Storage limts not working
Exchange 2k sp3. A user went over our storage limits and cant send. I changed her account so she doesn't have any limits until she sends out these important emails while she is on the road. The exchange server isn't reflecting the change though even after I ran the RUS with no errors? Any ideas? Thanks. _ 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 unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Storage limts not working
Does this fit the bill? http://support.microsoft.com/?id=327378 Neil -Original Message- From: Woodruff, Michael [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Posted At: 15 August 2003 14:44 Posted To: Swynk Exchange List Conversation: Storage limts not working Subject: Storage limts not working Exchange 2k sp3. A user went over our storage limits and cant send. I changed her account so she doesn't have any limits until she sends out these important emails while she is on the road. The exchange server isn't reflecting the change though even after I ran the RUS with no errors? Any ideas? Thanks. _ 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 unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] __ This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual to whom it is addressed. Any view or opinions presented are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of Silversands. If you have received this email in error, please contact our Support Desk immediately on 01202 360360 or email [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.silversands.co.uk _ 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 unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Norton stuck on version 8/6/2003
I'd advise you to try Symantec's Knowledge Base: http://www.symantec.com/techsupp/enterprise/ I'd also advise you to look in the event logs on the affected machines for any clues. Les Bessant [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sanderson Townend Gilbert -Original Message- From: Orin Rehorst [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 14 August 2003 21:33 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Norton stuck on version 8/6/2003 Have Norton Enterprise AV. Many users stuck on ver 8/6/2003 instead of being at 8/13/2003. Please advise. TIA 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 unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] This e-mail has been scanned for all viruses by Star Internet. The information in this communication and any attachments is confidential and may be legally privileged. It is intended solely for the addressee. If you are not the intended recipient any use, review, dissemination, distribution or copying of this information is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error please notify us immediately on 0191 261 2681 and delete the original message and any copies of it. Any opinions, conclusions or other information in this message that do not relate to the official business of Sanderson Townend Gilbert are neither given nor endorsed by the firm. This e-mail has been scanned for all viruses by Star Internet. The service is powered by MessageLabs. For more information on a proactive anti-virus service working around the clock, around the globe, visit: http://www.star.net.uk _ 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 unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Storage limts not working
That would probably be it.. Thanks, didn't see that one. I tried to run the post SP3 patch, but it hosed my server and had to roll back out. Restarting the IS is not an option so I guess they are screwed. -Original Message- From: Neil Hobson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, August 15, 2003 9:52 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Storage limts not working Does this fit the bill? http://support.microsoft.com/?id=327378 Neil -Original Message- From: Woodruff, Michael [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Posted At: 15 August 2003 14:44 Posted To: Swynk Exchange List Conversation: Storage limts not working Subject: Storage limts not working Exchange 2k sp3. A user went over our storage limits and cant send. I changed her account so she doesn't have any limits until she sends out these important emails while she is on the road. The exchange server isn't reflecting the change though even after I ran the RUS with no errors? Any ideas? Thanks. _ 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 unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] __ This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual to whom it is addressed. Any view or opinions presented are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of Silversands. If you have received this email in error, please contact our Support Desk immediately on 01202 360360 or email [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.silversands.co.uk _ 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 unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ 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 unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Abuse@[x.x.x.x] - Blacklisted
