for themselves. -Abraham Lincoln -Original Message- From: Ronald Mazzotta [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 8:12 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please That's all I see in the log for that access point. Although I just set up another internal web site to try redirection with and I get the same problem so I would guess that the proxy or pix are the prob not the exchange server. Yes that ip is a dialup client -Original Message- From: Don Ely [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 11:08 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please Is the 63.x.x.x address the client address or what? What shows up in the logs when you try to pass authentication? D A computer lets you make more mistakes faster than any invention in human history - with the possible exceptions of handguns and tequila. -Mitch Ratcliffe, Technology Review -Original Message- From: Ronald Mazzotta [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 7:57 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please When accessing the site this is what is in the proxy log 2001-12-18 15:51:12 63.17.150.119 - 172.16.1.1 80 GET /scripts/proxy/w3proxy.dll 038b0008,+http://tahoe/exchange/USA/ 200 Mozilla/4.0+(compatible;+MSIE+6.0;+Windows+NT+5.1;+Q312461) tahoe is the internal exchange server. -Original Message- From: Don Ely [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 10:45 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please OK, let us know what you find. D DOS 6: Because there aren't enough problems in the world already. -Original Message- From: Ronald Mazzotta [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 7:37 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please I will have to call cisco as per starting logs. I am not that secure enough about the proper way of turning the loggin up. As for proxy I am attempting that now. -Original Message- From: Don Ely [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 10:37 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please That's why I wanted you to check the logs on both Proxy and the PIX. Somewhere there's something not passing traffic correctly... D Overconfidence: Before you attempt to beat the odds, be sure you can survive the odds beating you. - - http://www.despair.com -Original Message- From: Ronald Mazzotta [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 7:31 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please Its funny. I can not redirect and websites to internal servers. I am beginning to think this is a proxy problem. -Original Message- From: Don Ely [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 10:18 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please Router??? I thought you said you have a PIX. They have much more than 16MB, well, not much more, but at least 32MB. D Arrogance: The Best Leaders Inspire by Example. When that's not an option, brute intimidation works pretty well too. - - http://www.despair.com -Original Message- From: Ronald Mazzotta [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 7:13 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please Can't upgrade to 6.0. cisco will not allow me to dl it as I only have 16mb in my router. Also, tom I have verified that information. Thanks. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 10:11 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please Upgrade to 6.0 IOS -Original Message- From: Don Ely [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, December 17, 2001 9:07 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please I can't recall some great examples off hand, but I remember a time where the PIX would to funny things to the network traffic as it
RE: Help please
I'm not sure why your using host headers but you need to do one of two things: 1. First, make sure that your IP address is set to all unassigned 2. Next, remove the host headersor 3. or add the host header matching your outside alias (dns). -Original Message- From: Don Ely [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 10:26 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please Nope, if that is the address of the PIX, it won't work. Do a sh xlate at the prompt on the PIX. You should have a statically defined Pub address that points to your priv address. D I only regret that I have but one life to lose for my country. -Nathan Hale -Original Message- From: Ronald Mazzotta [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 8:23 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please I have an inside outside mapping from that ip to the public ip 208.253.38.123 which is the outside ip of the pix -Original Message- From: Don Ely [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 11:20 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please I think I've got it! What there should be an address translation from the 172.16.1.1 (private address) to a Public address. You're trying to route a non-routable address to the outside. I don't know about proxy, but the PIX is telling you to fsck off. That 172 address HAS to be routed to a routable IP address! D Those who deny freedom to others deserve it not for themselves. -Abraham Lincoln -Original Message- From: Ronald Mazzotta [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 8:12 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please That's all I see in the log for that access point. Although I just set up another internal web site to try redirection with and I get the same problem so I would guess that the proxy or pix are the prob not the exchange server. Yes that ip is a dialup client -Original Message- From: Don Ely [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 11:08 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please Is the 63.x.x.x address the client address or what? What shows up in the logs when you try to pass authentication? D A computer lets you make more mistakes faster than any invention in human history - with the possible exceptions of handguns and tequila. -Mitch Ratcliffe, Technology Review -Original Message- From: Ronald Mazzotta [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 7:57 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please When accessing the site this is what is in the proxy log 2001-12-18 15:51:12 63.17.150.119 - 172.16.1.1 80 GET /scripts/proxy/w3proxy.dll 038b0008,+http://tahoe/exchange/USA/ 200 Mozilla/4.0+(compatible;+MSIE+6.0;+Windows+NT+5.1;+Q312461) tahoe is the internal exchange server. -Original Message- From: Don Ely [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 10:45 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please OK, let us know what you find. D DOS 6: Because there aren't enough problems in the world already. -Original Message- From: Ronald Mazzotta [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 7:37 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please I will have to call cisco as per starting logs. I am not that secure enough about the proper way of turning the loggin up. As for proxy I am attempting that now. -Original Message- From: Don Ely [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 10:37 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please That's why I wanted you to check the logs on both Proxy and the PIX. Somewhere there's something not passing traffic correctly... D Overconfidence: Before you attempt to beat the odds, be sure you can survive the odds beating you. - - http://www.despair.com -Original Message- From: Ronald Mazzotta [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 7:31 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please Its funny. I can not redirect and websites to internal servers. I am beginning to think this is a proxy problem. -Original Message- From: Don Ely [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 10:18 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please Router??? I thought you said you have a PIX. They have much more than 16MB, well, not much more, but at least 32MB. D Arrogance: The Best Leaders Inspire by Example. When that's not an option, brute intimidation works pretty well too. - - http://www.despair.com -Original Message- From: Ronald Mazzotta [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 7:13 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please Can't upgrade to 6.0. cisco will not allow me to dl it as I only have 16mb in my router. Also, tom I have verified that information. Thanks. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL
Re: Help please
Guys, I don't think this is a routing problem. I can access the default web page on tahoe.sss-cpa.com w/o any problem. This IS an authentication issue. /Peter - Original Message - From: Ronald Mazzotta [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 11:22 AM Subject: RE: Help please I have an inside outside mapping from that ip to the public ip 208.253.38.123 which is the outside ip of the pix -Original Message- From: Don Ely [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 11:20 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please I think I've got it! What there should be an address translation from the 172.16.1.1 (private address) to a Public address. You're trying to route a non-routable address to the outside. I don't know about proxy, but the PIX is telling you to fsck off. That 172 address HAS to be routed to a routable IP address! D Those who deny freedom to others deserve it not for themselves. -Abraham Lincoln -Original Message- From: Ronald Mazzotta [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 8:12 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please That's all I see in the log for that access point. Although I just set up another internal web site to try redirection with and I get the same problem so I would guess that the proxy or pix are the prob not the exchange server. Yes that ip is a dialup client -Original Message- From: Don Ely [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 11:08 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please Is the 63.x.x.x address the client address or what? What shows up in the logs when you try to pass authentication? D A computer lets you make more mistakes faster than any invention in human history - with the possible exceptions of handguns and tequila. -Mitch Ratcliffe, Technology Review -Original Message- From: Ronald Mazzotta [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 7:57 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please When accessing the site this is what is in the proxy log 2001-12-18 15:51:12 63.17.150.119 - 172.16.1.1 80 GET /scripts/proxy/w3proxy.dll 038b0008,+http://tahoe/exchange/USA/ 200 Mozilla/4.0+(compatible;+MSIE+6.0;+Windows+NT+5.1;+Q312461) tahoe is the internal exchange server. -Original Message- From: Don Ely [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 10:45 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please OK, let us know what you find. D DOS 6: Because there aren't enough problems in the world already. -Original Message- From: Ronald Mazzotta [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 7:37 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please I will have to call cisco as per starting logs. I am not that secure enough about the proper way of turning the loggin up. As for proxy I am attempting that now. -Original Message- From: Don Ely [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 10:37 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please That's why I wanted you to check the logs on both Proxy and the PIX. Somewhere there's something not passing traffic correctly... D Overconfidence: Before you attempt to beat the odds, be sure you can survive the odds beating you. - - http://www.despair.com -Original Message- From: Ronald Mazzotta [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 7:31 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please Its funny. I can not redirect and websites to internal servers. I am beginning to think this is a proxy problem. -Original Message- From: Don Ely [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 10:18 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please Router??? I thought you said you have a PIX. They have much more than 16MB, well, not much more, but at least 32MB. D Arrogance: The Best Leaders Inspire by Example. When that's not an option, brute intimidation works pretty well too. - - http://www.despair.com -Original Message- From: Ronald Mazzotta [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 7:13 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please Can't upgrade to 6.0. cisco will not allow me to dl it as I only have 16mb in my router. Also, tom I have verified that information. Thanks. