The Event Service in Ex2K is a near-direct-lift of the existing one in 5.5.
I had asked Robert Strong about it at one time and he concurred it should
work fine and had done so in his own testing. However it is very much
recommended that scripts be migrated to event sinks.
- Original Message
In Exchange admin, do Tools:Options:Permissions and check the top two boxes.
Get properties on a user and go to the Permissions tab. What accounts show
here with what rights?
- Original Message -
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, April 22,
Now, if I may...
When this was first suggested as the only likely possibility you said it
couldn't be right.
Something I learned a long time ago: if I'm asking questions I'm not in the
right place to be questioning the answers.
- Original Message -
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange
It uses the amount it needs.
- Original Message -
From: Peter Szabo [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, April 22, 2002 6:27 PM
Subject: Store.exe memmory usage
Hi all,
I just installed a new EX5.5 server and the store.exe will NOT use all
Let's get this straight once and for all...
Diskeeper does a file-level defrag of the hard-drive. It does not touch what
is inside the files, just gathers the fragments together.
Exchange databases do get fragmented, but _internally_ to their structure.
Diskeeper will not touch that
, rightly or wrongly, not everyone has the luxury of storing the
Exchange
DB's on their own spindles.
- Original Message -
From: Daniel Chenault [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, April 23, 2002 10:11 AM
Subject: Re: Diskeeper and Exchange
Coulda swore I answered this last week. Archives no workee?
In x.400 parlance a bind is the process whereby two MTAs exchange security
information. Basically it's a login failure.Same site and same domain?
- Original Message -
From: Tony McCarthy [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange
correction:
net stop msexchangesa /y
I have seen cases where the above line had to be specified twice to actually
shut the SA down.
- Original Message -
From: Kevin Miller [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, April 19, 2002 1:22 PM
Subject: RE: How
XADM: Setting TCP/IP Port Numbers for Internet Firewalls (Q148732)
- Original Message -
From: McCready, Robert [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, April 18, 2002 8:41 AM
Subject: OWA Ports
Exchange 5.5, NT 4.0.
OK. We are using OWA.
Opening a firewall for OWA to talk to the server is no different than
opening the firewall for OL clients to talk to the server.
- Original Message -
From: McCready, Robert [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, April 18, 2002 8:47 AM
Subject: RE:
Ah... then you're setting the wrong ports anyway. As someone else said you
should open 443 on the firewall. What happens behind the firewall is
irrelevant to the task at hand.
- Original Message -
From: McCready, Robert [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent:
: OWA Ports
Ahhh. This article says I have to edit the registry for the MTA
also. I did not do that.
Thanks.
Robert
-Original Message-
From: Daniel Chenault [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Thursday, April 18, 2002 10:02 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: Re: OWA Ports
XADM
That's the whole point of multipart/alternative.
- Original Message -
From: Jasa, Ken [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, April 18, 2002 12:51 PM
Subject: Question regarding Q161044 - Multipart/Alternative
I have one office that needs to have
above. [1]
If anyone could direct me to a place where error messages are described
detailed I would love to know.
Thank you all again,
John Q
- Original Message -
From: Daniel Chenault [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, April 16, 2002 4:07 PM
I want to know how to install SP4.??
Oh, man.
If there are any hiring managers reading, I'm available and I don't ask
questions like this.
feeling mean today
- Original Message -
From: Stephen Mynhier [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent:
An EDB file? You'd have to do a full disaster recovery on it on a clean
server matching the original org/site names and server name.
If he was running his own server let him deal with it and deliver a PST to
you.
- Original Message -
From: Mark Chandler [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange
Then he'll need a machine running at least NT4 and Exchange installed on it
with the same SP. The rest is outlined in the DR paper.
- Original Message -
From: Mark Chandler [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, April 17, 2002 4:37 PM
Subject: Re:
FAQ
- Original Message -
From: King, John [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, April 16, 2002 12:52 PM
Subject: IMS queue oddities
Hello all,
I have a question for the Exchange experts. MS Exchange 5.5 NT 4 SP 6a..
I
recently went live with a
I see Soysal already answered. I'll take this opportunity to rant a little
bit.
The title of administrator carries with it an implicit ability to logically
think things through. The error message you are getting below is
_completely_ clear - mail01-ens.domain.com obviously has a message size
Just in case anyone cares, my e-mail address has changed. Please make the
appropriate changes or delete this message as you see fit.
OLD: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
NEW: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
_
List posting FAQ:
, or where the size
limit
issue is.
I can, will, and do research and read, but thank you.
