-Original Message-
From: Daniel Chenault [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Wednesday, January 09, 2002 3:11 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: Re: IMC originator
The RFC isn't real clear on this. We've gone round on this before and it
seems that server can optionally deny the message
Without Verify turned on, no, Exchange will not give up your internal
addresses. Verify is off by default.
- Original Message -
From: Hansen, Eric [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, January 09, 2002 4:46 PM
Subject: Solicitation
Hi
On a
Ah... I spoke too soon. Had forgotten about LDAP. That's what I get for
replying to a message at 0245. ;)
- Original Message -
From: Durkee, Peter [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, January 09, 2002 4:52 PM
Subject: RE: Solicitation
Are you
Not quite. Outlook does close the connection after a period of time. If new
mail is present the server informs the client via UDP (we've had this
discussion before). I forget what the default value was; maybe 15 minutes
like everything else. But it is a clean disconnection and reconnect is
That would be her...
- Original Message -
From: Jerry W. Hubbard [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, January 09, 2001 4:01 AM
Subject: RE: fix monitor
Is this pictures of you Kelly?
http://kellyborndale.homestead.com/photo.html
Jerry W.
Crowley looks like?
Regards
Mr Louis Joyce
Computer Support Analyst
Network Administrator
BT Ignite eSolutions
-Original Message-
From: Daniel Chenault [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: 09 January 2002 10:18
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: Re: fix monitor
That would be her
That is your server NDRing the attempted relays back to the spammers. Since
spammers tend to use bogus addresses those messages will likely timeout
after three days as undeliverable.
- Original Message -
From: Siegel, Richard [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
that
nothing here is pronounced as it is spelled. They also like to think the
word go is spell geaux.
Geaux figure.
-Original Message-
From: Daniel Chenault [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Tuesday, January 08, 2002 8:25 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: Re: Sarcasm makes
!
-Original Message-
From: Daniel Chenault [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Wednesday, January 09, 2002 12:43 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: Re: Sarcasm makes this list great (Not)
You mean it isn't?
- Original Message -
From: WILLIAMS,JESSICA D [EMAIL PROTECTED
Whenever I go there folks look at my name and I get a slew of cajun thrown
in my face.
- Original Message -
From: K. Triona Guidry [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, January 09, 2002 1:17 PM
Subject: RE: Sarcasm makes this list great (Not)
At
reccomendations regarding relaying.
Rich
-Original Message-
From: Daniel Chenault [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Wednesday, January 09, 2002 1:41 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: Re: IMC originator
That is your server NDRing the attempted relays back to the spammers.
Since
if they are not causing any other problem?
I have followed all the suggested reccomendations regarding relaying.
Rich
-Original Message-
From: Daniel Chenault [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Wednesday, January 09, 2002 1:41 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: Re: IMC originator
Lends a whole new meaning to the phrase, Good s***.
- Original Message -
From: Jennifer Baker [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, January 08, 2002 12:44 AM
Subject: RE: PRIV IS rapidly growing out of proportions
I think Ed Norton was high on
According to RFC-977, the LIST command is supported by an NNTP server (i.e.
is not optional). All you need to do is use telnet to open a connection to
119 and issue list capturing to a text file. There's your active file.
- Original Message -
From: Shields, Anthony [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To:
that was part of the WinNT4 Telnet. Is it gone?
-Original Message-
From: Daniel Chenault [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Tuesday, January 08, 2002 9:21 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: Re: Exchange Active File for NNTP
According to RFC-977, the LIST command is supported
Opinions: everyone has one...
- Original Message -
From: Kevin [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, January 08, 2002 10:18 AM
Subject: Sarcasm makes this list great (Not)
You've got to be kidding...
The excessive sarcasm is what ruins this list.
The top of the Exchange world _created_ this list.
- Original Message -
From: Kevin Miller [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, January 08, 2002 10:24 AM
Subject: RE: Sarcasm makes this list great (Not)
That is what makes this list great. With out
Bog dogs? Would they be anything like Hounds of the Baskervilles?
- Original Message -
From: Don Ely [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, January 08, 2002 10:22 AM
Subject: RE: Sarcasm makes this list great (Not)
Did we hurt your wittle
I dunno. Sometimes I do it just to piss you off.
- Original Message -
From: Bowles, John L. [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, January 08, 2002 10:32 AM
Subject: RE: Sarcasm makes this list great (Not)
Excactly, after I got bombarded I took a
Which is a reference to the Hounds of Baskervilles
- Original Message -
From: Thomas Di Nardo [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, January 08, 2002 11:01 AM
Subject: RE: Sarcasm makes this list great (Not)
A dog the lives in a bog.
bog (bôg,
Oh no! A test! And I didn't study!!