We did add this to our reroute box, hit apply and OK, then restarted the IMC service. It still doesn't work. However, I am wondering if I need to go into raw mode to adjust the routing tab address? I will try this later today. Thanks for the help. Damian Scoles Senior Technical Analyst MCSE+I, CCNP -Original Message- From: Roger Seielstad [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, August 15, 2003 6:02 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - Blacklisted Ahh - that's part of your problem then. The reroute option means you're going to have to add [x.x.x.x] as a valid inbound address, in the same place as the domain name is now. -- Roger D. Seielstad - MTS MCSE MS-MVP Sr. Systems Administrator Inovis Inc. -Original Message- From: Scoles, Damian [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, August 14, 2003 4:57 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - Blacklisted The IMC is set to route traffic only for the internal domain and only if the traffic is inbound. [Routing Tab - Reroute incoming SMTP mail (required for PP3/IMAP4 support) is checked. Below this is a box that contains 'ourdomain.cominbound'. Hope that clears things up. Damian Scoles Senior Technical Analyst MCSE+I, CCNP -Original Message- From: Roger Seielstad [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, August 14, 2003 3:37 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - Blacklisted When you say the IMS is set to only route mail for your domain, does that mean its set to relay and the domain is listed, or is it set to not relay at all? -- Roger D. Seielstad - MTS MCSE MS-MVP Sr. Systems Administrator Inovis Inc. -Original Message- From: Scoles, Damian [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, August 14, 2003 4:34 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - Blacklisted We are having problems removing a client from a black list and need a little help. This particular blacklister wants us to have an email address of [EMAIL PROTECTED] where x.x.x.x refers to the IP of our Exchange server. RFC 1123 talks about this in some detail. My only problem is that I can't get it to work. We tried adding an SMTP address for a users account (the user who will be responsible for these emails. This failed. I then added the SMTP address to the server under Directory Services. This failed. I then added it to our IMC as it is set to only route mail for our domain (to prevent the server from being used as a relay point). This also fails. All we get is that the server prohibits relaying. Also, raw mode (recommended by Microsoft) shows the address to be correct. What am I missing? Here is our setup: Exchange 5.5 SP4 Windows NT SP6a Thanks for any help you can provide. Damian Scoles Senior Technical Analyst MCSE+I, CCNP _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchanget ext_mode=lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchanget ext_mode= lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ 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 unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ 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 unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ 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 unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Abuse@[x.x.x.x] - Blacklisted
Hmmm, I spent a fair amount of time trying to make this work in MSX 5.5, and could never make it work. I was told by various members of this list that it just was not supported. I'll admit that I've never seen Q194742, though. -Original Message- From: Roger Seielstad [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, August 15, 2003 6:00 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - Blacklisted Exchange 5.5 has always accepted @IP addresses - Q194742: SUMMARY In Exchange Server versions 4.0 and 5.0, it is not possible to send messages to a user by using the following format: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Address] However, in accordance with for Request for Comments (RFC) 821 and 821bis, this is a valid addressing format. Microsoft recognizes the need for compliance to this RFC specification. Microsoft Exchange Server version 5.5 allows for this addressing method and therefore allows messages to be sent by using this format. The feature involves a modification to the Exchange Server Internet Mail Service to understand IPv4 literals. The Internet Mail Service is now capable of accepting mail inbound, delivering outbound, and rerouting mail addressed in the format [EMAIL PROTECTED] Address], also known as IPv4 literal. NOTE: The admin does not allow you to create a proxy of the form '[EMAIL PROTECTED] Address]' (it strips the brackets). For additional information, click the article number below to view the article in the Microsoft Knowledge Base: 193316 XFOR: How to create addresses of form '[EMAIL PROTECTED] Address] -- Roger D. Seielstad - MTS MCSE MS-MVP Sr. Systems Administrator Inovis Inc. -Original Message- From: Ken Cornetet [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, August 14, 2003 4:56 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - Blacklisted Unless something has changed in SP4 (we never made it all the way to SP4), Exchange 5.5 does not allow email in the form [EMAIL PROTECTED] I have in the past argued this to be non RFC compliant behavior, but some very sharp people on this list, who's opinions I respect very much, have argued otherwise. I will admit the RFC is not unambiguous this point due to poor wording. -Original Message- From: Scoles, Damian [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, August 14, 2003 3:34 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - Blacklisted We are having problems removing a client from a black list and