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 10:11 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please Upgrade to 6.0 IOS -Original Message- From: Don Ely [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, December 17, 2001 9:07 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please I can't recall some great examples off hand, but I remember a time where the PIX would to funny things to the network traffic as it passed in either direction. Tended to time things out and make stuff not work. D The true test of
RE: Help please
Oh. -Original Message- From: Peter Szabo [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 10:38 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Re: Help please Guys, I don't think this is a routing problem. I can access the default web page on tahoe.sss-cpa.com w/o any problem. This IS an authentication issue. /Peter - Original Message - From: Ronald Mazzotta [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 11:22 AM Subject: RE: Help please I have an inside outside mapping from that ip to the public ip 208.253.38.123 which is the outside ip of the pix -Original Message- From: Don Ely [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 11:20 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please I think I've got it! What there should be an address translation from the 172.16.1.1 (private address) to a Public address. You're trying to route a non-routable address to the outside. I don't know about proxy, but the PIX is telling you to fsck off. That 172 address HAS to be routed to a routable IP address! D Those who deny freedom to others deserve it not for themselves. -Abraham Lincoln -Original Message- From: Ronald Mazzotta [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 8:12 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please That's all I see in the log for that access point. Although I just set up another internal web site to try redirection with and I get the same problem so I would guess that the proxy or pix are the prob not the exchange server. Yes that ip is a dialup client -Original Message- From: Don Ely [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 11:08 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please Is the 63.x.x.x address the client address or what? What shows up in the logs when you try to pass authentication? D A computer lets you make more mistakes faster than any invention in human history - with the possible exceptions of handguns and tequila. -Mitch Ratcliffe, Technology Review -Original Message- From: Ronald Mazzotta [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 7:57 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please When accessing the site this is what is in the proxy log 2001-12-18 15:51:12 63.17.150.119 - 172.16.1.1 80 GET /scripts/proxy/w3proxy.dll 038b0008,+http://tahoe/exchange/USA/ 200 Mozilla/4.0+(compatible;+MSIE+6.0;+Windows+NT+5.1;+Q312461) tahoe is the internal exchange server. -Original Message- From: Don Ely [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 10:45 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please OK, let us know what you find. D DOS 6: Because there aren't enough problems in the world already. -Original Message- From: Ronald Mazzotta [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 7:37 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please I will have to call cisco as per starting logs. I am not that secure enough about the proper way of turning the loggin up. As for proxy I am attempting that now. -Original Message- From: Don Ely [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 10:37 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please That's why I wanted you to check the logs on both Proxy and the PIX. Somewhere there's something not passing traffic correctly... D Overconfidence: Before you attempt to beat the odds, be sure you can survive the odds beating you. - - http://www.despair.com -Original Message- From: Ronald Mazzotta [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 7:31 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please Its funny. I can not redirect and websites to internal servers. I am beginning to think this is a proxy problem. -Original Message- From: Don Ely [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 10:18 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please Router??? I thought you said you have a PIX. They have much more than 16MB, well, not much more, but at least 32MB. D Arrogance: The Best Leaders Inspire by Example. When that's not an option, brute intimidation works pretty well too. - - http://www.despair.com -Original Message- From: Ronald Mazzotta [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 7:13 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please Can't upgrade to 6.0. cisco will not allow me to dl it as I only have 16mb in my router. Also, tom I have verified that information. Thanks. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 10:11 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please Upgrade to 6.0 IOS -Original Message- From: Don Ely [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, December 17, 2001 9:07 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please I can't recall some great examples off hand, but I remember a time
RE: Help please
Sh xlate returns Global 208.253.38.123 local 172.16.1.1 static -Original Message- From: Don Ely [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 11:26 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please Nope, if that is the address of the PIX, it won't work. Do a sh xlate at the prompt on the PIX. You should have a statically defined Pub address that points to your priv address. D I only regret that I have but one life to lose for my country. -Nathan Hale -Original Message- From: Ronald Mazzotta [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 8:23 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please I have an inside outside mapping from that ip to the public ip 208.253.38.123 which is the outside ip of the pix -Original Message- From: Don Ely [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 11:20 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please I think I've got it! What there should be an address translation from the 172.16.1.1 (private address) to a Public address. You're trying to route a non-routable address to the outside. I don't know about proxy, but the PIX is telling you to fsck off. That 172 address HAS to be routed to a routable IP address! D Those who deny freedom to others deserve it not for themselves. -Abraham Lincoln -Original Message- From: Ronald Mazzotta [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 8:12 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please That's all I see in the log for that access point. Although I just set up another internal web site to try redirection with and I get the same problem so I would guess that the proxy or pix are the prob not the exchange server. Yes that ip is a dialup client -Original Message- From: Don Ely [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 11:08 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please Is the 63.x.x.x address the client address or what? What shows up in the logs when you try to pass authentication? D A computer lets you make more mistakes faster than any invention in human history - with the possible exceptions of handguns and tequila. -Mitch Ratcliffe, Technology Review -Original Message- From: Ronald Mazzotta [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 7:57 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please When accessing the site this is what is in the proxy log 2001-12-18 15:51:12 63.17.150.119 - 172.16.1.1 80 GET /scripts/proxy/w3proxy.dll 038b0008,+http://tahoe/exchange/USA/ 200 Mozilla/4.0+(compatible;+MSIE+6.0;+Windows+NT+5.1;+Q312461) tahoe is the internal exchange server. -Original Message- From: Don Ely [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 10:45 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please OK, let us know what you find. D DOS 6: Because there aren't enough problems in the world already. -Original Message- From: Ronald Mazzotta [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 7:37 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please I will have to call cisco as per starting logs. I am not that secure enough about the proper way of turning the loggin up. As for proxy I am attempting that now. -Original Message- From: Don Ely [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 10:37 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please That's why I wanted you to check the logs on both Proxy and the PIX. Somewhere there's something not passing traffic correctly... D Overconfidence: Before you attempt to beat the odds, be sure you can survive the odds beating you. - - http://www.despair.com -Original Message- From: Ronald Mazzotta [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 7:31 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please Its funny. I can not redirect and websites to internal servers. I am beginning to think this is a proxy problem. -Original Message- From: Don Ely [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 10:18 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please Router??? I thought you said you have a PIX. They have much more than 16MB, well, not much more, but at least 32MB. D Arrogance: The Best Leaders Inspire by Example. When that's not an option, brute intimidation works pretty well too. - - http://www.despair.com -Original Message- From: Ronald Mazzotta [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 7:13 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please Can't upgrade to 6.0. cisco will not allow me to dl it as I only have 16mb in my router. Also, tom I have verified that information. Thanks. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 10:11 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please Upgrade to 6.0 IOS -Original Message- From: Don Ely [mailto:[EMAIL
