Good morning all
Exchange 2000 SP1. I had a corruption on one of my EDB files and had to
recreate the STM file. At the time it looked like no mail was lost, but
alas, this was not true. Outlook now still reports mail items that can't
be opened. Error: Can not open this item Checked Event logs -
You have logical corruption now because all of the pointers in the EDB
file that were pointing to the STM are no longer valid. Run isinteg to
fix logical corruption. Run it until you get 0 errors, 0 warnings, and
0 fixes or the same results twice.
Isinteg -s servername -fix -test alltests
Thank you Jeffrey
I guessed that it were valid pointers pointing to a missing item, just
didn't know how to get rid of them. Will run this tonight, as I can't
take the production system down during the day.
Regards
Sander
-Original Message-
From: Jeffrey A. Beckham [mailto:[EMAIL
Also as long as you don't have IXOS eCon archive email as that uses it as
well.
Cheers
Paul
Standards are like toothbrushes,
everybody agrees you should have one,
but no one wants to use yours
-Original Message-
From: Stevens, Dave [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Wednesday, June
Long shot, but...
Have had users with this or similar problems when running apps (SETI command line
comes to mind) which consmue 100% CPU at normal priority.
Not exactly sure why it happens [you can guess at my advised solution to this one
and the amount of time I haven't spent fixing it],
-Original Message-
From: Jim Underwood [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: 27 June 2002 06:28
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Guidance for Upgrade of Small Network to W2K/E2K
I hope you guys feel better. It must be nice to know
everything, and be ready to jump on anyone
It may be worth running a Consistency Adjust on your 55 mailbox PF
server(s) to remove unknown permissions from mailboxes. Do NOT check the
Sync with Directory option though. If E2K sees unknown permissions, it can
block the known permissions (i.e. the assistant) from accessing folders to
tombolian?
Paul Chinnery
Network Administrator
Mem Med Ctr
-Original Message-
From: Chris Scharff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Wednesday, June 26, 2002 4:10 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Kill new e-mail messages to previous employees - the most
pra ctical solution
I
I would say do whatever works best for you. 400 groups seems like a lot, but
then again, I do not know how you do things on the inside!
-Original Message-
From: Parrnelli GS11 Ben T [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Thursday, June 27, 2002 12:04 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE:
Ok then, you tell us what methods you have looked at and ask specific
questions from there. And btw, I know very little, just ask my kids.
-Original Message-
From: Jim Underwood [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Thursday, June 27, 2002 1:28 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE:
I shut down all the services but the most basic NT services. I
specifically shut down SNMP and a host of Compaq services. There were no
3rd party services running at all.
-Original Message-
Any SNMP /AV/ Other 3rd party services running?
Did you even LOOK at the rules wizard?
Let's see - create a blank rule, and select From .., specify the people
you want to ignore, then select Uses a specific form and specify the
various appointment forms. For good measure, tell it to stop processing
rules too.
Looks like one rule to me.
Nacho's are in trouble? I better go buy some!
--
Roger D. Seielstad - MCSE
Sr. Systems Administrator
Peregrine Systems
Atlanta, GA
-Original Message-
From: Tony Hlabse [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Tuesday, June 25, 2002 11:29
Mmmm nachos. Can I get some beer in here?
-Original Message-
From: Roger Seielstad [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: 27 June 2002 13:47
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Public folders delivering mail?!
Nacho's are in trouble? I better go buy some!
Where is Les? Is he here?
-Original Message-
From: William Lefkovics [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Wednesday, June 26, 2002 6:30 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: RECALL: Guidance for Upgrade of Small Network to W2K/E2K
The Outlook programmers need to work on they're [1]
Personally, if you would have taken an extra few minutes, told us what you'd
read, what you're thinking about trying, and then asking us for our
opinion... You'd have likely been garnered a more fruitful answer...
Just my opinion mind you cuz it makes me feel really big
-Original
Are you doing any SMTP proxying or filtering on your firewall or are you
using a SMTP gateway product? It sounds like the server sending you the
email is trying your first MX and then trying the second MX record and
it then goes through.