need a little help. This particular blacklister wants us to have an email address of [EMAIL PROTECTED] where x.x.x.x refers to the IP of our Exchange server. RFC 1123 talks about this in some detail. My only problem is that I can't get it to work. We tried adding an SMTP address for a users account (the user who will be responsible for these emails. This failed. I then added the SMTP address to the server under Directory Services. This failed. I then added it to our IMC as it is set to only route mail for our domain (to prevent the server from being used as a relay point). This also fails. All we get is that the server prohibits relaying. Also, raw mode (recommended by Microsoft) shows the address to be correct. What am I missing? Here is our setup: Exchange 5.5 SP4 Windows NT SP6a Thanks for any help you can provide. Damian Scoles Senior Technical Analyst MCSE+I, CCNP _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchanget ext_mode= lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ 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 unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ 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 unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ 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 unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Exchange 2000 and Backup Exec 9.0
We have reached a point where we must upgrade from Backup Exec 8.6 to Backup Exec 9.0 for the entire organization. Backup Exec 8.6 doesn't support Windows 2003. We have 2 backup servers that perform backups. The backup agent must be upgrade on all our servers. Sadly, this requires the 8.6 version to be uninstalled, the server be rebooted, and the 9.0 agent installed. Which bring me to my question (finally): Has anybody had any issue upgrading their Exchange 2000 SP3/Windows 2K SP3 machines to Backup Exec 9.0? Veritas's knowledge base didn't show anything but there is a lot of real world experience on this list. Thanks, - Matt Matthew Bailey LAN Engineer CSK Auto, Inc. Voice: 602.631.7486 Fax: 602.294.7486 _ 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 unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
3rd Party SPAM block companies besides edoxs (Brightmail)
Do you know of any good 3rd Party SPAM block companies besides edoxs ( they use Brightmail)? TIA Regards, Orin Orin Rehorst _ 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 unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: 3rd Party SPAM block companies besides edoxs (Brightmail)
MessageLabs -Original Message- From: Orin Rehorst [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Posted At: Friday, August 15, 2003 9:49 AM Posted To: swynk Conversation: 3rd Party SPAM block companies besides edoxs (Brightmail) Subject: 3rd Party SPAM block companies besides edoxs (Brightmail) Do you know of any good 3rd Party SPAM block companies besides edoxs ( they use Brightmail)? TIA Regards, Orin Orin Rehorst _ 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 unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ 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 unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: 3rd Party SPAM block companies besides edoxs (Brightmail)
GFI has a decent one. Also gives you a few more features like autoreply disclaimers as well. -Original Message- From: Chris Scharff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, August 15, 2003 9:58 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: 3rd Party SPAM block companies besides edoxs (Brightmail) MessageLabs -Original Message- From: Orin Rehorst [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Posted At: Friday, August 15, 2003 9:49 AM Posted To: swynk Conversation: 3rd Party SPAM block companies besides edoxs (Brightmail) Subject: 3rd Party SPAM block companies besides edoxs (Brightmail) Do you know of any good 3rd Party SPAM block companies besides edoxs ( they use Brightmail)? TIA Regards, Orin Orin Rehorst _ 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 unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ 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 unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] The information transmitted is intended only for the person or entity to which it is addressed and may contain proprietary, confidential and/or legally privileged material. Any review, retransmission, dissemination or other use of, or taking of any action in reliance upon, this information by persons or entities other than the intended recipient is prohibited. If you received this in error, please contact the sender and delete the material from all computers. _ 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 unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Exchange 2K and MS CRM Router issue
Our company is testing Microsoft's CRM application, the problem we seem to be having deals with the CRM router service. We can send email through the CRM and recieve via Outlook but the message never makes it back to CRM. We currently have an escalated case with Microsoft and they have yet to figure out why it is not funcioning correctly. Has anyone else experienced this? Any help would be greatly appreciated. Thanks in advance. dave _ 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 unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Opnion on Server Size
