PM
Subject: RE: blank emails
Yes we have a pix firewall
-Original Message-
From: Daniel Chenault [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Monday, August 13, 2001 2:28 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: Re: blank emails
PIX involved?
- Original Message -
From: Michael Ahlfont
...an email address for which the Exchange Server isn't authoritative.
- Original Message -
From: Tom Meunier [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, August 13, 2001 5:04 PM
Subject: RE: moving/renaming user.
oh yeah. you could also tell him to try
What does your Exchange administrator say?
- Original Message -
From: Aristotle Zoulas [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, August 14, 2001 11:06 AM
Subject: distribution list
Exchange 5.5.
I neeed to take someone off a distribution list. Where
It has more to do with the client side than the server side. The range on
the client can be closed down but one then runs the risk of causing other
services to fail.
This is nothing new. Open an ftp connection to a server somewhere and take a
netmon trace. Your packets are going out to port 21
Exchange uses UDP for new mail notifications which most routers have blocked
by default.
(psst: read the FAQ)
- Original Message -
From: Kevin Derby [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, August 14, 2001 10:58 PM
Subject: Re: New mail notification
Starting point:
http://developer.netscape.com/docs/manuals/security/sslin/contents.htm
- Original Message -
From: Joshua M. Folcik [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, August 15, 2001 12:49 PM
Subject: Netscape and IMAP
This has been a bit of a
It means the remote host is, er, unreachable.
That is to say: the destination domain was located and resolved in DNS but
the server can't be reached/isn't responding.
- Original Message -
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, August 15, 2001
WAG: your AV is scanning the \exchsrvr directory structure.
- Original Message -
From: Mike Castillo [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, August 14, 2001 2:47 PM
Subject: Event 2125
On of my servers gets an an MTA database server error. A
Their server is down or a router before it is fubar.
72 hours by default (configurable in the IMS; exactly where is an exercise
for the reader)
- Original Message -
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, August 15, 2001 2:53 PM
Subject: RE:
It's not server-side. There is a hidden folder in the client that, by
default, is enabled and is accessed by highlighting the Deleted Items folder
and selecting Tools:Recover Items. There is an optional reg key for it as
well.
The other alternative is to do a restore of the last backup to a
FAQ
- Original Message -
From: Bowles, John L. [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, August 20, 2001 12:42 PM
Subject: IMS Queue
All,
I have a whole bunch of emails piling up in my IMS. The Orignator of all
these messages sayWith nothing in
The logfiles show the _attempt_ to infect.
Symantec's scanner is broken.
- Original Message -
From: Chris Haaker [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, August 20, 2001 12:12 PM
Subject: Re: Code red
It also shows up in the logfiles for w3svc and
EVERYTHING gets logged.
- Original Message -
From: Chris Haaker [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, August 20, 2001 12:29 PM
Subject: Re: Code red
This appears in my log just once:
2001-08-20 16:28:41 61.187.115.20 - 172.17.1.217 80 GET
Read the FAQ again.
- Original Message -
From: Mitchell Mike [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, August 21, 2001 3:52 PM
Subject: Over limits message
I have read the FAQ but I did not see anything about the following:
Can the message that
The MTA is unable to determine the state (inbound, outbound) of the IMS.
Thus the MTA will still deliver messages into the IMS' hidden mailbox for
external delivery if certain conditions are met. Since the IMS was set to
inbound only, those messages were never looked at. Not until you set it to
said it was one of his finer pieces of
work,
but the recipient wasn't his boss at the time. Oopsy.
On Thu, 23 Aug 2001, Daniel Chenault wrote:
The MTA is unable to determine the state (inbound, outbound) of the IMS.
Thus the MTA will still deliver messages into the IMS' hidden mailbox
admins. I cannot seem to get out of the If it isn't broken, it doesn't
have enough features yet mode. If I would have known *better* I should
have checked the queues before making the change to the correct config.
Beat me and call me Edna.
On Thu, 23 Aug 2001, Daniel Chenault wrote
Single site? No problem at all. Just do it.
- Original Message -
From: Debysingh, Bruce [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, August 27, 2001 11:49 AM
Subject: Changing the Exchange Admin. Password (Service Account Password)
Hello All,
I need to
thing, this.
[2]A political thing, that. It might have ~50 service accounts :(
Paul
bcctc
-Original Message-
From: Daniel Chenault [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Monday, August 27, 2001 12:55 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: Re: Changing the Exchange Admin. Password
: Monday, August 27, 2001 5:35 PM
Subject: RE: New Worm on the loose
Check your hard drive for FishTaco.exe
-Original Message-
From: Daniel Chenault [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Monday, August 27, 2001 6:28 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: Re: New Worm on the loose
I visited
Ex5.5 already has two information stores; one for mailboxes, one for public
folders. But that is all it has; you need Ex2K to get more.