The dog ate my textbook!
- Original Message -
From: Dean Clark [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, January 08, 2002 9:33 AM
Subject: test
just testing please ignore
You could start with the readme on the CD.
- Original Message -
From: Dean Clark [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, January 08, 2002 8:46 AM
Subject: Install trouble
I have just been given the task of setting up the companies exchange
server.
Uh... yeah. Have just one IMS. The MTA does not send out SMTP mail.
- Original Message -
From: John Q [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, January 08, 2002 3:11 PM
Subject: Re: Mail relay w/ E 5.5
If you are using 2 EX 5.5 servers in one site and
Kelly barefoot... bellydance... drops to floor with loud thud
- Original Message -
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, January 08, 2002 12:34 PM
Subject: RE: fix monitor
Who, me? I belly dance, and that is generally done barefoot.
Question was asked and answered already. We're just beating on the dead
corpse.
- Original Message -
From: Mike Lagase [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, January 08, 2002 12:10 PM
Subject: Re: PRIV IS rapidly growing out of proportions
Man, try
Experience
- Original Message -
From: Morgan, Joshua [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, January 08, 2002 1:07 PM
Subject: RE: Sarcasm makes this list great (Not)
Question:
I'm probably one of the newest people on this list, and I think its
Administrator
BT Ignite eSolutions
-Original Message-
From: Daniel Chenault [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: 08 January 2002 17:24
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: Re: test
Oh no! A test! And I didn't study!!
The dog ate my textbook!
- Original Message
Only if the owner's name is Suessereaux...
NB: for the uninformed - Louisianna is home to a particular group of folks
called Cajuns. The vast majority of them have names ending in -eaux.
- Original Message -
From: Robert Williams [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL
of Kelly on her Website. The link is in
the
archives.
-Original Message-
From: Daniel Chenault [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Tuesday, January 08, 2002 1:28 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: Re: fix monitor
Kelly barefoot... bellydance... drops to floor with loud thud
Joe Smith hires on and goes to work for Mike Bloggs in Engineering. So you
create his mailbox in Engineering. A few years later he moves to Marketing
to be a technical rep. How do you move his mailbox from the Engineering
container to the Marketing containter?
You don't. Not without deleting and
Well, sorta. The directories talk to each other, er... directly.
- Original Message -
From: missy koslosky [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Saturday, January 05, 2002 1:46 PM
Subject: Re: 2 EXCH 5.5 Servers in 1 site
Exchange 5.5 servers communicate
. -- Buddha
-Original Message-
From: Daniel Chenault [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Monday, January 07, 2002 3:06 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: Re: 2 EXCH 5.5 Servers in 1 site
Well, sorta. The directories talk to each other, er... directly.
- Original Message -
From
It doesn't unless you run offline defrag.
- Original Message -
From: John Navara [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, January 07, 2002 2:35 PM
Subject: RE: Mailbox Resources Questions
Missy,
I have just dumped several MB of info from my Mailbox
It's a description of how to do Norton's job.
- Original Message -
From: Jennifer Baker [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, January 07, 2002 11:35 PM
Subject: RE: PRIV IS rapidly growing out of proportions
What does this have to do with the
Separate the saucer.
- Original Message -
From: Tim Ault [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, January 04, 2002 8:14 AM
Subject: Some Problem Someplace, I think
hi list..
i have a problem with either the server or the client..
how do i fix
of an unladen sparrow?
Ed Crowley MCSE+I MVP
Tech Consultant
Compaq Computer
There are seldom good technological solutions to behavioral problems.
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Daniel Chenault
Sent: Thursday, January 03, 2002 1:55 PM
I'm available for consulting of this nature. Where is aruplabs located?
- Original Message -
From: Hansen, Eric [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, January 04, 2002 10:08 AM
Subject: Consultant Security/System Audit??
Does anyone here do or
technological solutions to behavioral problems.
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Daniel Chenault
Sent: Thursday, January 03, 2002 1:55 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: Re: Was: Question from a troll to a Yoda - Now: RFC Question
You asked
Would that be the new and improved STiCK?
- Original Message -
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, January 04, 2002 10:19 AM
Subject: RE: Some Problem Someplace, I think
Sure, with this !
.
S.
-Original Message-
From: Daniel Chenault [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Friday, January 04, 2002 12:52 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: Re: Some Problem Someplace, I think
But what about the mess that leaves? Doesn't the nail ever get stuck? Does
tech support have a 24
Put 'em all in one container. Use other containers to create DL's and CR's.
- Original Message -
From: Sparrow, Teresa (GOT) [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, January 04, 2002 1:49 PM
Subject: Containers
Wanting to gather information.