I have 3 field offices with about 80 users each, that currently have HP E60 servers deployed running Exchange 5.5 with no complaints. Those servers are P3 500 single cpu's, with 512mb ram, and 4 18.2GB 7200rpm disks running raid 5. Currently we don't have any speed issues. To simplify our coming upgrade process to Exchange 2003, I am considering reconfiguring the following server spec for each office, and shipping them to the offices, and them moving the mailboxes to the new servers. I am looking to buy the following spec: Dell PowerEdge 400SC, P4 2.8ghz with 512mb ram. For storage, I am going to install an SATA raid controller for mirroring and 2, 120gb SATA disks. I think this spec should do quite nicely for my users at these sites, my only doubts are that there might not be enough disk performance to keep them happy. Thoughts? Miles --- Miles Holt, MCP Network Engineer Summit Marketing [EMAIL PROTECTED] 770-303-0426 --- Show me a completely smooth operation and I'll show you someone who's covering mistakes. Real boats rock. - Frank Herbert, Chapterhouse: Dune _ 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 unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Abuse@[x.x.x.x] - Blacklisted
Ahh - that's part of your problem then. The reroute option means you're going to have to add [x.x.x.x] as a valid inbound address, in the same place as the domain name is now. -- Roger D. Seielstad - MTS MCSE MS-MVP Sr. Systems Administrator Inovis Inc. -Original Message- From: Scoles, Damian [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, August 14, 2003 4:57 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - Blacklisted The IMC is set to route traffic only for the internal domain and only if the traffic is inbound. [Routing Tab - Reroute incoming SMTP mail (required for PP3/IMAP4 support) is checked. Below this is a box that contains 'ourdomain.cominbound'. Hope that clears things up. Damian Scoles Senior Technical Analyst MCSE+I, CCNP -Original Message- From: Roger Seielstad [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, August 14, 2003 3:37 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - Blacklisted When you say the IMS is set to only route mail for your domain, does that mean its set to relay and the domain is listed, or is it set to not relay at all? -- Roger D. Seielstad - MTS MCSE MS-MVP Sr. Systems Administrator Inovis Inc. -Original Message- From: Scoles, Damian [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, August 14, 2003 4:34 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - Blacklisted We are having problems removing a client from a black list and need a little help. This particular blacklister wants us to have an email address of [EMAIL PROTECTED] where x.x.x.x refers to the IP of our Exchange server. RFC 1123 talks about this in some detail. My only problem is that I can't get it to work. We tried adding an SMTP address for a users account (the user who will be responsible for these emails. This failed. I then added the SMTP address to the server under Directory Services. This failed. I then added it to our IMC as it is set to only route mail for our domain (to prevent the server from being used as a relay point). This also fails. All we get is that the server prohibits relaying. Also, raw mode (recommended by Microsoft) shows the address to be correct. What am I missing? Here is our setup: Exchange 5.5 SP4 Windows NT SP6a Thanks for any help you can provide. Damian Scoles Senior Technical Analyst MCSE+I, CCNP _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchanget ext_mode=lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchanget ext_mode= lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ 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 unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ 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 unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Trend? (Was Exchange Services).
I have to admit that Trend does tend to be the better product out there (from what I have heard and seen). I know Groupshield at a VERY intimate level (more then I would like to admit on this list) and I would recommend staying away from it personally. One thing to point out about Trend (and any AV vendor really) is that when you go to buy their Exchange product they will try to tell you to put the Exchange AV product on every Exchange server (many even go so far as to put it in their documentation). The problem with this is that if they are using the AVAPI (2.0 and below) then it only scans MAPI transactions (not SMTP). So putting an Exchange AV solution on a bridge head that just routes SMTP mail is worthless (again..as long as it is using the AVAPI v2.0 and below). Exchange 2003 includes version 2.5, which allows for scanning of SMTP transactions, at which point it does then make sense to put an AV solution on a bridge head server. Just wanted to make this point because I have seen a number of companies paying for licenses for an Exchange AV solution on a bridgehead server that uses the AVAPI. Anyhow...Enjoy Trend if that is what you get...it is definitely a good product. For those of you who care, after many sleepless nights, it turns out my problem came down to good old Groupshield for Exchange. Needless to say it's gone now. Is Scanmail still the defacto? I would like to get the best antivirus package out there. Thanks, Scott. _ 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 unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Trend? (Was Exchange Services).