If this is a case (you can verify with the message
When sending a message to one of our contractor sites the delivery fails
with a network error during host resolution. I'm pretty sure this is
because there is no MX record for the new test domain they've setup. I
remember reading somewhere that the Exchange IMC will not revert to host
name
Hello,
We're migrating from a Exchange5.5 organization to a new Exchange2000
organization. We are moving mailboxes with the Exch.SP2 Exchange Migration
Wizard.
The problem is that, with this procedure, client reconfiguration is
necessary, (server name).
( Clients are Outlook98/2000 ).
Do you
Hi Guys,
I have not been on the list for over a year so excuse me if I have missed
the threads on this
Can I re-route all inbound unknown recipient mail to a single mailbox in
Exchange 2000? (I known how to do it in 5.5)
At the moment it goes into the badmail directory.
This is for people
-Original Message-
From: Chris Jordan [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: 26 June 2002 14:35
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Exch 5.5 Backup Server?
You might need to define what you mean by Backup mail server.
If you mean a message store (e.g. Exchange's Information Store) where
Test message please ignore
_
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
Hello everyone,
We're migrating from a Exchange5.5 organization to a new Exchange2000
organization. We are moving mailboxes with the Exch.SP2 Exchange Migration
Wizard.
The problem is that, with this procedure, client reconfiguration is
necessary, (server name).
( Clients are Outlook98/2000 ).
Exchange 5.5 sp4 on NT4 sp5. I downloaded the script from CDO which
allows you to set up an agent on a Public Folder to send a notification to
a distribution list whenever a new posting occurs. This notification also
has a shortcut to the Public Folder. When a new posting occurs, everything
I have an Exchange 5.5 server in a Windows 2000 Active Directory running
in mixed mode. I've been trying to determine the impact of switching AD
to Native mode instead of Mixed mode.
Anyone know if it is OK to switch to Native Mode, or are there issues I
need to be concerned about?
Thanks.
Ok I didn't see it
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Gary Duckman
Sent: Wednesday, June 26, 2002 6:04 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: Test
Test message please ignore
Yes you can but it breaks the RFCS. And why would you want to? Do
Catchall mailbox event sink for Exchange2000:
http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;en-us;Q324021SD=MSKB;
--Kevinm KMAP-SR, M, WLKMMAS, UCC+WCA, And Beyond
http://www.daughtry.ca/ For Graphics and WebDesign, GO
Got it...testing back..did you get it?
___
John Bowles
Exchange Administrator
Enterprise Support Engineering
Celera Genomics
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
-Original Message-
From: Steve Hanna [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Thursday, June 27, 2002 11:38 AM
To: Exchange
Nope didn't get it
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Bowles, John
L.
Sent: Thursday, June 27, 2002 8:32 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Test
Got it...testing back..did you get it?
___
John Bowles
Do a search on Technet for PROFGEN.
-Original Message-
From: Gonzalez Gonzalez, Jose J
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: 27 June 2002 08:08
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: Migration and Outlook
Hello everyone,
We're migrating from a Exchange5.5 organization to a new Exchange2000
One big one -- you can't go back to Mixed mode once you switch to Native
mode.
Geoff
-Original Message-
From: Andrew Woodworth [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Thursday, June 27, 2002 9:01 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: Exchange 5.5 and Active Directory Native Mode
I have an
friggin login using the address in the alias field of OWA.
If you don't have permission, you'll get an entry in event viewer. If you do
have permission you'll login.
-Original Message-
From: Greg Martin(MG1) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: 26 June 2002 15:31
To: Exchange Discussions
Hi Guys,
Exchange 5.5 sp4, win nt sp6
Ex 2k Sp2 , win2k sp2. two way trust between domains.
User X has accounts in both the domains.
User X mail box resides in Exch 2K Server(moved from NT domain).
X can log in to the NT domain and access his email using OLXP from the AD
domain, Exchange
Q174045
-Original Message-
From: Joe Berthiaume [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Thursday, June 27, 2002 11:48 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: rules wizard stops working
User has about 15 - 20 rules. A few days ago they all stopped running
automatically. Apparently he had recently
Restore from backup.
