Hi andy
Well I got a bit further now with rtc! I think it was a messenger client on
the rtc server that messed it up.
The only problem now is that administrator is the only one who can log on to
the service even if others are enabled.
Karsten
-Original Message-
From: Webb, Andy
I think this would more appropriately be an Outlook question since it is the
client handling the email. You may want to check out www.slipstick.com, but
I personally have never heard of anything like this.
-Original Message-
From: Whitlock, James A. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent:
I am having trouble emailing a certain domain. I thought maybe there
was a dns issue due to the fact that the recipient domain contained my
domain name (from myorg.org to myorgmadison.org), but people sending
email from myorgmadison.org are getting similar responses when they
email myorg.org,
I believe this may be one of those situations in which Ed's Maxim
applies.
There are seldom good technological solutions to behavioral problems.
- Ed Crowley
-Original Message-
From: Whitlock, James A. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Posted At: Tuesday, May 27, 2003 10:33 AM
Posted To: swynk
The recipient's mail server is set to reject mail from you based on your
originating IP/DNS name. Apparently they don't like you...
-Original Message-
From: Todd Bentley [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Posted At: Tuesday, May 27, 2003 10:56 AM
Posted To: swynk
Conversation: 5.7.1 denials to
We use it for all 100+ of our NT4, Win2000, and Unix servers, and for
Exchange, SQL, and Oracle. We also have their robotic tape unit and
once you get it setup, it works great. After working with DLT tapes for
years, this system is wonderful since you never have to touch tapes
again. We still
Their mail server is rejecting you for some reason.
Maybe cuz you don't have a reverse DNS record for your mail server?
-Original Message-
From: Todd Bentley [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, May 27, 2003 11:56 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: 5.7.1 denials to common
There are to many clients to think about an outlook solution. If there is a solution
it would be better at the server side.
-Original Message-
From: Martin Blackstone [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, May 27, 2003 10:51 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Outside company
What exactly are they trying to accomplish by doing this? Maybe there is
another solution.
-Original Message-
From: Whitlock, James A. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, May 27, 2003 9:23 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Outside company mail
There are to many clients to
And this will somehow prevent someone from sending a confidential or
inappropriate email to an external recipient?
How long do you think it will take before your users just ignore this
warning box and hit yes just to get the email out?
I suppose you could hire someone to write you some elaborate
Then why are they getting rejections when sending to me. I am not
denying any ip/dns. I like them.
Todd L. Bentley Director
Allarus Technology Management
350 Fifth Ave 57th Floor
New York, NY 10118
www.allarus.com
-Original Message-
From: Chris Scharff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent:
-Original Message-
From: Peter Orlowski [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, May 27, 2003 11:27 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Outside company mail
What exactly are they trying to accomplish by doing this? Maybe there is
another solution.
-Original Message-
so then..and Im sure Im a bit off...
but say you have 125 users.standard exch(55)...the PRIV on a 15GB disk...
(Exchnage main and PUB of different disks)
if I gave each user say 100MB mail box...
so 100MB * 125 users = 12.5GB (if all users are max'd out)
which say would leave me ~ 2.5GB of free
Dunno... Perhaps they do a similar lookup on recipient domains... which
is generally pretty stupid as well.
-Original Message-
From: Todd Bentley [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Posted At: Tuesday, May 27, 2003 11:44 AM
Posted To: swynk
Conversation: 5.7.1 denials to common recipient
Subject:
1. no send/receive limit is probably a bad idea. If one user got
mailbombed it could stop Exchange for everyone.
2. The odds of all users being mail bombed is pretty low isn't it?
3. You've not taken into consideration SIS, but it's not necessarily all
that important.
4. It would if you believe
For that you may need to go back to the RTC folks to dig into.
ERM (Exchange Resource Manager) Released!
http://www.swinc.com/erm
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
thanks! chris
bill
-Original Message-
From: Chris Scharff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, May 27, 2003 12:53 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Q -Exch55 Prohibit SND/RCV message
1. no send/receive limit is probably a bad idea. If one user got
mailbombed it could stop
P.S. Then why use the Send and Recieve Prohibit at all?
why would one use it...???
bill
-Original Message-
From: Mellott, Bill [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, May 27, 2003 1:07 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Q -Exch55 Prohibit SND/RCV message
thanks! chris
bill
Could someone tell me what this error is, do i need to worry about it.
NSPI Proxy encountered an error while receiving a packet. The target
Domain Controller or the network or a client might be down. The winsock
subsystem returned the error:[0x2746]. The circuit that received this
error is being
I need to regenerate my OAB to my 4 Exchange 2000 servers but I am not
sure how. Through System Administrator, I have rebuilt the default OAB
and I've added another OAB - setting it as the default but I still get
this error in the users' synchronization logs (the last two lines).
Please let me
I use it to stop mail loops and keep departments from using a 'receive
only' mailbox as a filing cabinet.
-Original Message-
From: Mellott, Bill [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Posted At: Tuesday, May 27, 2003 12:08 PM
Posted To: swynk
Conversation: Q -Exch55 Prohibit SND/RCV message
Subject:
Anyone have critique iHateSpam Server?
Regards,
Orin
_
List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
Web Interface:
http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang=english
To
I hate these!
--- [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I need to regenerate my OAB to my 4 Exchange 2000
servers but I am not
sure how. Through System Administrator, I have
rebuilt the default OAB
and I've added another OAB - setting it as the
default but I still get
this error in the users'
Currently:
Exchange 5.5
Windows 2000 member server (no AD)
Migrating our company domain to Windows 2000 Active Directory and Exchange
2000. Any stories to share? The do's and do not's of upgrading the domain
and Exchange.