IIRC the reroute via store option may have some effect on the ability to scan bridgehead traffic. For my org, pricing for most Exchange AV products has historically been per seat rather than per server. YMMV -Original Message- From: Steve [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Posted At: Friday, August 15, 2003 12:07 PM Posted To: swynk Conversation: Trend? (Was Exchange Services). Subject: Re: Trend? (Was Exchange Services). I have to admit that Trend does tend to be the better product out there (from what I have heard and seen). I know Groupshield at a VERY intimate level (more then I would like to admit on this list) and I would recommend staying away from it personally. One thing to point out about Trend (and any AV vendor really) is that when you go to buy their Exchange product they will try to tell you to put the Exchange AV product on every Exchange server (many even go so far as to put it in their documentation). The problem with this is that if they are using the AVAPI (2.0 and below) then it only scans MAPI transactions (not SMTP). So putting an Exchange AV solution on a bridge head that just routes SMTP mail is worthless (again..as long as it is using the AVAPI v2.0 and below). Exchange 2003 includes version 2.5, which allows for scanning of SMTP transactions, at which point it does then make sense to put an AV solution on a bridge head server. Just wanted to make this point because I have seen a number of companies paying for licenses for an Exchange AV solution on a bridgehead server that uses the AVAPI. Anyhow...Enjoy Trend if that is what you get...it is definitely a good product. For those of you who care, after many sleepless nights, it turns out my problem came down to good old Groupshield for Exchange. Needless to say it's gone now. Is Scanmail still the defacto? I would like to get the best antivirus package out there. Thanks, Scott. _ 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 unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ 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 unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Calendar Problems
We are using Exchange 5.5 on nt4.0 on 6 different domains(really sad) We have a calendar created on public folder store on a server in the eastern time zone on one domain. The users use it to show when different technology users will be off for the day or sick. We have a user adding an appointment from a server/client in central time zone on another domain. When The appointment is created in this calendar and it is made a all day event the originator's view shows as a single day. When anyone from the eastern time zone server views it it is shown as a 2 day event(forward a day). The reverse happens to the view if the originator is from the eastern server/client except the user in the central time zones views it as a 2day event(backwards a day) Let me know if you have any ideas why and or if there is a correction for this. Thanks Kent _ 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 unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Trend? (Was Exchange Services).
Just wanted to make this point because I have seen a number of companies paying for licenses for an Exchange AV solution on a bridgehead server that uses the AVAPI. You're obviously not intimately familiar with Trend's licensing model.;) They license on a per user not per machine basis. So, pay for 1000 users, and install it on as many servers as necessary. You are correct, however, that they don't scan SMTP directly at that level - which is part of the reason we run Interscan VirusWall as a front end. -- Roger D. Seielstad - MTS MCSE MS-MVP Sr. Systems Administrator Inovis Inc. -Original Message- From: Steve [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, August 15, 2003 1:07 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Re: Trend? (Was Exchange Services). I have to admit that Trend does tend to be the better product out there (from what I have heard and seen). I know Groupshield at a VERY intimate level (more then I would like to admit on this list) and I would recommend staying away from it personally. One thing to point out about Trend (and any AV vendor really) is that when you go to buy their Exchange product they will try to tell you to put the Exchange AV product on every Exchange server (many even go so far as to put it in their documentation). The problem with this is that if they are using the AVAPI (2.0 and below) then it only scans MAPI transactions (not SMTP). So putting an Exchange AV solution on a bridge head that just routes SMTP mail is worthless (again..as long as it is using the AVAPI v2.0 and below). Exchange 2003 includes version 2.5, which allows for scanning of SMTP transactions, at which point it does then make sense to put an AV solution on a bridge head server. Just wanted to make this point because I have seen a number of companies paying for licenses for an Exchange AV solution on a bridgehead server that uses the AVAPI. Anyhow...Enjoy Trend if that is what you get...it is definitely a good product. For those of you who care, after many sleepless nights, it turns out my problem came down to good old Groupshield for Exchange. Needless to say it's gone now. Is Scanmail still the defacto? I would like to get the best antivirus package out there. Thanks, Scott. _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchanget ext_mode=lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ 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 unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: 3rd Party SPAM block companies besides edoxs (Brightmail)
On Fri, 15 Aug 2003, at 9:48am, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Do you know of any good 3rd Party SPAM block companies besides edoxs ... My ISP at home uses Postini (www.postini.com). They seem to do a good job. No idea if they are what you're looking for. -- Ben Scott [EMAIL PROTECTED] | The opinions expressed in this message are those of the author and do | | not represent the views or policy of any other person or organization. | | All information is provided without warranty of any kind. | _ 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 unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Trend? (Was Exchange Services).