RE: Help please
Yes my bad sorry. I do and I just received ios 6.0. maybe ill do that tonight. -Original Message- From: Don Ely [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 10:54 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please Ronald, the 16MB you see is for the flash memory, not the RAM. I just looked on their site. You should have at least 32MB of RAM in there. http://www.cisco.com/univercd/cc/td/doc/pcat/fw.htm D Ideas pull the trigger, but instinct loads the gun. -Don Marquis -Original Message- From: King, John [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 7:56 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 I have a Pix 515 that I run 6.1 on.. I thought they only shipper with 32mb as a minimum.. You should be able to download IOS versions with a valid cco, regardless of what PIX model you have.. ~John - -Original Message- From: Ronald Mazzotta [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 10:28 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please Yes I have a cco login that's where it blocks me. Pix 515 Web site says that it comes with 16mb but 6.0 requires 32mb I really appreciate all the help. - -Original Message- From: Don Ely [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 10:25 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please Which model of the PIX do you have? D Ideas pull the trigger, but instinct loads the gun. -Don Marquis - -Original Message- From: Ronald Mazzotta [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 7:21 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please Version 5.3(5) - -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 10:22 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please What version are you on now? - -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 9:21 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please That doesnt make any sense. Download the file to a server running tftp. Tftp the image to your router? - -Original Message- From: Ronald Mazzotta [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 9:13 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please Can't upgrade to 6.0. cisco will not allow me to dl it as I only have 16mb in my router. Also, tom I have verified that information. Thanks. - -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 10:11 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please Upgrade to 6.0 IOS - -Original Message- From: Don Ely [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, December 17, 2001 9:07 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please I can't recall some great examples off hand, but I remember a time where the PIX would to funny things to the network traffic as it passed in either direction. Tended to time things out and make stuff not work. D The true test of character is not how much we know how to do, but how we behave when we don't know what to do. -John Holt - -Original Message- From: Peter Szabo [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, December 17, 2001 6:26 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Re: Help please Don, I'm not too familiar with PIX but I know the problem with esmtp and pix , but never heard of any with http. Ronald, The easiet way to make sure is not the pix, connect your laptop to the segment bethwin the pix and your proxy and try to connect to OWA. If it is working, call Ci$co. /Peter - - Original Message - From: Don Ely [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, December 17, 2001 9:06 PM Subject: RE: Help please That's another theory too... However, on the PIX there are some strange occurrences that would not pass some HTTP traffic correctly. Not always, but I've seen it. D Ignorance: It's amazing how much easier it is for a team to work together when no one has any idea where they're going. - - http://www.despair.com -Original Message- From: Peter Szabo [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, December 17, 2001 6:06 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Re: Help please Ronald, If your external address for your owa is tahoe.ss-pca.com/exchange then you have an authentication problem on your OWA server, nothing to do with your proxy or PIX. for a proxy server or a pix f/w http is http is http. period. On your OWA server diasble any other authentication but Basic. If I remember correctly internaly users can access OWA, yes ? /Peter - Original Message - From: Don Ely [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, December 17, 2001 8:47 PM Subject: RE: Help please Have you turned up syslog on your PIX to watch the traffic? What do the logs say
RE: Help please
Ok, so that address is only assigned to the OWA server? Is there anything else in the proxy logs that might turn something up? Proxy and the PIX are dropping the return path or something. Does the user account ever get locked out with the bad login attempts? D May you have the foresight to know where you're going, the hindsight to know where you've been, and the insight to know when you've gone too far. -Irish Toast -Original Message- From: Ronald Mazzotta [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 8:36 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please Sh xlate returns Global 208.253.38.123 local 172.16.1.1 static -Original Message- From: Don Ely [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 11:26 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please Nope, if that is the address of the PIX, it won't work. Do a sh xlate at the prompt on the PIX. You should have a statically defined Pub address that points to your priv address. D I only regret that I have but one life to lose for my country. -Nathan Hale -Original Message- From: Ronald Mazzotta [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 8:23 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please I have an inside outside mapping from that ip to the public ip 208.253.38.123 which is the outside ip of the pix -Original Message- From: Don Ely [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 11:20 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please I think I've got it! What there should be an address translation from the 172.16.1.1 (private address) to a Public address. You're trying to route a non-routable address to the outside. I don't know about proxy, but the PIX is telling you to fsck off. That 172 address HAS to be routed to a routable IP address! D Those who deny freedom to others deserve it not for themselves. -Abraham Lincoln -Original Message- From: Ronald Mazzotta [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 8:12 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please That's all I see in the log for that access point. Although I just set up another internal web site to try redirection with and I get the same problem so I would guess that the proxy or pix are the prob not the exchange server. Yes that ip is a dialup client -Original Message- From: Don Ely [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 11:08 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please Is the 63.x.x.x address the client address or what? What shows up in the logs when you try to pass authentication? D A computer lets you make more mistakes faster than any invention in human history - with the possible exceptions of handguns and tequila. -Mitch Ratcliffe, Technology Review -Original Message- From: Ronald Mazzotta [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 7:57 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please When accessing the site this is what is in the proxy log 2001-12-18 15:51:12 63.17.150.119 - 172.16.1.1 80 GET /scripts/proxy/w3proxy.dll 038b0008,+http://tahoe/exchange/USA/ 200 Mozilla/4.0+(compatible;+MSIE+6.0;+Windows+NT+5.1;+Q312461) tahoe is the internal exchange server. -Original Message- From: Don Ely [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 10:45 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please OK, let us know what you find. D DOS 6: Because there aren't enough problems in the world already. -Original Message- From: Ronald Mazzotta [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 7:37 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please I will have to call cisco as per starting logs. I am not that secure enough about the proper way of turning the loggin up. As for proxy I am attempting that now. -Original Message- From: Don Ely [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 10:37 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please That's why I wanted you to check the logs on both Proxy and the PIX. Somewhere there's something not passing traffic correctly... D Overconfidence: Before you attempt to beat the odds, be sure you can survive the odds beating you. - - http://www.despair.com -Original Message- From: Ronald Mazzotta [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 7:31 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please Its funny. I can not redirect and websites to internal servers. I am beginning to think this is a proxy problem. -Original Message- From: Don Ely [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 10:18 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please Router??? I thought you said you have a PIX. They have much more than 16MB, well, not much more, but at least 32MB. D Arrogance: The Best Leaders Inspire by Example. When that's not an option, brute intimidation works pretty well too. - -
RE: Help please
