i know for sure that e-nspect does provide this level of detail.
mike
- Original Message -
From: Coleman, Hunter [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, June 20, 2003 7:35 PM
Subject: RE: Tracking email use to save bandwidth
I'm sure that
Are you bored?
-Original Message-
From: Ed Crowley [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 20 June 2003 20:44
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: OWA and the M:
There is no M: drive.
Ed Crowley MCSE+Internet MVP
Freelance E-Mail Philosopher
Protecting the world from PSTs and Bricked
Before you start looking at your users mail ensure that you have an email
policy defined and that all your companies employees know what it is.
Otherwise, you personally can be held responsible for invading someones
privacy. Like with tapping phones you have to have reasonable grounds to do
this
Like with tapping phones you have to have reasonable grounds to do this
sort of thing.
Depends on jurisdiction.
-Original Message-
From: Midgley, Ian [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, June 23, 2003 07:10
To: Exchange Discussions
Before you start looking at your users mail
give yourself permissions to everyone's mailbox and start reading their mail
:)
-Original Message-
From: Terry Hines [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Saturday, June 21, 2003 6:36 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: Monitor Email content
I have been tasked with reviewing the content of
I'd wager that Siegfried is fully aware of the differences, probably more so
than most on the list.
The question I have is what's the status of this hotfix with regards to
E2k3? Is there an expectation that this functionality will be included in
the RTM release?
Sure does but I'd rather have someone elses butt on the line than mine,
especially if 'm doing it for them anyway. I'm intrigued - where is phone
tapping legal?
-Original Message-
From: Slinger, Gary [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 23 June 2003 12:39
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE:
That's why you want to make sure your company has a policy in place and that
all of your staff is aware of this.
You also want to get this in writing from HR and have THEM do the
monitoring. You simply set it up for them, and let them have at it.
-Original Message-
From: Midgley, Ian
Russia? Dunno. I wasn't referring to phone taps; there are any number of
situations where monitoring of email is legal without consent.
-Original Message-
From: Midgley, Ian [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, June 23, 2003 6:03 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Monitor
That's why you shouldn't support OWA as a primary client for those people
--
Roger D. Seielstad - MTS MCSE MS-MVP
Sr. Systems Administrator
Inovis Inc.
-Original Message-
From: Fioon [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday,
Hello everone,
finally got the boss at a side job to scrap MS Proxy 2.0 and put a PIX 515 in.
Exchange 5.5 is running on the same box as Proxy 2.0. i removed Proxy 2.0 and now OWA
5.5 does not work thru my PIX. i have a NAT translation configured for our mail
server and have tcp ports 25
Check for filters on your client.
-Original Message-
From: Bridges, Samantha [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, June 19, 2003 8:34 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: Unread Message Indicator Next To Inbox/Calendar
Good Morning All,
Next to the Inbox icon in the Folder list
OkI will...thank you.
But, what would that have to do with the filters?
Thanks
Samantha
-Original Message-
From: Van Hooser, Chuck [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, June 23, 2003 10:26 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Unread Message Indicator Next To Inbox/Calendar
We had one person who set up a filter to only show read messages. If you
looked at his inbox it was empty but when we cleared the filter he had 800+
unread messages that had been filtered from the view. This may or may not
be related to your problem.
-Original Message-
From: Bridges,
Try this link for starters.
http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb%3Ben-us%3B326856
From: Chyka Robert [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Help with OWA 5.5 after changing firewalls
Date: Mon, 23
Why not IMAP??
Chuck
-Original Message-
From: Fioon [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Sunday, June 22, 2003 10:54 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: .Pst on OWA?
:)
No other way to let OWA users to able to drag their Server Email into their
own pc..
-Original Message-
Hi,
I've been having a problem with one of my Public folders. I have it setup to be used
for contacts. Occationally I will get the Operation failed error message when
clicking on the letter tabs on the right hand side of the Outlook window. I cannot
reproduce the issue at will and the users
We've just started to migrate users from GW to Exchange and some users
fail on calendar items and notes (which are migrated as an all day
appointment). GW notes are different from Exchange notes. We have not
yet figured out what kind of calendar items. Anyone else run into this
who can tell me
not in the US . . . courts ruled a while ago that email is company property.
A policy is good if you want to be *nice* but it is not required to read
employee email . . .
- Original Message -
From: Midgley, Ian [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday,
In some states of the US that is true. In others you must provide due
notice. In some cases even a logon warning is recommended. Otherwise the
company can be liable for civil action. Email does not actually fall in
to the wiretapping statutes, I don't think anyway.