- Original Message -
From: James Casstevens [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, August 28, 2001 11:42 AM
Leave DNS alone and change the IP address of the new box to that of the old
box.
- Original Message -
From: Pfefferkorn, Pete (PFEFFEPE) [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, August 28, 2001 1:03 PM
Subject: Removal of First Server in Site Question.
28, 2001 1:08 PM
Subject: RE: Removal of First Server in Site Question.
Actually, I forgot to mention we're cutting over to a new network, so all
the IP addresses are changing for all the servers.
-Original Message-
From: Daniel Chenault [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Tuesday
FAQ
- Original Message -
From: Mario [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, August 28, 2001 10:50 AM
Subject: exchange 5.5 e-mail disclaimer
Is their a way to add a disclaimer to all internal and outgoing e-mails in
Exchange 5.5 SP4.
Thanks
FAQ
- Original Message -
From: Milan [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, August 28, 2001 2:22 AM
Subject: Blocking Outside Mail
I wish to disallow certain users to send mail outside my domain. they are
anly allowed to send mail messages
leaning toward SYSTEMD which is the IMC and PDC,
since
it will be on the same segment as the main Exchange servers. It also is
our
OWA access point as well.
-Original Message-
From: Daniel Chenault [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Tuesday, August 28, 2001 2:18 PM
To: Exchange
It is not recommended to have a single site 5.5 span domains. In this
context the 2K server would be considered a 5.5 server.
- Original Message -
From: Bowles, John L. [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, August 28, 2001 2:05 PM
Subject: EXCH2K in
Since they are connecting from home they presumably have an ISP. They can
use the ISP's SMTP server.
- Original Message -
From: Alex Lazen [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, August 28, 2001 2:19 PM
Subject: Exchange 2000 Relay
Preventing mail
If you followed the Q article for removing the first server AND all clients
have connected and been redirected to their new server, all is well. The
only thing you may run into is if anyone had any pointers in their PF
Favorites pointing to that old server.
- Original Message -
From:
FAQ
- Original Message -
From:
Saul
Gonzalez
To: Exchange Discussions
Sent: Tuesday, August 28, 2001 7:09
PM
Subject: RE: Enterprise Calendar by Tom
Howe
PSS?
-Original
Message-From: Daniel
Chenault [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent
to the new server without having to change
their profiles, so I just need to ensure the first X5.5 server is removed
correctly, yes?
Sakti
-Original Message-
From: Daniel Chenault [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Wednesday, 29 August 2001 3:13 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: Re
Perhaps you also have a certian (sic) support number for help on that
product?
- Original Message -
From: Mark Hanji [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, August 29, 2001 11:57 AM
Subject: Re: Exchange 5.5 admin program on windowsxp
for the
Network error during host resolution appears all throughout Technet.
It means that the domain was not resolveable by the DNS box the Exchange
server is configured to use.
- Original Message -
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, August 29,
Rules are stored in a hidden message in the top-level of the mailbox. They
can be exported via the Rules Manager.
- Original Message -
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, August 29, 2001 2:04 PM
Subject: Exporting Outlook 2000 User Profiles
FAQ
- Original Message -
From: Buckley, Marie (UK - London) [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, August 29, 2001 11:15 AM
Subject: Mailbox limit notification
Does anyone know how to change the Mailbox limit notification message that
is sent
Version and SP level.
- Original Message -
From: Peña, Botp [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, August 29, 2001 11:30 PM
Subject: Database resource failure error 0xfc0b -an hour ago
Hello Team,
I just got the ff error an hour ago. I had
I do believe Seattle Labs' offering is little more than a SMTP daemon and a
POP/IMAP daemon. I'm not exactly sure what you're trying to do here.
Howzabout posting the business requirement that led to this (questionable)
solution and why you think it's the way to go.
- Original Message -
if installed on the X400 bridgehead server. However they will also
be
a big hit on performance.
Mark
-Original Message-
From: Daniel Chenault [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: 31 August 2001 09:14
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: Re: Default Signature
I can't think of any easy way to do
The same mirror? If that mirror goes you lose everything. If put on separate
mirrors, the odds are against both of them failing at the same time.
For performance, the EDB files go on a striped set and the logs go on a
mirrored set (doesn't need to be striped; no advantage). If you lose your
EDB
Martin is loved by
All others who try and fail
Which is all of us
- Original Message -
From: Martin Blackstone [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, August 31, 2001 8:18 AM
Subject: RE: Haiku Friday
Three cups of coffee
My brain must work extra
?