Ed Crowley MCSE+Internet MVP kcCC+I
Tech Consultant
hp Services
Protecting the world from PSTs and Bricked Backups!
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Sander Van
Butzelaar
Sent: Wednesday, June 26, 2002 11:49 PM
To:
Current environment is Ex5.5 Sp4 / E2k sp2 in mixed mode. I've rehomed my
public folders to my 1st E2K server and
setup my 2nd E2Kserver as a replica along with my remaining Ex5.5 servers.
When I replicate the Ex5.5 servers
get all the updates... the 2nd E2K server doesn't get the updated
Please define saving mailboxes. If you're talking about individual
mailbox (a.k.a. brick) backup, then please be informed that it's a
great big kludge that you don't need. See:
http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq_appxb.htm.
Ed Crowley MCSE+Internet MVP kcCC+I
Tech Consultant
hp Services
How were the accounts migrated into 2000? I have been testing this same
scenario for awhile. Did you migrate the SID from the NT domain? Did you
change the account assigned to the mailbox in 5.5 admin (not sure if this is
necessary or not, haven't gotten that far yet in my testing)?
Funny thing, Outlook did this to me (on my Compaq Deskpro, no less) when
I shut down. I haven't noticed the problem before because I usually
don't shut down. I usually hibernate.
Ed Crowley MCSE+Internet MVP kcCC+I
Tech Consultant
hp Services
Protecting the world from PSTs and Bricked Backups!
I am still beating my head against the wall, any advice is welcome. I am
even willing to pay for tech support but I dont know anyone who does for
this . . . any ideas?
XCH 5.5 SP4
Added myself to the EventConfig_Servername folder for the server I am homed
on
Gave myself create/read for OWN
The record shows that I never put you down in this thread. You can
interpret my posts however you want, and I'm sure you will, but my first
post specifically and correctly answered your request for references.
My second post addressed Andy David's post, which I felt, and expressed,
was a little
Add an MX record in the IMC server's hosts file.
Ed Crowley MCSE+Internet MVP kcCC+I
Tech Consultant
hp Services
Protecting the world from PSTs and Bricked Backups!
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, June
Please post the relevant section of the RFC that the request breaks.
Ed Crowley MCSE+Internet MVP kcCC+I
Tech Consultant
hp Services
Protecting the world from PSTs and Bricked Backups!
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Kevin Miller
Sent:
Seems like God doesn't accept mail from mortals.
What servername did you blank out? Yours or someone else's?
Ed Crowley MCSE+Internet MVP kcCC+I
Tech Consultant
hp Services
Protecting the world from PSTs and Bricked Backups!
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL
The one all about NDR's Don't have it off the top of my head, but the
Idea of a catch all breaks that, does it not?
--Kevinm KMAP-SR, M, WLKMMAS, UCC+WCA, And Beyond
http://www.daughtry.ca/ For Graphics and WebDesign, GO here!
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL
I think that would be to narrow a definition, after all the message is delivered and
is theory is available for review.
-Original Message-
From: Kevin Miller [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Thursday, June 27, 2002 12:42 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Catch All...
The one
No nachos how about hot dogs.
-Original Message-
From: Robert Moir [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Thursday, June 27, 2002 8:50 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Public folders delivering mail?!
Mmmm nachos. Can I get some beer in here?
-Original Message-
From:
But the address was bad. How is the user ever going to know that.
--Kevinm KMAP-SR, M, WLKMMAS, UCC+WCA, And Beyond
http://www.daughtry.ca/ For Graphics and WebDesign, GO here!
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Mark Rotman
Sent:
http://searchwin2000.techtarget.com/ateQuestionNResponse/0,289625,sid1_c
id468033_tax285117,00.html This one according to Scott.
--Kevinm KMAP-SR, M, WLKMMAS, UCC+WCA, And Beyond
http://www.daughtry.ca/ For Graphics and WebDesign, GO here!
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
The user accounts were manually created (Network Admin designed and deployed
the AD structure).