- John Q
- Original Message -
From: Daniel Chenault [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, April 16, 2002 12:38 PM
Subject: Re
Did you accept the meeting? No. Did you even bother keeping the invite? No.
What conclusion is OL supposed to derive from these actions but to forget
the whole thing?
- Original Message -
From: Wei Yan [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, April 15,
Disclaimers are pretty much worthless but a lot of legal types like to
include them just to CYA.
- Original Message -
From: Gagrani, Kishore [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, April 12, 2002 12:43 PM
Subject: E-mail disclaimer
We are a
More to the point would be understanding how any user could access another's
mailbox. What does the permissions tab show on this one user's mailbox?
- Original Message -
From: Pillai, Raj [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, April 12, 2002 4:07 PM
Please read the docs on the CD. They tell you exactly what permission are
needed. There is no service account, per se, in Ex2K.
Sorry if this seems insulting but from what you've typed below you are NOT
ready to install Ex2K.
- Original Message -
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange
FAQ
- Original Message -
From: Erik L. Vesneski [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, April 10, 2002 9:43 AM
Subject: Objects In The Drop Down For Email-Adresses
Hi,
When creating a new email message one presses on the 'To' button and there
Okay if you say so.
- Original Message -
From: Bibel, Laura Y. [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, April 10, 2002 9:23 PM
Subject: RE: Prevent the forwarding of an email message.
If the message composed in Outlook is marked private,
You can remove inherited objects from child leafs.
- Original Message -
From: Carlos Dinapoli [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, April 04, 2002 5:04 PM
Subject: Administrator Permissions
Hi guys I have the follow quetion:
I have one Group
By creating a custom form, yes. Quick and easy and you can set it to be the
default form for the org.
But that won't prevent anyone from copying the information into a new
message, saving it out as an file and attaching to a new message or any of a
number of ways to copy the content into a new
Set that profile to not use password authentication; they'll be prompted for
the creds.
- Original Message -
From: Mitchell Mike [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, April 09, 2002 10:50 AM
Subject: Needing to open a mailbox to verify...
Good
Tools:Accounts and get properties on his account. Servers:Outgoing mail
server and see to it that Remember my password is checked.
That's one hour of consulting time at your going rate.
- Original Message -
From: David Florea [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Exmerge
- Original Message -
From: LIU, JEFF [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, April 05, 2002 11:38 AM
Subject: Retracting
Config:
1,E2K and GW5.5
2,E2K Novell Connector, GW5.5 API
Question:
An user sent a wrong mail to a group in E2K from
-
From: Daniel Chenault [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Tuesday, April 09, 2002 2:06 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: Re: OLExpress asks for re-authentication to send
I've been called worse.
- Original Message -
From: David Florea [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL
boggle
- Original Message -
From: NetStar [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, April 09, 2002 8:43 PM
Subject: Re: IMC
Thanks! What is UI?
--- Daniel Chenault [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
First off, recognize that the IMS just sits
yes
- Original Message -
From: CHRIS H [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, April 08, 2002 4:28 PM
Subject: Restoring Public Folder
I was reading in the MS Disaster Recovery paper that you do not need to
name
the server the same name as the one
]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Daniel
Chenault
Sent: Thursday, April 04, 2002 10:58 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: Re: Requesting Data errors with SAN and Large Mailboxs
Perfmon should also reveal whether the SAN is somehow slowing things
down. I
know a SAN is supposed to be faster
I've always preferred a furshlugginer(1) pneumatic drill.
1) for those who remember Alfred E. Neuman
- Original Message -
From: Andy David [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Sunday, April 07, 2002 4:52 PM
Subject: RE: Need help with Exchange 5.5 to 2k
The Disaster Recovery document covers this. Found at
www.microsoft.com/exchange.
- Original Message -
From: Patrick [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Saturday, April 06, 2002 3:07 PM
Subject: Migrating form an existing Exchange 5.5 server to an upgraded
Yeah, that too.
- Original Message -
From: Martin Blackstone [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Saturday, April 06, 2002 3:08 PM
Subject: RE: Migrating form an existing Exchange 5.5 server to an upgraded
Exchange 5.5 server
You have two choices: the UI or command-line import of a CSV. Pick one.
Unless, of course, you want to do some custom coding using DAPI.
- Original Message -
From: Matt Hoffman [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, April 04, 2002 10:31 AM
Subject:
Okay, Pink, settle down.
- Original Message -
From: Newsgroups [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, April 04, 2002 6:50 PM
Subject: RE: Recall: hello
Yes you can! With 1010220 all call up to 20 minutes are just 0.99!
-Original Message-
I'm betting these users have tons of folders or, just as bad, a small number
of folders with lots of messages in them.