-Original Message-
From: Daniel Chenault [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Friday, August 31, 2001 9:24 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: Re: Haiku Friday
Haiku poetry
three lines of five, seven and
five syllables. Easy.
- Original Message -
From: Mike Morrison
Ya beat me to it.
- Original Message -
From: Andy David [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, August 31, 2001 8:41 AM
Subject: RE: IMC problem with Earthlink.net
So the Firewall is relaying the mail?
In previous Checkpoint versions (4.x), the SMTP
Column on OUTLOOKEXCHANGE.COM:
http://www.outlookexchange.com/articles/drewnicholson/default.asp
Pics of Max are BACK! http://www.drewncapris.net
Puns are for children, not groan readers.
-Original Message-
From: Daniel Chenault [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED
chances crop up nine times out of ten. - Granny
Weatherwax
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Daniel Chenault
Sent: Friday, August 31, 2001 8:47 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: Re: A good space for the Exchange server 5.5 configuration
-6001
-Original Message-
From: Daniel Chenault [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Friday, August 31, 2001 6:37 AM
To: Exchange 5.5 List
Subject: Re: Haiku Friday
Poetry gives wings
To that part in all of us
Dormant due to work.
- Original Message -
From: LSeltzer [EMAIL
-
From: Daniel Chenault [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Friday, August 31, 2001 12:29 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: Re: OWA access denied.
Damn, am I good or what? A shot from the hip and hit the target dead
center.
preening, waiting for applause
- Original Message
When you joined the list, you _did_ get a link to the FAQ, right?
- Original Message -
From: Patrick Hudson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, August 31, 2001 10:31 AM
Subject: Adding Message to all outgoing email
Can someone please tell me how
Well, best is a subjective term. I've heard good reports on OmFax.
- Original Message -
From: Gordon Olson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, September 04, 2001 3:14 PM
Subject: RE: Fax server - What is the best solution?
Missy,
I actually
I've got news fer ya bud; Ive known Ed for several years now, hoisted more
than a couple of beers with him and he still gets sarcastic with me. I think
most would consider me a list insider (if such a thing existed).
- Original Message -
From: Rocky Stefano [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange
You are one step away from killing your Ex2000 installation.
- Original Message -
From: Cassani Alexio [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, September 05, 2001 12:42 PM
Subject: RE: Instant Messaging: install problem
Ok, so first I need to change
There are some post-SP4 fixes that you should consider. I suggest contacting
MS PSS to check on their applicability to your own environment. I think
playboy.com can afford the cost of the call (though I would as the engineer
to refund the call).
- Original Message -
From: Grewal, Raj
From the little bit below, no error message, I'd guess your Exchange IMS is
set to not relay.
- Original Message -
From: Jeremy [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, September 05, 2001 2:56 PM
Subject: third party client can't send email to
There's more to it than that. Check Technet for the article called how to
remove the first exchange server in a site.
- Original Message -
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, September 05, 2001 2:17 PM
Subject: First Exchange Server
We
I think you better call PSS on this one.
- Original Message -
From: Anthony L. Sollars [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, September 05, 2001 5:48 PM
Subject: Win2k Server Password recovery!
I have a win2k SP2 that I migrated from an NT4
it requires a hostname AND a domain name in the two separate boxes. It will
also require a DNS server.
- Original Message -
From: Van Huissteden, Adriaan [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, September 05, 2001 10:26 PM
Subject: The Internet Mail
SP4 modified the schema of the databases. You did make a backup before
upgrading to SP4, right?
- Original Message -
From: Nizar El-Assaad [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, September 06, 2001 12:04 PM
Subject: RE: MTA Problems with Exchange 5.5
That's not an error. That's nothing more than an encapsulated address.
You're gonna have to get more specific here.
- Original Message -
From: Jim [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, September 06, 2001 11:55 AM
Subject: RE: x400 connector?
There is an article on Technet on how to set it up. Search on iis ims key
-Original Message-
From: James Barry [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Thursday, September 06, 2001 3:15 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: Re: Secure Email over the Internet between to Exchange Servers
Fast, cheap, easy
Pick two
- Original Message -
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, September 06, 2001 3:03 PM
Subject: RE: Secure Email over the Internet between to Exchange Servers (5
.5)
Since they're only lawyers, they probably don't
Yeah, PSS is a good call at this point.
FYI: -1018 errors are always hardware errors in the disk subsystem.