In a
The queue Inbound messages awaiting delivery are messages that have
already been read from the file system, converted and placed in the store.
Deleting queue.dat won't help a bit. If the delete button in the UI doens't
work you'll need to use mdbvu32.exe to delete them There is an article on
it doesn't know
what
they were doing. I thought I may have to use mdbvu32.exe but have never
used
it before. I'm moving everything to Exchange 2000 soon so maybe I'll just
leave them out there for now.
Thanks,
Jeff
-Original Message-
From: Daniel Chenault [mailto:[EMAIL
Oh, my. You mean the truth is out there for those willing to seek it? Will
wonders never cease...
- Original Message -
From: Ben Schorr [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, January 04, 2002 3:54 PM
Subject: RE: changing port
Actually a quick
The costs of monitors have really come down to the point that repairing
costs more than a new one. Plus there is a lot of high voltage inside, even
with the monitor unplugged. This is not a job for the weekend parts-swapper.
- Original Message -
From: Tener, Richard [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To:
However, note Chris will pipe down if I correct him. ;)
- Original Message -
From: Kevin Miller [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, January 03, 2002 12:15 PM
Subject: RE: recipients
He knows more Chit then a good number of us combined. And he
The party line is N-1
- Original Message -
From: Soysal, Serdar [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, January 03, 2002 1:24 PM
Subject: RE: life cycle of Exchange
I believe MS supports the current version and the previous version of
every
Your surmise that it is not possible in 2K is correct.
- Original Message -
From: Ed Smits [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, January 03, 2002 9:52 AM
Subject: Exchange 5.5 - POP IMAP banners?
Is it possible to change the default banners in
First thing you do is disable the file-level scanning on the \exchsrvr
directories.
- Original Message -
From: Mark Peoples [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, January 03, 2002 1:00 AM
Subject: e2k recovery
Hi,
This afternoon my e2k server
1) The RFC states that a given mailer must properly handle up to 100
recipients in a single mail. The destination server to which you are sending
does not support more then 100
2) The destination server has an inbound limit of 5M and you are sending an
attachment of 12M
My bill will be in the
After 5.5 SP2 the Received headers were counted. The limit is set to 512 I
believe (don't know if this can be changed).
Does the RFC say what constitutes a trivial loop?
Not really.
- Original Message -
From: Andy David [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent:
That'll get ya a 5% discount.
- Original Message -
From: Tener, Richard [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, January 03, 2002 3:16 PM
Subject: RE: Question from a troll to a Yoda
U da man
-Original Message-
From: Daniel Chenault
- Now: RFC Question
You didnt answer my last question. ;)
-Original Message-
From: Daniel Chenault [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Thursday, January 03, 2002 4:14 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: Re: Was: Question from a troll to a Yoda - Now: RFC Question
After 5.5 SP2
Run, don't walk, to http://www.microsoft.com/exchange and get the disaster
recovery document. Read it. Let us know if you need any help understanding
it.
- Original Message -
From: Lewis Kapell [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, January 03, 2002
MVP
Tech Consultant
Compaq Computer
There are seldom good technological solutions to behavioral problems.
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Daniel Chenault
Sent: Thursday, January 03, 2002 1:54 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: Re
Why bother with web-based?
From any machine who's IP address is not an allowed relayer in IMS
Properties:
telnet ip of server) 25
HELO your machine name
MAIL FROM:some real external address, like hotmail
RCPT TO:an address outside your organization you have access to
DATA
blah-blah-blah,
There is a KB article on removing the first server in the site. Read it and
follow it.
- Original Message -
From: Hansen, Eric [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, December 31, 2001 9:43 AM
Subject: home server?
Hi
HAPPY NEW YEAR!
Anyway... I
The last one in the site as in the last one installed into the site has no
significance. The last one in the site as in there are no other servers in
the site makes it special.
- Original Message -
From: Paul Bouzan [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent:
A more cogent question:
What does the archive of the outbound message show? MS-TNEF mayhaps? (IMS
Properties:Diagnostics:Message Archiving: Maximum, will be stored in
\imcdata\out\archive)
- Original Message -
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent:
I swear I read the FAQ (followed immediately by someone posting the exact
location in the FAQ)
- Original Message -
From: Ben Schorr [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, December 28, 2001 6:18 PM
Subject: RE: Top Ten Statements or Phrases - Year 2001
FAQ
- Original Message -
From: Friese, Casey [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, December 27, 2001 8:38 AM
Subject: Changing OBJ-Container
Is there a way in Exchange 5.5 sp4 to change a mailbox's OBJ-Container
after
it has already been applied
Aruplabs.com... huh. Now we know where the odd message with subject X and
body ABC1234567890DEF came from. Wasn't real ethical of ya, Eric,
masquerading as someone else.