For wiretapping, it is
Wow. So if a manager comes to me (Exchange admin) coz she dating a bloke in
the typing pool and suspects he's two timing her and asks if she can read
all his mail then it's ok for me to let her? Can I read his emails at the
same time? What's my defence when he files a claim against me for
The emails might be the companies property but who is allowed to read them
is a different thing altogether.
Don't confuse your opinion with established law. This is a whole mess of
it depends.
-Original Message-
From: Midgley, Ian [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, June 23, 2003
I'm not confusing my opinion with established law. Give me an example of
anywhere in the world where the scenario I outlined below would be legal?
-Original Message-
From: Slinger, Gary [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 23 June 2003 15:51
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Monitor Email
Florida if you want a US location; England if you prefer the other side of
the pond - DEPENDING on the chain-of-command structure for the given
company. And a few other things. It depends.
-Original Message-
From: Midgley, Ian [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, June 23, 2003
First off, anyone who lets a manager dictate reading emails is a fool. This
type of stuff has to come from the top down.
As an example here, any email monitoring has to be approved by the CEO, who
in turn passes it on to HR, then to me. At that point I do the configuration
and then let whoever
Which happens to be broadly similar to our policy here; coincidentally, I'm
rewriting the operating procedure for this today anyway, and we're going to
require the signoff of a local HR representative, and a line manager.
-Original Message-
From: Martin Blackstone [mailto:[EMAIL
Which is exactly where a defined policy comes into play. To be able to read
someone else's email the company must have an agreed policy in place whether
or not the end user knows about it. That's the only way you can tell whether
you are being asked to do something which you should do without
yawn
-Original Message-
From: Midgley, Ian [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 23 June 2003 17:11
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Monitor Email content
Which is exactly where a defined policy comes into play. To be able to read
someone else's email the company must have an agreed
LOL. I nearly became a lawyer in my younger days and I just miss it. Now
let's see - how's that restore coming along?
-Original Message-
From: Henderson Richard [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 23 June 2003 16:11
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Monitor Email content
yawn
I've just spent the last couple of months doing this so I guess it's all
still buzzing round. Apologies. We also elected for minimum HR and line
manager approval.
-Original Message-
From: Slinger, Gary [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 23 June 2003 16:09
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject:
Are you tied into any of the RBL's, in addition to using the Vamsoft Open
Relay Filter? If so, that's probably why, as hanafos.com is on the FiveTen
RBL. Can you add the domain name to the white-list, instead of the IP addy?
By the entire IP range...not to be checked, what range are you
Yawn? Maybe to you, but anytime you want to come out and play with the big
boys, pal, this is exactly the kind of issue that has to be addressed. Hit
the delete key, or sod off, I don't much care which - this is on topic, and
being discussed in a perfectly reasonable manner.
You're with an
Mmm. One of the potentials that I worked us around was avoiding a local
manager and a local HR person working together to bypass the procedure.
Excessively paranoid, perhaps, but hey - that's what I'm paid for.
-Original Message-
From: Midgley, Ian [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent:
Nice one, a man with a sense of humour...
-Original Message-
From: Slinger, Gary [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 23 June 2003 17:22
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Monitor Email content
Yawn? Maybe to you, but anytime you want to come out and play with the big
boys, pal, this
I'm assuming this is an issue, only if the person has the NAV Corporate
Edition client email plug-in for Outlook installed. We have this version
of the client installed on our desktops, but without the Outlook plugin and
have experienced zero problems to date.
-Original Message-
From:
The question I have is what's the status of this hotfix with
regards to E2k3? Is there an expectation that this
functionality will be included in the RTM release?
Exactly my thoughts. I'm going to run some tests with RC1 to see if it
is included there and post back here.
Cheers:Siegfried
Ha. Now I can see where you got it depends from!
The assumption we accepted was that the line manager should know what her
subordinates were doing and the HR person would ensure that it was business
related. The initial request was from business manager to HR and needed
sanction was required
We are so happy that you've recovered from your bout of insanity.
John Matteson
Geac Corporate ISS
(404) 239 - 2981
Atlanta, Georgia, USA.
-Original Message-
From: Midgley, Ian [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Posted At: Monday, June 23, 2003 12:16 PM
Posted To: Exchange Discussion List
I'm assuming we were all just kidding...
-Original Message-
From: Slinger, Gary [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, June 20, 2003 5:18 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: IIS log Files with wrong date??
Assuming you're not kidding, UTC is the same as GMT is the same as Zulu
Tony,
that did it...i must have missed that article, i had the one for 2000.thanks for
the help!
-Original Message-
From: Tony Hlabse [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, June 23, 2003 11:04 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: Re: Help with OWA 5.5 after changing firewalls
That's a situation which needs to be governed by corproate policies, not the
law.