Your right...I'm not (I honestly forgot what the model was)but another way to approach it would be to say it is a piece of software installed on a server that does not need to be :-). I suppose my post should have been based on that as opposed to the licensing model (which I did not mean to say I was just talking about Trend when talking about the licensing model...I ment to make a more general statement about installing unneccesary software). Oh well. On Fri, 2003-08-15 at 12:57, Roger Seielstad wrote: Just wanted to make this point because I have seen a number of companies paying for licenses for an Exchange AV solution on a bridgehead server that uses the AVAPI. You're obviously not intimately familiar with Trend's licensing model.;) They license on a per user not per machine basis. So, pay for 1000 users, and install it on as many servers as necessary. You are correct, however, that they don't scan SMTP directly at that level - which is part of the reason we run Interscan VirusWall as a front end. -- Roger D. Seielstad - MTS MCSE MS-MVP Sr. Systems Administrator Inovis Inc. -Original Message- From: Steve [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, August 15, 2003 1:07 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Re: Trend? (Was Exchange Services). I have to admit that Trend does tend to be the better product out there (from what I have heard and seen). I know Groupshield at a VERY intimate level (more then I would like to admit on this list) and I would recommend staying away from it personally. One thing to point out about Trend (and any AV vendor really) is that when you go to buy their Exchange product they will try to tell you to put the Exchange AV product on every Exchange server (many even go so far as to put it in their documentation). The problem with this is that if they are using the AVAPI (2.0 and below) then it only scans MAPI transactions (not SMTP). So putting an Exchange AV solution on a bridge head that just routes SMTP mail is worthless (again..as long as it is using the AVAPI v2.0 and below). Exchange 2003 includes version 2.5, which allows for scanning of SMTP transactions, at which point it does then make sense to put an AV solution on a bridge head server. Just wanted to make this point because I have seen a number of companies paying for licenses for an Exchange AV solution on a bridgehead server that uses the AVAPI. Anyhow...Enjoy Trend if that is what you get...it is definitely a good product. For those of you who care, after many sleepless nights, it turns out my problem came down to good old Groupshield for Exchange. Needless to say it's gone now. Is Scanmail still the defacto? I would like to get the best antivirus package out there. Thanks, Scott. _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchanget ext_mode=lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ 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=〈=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ 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 unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Calendar Problems
Well, a -to- appointment in Mountain Time would be 0200-0200 Eastern Time. You can check this, but I think the newest versions of Outlook handle this better. 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 Kent Sent: Friday, August 15, 2003 12:49 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Calendar Problems We are using Exchange 5.5 on nt4.0 on 6 different domains(really sad) We have a calendar created on public folder store on a server in the eastern time zone on one domain. The users use it to show when different technology users will be off for the day or sick. We have a user adding an appointment from a server/client in central time zone on another domain. When The appointment is created in this calendar and it is made a all day event the originator's view shows as a single day. When anyone from the eastern time zone server views it it is shown as a 2 day event(forward a day). The reverse happens to the view if the originator is from the eastern server/client except the user in the central time zones views it as a 2day event(backwards a day) Let me know if you have any ideas why and or if there is a correction for this. Thanks Kent _ 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 unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ 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 unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Abuse@[x.x.x.x] - Blacklisted
We added the [x.x.x.x] to the IMC and it worked fine. Apparently there was some miscommunication about what to put in the box and x.x.x.x was entered the first time. Now the client is off the blacklist. FYI, even though the MS article says the Exchange admin program strips off the [], it did not for this client. He entered another SMTP address for his mail account with the [x.x.x.x] format and verified it was correct via the raw mode of the admin program [admin /r]. Thanks again for all your help. Damian Scoles Senior Technical Analyst MCSE+I, CCNP -Original Message- From: Ken Cornetet [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, August 15, 2003 9:30 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - Blacklisted Hmmm, I spent a fair amount of time trying to make this work in MSX 5.5, and could never make it work. I was told by various members of this list that it just was not supported. I'll admit that I've never seen Q194742, though. -Original