I used ADC to replicate exchange objects, and then merged the replicated
user object x-1 to the manually created user x, using AD cleanup wizard.
-Original Message-
From: Chris Anelick
from rfc2821
6.1 Reliable Delivery and Replies by Email
When the receiver-SMTP accepts a piece of mail (by sending a 250 OK
message in response to DATA), it is accepting responsibility for
delivering or relaying the message. It must take this responsibility
seriously. It MUST NOT
Exactly, these RFC sections indicate that the SMTP server is responsible for the
delivery of the message and the message itself must never be lost prior to delivery to
the destination system.
The RFC is not broken because:
a) the message is at its ultimate destination - domain.com
b) The
Do you have a public folder connection agreement?
Ed Crowley MCSE+Internet MVP kcCC+I
Tech Consultant
hp Services
Protecting the world from PSTs and Bricked Backups!
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Pennell,
Ronald B.
Sent: Thursday,
Have you read the RFC? That section refers to relaying e-mail, not
accepting it for eventual delivery. What's to say that the owner of an
e-mail domain can't decree that all mail for all other addresses in the
domain he owns except the ones specifically defined can't go to a catch
all mailbox?
Yes, have one in the ADC that is from the exchange server to the active
directory server.
Get Event ID 1110 , understand that there might be a post sp2 fix. Don't
know if it is
associated with this problem.
Ron
-Original Message-
From: Ed Crowley [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent:
I apologize to those of you who subscribe to Martin's E2K list. I am
excerpting my long-winded post from that forum.
If, as an administrator for a domain, I decide that address
[EMAIL PROTECTED] is the intended recipient for all unresolved
addreses in my domain, then it's the intended
Does the calendar have ALL DAY EVENTS on it that may be interfering? These
only show up in the banner area of the top of a ONE DAY VIEW.
Are you using Robert Strongs... script? I have never had a problem with
his script. (Just corrupt recurring meetings on occation).
Have you run /Cleanfreebusy
I am more with Scott, But then I think the idea of a catch all is simply
asking for way to much work, and a waste of time. You do make a very
good point, if someone is monitoring the box and the email is delivered
to the intended party. then no harm is done.
I will stop saying This breaks things
That last paragraph says it all, Thanks for the long winded reply!!
--Kevinm KMAP-SR, M, WLKMMAS, UCC+WCA, And Beyond
http://www.daughtry.ca/ For Graphics and WebDesign, GO here!
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Ed Crowley
Sent:
I got tired. What did it say?
-Original Message-
From: Kevin Miller [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Thursday, June 27, 2002 10:37 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Catch All...
That last paragraph says it all, Thanks for the long winded reply!!
--Kevinm KMAP-SR, M,
Yea, Its a double-edged sword. I can see a lot of legitimate, fat-fingered
email sitting forgotten.
-Original Message-
From: Kevin Miller [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Thursday, June 27, 2002 1:33 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Catch All...
I am more with Scott, But then
That is one that you should read all the way, Ed did a very good job
with it. This thread went into my Craig folder.
--Kevinm KMAP-SR, M, WLKMMAS, UCC+WCA, And Beyond
http://www.daughtry.ca/ For Graphics and WebDesign, GO here!
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL
I didnt know the author, but it is the one the Wizard installs that I
downloaded from Exchangecode. In the script it says Copyright 1999 blah blah
Robert Strong so I am going to assume yes.
Did the /cleanfreebusy -- didnt help
No all day events
I even ran through all of the reqs again and I
I can just see the mail box going crazy. I have 5000 accounts here, and
It took moths to get my admin mail box down to less then 2,000 messages
a day. Thanks to the black hole. I can see this mail box getting as
active as my TS or Cheese box's. I would much rather keep up with them
then the catch
What's a Cheese box?
--
Martin Tuip
MVP Exchange
Exchange2000 List owner
www.exchange-mail.org
www.sharepointserver.com
--
- Original Message -
From: Kevin Miller [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday,
And where the cheese at?
-Original Message-
From: Martin Tuip [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Thursday, June 27, 2002 2:08 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: Re: Catch All...