No prob, just remember to pay attention to details. We like details, especially finite details. ;o) D In the kingdom of the blind, the one-eyed man is king. -Desiderius Erasmus -Original Message- From: Ronald Mazzotta [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 8:41 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please Yes my bad sorry. I do and I just received ios 6.0. maybe ill do that tonight. -Original Message- From: Don Ely [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 10:54 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please Ronald, the 16MB you see is for the flash memory, not the RAM. I just looked on their site. You should have at least 32MB of RAM in there. http://www.cisco.com/univercd/cc/td/doc/pcat/fw.htm D Ideas pull the trigger, but instinct loads the gun. -Don Marquis -Original Message- From: King, John [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 7:56 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 I have a Pix 515 that I run 6.1 on.. I thought they only shipper with 32mb as a minimum.. You should be able to download IOS versions with a valid cco, regardless of what PIX model you have.. ~John - -Original Message- From: Ronald Mazzotta [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 10:28 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please Yes I have a cco login that's where it blocks me. Pix 515 Web site says that it comes with 16mb but 6.0 requires 32mb I really appreciate all the help. - -Original Message- From: Don Ely [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 10:25 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please Which model of the PIX do you have? D Ideas pull the trigger, but instinct loads the gun. -Don Marquis - -Original Message- From: Ronald Mazzotta [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 7:21 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please Version 5.3(5) - -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 10:22 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please What version are you on now? - -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 9:21 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please That doesnt make any sense. Download the file to a server running tftp. Tftp the image to your router? - -Original Message- From: Ronald Mazzotta [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 9:13 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please Can't upgrade to 6.0. cisco will not allow me to dl it as I only have 16mb in my router. Also, tom I have verified that information. Thanks. - -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 10:11 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please Upgrade to 6.0 IOS - -Original Message- From: Don Ely [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, December 17, 2001 9:07 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please I can't recall some great examples off hand, but I remember a time where the PIX would to funny things to the network traffic as it passed in either direction. Tended to time things out and make stuff not work. D The true test of character is not how much we know how to do, but how we behave when we don't know what to do. -John Holt - -Original Message- From: Peter Szabo [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, December 17, 2001 6:26 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Re: Help please Don, I'm not too familiar with PIX but I know the problem with esmtp and pix , but never heard of any with http. Ronald, The easiet way to make sure is not the pix, connect your laptop to the segment bethwin the pix and your proxy and try to connect to OWA. If it is working, call Ci$co. /Peter - - Original Message - From: Don Ely [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, December 17, 2001 9:06 PM Subject: RE: Help please That's another theory too... However, on the PIX there are some strange occurrences that would not pass some HTTP traffic correctly. Not always, but I've seen it. D Ignorance: It's amazing how much easier it is for a team to work together when no one has any idea where they're going. - - http://www.despair.com -Original Message- From: Peter Szabo [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, December 17, 2001 6:06 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Re: Help please Ronald, If your external address for your owa is tahoe.ss-pca.com/exchange then you have an authentication problem on your OWA server, nothing to do with your proxy or PIX. for a proxy server or a pix f/w http is http is http. period. On your OWA server diasble any other authentication
RE: Help please
No lockout That ip is the only ip associated with the proxy. All incoming requests go to it first. That's all the proxy logs seem to have regarding that connection. Im setting up the pix syslog serve now. -Original Message- From: Don Ely [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 11:51 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please Ok, so that address is only assigned to the OWA server? Is there anything else in the proxy logs that might turn something up? Proxy and the PIX are dropping the return path or something. Does the user account ever get locked out with the bad login attempts? D May you have the foresight to know where you're going, the hindsight to know where you've been, and the insight to know when you've gone too far. -Irish Toast -Original Message- From: Ronald Mazzotta [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 8:36 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please Sh xlate returns Global 208.253.38.123 local 172.16.1.1 static -Original Message- From: Don Ely [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 11:26 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please Nope, if that is the address of the PIX, it won't work. Do a sh xlate at the prompt on the PIX. You should have a statically defined Pub address that points to your priv address. D I only regret that I have but one life to lose for my country. -Nathan Hale -Original Message- From: Ronald Mazzotta [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 8:23 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please I have an inside outside mapping from that ip to the public ip 208.253.38.123 which is the outside ip of the pix -Original Message- From: Don Ely [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 11:20 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please I think I've got it! What there should be an address translation from the 172.16.1.1 (private address) to a Public address. You're trying to route a non-routable address to the outside. I don't know about proxy, but the PIX is telling you to fsck off. That 172 address HAS to be routed to a routable IP address! D Those who deny freedom to others deserve it not for themselves. -Abraham Lincoln -Original Message- From: Ronald Mazzotta [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 8:12 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please That's all I see in the log for that access point. Although I just set up another internal web site to try redirection with and I get the same problem so I would guess that the proxy or pix are the prob not the exchange server. Yes that ip is a dialup client -Original Message- From: Don Ely [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 11:08 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please Is the 63.x.x.x address the client address or what? What shows up in the logs when you try to pass authentication? D A computer lets you make more mistakes faster than any invention in human history - with the possible exceptions of handguns and tequila. -Mitch Ratcliffe, Technology Review -Original Message- From: Ronald Mazzotta [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 7:57 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please When accessing the site this is what is in the proxy log 2001-12-18 15:51:12 63.17.150.119 - 172.16.1.1 80 GET /scripts/proxy/w3proxy.dll 038b0008,+http://tahoe/exchange/USA/ 200 Mozilla/4.0+(compatible;+MSIE+6.0;+Windows+NT+5.1;+Q312461) tahoe is the internal exchange server. -Original Message- From: Don Ely [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 10:45 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please OK, let us know what you find. D DOS 6: Because there aren't enough problems in the world already. -Original Message- From: Ronald Mazzotta [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 7:37 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please I will have to call cisco as per starting logs. I am not that secure enough about the proper way of turning the loggin up. As for proxy I am attempting that now. -Original Message- From: Don Ely [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 10:37 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please That's why I wanted you to check the logs on both Proxy and the PIX. Somewhere there's something not passing traffic correctly... D Overconfidence: Before you attempt to beat the odds, be sure you can survive the odds beating you. - - http://www.despair.com -Original Message- From: Ronald Mazzotta [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 7:31 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please Its funny. I can not redirect and websites to internal servers. I am beginning to think this is a proxy problem. -Original Message- From:
RE: Help please
One thing you might try is to take the proxy server out of the picture. Direct OWA straight to the PIX and see if that works. That will limit one point of failure. You can't take the PIX out of the picture, but if your problem still exists after taking proxy out of the middle, then you can start looking harder at your OWA server. You don't have any funky file or share level permissions on the OWA server do you? D BSD Skunks the Penguin - Roger Seilestad -Original Message- From: Ronald Mazzotta [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 8:56 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please No lockout That ip is the only ip associated with the proxy. All incoming requests go to it first. That's all the proxy logs seem to have regarding that connection. Im setting up the pix syslog serve now. -Original Message- From: Don Ely [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 11:51 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please Ok, so that address is only assigned to the OWA server? Is there anything else in the proxy logs that might turn something up? Proxy and the PIX are dropping the return path or something. Does the user account ever get locked out with the bad login attempts? D May you have the foresight to know where you're going, the hindsight to know where you've been, and the insight to know when you've gone too far. -Irish Toast -Original Message- From: Ronald Mazzotta [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 8:36 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please Sh xlate returns Global 208.253.38.123 local 172.16.1.1 static -Original Message- From: Don Ely [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 11:26 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please Nope, if that is the address of the PIX, it won't work. Do a sh xlate at the prompt on the PIX. You should have a statically defined Pub address that points to your priv address. D I only regret that I have but one life to lose for my country. -Nathan Hale -Original Message- From: Ronald Mazzotta [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 8:23 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please I have an inside outside mapping from that ip to the public ip 208.253.38.123 which is the outside ip of the pix -Original Message- From: Don Ely [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 11:20 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please I think I've got it! What there should be an address translation from the 172.16.1.1 (private address) to a Public address. You're trying to route a non-routable address to the outside. I don't know about proxy, but the PIX is telling you to fsck off. That 172 address HAS to be routed to a routable IP address! D Those who deny freedom to others deserve it not for themselves. -Abraham Lincoln -Original Message- From: Ronald Mazzotta [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 8:12 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please That's all I see in the log for that access point. Although I just set up another internal web site to try redirection with and I get the same problem so I would guess that the proxy or pix are the prob not the exchange server. Yes that ip is a dialup client -Original Message- From: Don Ely [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 11:08 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please Is the 63.x.x.x address the client address or what? What shows up in the logs when you try to pass authentication? D A computer lets you make more mistakes faster than any invention in human history - with the possible exceptions of handguns and tequila. -Mitch Ratcliffe, Technology Review -Original Message- From: Ronald Mazzotta [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 7:57 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please When accessing the site this is what is in the proxy log 2001-12-18 15:51:12 63.17.150.119 - 172.16.1.1 80 GET /scripts/proxy/w3proxy.dll 038b0008,+http://tahoe/exchange/USA/ 200 Mozilla/4.0+(compatible;+MSIE+6.0;+Windows+NT+5.1;+Q312461) tahoe is the internal exchange server. -Original Message- From: Don Ely [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 10:45 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please OK, let us know what you find. D DOS 6: Because there aren't enough problems in the world already. -Original Message- From: Ronald Mazzotta [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 7:37 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please I will have to call cisco as per starting logs. I am not that secure enough about the proper way of turning the loggin up. As for proxy I am attempting that now. -Original Message- From: Don Ely [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 10:37 AM