If either HR or a person's manager asks for access to a mailbox, they are
granted that access.
--
Roger D. Seielstad - MTS MCSE MS-MVP
Sr. Systems
Um, whereas I'm considering studying law now just for the hell of it...
-Original Message-
From: John Matteson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, June 23, 2003 12:43
To: Exchange Discussions
We are so happy that you've recovered from your bout of insanity.
John Matteson
Geac
I agree, and then when an authorized spy (that is, with a signed letter from
the CEO) wants to read someone's mailbox, restore a copy from a backup onto
your recovery server, set up Outlook on a machine in a locked room, and let
the spy have access to it there.
Resist the urge to do the spying
No problem always trying to help others as they have helped me on this list.
From: Chyka Robert [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: Help with OWA 5.5 after changing firewalls
Date: Mon, 23 Jun 2003 13:31:11
Are you an attorney? You might want to be careful dispensing legal advice
if you are not.
Ed Crowley MCSE+Internet MVP
Freelance E-Mail Philosopher
Protecting the world from PSTs and Bricked Backups!T
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
I'm not an attorney, but I play one on TV
-Original Message-
From: Ed Crowley [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, June 23, 2003 11:05 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Monitor Email content
Are you an attorney? You might want to be careful dispensing legal advice
if you are
You play one in your own mind.
Ed Crowley MCSE+Internet MVP
Freelance E-Mail Philosopher
Protecting the world from PSTs and Bricked Backups!T
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Martin Blackstone
Sent: Monday, June 23, 2003 11:09 AM
To:
I've considered becoming a lawyer because I could then criticize lawyers
with standing.
Ed Crowley MCSE+Internet MVP
Freelance E-Mail Philosopher
Protecting the world from PSTs and Bricked Backups!T
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
Thank you for the info.
-Original Message-
From: Dave Mills [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, June 23, 2003 2:24 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [Exchange2000] Possible hotfix for SMTP mail to public
folders as IPM.Note not IPM.Post
I just tested this
Are you a good one at least?
-Original Message-
From: Ed Crowley [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, June 23, 2003 2:53 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Monitor Email content
You play one in your own mind.
Ed Crowley MCSE+Internet MVP
Freelance E-Mail Philosopher
Only if he stays awake long enough to try the case.
--
Roger D. Seielstad - MTS MCSE MS-MVP
Sr. Systems Administrator
Inovis Inc.
-Original Message-
From: Avi Smith-Rapaport [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, June 23,
Of course you do. You live in LA after all.
- Original Message -
From: Martin Blackstone [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, June 23, 2003 2:08 PM
Subject: RE: Monitor Email content
I'm not an attorney, but I play one on TV
-Original
You'd be best off consulting an attorney for your jurisdiction before you go
with that idea. In some jurisdictions that approach could get you in a lot
of trouble. Trust me (see sig block).
Aloha,
-Ben-
Ben M. Schorr, MVP-OneNote, CNA, MCPx4
Director of Information Services
Damon Key Leong
Follow up: doesn't look like it included in Exchange 2003 RC1. Tried it
and it is still IPM.Post...
-Original Message-
From: Siegfried Weber [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, June 23, 2003 6:34 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: IPM.Post VS. IPM.Note
The question
Does anyone know exactly what permissions are needed to run PFINFO without logging any
errors. I am running it on a international org with multiple sites...I am SA admin on
all of the sites and configs that contain PF servers but I am still getting thousands
of errors.
Have you seen this article:
http://support.microsoft.com/?scid=328880
What errors exactly are you getting?
k
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Hatley, Ken
Sent: 23 June 2003 20:57
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: PFINFO question
Does
Are there any dirsync tools available to help export Lotus Notes groups
with members into AD?
Thanks.
_
List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
Web Interface:
Errors are logged in the PFINFO.log preceded by getting folder properties: Error
E_FAIL - Unknown Failure... Yes I saw that article, but I don't think that is my
problem...I did see the one on Address book views, and I did have Outlook Address Book
in the profile. I am rerunning it right now
Look on MS's site. There are some third party ones there If I remember right
besides what MS offers
From: Wade Robinson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Lotus Group members
Date: Mon, 23 Jun 2003 16:09:42 -0400
Is this Org completley 5.5?
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Hatley, Ken
Sent: 23 June 2003 21:13
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: PFINFO question
Errors are logged in the PFINFO.log preceded by getting folder
properties: Error
I once flew on the same plane as Michael Tucker.