When a user accesses the root of his mailbox the folders in the root level
are enumerated by the server and passed back to the client. As each folder
is accessed (either by
in the mailbox) ... that's not going to make a
difference, right? ... didn't think so.
Thanks again ... Jim
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Daniel
Chenault
Sent: Thursday, April 04, 2002 7:54 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject
deeply disappointed that this thread is not about beer. I
was
about to jump on this like a donkey on a waffle(1)
(1) Hi, CJ!
Dale L. Orr
Network Administrator
DoD Polygraph Institute
-Original Message-
From: Daniel Chenault [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Tuesday, April 02, 2002
Yes. Absolutely. Required AAMOF.
- Original Message -
From: Woodruff, Michael [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, April 03, 2002 10:27 AM
Subject: RE: Upgrade problems
I think we originally installed the ADC using Windows 2k CD. Should I
It's not supported. Ex2K might install on it, but not 5.5
- Original Message -
From: Chris H [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, April 03, 2002 11:04 AM
Subject: Exchange not supported by this version of Windows
I am trying to install Exchange
Hotfixes should only be installed if you are experiencing the problem for
which the hotfix was created. Willy-nilly installing new patches just
because they exist is the mark of an amatuer.
- Original Message -
From: McCready, Robert [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL
That would be the PHB add-in.
- Original Message -
From: Ben Schorr [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, April 02, 2002 4:44 PM
Subject: RE: Exchange 5.5 question
I once had a receptionist who asked me to send out an e-mail to let
everybody know
I do believe that's TCP returning the error; Exchange is only reporting it.
In proper OSI modeling an application knows nothing about what is happening
on the lower levels and hops is a TCP concept.
- Original Message -
From: Hansen, Eric [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL
Most likely a Netscape user sending you mail. Netscape erroneously attempts
to login to servers that offer the AUTH command even if the Netscape client
was not configured to login to that server in the first place.
- Original Message -
From: Shane S. [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange
It's malformed. It should be sent with multipart/alternative. Additionally
the line:
boundry=InterScan_NT_MIME_Boundry
should be equivalent to --=_938802==_.ALT
and finally the correct word is boundary not boundry. If that's not a
result of your munging than
If it's a failed dot.com what did they do for connectivity previously?
- Original Message -
From: King, John [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, April 01, 2002 9:20 AM
Subject: Remote Site Question
Hello all,
I am stuck trying to figure out
: King, John [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, April 01, 2002 9:36 AM
Subject: RE: Remote Site Question
There is a T1 terminated, but it is not live... yet..
-Original Message-
From: Daniel Chenault [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Monday, April 01
Yes. Obvious when you think about it.
- Original Message -
From: Mitchell Mike [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, March 29, 2002 12:54 PM
Subject: RE: Containers
When exmerge a mailbox to move between containers do you have to rebuild a
I can tell you from experience it's no better, but it IS more fun.
- Original Message -
From: John Matteson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, March 29, 2002 12:58 PM
Subject: RE: Comm Check
I'm also experimenting whether being a PITA is any
Pointy-Haired Boss, from Dilbert.
- Original Message -
From: Etts, Russell [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, March 28, 2002 12:06 PM
Subject: RE: Delay Outgoing Mail
Question -
What does PHB mean??
(Putting on flame retardant suit - this
what kind of AV are you running?
- Original Message -
From: Alverson, Thomas M. [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, March 27, 2002 4:28 PM
Subject: EX55 sp4: Inbound IMC messages stuck problem update
A few days ago I reported a problem with
update
Norton AV for exchange 2.5 (probably latest build - got an update about a
month ago). I suspected that right away but stopping it made no
difference
at all.
Tom
-Original Message-
From: Daniel Chenault [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Wednesday, March 27, 2002 5:33 PM
I have to admit I'm kinda stumped here. BackupExec v8.6 running latest
driver package using a Seagate/Archive autoloaded (OEMed by Compaq). Works
fine doing file-level backups but when I create a job to backup Exchange 5.5
SP4 it gives directory not responding and store not responding yet all
Newbie alert! Fresh meat!
- Original Message -
From: Irfan Malik [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, March 27, 2002 10:22 PM
Subject: RE: protocol error
Dear Mr. Doug,
Please be advise that if you don't have the answer please don't waste time
on the system doing
the
backups?
A poorly documented gottcha.
-Original Message-
From: Daniel Chenault [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Wednesday, March 27, 2002 3:50 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: BE 8.6
I have to admit I'm kinda stumped here. BackupExec v8.6 running latest
driver
is loading ok on Xchg machine.