RE: Help please
I'm not sure I see the relevance of forwarding the ip packets to the proxy then to the internal server. Your not accomplishing anything different then directly forwarding the port 80 packets to your internal owa server. I only say this because your behind the PIX firewall. I could understand if you were behind a proxy server but this is not the case. I'm assuming your using some type of access-list entry like: access-list 100 permit tcp any host (external_ip) eq www and then a corresponding conduit (or static) command for your internal server (proxy) static (inside,outside) tcp (external_ip) www (internal_ip) www netmask 255.255.255.255 Simply change the internal_ip to your owa server so that we can RULE out the proxy server. Make sure you do a write mem then retest. However, make sure your followed my previous advise on the host headers and ip info. Thx. -Original Message- From: Ronald Mazzotta [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 10:56 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please No lockout That ip is the only ip associated with the proxy. All incoming requests go to it first. That's all the proxy logs seem to have regarding that connection. Im setting up the pix syslog serve now. -Original Message- From: Don Ely [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 11:51 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please Ok, so that address is only assigned to the OWA server? Is there anything else in the proxy logs that might turn something up? Proxy and the PIX are dropping the return path or something. Does the user account ever get locked out with the bad login attempts? D May you have the foresight to know where you're going, the hindsight to know where you've been, and the insight to know when you've gone too far. -Irish Toast -Original Message- From: Ronald Mazzotta [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 8:36 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please Sh xlate returns Global 208.253.38.123 local 172.16.1.1 static -Original Message- From: Don Ely [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 11:26 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please Nope, if that is the address of the PIX, it won't work. Do a sh xlate at the prompt on the PIX. You should have a statically defined Pub address that points to your priv address. D I only regret that I have but one life to lose for my country. -Nathan Hale -Original Message- From: Ronald Mazzotta [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 8:23 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please I have an inside outside mapping from that ip to the public ip 208.253.38.123 which is the outside ip of the pix -Original Message- From: Don Ely [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 11:20 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please I think I've got it! What there should be an address translation from the 172.16.1.1 (private address) to a Public address. You're trying to route a non-routable address to the outside. I don't know about proxy, but the PIX is telling you to fsck off. That 172 address HAS to be routed to a routable IP address! D Those who deny freedom to others deserve it not for themselves. -Abraham Lincoln -Original Message- From: Ronald Mazzotta [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 8:12 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please That's all I see in the log for that access point. Although I just set up another internal web site to try redirection with and I get the same problem so I would guess that the proxy or pix are the prob not the exchange server. Yes that ip is a dialup client -Original Message- From: Don Ely [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 11:08 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please Is the 63.x.x.x address the client address or what? What shows up in the logs when you try to pass authentication? D A computer lets you make more mistakes faster than any invention in human history - with the possible exceptions of handguns and tequila. -Mitch Ratcliffe, Technology Review -Original Message- From: Ronald Mazzotta [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 7:57 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please When accessing the site this is what is in the proxy log 2001-12-18 15:51:12 63.17.150.119 - 172.16.1.1 80 GET /scripts/proxy/w3proxy.dll 038b0008,+http://tahoe/exchange/USA/ 200 Mozilla/4.0+(compatible;+MSIE+6.0;+Windows+NT+5.1;+Q312461) tahoe is the internal exchange server. -Original Message- From: Don Ely [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 10:45 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please OK, let us know what you find. D DOS 6: Because there aren't enough problems in the world already. -Original Message-
RE: Help please
Also... When you upgrade to 6.0 make sure you add the following lines: ip audit info action alarm ip audit attack action alarm no snmp-server location no snmp-server contact snmp-server community public no snmp-server enable traps floodguard enable Thx. Murphy -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 11:10 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please I'm not sure I see the relevance of forwarding the ip packets to the proxy then to the internal server. Your not accomplishing anything different then directly forwarding the port 80 packets to your internal owa server. I only say this because your behind the PIX firewall. I could understand if you were behind a proxy server but this is not the case. I'm assuming your using some type of access-list entry like: access-list 100 permit tcp any host (external_ip) eq www and then a corresponding conduit (or static) command for your internal server (proxy) static (inside,outside) tcp (external_ip) www (internal_ip) www netmask 255.255.255.255 Simply change the internal_ip to your owa server so that we can RULE out the proxy server. Make sure you do a write mem then retest. However, make sure your followed my previous advise on the host headers and ip info. Thx. -Original Message- From: Ronald Mazzotta [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 10:56 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please No lockout That ip is the only ip associated with the proxy. All incoming requests go to it first. That's all the proxy logs seem to have regarding that connection. Im setting up the pix syslog serve now. -Original Message- From: Don Ely [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 11:51 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please Ok, so that address is only assigned to the OWA server? Is there anything else in the proxy logs that might turn something up? Proxy and the PIX are dropping the return path or something. Does the user account ever get locked out with the bad login attempts? D May you have the foresight to know where you're going, the hindsight to know where you've been, and the insight to know when you've gone too far. -Irish Toast -Original Message- From: Ronald Mazzotta [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 8:36 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please Sh xlate returns Global 208.253.38.123 local 172.16.1.1 static -Original Message- From: Don Ely [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 11:26 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please Nope, if that is the address of the PIX, it won't work. Do a sh xlate at the prompt on the PIX. You should have a statically defined Pub address that points to your priv address. D I only regret that I have but one life to lose for my country. -Nathan Hale -Original Message- From: Ronald Mazzotta [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 8:23 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please I have an inside outside mapping from that ip to the public ip 208.253.38.123 which is the outside ip of the pix -Original Message- From: Don Ely [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 11:20 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please I think I've got it! What there should be an address translation from the 172.16.1.1 (private address) to a Public address. You're trying to route a non-routable address to the outside. I don't know about proxy, but the PIX is telling you to fsck off. That 172 address HAS to be routed to a routable IP address! D Those who deny freedom to others deserve it not for themselves. -Abraham Lincoln -Original Message- From: Ronald Mazzotta [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 8:12 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please That's all I see in the log for that access point. Although I just set up another internal web site to try redirection with and I get the same problem so I would guess that the proxy or pix are the prob not the exchange server. Yes that ip is a dialup client -Original Message- From: Don Ely [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 11:08 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please Is the 63.x.x.x address the client address or what? What shows up in the logs when you try to pass authentication? D A computer lets you make more mistakes faster than any invention in human history - with the possible exceptions of handguns and tequila. -Mitch Ratcliffe, Technology Review -Original Message- From: Ronald Mazzotta [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 7:57 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please When accessing the site this is what is in the proxy log 2001-12-18 15:51:12 63.17.150.119 - 172.16.1.1 80 GET /scripts/proxy/w3proxy.dll
How do I connect to Exchange Server 2000 via ASP page?