Message- From: Roger Seielstad [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, August 15, 2003 6:00 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - Blacklisted Exchange 5.5 has always accepted @IP addresses - Q194742: SUMMARY In Exchange Server versions 4.0 and 5.0, it is not possible to send messages to a user by using the following format: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Address] However, in accordance with for Request for Comments (RFC) 821 and 821bis, this is a valid addressing format. Microsoft recognizes the need for compliance to this RFC specification. Microsoft Exchange Server version 5.5 allows for this addressing method and therefore allows messages to be sent by using this format. The feature involves a modification to the Exchange Server Internet Mail Service to understand IPv4 literals. The Internet Mail Service is now capable of accepting mail inbound, delivering outbound, and rerouting mail addressed in the format [EMAIL PROTECTED] Address], also known as IPv4 literal. NOTE: The admin does not allow you to create a proxy of the form '[EMAIL PROTECTED] Address]' (it strips the brackets). For additional information, click the article number below to view the article in the Microsoft Knowledge Base: 193316 XFOR: How to create addresses of form '[EMAIL PROTECTED] Address] -- Roger D. Seielstad - MTS MCSE MS-MVP Sr. Systems Administrator Inovis Inc. -Original Message- From: Ken Cornetet [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, August 14, 2003 4:56 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - Blacklisted Unless something has changed in SP4 (we never made it all the way to SP4), Exchange 5.5 does not allow email in the form [EMAIL PROTECTED] I have in the past argued this to be non RFC compliant behavior, but some very sharp people on this list, who's opinions I respect very much, have argued otherwise. I will admit the RFC is not unambiguous this point due to poor wording. -Original Message- From: Scoles, Damian [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, August 14, 2003 3:34 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - Blacklisted We are having problems removing a client from a black list and need a little help. This particular blacklister wants us to have an email address of [EMAIL PROTECTED] where x.x.x.x refers to the IP of our Exchange server. RFC 1123 talks about this in some detail. My only problem is that I can't get it to work. We tried adding an SMTP address for a users account (the user who will be responsible for these emails. This failed. I then added the SMTP address to the server under Directory Services. This failed. I then added it to our IMC as it is set to only route mail for our domain (to prevent the server from being used as a relay point). This also fails. All we get is that the server prohibits relaying. Also, raw mode (recommended by Microsoft) shows the address to be correct. What am I missing? Here is our setup: Exchange 5.5 SP4 Windows NT SP6a Thanks for any help you can provide. Damian Scoles Senior Technical Analyst MCSE+I, CCNP _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchanget ext_mode= lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ 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 unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
CDOEXM / ACL Permissions Outlook 2002/Exchange 2000
I have been able to set permissions on individual folders (delegate access) using ACL and CDO 1.21. I have also been able to set 'Mailbox permissions' for the entire mailbox using CDOEXM (sp2 and up) with the MailboxRights property. My question is can I set folder permissions with CDOEXM? or with anything besides ACL? I want to be able to set specific folder permissions with CDOEXM but all I have seen is how to set mailbox rights (like you see in the Active Directory Users, Advanced, Mailbox rights). I appreciate any help you can offer. Thanks, Bill _ 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 unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Exchange 2000 and Backup Exec 9.0
Matt, Yes, we had a problem with BE 9.0 on our E2K SP3/W2K SP3 servers. After installing BE 9.0, some users could not access public folders and personal folders that they could access previous to the upgrade. We thought we had a bad install so we reinstalled BE 9.0. The result was the same, just different users were affected. Called Veritas and they had no clue. Searched Google and found another company with the same problem. Per their recommendation we installed BE 9.0 without the Advanced File option and everything seems to be OK now. I hope this helps. David Klindt AmerisourceBergen == We have reached a point where we must upgrade from Backup Exec 8.6 to Backup Exec 9.0 for the entire organization. Backup Exec 8.6 doesn't support Windows 2003. We have 2 backup servers that perform backups. The backup agent must be upgrade on all our servers. Sadly, this requires the 8.6 version to be uninstalled, the server be rebooted, and the 9.0 agent installed. Which bring me to my question (finally): Has anybody had any issue upgrading their Exchange 2000 SP3/Windows 2K SP3 machines to Backup Exec 9.0? Veritas's knowledge base didn't show anything but there is a lot of real world experience on this list. Thanks, - Matt Matthew Bailey LAN Engineer CSK Auto, Inc. Voice: 602.631.7486 Fax: 602.294.7486 _ 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 unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