-Original Message-
From: Daniel Chenault [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Wednesday, March 27, 2002 15:50
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: BE 8.6
I have to admit I'm kinda stumped here. BackupExec v8.6 running latest
driver package using a Seagate/Archive
That's not ADC; did you join them to the site during install? It should have
prompted for the name of the 5.5 server and the service account/password.
- Original Message -
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, March 26, 2002 8:08 AM
Subject:
just
un-installed E2K.
It only asked me at forest prep time originally.
-Original Message-
From: Daniel Chenault [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: 26 March 2002 14:13
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: Re: ADC - Config Entry
That's not ADC; did you join them to the site during
Well, something is unusual about them. Not having access to the messages
that's the best I can offer.
- Original Message -
From: Tom Alverson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, March 26, 2002 2:55 PM
Subject: Re: Messages stuck in IMC inbound
My thoughts exactly, but I'll hold back on the plonk. It's always amusing to
watch newbies flounder in the waves.
- Original Message -
From: Thomas Di Nardo [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, March 26, 2002 6:47 PM
Subject: RE: Prep
If there
Reconfigure your file-level AV software to not scan the \exchsrvr directory
structure
- Original Message -
From: How, Say Chuan [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, March 25, 2002 12:41 AM
Subject: Evet ID: 2186
Folks,
The following event log
More likely the recipient's mailbox is full; that's why his mailbox is
unavailable.
- Original Message -
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, March 25, 2002 8:12 AM
Subject: RE: Any Explanation? One Way Email
Looks to me like the mailbox
No, journalING, not just journal. And it has nothing to do with the
client, it's purely server-side.
- Original Message -
From: Ed Esgro [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, March 25, 2002 10:50 AM
Subject: RE: BCC any sent message
Are you
Did you open the messages and see what might be so odd about them?
- Original Message -
From: Alverson, Thomas M. [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, March 25, 2002 1:02 PM
Subject: Messages stuck in IMC inbound Queue - EX55 - can't stop IMC (nice
Hehe...
Line-wrapping done at the server or the sending client is an archaic
functionality. The client is now expected to understand how to display a
message. Looks like Netscape is either misconfigured or brain-dead (or
hopelessly outdated).
- Original Message -
From: Blunt, James H
mom would be proud of you.
- Original Message -
From: Daniel Chenault [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Saturday, March 23, 2002 7:29 PM
Subject: Re: IMC Queues
Again, READ RFC-821/2821.
- Original Message -
From: Chris Haaker [EMAIL
Again, READ RFC-821/2821.
- Original Message -
From: Chris Haaker [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Saturday, March 23, 2002 11:34 AM
Subject: Re: IMC Queues
After finally finding the answer (I think) at Trend's site . . .
Note that this unknown
You've reached the inbox of Mike Jamison. I'm out of the office touring SE
Asia for the next two months. Contact Jim Standin at 222-555-1212.
That tells a potentially nefarious person that someone's house is empty and
unattended for two months. It also tells him the name and phone number of an
FAQ
- Original Message -
From: Chris Haaker [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, March 22, 2002 2:45 PM
Subject: IMC Queues
Looking in the IMC Queue for Outbound Mail awaiting delivery I see 10-20
enteries to the same address all with as the
If the FAQ was not illuminating enough may I suggest RFC-821 or 2821?
- Original Message -
From: Chris Haaker [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, March 22, 2002 3:55 PM
Subject: Re: IMC Queues
Perhaps I am dim but I can only find 1 entry with no
sent/received
message
within the site? Just wondering how to enable that to happen. Server-side
rule, or is there built-in functionality?
Thanks much.
Larry Seltzer
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
-Original Message-
From: Daniel Chenault [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Friday, March 15, 2002 11
I know of a financial company in SF that uses off-site data storage. They
told me while I was there that they have tested their DR procedures and can
be 80-90% operational within 24 hours of a complete disaster (i.e. their SF
offices being completely destroyed).
Contact me offlist if you'd like
It's a Cisco PIX firewall command to tell the PIX to stop acting like it
knows what it's doing.
- Original Message -
From: Mitchell Mike [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, March 21, 2002 10:11 AM
Subject: RE: 554 errors from Hot Mail
what is
Hmmm the meeting room that is the resource has a full mailbox from all
the attachments sent to it in the past and it's hit your mailbox limit? Just
a WAG...
- Original Message -
From: Phil [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, March 20, 2002
It's a no-brainer to upgrade to Enterprise. Seriously. Just put the CD in
and answer the questions appropriately. Other then the requisite downtime
it's not even a blip on operations.