Ed Crowley MCSE+Internet MVP
Freelance E-Mail Philosopher
Protecting the world from PSTs and Bricked Backups!T
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Andy David
Sent: Monday, June 23, 2003 12:38
Hey guys we're having a problem here that has become very frustrating --
When we add a new user the email addresses are not being populated. It seems that the
recipient policy is not being applied. This is using the default policy, win2k domain,
exchange 6 SP3. I have tried moving the
Did you dance around the hat chanting incantations first?
Ed Crowley MCSE+Internet MVP
Freelance E-Mail Philosopher
Protecting the world from PSTs and Bricked Backups!T
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Siegfried Weber
Sent: Monday, June
Is there anything in the event log?
Ed Crowley MCSE+Internet MVP
Freelance E-Mail Philosopher
Protecting the world from PSTs and Bricked Backups!T
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Patrick Scribner
Sent: Monday, June 23, 2003 1:24 PM
To:
Yes it is
-Original Message-
From: knighTslayer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, June 23, 2003 3:22 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject:RE: PFINFO question
Is this Org completley 5.5?
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
I sacrificed a chicken. Still no go...
-Original Message-
From: Ed Crowley [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, June 23, 2003 10:25 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: IPM.Post VS. IPM.Note
Did you dance around the hat chanting incantations first?
Ed Crowley
Is there a way under Exchange 5.5 to have a DL which only works for people
in the org and will not work when coming from the outside world? My
management doesn't want a certain DL to be used from an outside
source...like an ex-employee for example...they need it to work for the
people in the
Not for the new accounts that aren't replicating. But I do see this error in there.
Failed to read attribute msExchUserAccountControl from Active Directory for
/o=Westwood/ou=First Administrative Group/cn=Recipients/cn=dcook.
Event ID 9562 which I've looked for in Technet and don't see
Are you doing this to get all the permissions and then to import it
again into another org or and upgrade of you 5.5 org?
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Hatley, Ken
Sent: 23 June 2003 21:37
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: PFINFO
The RUS is responsible for stamping the address on the user object.
-Original Message-
From: Patrick Scribner [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, June 23, 2003 4:24 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: Recipient Policy
Hey guys we're having a problem here that has become very
Change the SMTP address of the DL to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-Original Message-
From: BW Brandt Ward (5320) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Posted At: Monday, June 23, 2003 3:44 PM
Posted To: swynk
Conversation: DL for internal use only
Subject: DL for internal use only
Is there a way under
do you have any duplicate SMTP addresses in your org? they have been known
to trip RUS.
-Original Message-
From: Patrick Scribner [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, June 23, 2003 4:24 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: Recipient Policy
Hey guys we're having a problem here that
No, we are trying to do a cleanup and I have to put together documentation on what we
have before migrating to Ex2000. We have a custom coded application that will do 1way
or 2 way syncs until the migration is complete.
-Original Message-
From: knighTslayer [mailto:[EMAIL
We've tried moving the RUS to another domain controller and telling it to update
now, rebuild and it still isn't putting the stamp there. Is there a service we
could stop that would stop and restart this service.
Thanks,
Patrick Scribner, MCSE
DBA
Westwood College
303-426-7000 x764
[EMAIL
I experienced this issue where there was a mailbox associated with a
disabled user account object... Is that the case here?
-Original Message-
From: Patrick Scribner [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Posted At: Monday, June 23, 2003 3:44 PM
Posted To: swynk
Conversation: Recipient Policy
We have a TON of disabled user accounts out there with mailboxes.!! I bet that is the
issue!
Thanks,
Patrick Scribner, MCSE
DBA
Westwood College
303-426-7000 x764
[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
-Original Message-
From: Chris Scharff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent:
that's a property that gets whacked when a user is disabled. You can
re-instate that property by adding SELF back to the mailbox permissions with
the Full Mailbox Access and Associated External Account rights.
-Original Message-
From: Patrick Scribner [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent:
I used to live just up the street from April Hunter.
- Original Message -
From: Ed Crowley [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, June 23, 2003 1:23 PM
Subject: RE: Monitor Email content
I once flew on the same plane as Michael Tucker.
Ed Crowley
How many sites? Would it be a big job to try and connect to at least
one server in each site to check the permissions of the account you are
using?
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Hatley, Ken
Sent: 23 June 2003 21:50
To: Exchange
No.
-Original Message-
From: Patrick Scribner [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, June 23, 2003 4:53 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Recipient Policy
We've tried moving the RUS to another domain controller and telling it
to update now, rebuild and it still isn't putting
Can't you just remove the SMTP address?
-Original Message-
From: Chris Scharff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, June 23, 2003 4:52 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: DL for internal use only
Change the SMTP address of the DL to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-Original Message-
Yes, but it makes upgrading to E2K a bit more problematic.