What's a Cheese box?
--
Martin Tuip
MVP Exchange
Exchange2000 List
Here goes my WAG...
I do not think the ADC replicates any SID info, therefore your AD account
does not have a SID History entry. The mailbox, although moved to a
different server, may still be looking at the NT account as the Primary
account. In AD U C, view the advanced features for the
Momma's got a CheeseBox and Kevin doesnt sleep at night...
-Original Message-
From: Kevin Miller [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Thursday, June 27, 2002 1:48 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Catch All...
I can just see the mail box going crazy. I have 5000 accounts here,
In the bucket.
-Original Message-
From: Erik Sojka [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Thursday, June 27, 2002 2:04 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Catch All...
And where the cheese at?
-Original Message-
From: Martin Tuip [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Thursday,
Under the thong pile.
--Kevinm KMAP-SR, M, WLKMMAS, UCC+WCA, And Beyond
http://www.daughtry.ca/ For Graphics and WebDesign, GO here!
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Andy David
Sent: Thursday, June 27, 2002 11:19 AM
To: Exchange
From tombola, a lottery drum. Random chance, rare, bonus when it happens but
not likely.
-Original Message-
From: Chinnery Paul [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Thursday, June 27, 2002 6:46 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Kill new e-mail messages to previous employees - the
Cool word.
Jim H
-Original Message-
From: Chris Scharff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Thursday, June 27, 2002 2:21 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Kill new e-mail messages to previous employees - the most
pra ctical solution
From tombola, a lottery drum. Random chance,
By the tube top
-Original Message-
From: Kevin Miller [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Thursday, June 27, 2002 11:19 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Catch All...
Under the thong pile.
--Kevinm KMAP-SR, M, WLKMMAS, UCC+WCA, And Beyond http://www.daughtry.ca/
For Graphics and
Dumb-ass? ...here I thought you guys were starting to like me:)
-Original Message-
From: Chris Scharff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Wednesday, June 26, 2002 4:10 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Kill new e-mail messages to previous employees - the most pra
ctical solution
Mailsweeper for SMTP?
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Thursday, June 27, 2002 2:40 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: Content Filtering
personalmail
Any recommendation on software for content filtering? Environment of WK2 Adv
NT 4.0 w/ Ex
Sybari Antigen v6.5 for Exchange 5.5/2000 for the best.
Geoff
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Thursday, June 27, 2002 2:40 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: Content Filtering
Any recommendation on software for content filtering?
Nevermind, as I dug through the amazingly unintuitive Microsoft site I found
that X.400 connectors do not rely on NT domain trusts, just site connectors
do.
Thanks for any replies you may have already sent.
Josh
-Original Message-
From: Bennett, Joshua [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
But remember the Antigen only does Subject and HeaderI do not believe it
does the message body yet.
Better then nothing..but not the same as say a Mimesweeper or other such
type of software...
I find the selection depends on what you are trying to filter...
.02
bill
-Original
What is the reason behind breaking the trust and then rebuilding?
- Original Message -
From: Bennett, Joshua [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, June 27, 2002 2:19 PM
Subject: breaking trusts
Hello all,
I am newly appointed Exchange Admin so
We where having authentication issues that seem be coming from a broken
trust between the two domains.
-Original Message-
From: Tony Hlabse [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Thursday, June 27, 2002 2:50 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: Re: breaking trusts
What is the reason behind
Yes, however, they are planning on coming out with their Gold Version 6.0 in
October that WILL scan the message body as well.
Geoff
-Original Message-
From: Mellott, Bill [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Thursday, June 27, 2002 2:51 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Content
Ah that I did not know...good info thanks..as Im contemplating using it
instead on GS45/50
bill
-Original Message-
From: Dale Geoffrey Edwards [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Thursday, June 27, 2002 2:55 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Content Filtering
Yes, however, they
Emanager for Viruswall/Scanmail by trendmicro does a reasonably good job
-Original Message-
From: Dale Geoffrey Edwards [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Thursday, June 27, 2002 1:54 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Content Filtering
Yes, however, they are planning on coming
Yuck ... it leaves a lot to be desired for content scanning / anti-spam. Its a great
anti-virus product, but having to define all the words and domains and not having an
active capabilities removes it from the ranks.