I am trying to connect to our Exchange Server 2000 in order to publish a public calendar on our website. I tried code similiar to the following example, but got an error stating: ADODB.Connection (0x800A0E7A) Provider cannot be found. It may not be properly installed. Do I need the Exchange Administrator to do something or am I approaching the code incorrectly? set Conn = CreateObject(ADODB.Connection) Conn.Provider = ExOLEDB.DataSource Conn.Open http://ExchangeServer/public/MyFolder; Set Rec = CreateObject(ADODB.Record) Rec.Open http://ExchangeServer/public/MyFolder/MyItem.EML;, Conn, adModeReadWrite Thanks, Lisa Horton _ List posting FAQ: 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]
Send AS - No NDR Returned
Having an issue in that when a user sends an email with attachments he receives no NDR in response. If he sends it as himself - he gets the NDR. The NDR is not generated to him or the account he is sending as. Searched MSKB and returned nothing related to this issue. W2k SP2 Ex2000 SP1. Any ideas? _ List posting FAQ: 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: Archive process
PST can have 133MB file size even there's nothing in it. She probably had something in that PST with 133MB, but then deleted everything in her PST. Until you compact the PST, you will not find out the true size of that PST. Brian -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Farquharson, Andrea Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 10:09 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Archive process I have a user who was recently migrated to Win2K about 4 months ago. She's pretty sure she's been using Outlook2K all along. She has a 133MB .pst file. But, when you open the file, all the folders she archived are empty. I ran scanpst on it. The scan found no errors, 50 folders and only 3 files. How can this be?? I verified her archive path. What else should I be looking at to explain a large archive file, but with no contents?? 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: Help please
I don't think I can take the proxy out of the picture I only have 1 ip I can use and it's the pix ip. Is it possible to map that ip in and out along with the other statement. Your last statement was correct BUT there is no tcp or www in my static statement. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 12:10 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please I'm not sure I see the relevance of forwarding the ip packets to the proxy then to the internal server. Your not accomplishing anything different then directly forwarding the port 80 packets to your internal owa server. I only say this because your behind the PIX firewall. I could understand if you were behind a proxy server but this is not the case. I'm assuming your using some type of access-list entry like: access-list 100 permit tcp any host (external_ip) eq www and then a corresponding conduit (or static) command for your internal server (proxy) static (inside,outside) tcp (external_ip) www (internal_ip) www netmask 255.255.255.255 Simply change the internal_ip to your owa server so that we can RULE out the proxy server. Make sure you do a write mem then retest. However, make sure your followed my previous advise on the host headers and ip info. Thx. -Original Message- From: Ronald Mazzotta [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 10:56 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please No lockout That ip is the only ip associated with the proxy. All incoming requests go to it first. That's all the proxy logs seem to have regarding that connection. Im setting up the pix syslog serve now. -Original Message- From: Don Ely [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 11:51 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please Ok, so that address is only assigned to the OWA server? Is there anything else in the proxy logs that might turn something up? Proxy and the PIX are dropping the return path or something. Does the user account ever get locked out with the bad login attempts? D May you have the foresight to know where you're going, the hindsight to know where you've been, and the insight to know when you've gone too far. -Irish Toast -Original Message- From: Ronald Mazzotta [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 8:36 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please Sh xlate returns Global 208.253.38.123 local 172.16.1.1 static -Original Message- From: Don Ely [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 11:26 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please Nope, if that is the address of the PIX, it won't work. Do a sh xlate at the prompt on the PIX. You should have a statically defined Pub address that points to your priv address. D I only regret that I have but one life to lose for my country. -Nathan Hale -Original Message- From: Ronald Mazzotta [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 8:23 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please I have an inside outside mapping from that ip to the public ip 208.253.38.123 which is the outside ip of the pix -Original Message- From: Don Ely [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 11:20 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please I think I've got it! What there should be an address translation from the 172.16.1.1 (private address) to a Public address. You're trying to route a non-routable address to the outside. I don't know about proxy, but the PIX is telling you to fsck off. That 172 address HAS to be routed to a routable IP address! D Those who deny freedom to others deserve it not for themselves. -Abraham Lincoln -Original Message- From: Ronald Mazzotta [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 8:12 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please That's all I see in the log for that access point. Although I just set up another internal web site to try redirection with and I get the same problem so I would guess that the proxy or pix are the prob not the exchange server. Yes that ip is a dialup client -Original Message- From: Don Ely [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 11:08 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please Is the 63.x.x.x address the client address or what? What shows up in the logs when you try to pass authentication? D A computer lets you make more mistakes faster than any invention in human history - with the possible exceptions of handguns and tequila. -Mitch Ratcliffe, Technology Review -Original Message- From: Ronald Mazzotta [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 7:57 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please When accessing the site this is what is in the proxy log 2001-12-18 15:51:12 63.17.150.119 - 172.16.1.1 80 GET /scripts/proxy/w3proxy.dll
RE: Off topic: EXPLORER.EXE 100% CPU
Not sure about Scanmail having the file locked but have you tried del or attrib from a DOS prompt? Allan -Original Message- From: Pfefferkorn, Pete (PFEFFEPE) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 11:23 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Off topic: EXPLORER.EXE 100% CPU This is going to be a little off topic, but I thought I would post it in case someone ran into it as well. I have ScanMail moving infected files. One of the files that was moved into the \VIRUS area was a FUN.MP3 that is listed as a short cut. I cannot delete due to a sharing violation (believe ScanMail still has locked). Once you try to delete or look at the attributes, your NT workstation jumps up to 100% CPU utilization for EXPLORER. Even disconnecting the mapped drive does not clear EXPLORER.EXE and the only way to get your workstation back is to reboot. I duplicated this on 3 NT workstations. Two running NT 4.0 sp6a one running sp5. Took me 3 days to determine what was causing my workstation to go crazy. I sure won't clear the areas from the server console. I can just see me killing the box! Pete Pfefferkorn Senior Systems Engineer/Mail Administrator University of Cincinnati 51 Goodman Street Cincinnati, OH 45221 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: Survey/Voting