- Original Message -
From: Benjamin Winzenz [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, September 06, 2001 2:49 PM
Subject: RE: Private IS
I'm assuming the CR represents an internet user, the mail going out the IMS.
If so, this is by design and expected.
- Original Message -
From: Phillip Yan [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, September 06, 2001 6:28 PM
Subject: Send mail to
That'll work just fine.
- Original Message -
From: Atkinson, Daniel [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, September 07, 2001 3:28 AM
Subject: RE: How Do I Turn on outt of ofice on other users mail box!
Subject: RE: How Do I Turn on outt of ofice
Depends on why the message crashed the store (the content conversion engine
is in the store, not the IMS). It is not outside the realm of possibility
that you have unwittingly come across an untested MIME format.
As Lore said, find the message itself and parse through it. The MIME RFCs
are 1521
Did you add the IP as allowed or restricted?
There is a whitepaper on MS' site on the IMS and relaying.
- Original Message -
From: Jeremy [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, September 07, 2001 1:05 PM
Subject: RE: third party client can't send
You'd be best served by reporting this to Microsoft via PSS.
- Original Message -
From: Will Somervell [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, September 07, 2001 2:23 PM
Subject: CDO 1.2.1 memory leak, Using GetNext()
I can't eliminate a memory leak
You have to tell it which tests to run. And if you don't know, then don't
run it.
- Original Message -
From: Smith Thomas Contr 911 SPTG/SC [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, September 07, 2001 2:09 PM
Subject: Isinteg
Hello
I would
Well, pop mail doesn't come in anywhere except the client. The client sends
using SMTP and does this via relaying. So you're saying you can scan mail
that is being bounced off the external IMS interface?
- Original Message -
From: Monahon, Gregory [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange
PM
Subject: RE: Forcing users to use only our exchange server for mail
We scan incoming and outgoing and the IMCs.
We scan the desktops, servers, and the mail store.
We'll catch it one way or the other.
-Original Message-
From: Daniel Chenault [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent
?!?!?! A user might actually be smart enough to do that? ;o) Golly
gee...
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Daniel
Chenault
Sent: Friday, September 07, 2001 2:38 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: Re: Forcing users to use only our
-
From: Daniel Chenault [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Friday, September 07, 2001 2:38 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: Re: Forcing users to use only our exchange server for mail
How do you enforce scanning the desktops (I assume you mean something is
loading like CA InoculateIt
From my perspective, you're making this real hard.
Inform the students that they can use any mailbox they want, but as far as
the university is concerned official communications from staff and faculty
are delivered to their Exchange mailbox. It is the student's responsibility
to keep up with
There is no such Microsoft recommendation. The decision as to when to do an
offline defrag is purely the customer's decision.
- Original Message -
From: Derrick Stevenson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, September 10, 2001 1:23 PM
Subject: When
I know some Portuguese... but my passport is out of date.
Eu sei algum portuguese... mas meu passport realiza-se fora da data.
- Original Message -
From: Great Cthulhu Jones [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, September 10, 2001 9:34 PM
Subject:
I beg to differ with your narrow analysis.
For the US, this is the first time since 1812 that the civilian population
has been under attack. It is the first time since 1941 that the US has been
overtly attacked in an obvious act of war (I fail to find any other words to
describe the actions of
brick-level backup is a bad idea. The throughput is bad no matter what you
do.
- Original Message -
From: Barber Tom [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, September 12, 2001 8:02 AM
Subject: Antivirus and Backups
We're currently running NAV for
There is an article on changing the service account. It is not supported on
multi-server sites. I do know of persons who have done it in multi-server
sites but it is problematic and may not work.
I dont' have the article number handy, sorry.
- Original Message -
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Oh, ick. I was mildly giggling until I got to the part about Chris. Oh,
ick... I REALLY didn't need that image!
- Original Message -
From: Great Cthulhu Jones [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, September 12, 2001 10:52 PM
Subject: RE:
Be aware that Microsoft has already addressed some of the list:
http://www.microsoft.com/presspass/press/2001/sep01/09-12AttackDonationPr.as
p
- Original Message -
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, September 13, 2001 10:45 AM
Subject: FW:
Disable your AV and contact the AV company.
- Original Message -
From: RSangha [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, September 13, 2001 5:34 PM
Subject: Exchange 5.5 SP4, Event ID:3038 -IMC Warning in Event Log
Here's the entire error message:
Depending on the scope of the engagement, you might could get me for a
little less than that.