Our current DC will become the root.
I am a little weary to
Dear DL Members,
What do each of the following mean, and what is the difference /
subtle difference?
Exchange 5.5
Exchange Admin Program
Delivery Options (tab)
Give Send On Behalf Of permission to
My Name Here
Outlook 2000
Tools
Options
Delegates (tab)
Applying permissions via Outlook is more granular.
Can you give Send As permissions via Outlook? I don't think so.
-Original Message-
From: Garrish, Robert B. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, May 27, 2003 2:28 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: Delivery Options vs Delegates
ok I get the second idea...but Im not clear on the mail loop
-Original Message-
From: Chris Scharff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, May 27, 2003 2:05 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Q -Exch55 Prohibit SND/RCV message
I use it to stop mail loops and keep departments
With a mail loop, the over the limit message comes from a null sender
and thus should stop the loop.
-Original Message-
From: Mellott, Bill [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Posted At: Tuesday, May 27, 2003 1:07 PM
Posted To: swynk
Conversation: Q -Exch55 Prohibit SND/RCV message
Subject: RE: Q
You cannot restore an exchange mailbox individually however only the
full store and go from there.
Erik L. Vesneski
Sr. Systems Specialist
ISO - Intel Systems
Ph#: 925-685-6161
www.pmigroup.com
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
-Original Message-
From: Dryden, Karen [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
We did an inplace upgrade recently which worked pretty well. Had a few
issues, but got them worked out in reasonably quick fashion.
Some things that we did.
1) Made sure AD was functioning smoothly before adding the first MS Exchange
2000 server. Make sure you Domain Controllers are stable and
I have an interesting behavior we've noticed here. I'm wondering if this
is due to some glitch in our set-up, or if anyone else is experiencing
this as a more generalized behavior.
In this situation, we are running Exchange 2000. No server side send
as permissions have been granted; only delegate
Sounds about right.. 'on behalf of' is really an Exchange-ism which
doesn't have a direct parallel per se in the relevant RFCs AFAIK.
-Original Message-
From: Aaron Greer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Posted At: Tuesday, May 27, 2003 2:28 PM
Posted To: swynk
Conversation: Send on Behalf
OK, so given that I can see how it wouldn't work on when received by some other
client. I'm just puzzled by why it wouldn't work when looking at the message in
question using Outlook, on another Exchange org; or am I being naïve here?
-Original Message-
From: Chris Scharff
Oh dear.
-Original Message-
From: Whitlock, James A. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Posted At: Tuesday, May 27, 2003 11:33 AM
Posted To: Exchange
Conversation: Outside company mail
Subject: Outside company mail
I have a request from management to setup the exchange servers so that
when
Have you seen this oldie but goodie...
http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;en-us;316612
It's worth asking
-Original Message-
From: Joshua R. Morgan [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Posted At: Tuesday, May 27, 2003 9:23 AM
Posted To: Exchange
Conversation: Services Dying
Hi
Well, not entirely true !!! Any user NOT having a mailbox ... Can log on to
the RTC server..
Does that mean anything to you?
Karsten
-Original Message-
From: Webb, Andy [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 27. maj 2003 19:00
To: Exchange Discussions
For that you may need to go back to
I agree with Andy. Somebody like Sig could probably write an event sink
that does this, but by the 3rd day I doubt many users would pay any
attention to it; it would just be annoying to them.
Sounds more like a user-education issue to me.
-Ben-
Ben M. Schorr, MVP-OneNote, CNA, MCPx3
Director of
James,
It can be / is a real pain to do this sort of this, and as you have said,
there are more than outlook clients to worry about. One client I know of
required users to pre-pend some text to the subject line for outgoing mail,
essentially forcing the user to acknowledge that the mail being
The problem with a server side solution, is that the mail has already been
sent by the user at this point, so there's no yes button for them to
click. The message wouldn't be assessed for delivery to an external
recipient until the MTA got the message and expanded the recipient list.
For a
We use it here and have had no issues...My only complaint is its lack of
enterprise type reporting. Unless you have the Tivoli Framework installed
there is not a real good report system. I had to write a script that parses
the TSM logs on each server to give me an effective report on back up
That it is perhaps an SMTP address/upn/proxyAddress related issue. Not
much else changes during the mailbox creation process that would be
relevant.
ERM (Exchange Resource Manager) Released
http://www.swinc.com/erm
Depending on the size of your environment, you may want to consider not
even bothering with the ADC (if you've got another box for Exchange
2000). Build an Exchange 2000 box, come in on a Saturday, mail-enable
all your AD accounts, and ExMerge all your mail to the Exchange 2000
box. I've done it
Hi,
I recall the 'deleted items' for each user taking up space in their
individual limitation. If I choose to have 180 days for retention time
on deleted items on the Exchange server then I am under the impression
no matter how long I make the retention time the individual limitation
rule takes
DIR limits set on individual mailboxes or public folders take precedence
over any time you set globally on the store.
Items in the DIR recovery bin do not count against their ind. mailbox size
limits however.
-Original Message-
From: Erik L. Vesneski [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent:
We've been using it for several years to back up our Exchange databases, the
associated file systems on NT 4.0, as well as our Novell NetWare 4.x and 5.x
servers, our AIX servers...everything EXCEPT our mainframe.
Exchange database backups have been wonderfully trouble-free, and sometimes
managed
45 matches
Mail list logo