I'd look at MailEssentials, Praetor, Mailmarshall or a few other true
Raj..is that product easy to configure and setup? does it require much
daily administration? we are getting spammed to death and I am tired of
saying there is nothing that can be done. I have not heard much praise on
any content filtering software yet...was waiting for the next generation,
I'm changing the disk storage on a Exchange 5.5 cluster from fiber to
SCSI.
As long as I have to restore my whole database I figured I would take the
opportunity to upgrade the server OS to 2000.
I've tested restoring my 5.5 databases on to Windows 2000 successfully a
number of times. Has anyone
Hello all,
I was testing the restore on my recovery server.
Production and Recovery - NT 4.0 sp 6 Exchange sp 4
On my original server I have 5 recipient containers
When I restored to the recovery server, it only shows one container (377
accounts) and all the people that are supposed to be
we have to build those manually, then run the consistency checker.
dave
-Original Message-
From: Sandhya Pai [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Thursday, June 27, 2002 3:31 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: Disastor Recovery Testing
Hello all,
I was testing the restore on my
Does the Recovery server also have the same SAM database?
- Original Message -
From: Sandhya Pai [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, June 27, 2002 3:31 PM
Subject: Disastor Recovery Testing
Hello all,
I was testing the restore on my
Emanager for InterScan Virus wall which we use here is an easy product to
install and configure. Tech support is really good. Administration is a
different ballgame altogether, till the time you and your users are
accustomed to the content filter management,you will be spending a good
amount of
So, the name of your recovery server was different and the dir.edb wasn't
restored huh?
-Original Message-
From: Sandhya Pai [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Thursday, June 27, 2002 2:31 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: Disastor Recovery Testing
Hello all,
I was testing
Shouldn't these permissions remain after a mailbox move? If not, where do I
setup the new permissions for access?
Thanks,
Jason
_
List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
Archives:
I have Exchange 5.5 and my memory usage on all servers seems extremely
high. With a gig of RAM, I've got 8 MB available. What causes this? Is
there a way to prevent this? Is this normal for 5.5
Karon Miller
_
List posting FAQ:
Sounds normal to me.
-Original Message-
From: Karon Miller [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Thursday, June 27, 2002 1:19 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: Memory usage of store.exe high
I have Exchange 5.5 and my memory usage on all servers seems extremely
high. With a gig
Nice try at a plug for your company, Mark. If you have 13 Exchange Servers,
how many times would you have to define all the parameters for them? I
don't think you have really looked at the new v6.5. Antigen allows for a
template that your populate out to your other Exchange Servers at will. I
Anti-virus program maybe?
Geoff...
-Original Message-
From: Karon Miller [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Thursday, June 27, 2002 2:19 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: Memory usage of store.exe high
I have Exchange 5.5 and my memory usage on all servers seems extremely high.
Everything got restored just not in the appropriate recipient container. I
am following Dave's suggestion of manually creating the containers and
running ds/is.
Thanks.
-Original Message-
From: Chris Scharff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Thursday, June 27, 2002 3:37 PM
To: Exchange
Yes.
-Original Message-
From: Tony Hlabse [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Thursday, June 27, 2002 3:29 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: Re: Disastor Recovery Testing
Does the Recovery server also have the same SAM database?
- Original Message -
From: Sandhya Pai [EMAIL
This worked!!! Thanks. I feel somewhat prepared now :-)
-Original Message-
From: Stevens, Dave [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Thursday, June 27, 2002 3:28 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Disastor Recovery Testing
we have to build those manually, then run the consistency
I wouldn't put any shipping version of Antigen in the same league with the
products Mark listed for the most part unless they've snuck in a whole bunch
of features I'm not aware of. The initial question as asked was a bit vague
to make any solid solution recommendations IMO.
-Original
1 - 100 of 147 matches
Mail list logo