- Original Message -
From: Russell Hopkinson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL
Exchange does indeed use up all the available memory. It's designed to do
that.
- Original Message -
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, March 20, 2002 3:38 PM
Subject: Exchange 5.5 Server
I am running Exchage Server 5.5 SP4 on NT 4
PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, March 20, 2002 9:40 PM
Subject: RE: Exchange 5.5 Server
Except the 'fail' part.
-Original Message-
From: Daniel Chenault [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Wednesday, March 20, 2002 7:35 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: Re: Exchange 5.5 Server
Exchange does
You'll need to turn on protocol logging to see the actual conversation and
data being passed to understand why your server (rather, your firewall) is
returning the error.
Speaking of which, what are you running as a firewall
(myfirewall.mydomain.com)?
Speaking further of which: it's hard to do
telnet 207.212.40.254 25
220 wormhole.dionex.com Generic SMTP handler
That ain't Exchange.
- Original Message -
From: Roger Seielstad [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, March 19, 2002 11:28 AM
Subject: RE: 554 Invalid data in message
Ahhh -
, if we want to
find
out this info, we can. Just cough it up.
-Original Message-
From: Daniel Chenault [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Tuesday, March 19, 2002 9:27 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: Re: 554 Invalid data in message
Speaking further of which: it's hard to do
Oh, ghod. Now Andy will be even more insufferable!
- Original Message -
From: Alverson, Thomas M. [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, March 19, 2002 2:38 PM
Subject: RE: Changed NIC - Andy David is GODLIKE!
OK, so maybe
Number One.
-Original Message-
From: Daniel Chenault [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Tuesday, March 19, 2002 3:56 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: Re: Changed NIC - Andy David is GODLIKE!
Oh, ghod. Now Andy will be even more insufferable!
- Original Message -
From
!
Aye Sir. Remember Sir, we pee in the bowl, not around it.
-Original Message-
From: Daniel Chenault [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Tuesday, March 19, 2002 4:17 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: Re: Changed NIC - Andy David is GODLIKE!
Thank you Ensign. You may return to your
Bad, bad bidness. Guaranteed data loss. Do it right with SMTP and be done
with it.
- Original Message -
From: kedar [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, March 19, 2002 5:55 AM
Subject: POP3 Connector Needed
Hi All,
I know there is a pop3
The term, I believe, is black-hole router.
- Original Message -
From: Ben Schorr [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, March 19, 2002 9:54 PM
Subject: RE: Some Hosts Unreachable - Follow-up
Well, the problem is resolved but nobody's entirely sure
The Everyone Full Control is the NTFS permission level, not the sharing
permission level which should be Everyone Read.
The Everyone group can be removed from both. Leave the others accounts there
alone.
- Original Message -
From: Walbert, Bryan (Bryan) % [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange
FAQ
- Original Message -
From: Arch Willingham [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, March 18, 2002 9:24 AM
Subject: Where is global text set for outgoing messages?
We need to append text to the bottom of every e-mail message leaving our
Exchange
The secret to how you can use saucer separation in your enterprise.
- Original Message -
From: Jennifer Baker [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, March 15, 2002 1:23 AM
Subject: RE: Can exchange 5.5 be set up as a list server?
I know.. I KNOW!!
It will increase on it's own; you misread the event text.
- Original Message -
From: Mario Fernandez [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, March 18, 2002 6:08 PM
Subject: RE: only 6 Mb after online defrag
Yes, plenty of disk space on the hard
I assume the CR is an internet address? It's just another SMTP message to
the IMS; the message will queue up and timeout normally.
- Original Message -
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, March 18, 2002 5:27 PM
Subject: Journalling question
The only regular maintenance I recommend is watching the logs. Exchange will
tell you when it's hurting. If it ain't broke, don't fix it.
Whitespace is purely your own decision. Event ID 1221 (from memory; someone
correct me if I misremembered) will tell you how much whitespace is in the
db. How
And you've done the reg modification? I know this works as I've done it
several times (actually I think I may have written that article, cant'
remember for sure).
- Original Message -
From: Finch Brett [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Saturday, March 16,
Are the clients using Word as the e-mail editor?
- Original Message -
From: Woodruff, Michael [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, March 15, 2002 9:58 AM
Subject: RE: Conversion to Internet format failed
Mainly .docs. They are being attached both
Here in the States the SEC (Securities Exchange Commission, the folks who
regulate stock-related activities) required the retention of mail a couple
years ago. That's when MS came out with the journaling feature; that is to
say, the purpose of the journaling feature is exactly what you're looking
201 - 300 of 733 matches
Mail list logo