-Original Message-
From: Ward, Stuart [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Posted At: Monday, June 23, 2003 4:01 PM
Posted To: swynk
Conversation: DL for internal use only
Subject: RE: DL for internal use only
Can't you just remove the
We're doing this soon - why so?
Thanks
Stu
-Original Message-
From: Chris Scharff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, June 23, 2003 5:03 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: DL for internal use only
Yes, but it makes upgrading to E2K a bit more problematic.
-Original
I'm sorry if this is kind of elementary but I don't see where to do this in the
account properties in AD??
Thanks,
Patrick Scribner, MCSE
DBA
Westwood College
303-426-7000 x764
[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
-Original Message-
From: Fyodorov, Andrey [mailto:[EMAIL
Exchange Advanced Tab, Mailbox Rights.
-Original Message-
From: Patrick Scribner [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, June 23, 2003 5:03 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Recipient Policy
I'm sorry if this is kind of elementary but I don't see where to do this
in the account
Or remove the SMTP address in Exchange 5.5
** Please prefix your subject header with BETA for posts dealing with
Exchange 2003 **
--
Martin Tuip
MVP Exchange
Exchange 2000 List owner
www.exchange-mail.org
www.sharepointserver.com
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
True about that .. so skip my response from a few seconds ago :)
** Please prefix your subject header with BETA for posts dealing with
Exchange 2003 **
--
Martin Tuip
MVP Exchange
Exchange 2000 List owner
www.exchange-mail.org
www.sharepointserver.com
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
I am most concerned with one site that has about 2 public folders. All of the
folders are on 2 servers and I have confirmed my access to that site. I do not have a
mailbox in that site, howerver. I know it asks for a profile for the mapi connection
but I know I can traverse sites...so I
A goat siggi .. no chicken ..
- Original Message -
From: Siegfried Weber [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, June 23, 2003 10:41 PM
Subject: RE: IPM.Post VS. IPM.Note
I sacrificed a chicken. Still no go...
-Original Message-
From: Ed
Even our users that aren't disabled don't have the Associated External Account
rights, and SELF was already checked. What is the best way to disable a user if just
disabling them in AD causes this problem? Should we also reassociate the mailbox with
another account? What do you people do for
hehehe... Yahoo thought this email from Ed was spam...
--- Ed Crowley [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I've considered becoming a lawyer because I could
then criticize lawyers
with standing.
Ed Crowley MCSE+Internet MVP
Freelance E-Mail Philosopher
Protecting the world from PSTs and Bricked
You'd have nothing to lose with a mailbox - mapi connection direct to
that site. Esp. with 20,000 public folders, that's one big ACL!
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Hatley, Ken
Sent: 23 June 2003 22:17
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject:
That one is the bulk of the PF's for that Org and I have confirmed that I am SA in all
of the Sites that house PF's. You are probably correct in that I should create a
mailbox on the site that has the most of the folders, but I still should not be having
a problem...I know that I had a guy run
What does the app log say on that target server in that site? Does it
moan about permissions at all? Are these folders replicated to other
sites and do you get the same problems for those folders in other sites?
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
All I bringing up a new Exchange 2k server to replace my Notes server but
am having a issue with my boss. He wants to keep both systems alive and
running together with the same email addresses ands same domain name. He
wants to just migrate a few people at a time into the new exchange server,
You need a lotus notes directory connector I guess.
http://www.microsoft.com/exchange/techinfo/interop/NotesConnector.asp
k
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Ronk
Sent: 23 June 2003 22:42
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: Exchange 2000
Because all objects in E2K must have an SMTP address.
-Original Message-
From: Ward, Stuart [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Posted At: Monday, June 23, 2003 4:04 PM
Posted To: swynk
Conversation: DL for internal use only
Subject: RE: DL for internal use only
We're doing this soon - why so?
I had a customer who had Lotus Notes in-house and we hosted Exchange 2000
for them. They had 150 users on Exchange and a bunch more on LN.
They also had an NT Mail server in-house (Gordano NT Mail). MX records were
pointing to NT Mail server. NT Mail server had a routing table which defined
the
in AD Users and Computers do View-Advanced
-Original Message-
From: Patrick Scribner [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, June 23, 2003 5:03 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Recipient Policy
I'm sorry if this is kind of elementary but I don't see where to do this in
the
After you disable a user, go to the Mailbox Rights and bring back SELF. Then
mailbox will start accepting mail and you will be able to allow others to
view the mailbox. Without SELF, mailbox will not accept mail (mail will
bounce) and others will not be able to view the mailbox contents despite
1 - 100 of 105 matches
Mail list logo