http://www.cdolive.com/anonymousposting.htm I used this method. You may be able to configure and then send a poll created and sent as the Anonymous mailbox. When it returns to the Anonymous mailbox the headers will be stripped and fowarded to a public folder for public view. I did not try this but it sounds feasible... with a little tweaking. -Original Message- From: Alex Alborzfard [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, December 17, 2001 1:29 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Survey/Voting Well that's why I'm trying to do it through Outlook/Exchange (web server forms are not working properly!) Thanks anyway... Alex Alborzfard Network Manager... er...Errand Boy -Original Message- From: Josefowski, Larry [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, December 14, 2001 2:19 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Survey/Voting Not easily; maybe with some scripting, but I doubt it would ever be entirely anonymous. It would probably be easier to do it from a web server. -Original Message- From: Alex Alborzfard [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, December 14, 2001 1:54 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Survey/Voting Thanks is it possible to make it anonymous? -Original Message- From: Josefowski, Larry [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, December 14, 2001 1:55 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Survey/Voting OL2000: (CW) Outlook Voting and Vote Processing (Q197420) -Original Message- From: Alex Alborzfard [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, December 14, 2001 1:42 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Survey/Voting Yes it says it works with OL97. Do you know if it works with OL2000 as well? Thanks ALEX P.S. - Martin, don't quit your day job!!! -Original Message- From: Josefowski, Larry [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, December 14, 2001 1:45 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Survey/Voting Have you checked Technet out? Read Outlook Voting and Vote Processing (Q166446) for a quick overview. LEJ -Original Message- From: Alex Alborzfard [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, December 14, 2001 1:29 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Survey/Voting Is it possible to conduct an anonymous survey via Exchange/Outlook? On a related note how does voting work? Thanks Alex Alborzfard MCSE _ List posting FAQ: 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/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 AS - No NDR Returned
Is the account he's sending as a public folder by chance? Chris -- Chris Scharff Senior Sales Engineer MessageOne If you can't measure, you can't manage! -Original Message- From: David J. Culliton [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 11:19 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Send AS - No NDR Returned Having an issue in that when a user sends an email with attachments he receives no NDR in response. If he sends it as himself - he gets the NDR. The NDR is not generated to him or the account he is sending as. Searched MSKB and returned nothing related to this issue. W2k SP2 Ex2000 SP1. Any ideas? _ List posting FAQ: 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 please
The tcp and www statement should be in a conduit permit statement... 1 IP address??? Might I ask why? D Mistakes: It could be that the purpose of your life is only to serve as a warning to others. -Original Message- From: Ronald Mazzotta [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 9:14 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please I don't think I can take the proxy out of the picture I only have 1 ip I can use and it's the pix ip. Is it possible to map that ip in and out along with the other statement. Your last statement was correct BUT there is no tcp or www in my static statement. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 12:10 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please I'm not sure I see the relevance of forwarding the ip packets to the proxy then to the internal server. Your not accomplishing anything different then directly forwarding the port 80 packets to your internal owa server. I only say this because your behind the PIX firewall. I could understand if you were behind a proxy server but this is not the case. I'm assuming your using some type of access-list entry like: access-list 100 permit tcp any host (external_ip) eq www and then a corresponding conduit (or static) command for your internal server (proxy) static (inside,outside) tcp (external_ip) www (internal_ip) www netmask 255.255.255.255 Simply change the internal_ip to your owa server so that we can RULE out the proxy server. Make sure you do a write mem then retest. However, make sure your followed my previous advise on the host headers and ip info. Thx. -Original Message- From: Ronald Mazzotta [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 10:56 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please No lockout That ip is the only ip associated with the proxy. All incoming requests go to it first. That's all the proxy logs seem to have regarding that connection. Im setting up the pix syslog serve now. -Original Message- From: Don Ely [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 11:51 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please Ok, so that address is only assigned to the OWA server? Is there anything else in the proxy logs that might turn something up? Proxy and the PIX are dropping the return path or something. Does the user account ever get locked out with the bad login attempts? D May you have the foresight to know where you're going, the hindsight to know where you've been, and the insight to know when you've gone too far. -Irish Toast -Original Message- From: Ronald Mazzotta [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 8:36 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please Sh xlate returns Global 208.253.38.123 local 172.16.1.1 static -Original Message- From: Don Ely [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 11:26 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please Nope, if that is the address of the PIX, it won't work. Do a sh xlate at the prompt on the PIX. You should have a statically defined Pub address that points to your priv address. D I only regret that I have but one life to lose for my country. -Nathan Hale -Original Message- From: Ronald Mazzotta [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 8:23 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please I have an inside outside mapping from that ip to the public ip 208.253.38.123 which is the outside ip of the pix -Original Message- From: Don Ely [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 11:20 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please I think I've got it! What there should be an address translation from the 172.16.1.1 (private address) to a Public address. You're trying to route a non-routable address to the outside. I don't know about proxy, but the PIX is telling you to fsck off. That 172 address HAS to be routed to a routable IP address! D Those who deny freedom to others deserve it not for themselves. -Abraham Lincoln -Original Message- From: Ronald Mazzotta [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 8:12 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please That's all I see in the log for that access point. Although I just set up another internal web site to try redirection with and I get the same problem so I would guess that the proxy or pix are the prob not the exchange server. Yes that ip is a dialup client -Original Message- From: Don Ely [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 11:08 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please Is the 63.x.x.x address the client address or what? What shows up in the logs when you try to pass authentication? D A computer lets you make more mistakes faster than any invention in human history - with the possible exceptions of
Re: Calendar Mailbox Permissions
I have a E2K box w/ clients running Outlook 2K 98. When I grant a user send on behalf of rights to an mailbox, that user can see the entire Inbox. Is that how it is supposed to work.?Second everyone has rights to see everyones entire calendar. Not just the free busy data. Where are these permissions set? -John Q _ List posting FAQ: 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: Off topic: EXPLORER.EXE 100% CPU
Try logging out and back in and then deleting. Tom -Original Message- From: Pfefferkorn, Pete (PFEFFEPE) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 11:23 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Off topic: EXPLORER.EXE 100% CPU This is going to be a little off topic, but I thought I would post it in case someone ran into it as well. I have ScanMail moving infected files. One of the files that was moved into the \VIRUS area was a FUN.MP3 that is listed as a short cut. I cannot delete due to a sharing violation (believe ScanMail still has locked). Once you try to delete or look at the attributes, your NT workstation jumps up to 100% CPU utilization for EXPLORER. Even disconnecting the mapped drive does not clear EXPLORER.EXE and the only way to get your workstation back is to reboot. I duplicated this on 3 NT workstations. Two running NT 4.0 sp6a one running sp5. Took me 3 days to determine what was causing my workstation to go crazy. I sure won't clear the areas from the server console. I can just see me killing the box! Pete Pfefferkorn Senior Systems Engineer/Mail Administrator University of Cincinnati 51 Goodman Street Cincinnati, OH 45221 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]
RE: Help please