- Original Message -
From: Lefkovics, William [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, September 13, 2001 7:00 PM
Subject: RE: TCO - Linux vs. Exchange
Received in Raw Form » that point
to the same answer
-Message d'origine-
De: Daniel Chenault [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Date: 14 septembre, 2001 19:34
À: Exchange Discussions
Objet: Re: Unknown character type...
The only thing you can do is create a registry entry with names of
x-unknown, X
FAQ 3.24
- Original Message -
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Sunday, September 16, 2001 6:32 PM
Subject: Using Outlook 2000 Exchange service through a firewall
Without setting up a vpn, does anyone know what ports would need to be
opened to
As others have already answered your immediate questions, I won't bother
repeating.
1. Read the FAQ (link at the bottom of this message)
2. Get a book on Exchange (anything by Tony Redmond or Paul Robichaux
appropriate to the version you're running)
- Original Message -
From: Kevin
Since two machines on a network can't have the same name, it would seem
obvious that the recovery server has to be on a separate network, eh?
- Original Message -
From: Stevens, Dave [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, September 17, 2001 10:25 AM
Uh... Martin? Could I ask a little favor of ya...? Would you... uh... blow
my horn?
- Original Message -
From: Martin Blackstone [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, September 17, 2001 4:40 PM
Subject: RE: God Bless America (way OT)
SHUT UP!!!
ah... it works on some and not others. There's a foothold.
Turn on archiving on the IMS. Identify a message that did successfully
deliver and one that did not. Find them in the \imcdata\in\archive
directory. Parse them out to see what is different between them. Check your
logs for any errors
I recall reading a KB article that NDS for NT breaks a BDC's ability to do
pass-through authentication. Sorry I can't remember the number and the facts
may be slightly incorrect, but the description jives with what's in my
(fallible human) memory.
Call MS about this one.
- Original Message
Most likely the other server is doing a reverse lookup and requires a) a
fully-qualifed domain name and b) that the supplied name lookup in reverse
to match the IP address of the machine identifying itself as such.
- Original Message -
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange Discussions
Yes, there is. It's outlined in the FAQ. Read it, live it, love it.
- Original Message -
From: Stevens, Dave [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, September 20, 2001 2:48 PM
Subject: RE: email addresses
supposedly there is a place to add a
The S. Korea server is, well, out of disk space. Nothing you can do about
that.
- Original Message -
From: Brian Ko [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, September 21, 2001 1:51 PM
Subject: SMTP;452 4.4.5 Insufficient disk space;try later
Hello!
OWA is really just a collection of HTML files. Edit them as you would any
other HTML file. Only difference is ASP is not used in the 2K version.
- Original Message -
From: Tony [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, September 25, 2001 5:41 PM
Subject:
And any book by Robichaux or Redmond.
- Original Message -
From: Martin Tuip [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, September 26, 2001 1:49 PM
Subject: Re: Good Exchange sources...
www.slipstick.com
www.microsoft.com/exchange
I can still support MSMail in my sleep, but from the below this doens't seem
like an MSMail problem. Just straight out SMTP. Not enough detail to pursue
though.
- Original Message -
From: Stephen Mynhier [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday,
FAQ 3.15
- Original Message -
From: Brent Miller [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, October 01, 2001 7:02 PM
Subject: Re: List server
Does anyone know how to make exchange into a list server?
Sturgis, South Dakota. And it's been rescheduled to coincide with the annaul
Harley motorcycle run.
- Original Message -
From: Doug Hampshire [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, October 05, 2001 10:43 AM
Subject: MEC next year
Okay, I missed the
restest /?
It's a really simple little app. All it does is a DNS MX/A record lookup
just like the SMTP mailer does.
- Original Message -
From: Scott Roussel [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, October 24, 2001 10:37 AM
Subject: RE: 3499
Configure your antivirus to not scan any of the \exchsrvr directories, most
notably the \mtadata and \imcdata directories.
- Original Message -
From: Erik Vesneski [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, October 23, 2001 2:37 PM
Subject: No Mail in the
Yes, this scenario is one that calls for running offline defragmentation.
- Original Message -
From: Davinder Gupta [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, October 25, 2001 1:09 PM
Subject: Fragmentation in mail database
We just setup a new mail
FAQ
- Original Message -
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, October 30, 2001 3:32 AM
Subject: pop with xchange5.5
Hi everyone,
I'm not sure but I guess that this item already 've been answered before,
but I can not find the solution
Configure your file-based AV to not scan the \exchsrvr directory structure.
- Original Message -
From: Niki Blowfield [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, November 05, 2001 8:07 AM
Subject: IMC Errors
Dear All,
We have been getting the following
1 - 100 of 733 matches
Mail list logo