Yes. Using the static commands. I would not use conduit commands in 6.0 IOS. Use a static command like I described below. This way you can use 1 IP address to redirect different ports to different servers. For example: Using one IP you can setup several different redirects static (inside,outside) tcp (external_ip) www (internal_ip1) www netmask 255.255.255.255 static (inside,outside) tcp (external_ip) ftp (internal_ip2) ftp netmask 255.255.255.255 static (inside,outside) tcp (external_ip) 443 (internal_ip1) 443 netmask 255.255.255.255 static (inside,outside) tcp (external_ip) 90 (internal_ip3) 90 netmask 255.255.255.255 -Original Message- From: Ronald Mazzotta [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 11:14 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please I don't think I can take the proxy out of the picture I only have 1 ip I can use and it's the pix ip. Is it possible to map that ip in and out along with the other statement. Your last statement was correct BUT there is no tcp or www in my static statement. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 12:10 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please I'm not sure I see the relevance of forwarding the ip packets to the proxy then to the internal server. Your not accomplishing anything different then directly forwarding the port 80 packets to your internal owa server. I only say this because your behind the PIX firewall. I could understand if you were behind a proxy server but this is not the case. I'm assuming your using some type of access-list entry like: access-list 100 permit tcp any host (external_ip) eq www and then a corresponding conduit (or static) command for your internal server (proxy) static (inside,outside) tcp (external_ip) www (internal_ip) www netmask 255.255.255.255 Simply change the internal_ip to your owa server so that we can RULE out the proxy server. Make sure you do a write mem then retest. However, make sure your followed my previous advise on the host headers and ip info. Thx. -Original Message- From: Ronald Mazzotta [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 10:56 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please No lockout That ip is the only ip associated with the proxy. All incoming requests go to it first. That's all the proxy logs seem to have regarding that connection. Im setting up the pix syslog serve now. -Original Message- From: Don Ely [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 11:51 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please Ok, so that address is only assigned to the OWA server? Is there anything else in the proxy logs that might turn something up? Proxy and the PIX are dropping the return path or something. Does the user account ever get locked out with the bad login attempts? D May you have the foresight to know where you're going, the hindsight to know where you've been, and the insight to know when you've gone too far. -Irish Toast -Original Message- From: Ronald Mazzotta [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 8:36 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please Sh xlate returns Global 208.253.38.123 local 172.16.1.1 static -Original Message- From: Don Ely [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 11:26 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please Nope, if that is the address of the PIX, it won't work. Do a sh xlate at the prompt on the PIX. You should have a statically defined Pub address that points to your priv address. D I only regret that I have but one life to lose for my country. -Nathan Hale -Original Message- From: Ronald Mazzotta [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 8:23 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please I have an inside outside mapping from that ip to the public ip 208.253.38.123 which is the outside ip of the pix -Original Message- From: Don Ely [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 11:20 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please I think I've got it! What there should be an address translation from the 172.16.1.1 (private address) to a Public address. You're trying to route a non-routable address to the outside. I don't know about proxy, but the PIX is telling you to fsck off. That 172 address HAS to be routed to a routable IP address! D Those who deny freedom to others deserve it not for themselves. -Abraham Lincoln -Original Message- From: Ronald Mazzotta [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 8:12 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please That's all I see in the log for that access point. Although I just set up another internal web site to try redirection with and I get the same problem so I would guess that the proxy or pix are the prob not the exchange
RE: Help please
Had to install kiwi enterprise syslog. Did everythin stated but no info is logged to the syslog server -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 11:12 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please Logging is fairly straight forward. Telnet to device and add the following lines logging on logging timestamp logging trap errors logging history errors logging facility 7 logging host inside (internal_ip) Your logging host inside needs to be running compliant software. Complaint defined as listening on TCP Port 1468 and UDP 514. I can recommend the PIX Firewall Syslog Server. Download from Cisco Website. Install on a local machine. -Original Message- From: Don Ely [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 9:45 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please OK, let us know what you find. D DOS 6: Because there aren't enough problems in the world already. -Original Message- From: Ronald Mazzotta [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 7:37 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please I will have to call cisco as per starting logs. I am not that secure enough about the proper way of turning the loggin up. As for proxy I am attempting that now. -Original Message- From: Don Ely [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 10:37 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please That's why I wanted you to check the logs on both Proxy and the PIX. Somewhere there's something not passing traffic correctly... D Overconfidence: Before you attempt to beat the odds, be sure you can survive the odds beating you. - - http://www.despair.com -Original Message- From: Ronald Mazzotta [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 7:31 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please Its funny. I can not redirect and websites to internal servers. I am beginning to think this is a proxy problem. -Original Message- From: Don Ely [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 10:18 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please Router??? I thought you said you have a PIX. They have much more than 16MB, well, not much more, but at least 32MB. D Arrogance: The Best Leaders Inspire by Example. When that's not an option, brute intimidation works pretty well too. - - http://www.despair.com -Original Message- From: Ronald Mazzotta [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 7:13 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please Can't upgrade to 6.0. cisco will not allow me to dl it as I only have 16mb in my router. Also, tom I have verified that information. Thanks. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 10:11 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please Upgrade to 6.0 IOS -Original Message- From: Don Ely [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, December 17, 2001 9:07 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Help please I can't recall some great examples off hand, but I remember a time where the PIX would to funny things to the network traffic as it passed in either direction. Tended to time things out and make stuff not work. D The true test of character is not how much we know how to do, but how we behave when we don't know what to do. -John Holt -Original Message- From: Peter Szabo [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, December 17, 2001 6:26 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Re: Help please Don, I'm not too familiar with PIX but I know the problem with esmtp and pix , but never heard of any with http. Ronald, The easiet way to make sure is not the pix, connect your laptop to the segment bethwin the pix and your proxy and try to connect to OWA. If it is working, call Ci$co. /Peter - Original Message - From: Don Ely [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, December 17, 2001 9:06 PM Subject: RE: Help please That's another theory too... However, on the PIX there are some strange occurrences that would not pass some HTTP traffic correctly. Not always, but I've seen it. D Ignorance: It's amazing how much easier it is for a team to work together when no one has any idea where they're going. - - http://www.despair.com -Original Message- From: Peter Szabo [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, December 17, 2001 6:06 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Re: Help please Ronald, If your external address for your owa is tahoe.ss-pca.com/exchange then you have an authentication problem on your OWA server, nothing to do with your proxy or PIX. for a proxy server or a pix f/w http is http is http. period. On your OWA server diasble any other authentication but Basic. If I remember correctly internaly users can access OWA, yes ? /Peter - Original