- Original Message -
From: Hansen, Eric [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent:
Y'all need to check the headers of the original message; didn't come from
me.
- Original Message -
From: Andy David [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Sunday, December 23, 2001 7:37 AM
Subject: RE: X
I think I'll add this to my disclaimer.
The list stripped out the original headers. The message actually originated
from postoffice01.aruplabs.com
- Original Message -
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Saturday, December 22, 2001 10:32 PM
Subject: X
--_ABC1234567890DEF_
All issued commands must yield a response.
- Original Message -
From: Barry Patterson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, December 21, 2001 11:52 AM
Subject: SMTP Testing
I am helping someone test SMTP through telnetting into port 25.
Should
-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Daniel Chenault
Sent: Friday, December 21, 2001 11:54 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: Re: SMTP Testing
All issued commands must yield a response.
- Original Message -
From: Barry Patterson [EMAIL PROTECTED
No. You have to give anonymous the permission.
- Original Message -
From: Walden H. Leverich [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, December 21, 2001 2:10 PM
Subject: Permissions necessary for public folder to receive SMTP mail
I have a public
Yes, Alex works for my erstwhile employer. ;)
Exmerge was written by a PSS employee (a personal friend of mine here in
TX). Utilities written like that, instead of out of Dev, are not expressly
supported by MS. They are classed as BORK utilites; best-effort support.
- Original Message -
Do you mean internal or external recipients?
- Original Message -
From: wade robinson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, December 19, 2001 2:11 PM
Subject: message sent but missing attachment on arrival
I have a handful of users that when
The receiving system has a receive size limit.
- Original Message -
From: Robert V [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 3:53 PM
Subject: 552 Exceeded Local Data Allocation Limit
Have Exchange 5.5 Server on NT 4.0 SP6A, clients
Event sink
- Original Message -
From: Kim Schotanus [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, December 20, 2001 9:30 AM
Subject: RE: return
the director wants all email adresses to generate a reply à la OoO, and
I don't feel like going round all
Public folders
- Original Message -
From: Jasa, Ken [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, December 20, 2001 3:11 PM
Subject: RE: Why Outlook establishes multiple connections to multiple Exch
ange servers
Virus?
-Original Message-
From:
Are these files sent from internal Exchange mailboxes or have they entered
your system from a foreign mail system (the internet counts as a foreign
system)? What does the icon show in the message?
- Original Message -
From: DJB [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
The description of the problem (runs fine, then performance begins to
gradually die) is indicative of the same problem that has been around since
the AVAPI was introduced in SP4. Basically one of the threads that handles
the attachment notification goes to lala-land. I remember there being a post
The article also states it is not supported in a multi-server environment.
It can be done, but it's very tricky.
- Original Message -
From: Aarts, Jan [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, December 14, 2001 2:15 AM
Subject: RE: Changing service
No way, I'm the maroon!!
- Original Message -
From: Andy David [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, December 14, 2001 11:20 AM
Subject: RE: Antivirus causing move errors thingamajig
If the dickhead position is still open, I'd be glad to take it,
Then there's MOSMWNMTK
- Original Message -
From: Milton R. Dogg [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, December 14, 2001 12:41 PM
Subject: RE: Don Rickles and this list
Dr. Dogg is a master of useless knowledge.
--
Dr. Milton R. Dogg
Of
members.
-Original Message-
From: Daniel Chenault [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Friday, December 14, 2001 12:53 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: Re: Antivirus causing move errors thingamajig
Maybe, but he's OUR smart-ass. Besides, you ain't seen me
when I get rollin
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Friday, December 14, 2001 12:25 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: Antivirus causing move errors thingamajig
I can see that this discussion list needs new members.
-Original Message-
From: Daniel Chenault [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent
Daniel, your HOA fees are more than 6 months late...
-Original Message-
From: Daniel Chenault [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Friday, December 14, 2001 4:24 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: Re: Antivirus causing move errors thingamajig
Hey, Chris, pearls before swine, ya know
Perhaps you should hit the Knowledgebase on microsoft.com and search on mta
9405; just did it and got back lots of hits.
- Original Message -
From: Tony Hlabse [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, December 13, 2001 9:52 AM
Subject: Re:
Perhaps they should be more specific in their recommendation.
- Original Message -
From: Brett Wesoloski [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, December 13, 2001 10:46 AM
Subject: isinteg util
Quick question
Had a computer go down sent the
Just do what MS said and change the password. Look at it this way; it's a
great way for you to document all the non-Exchange and non-authorized uses
of that account. Exchange will take care of itself leaving only the rest of
the world to complain that they can no long log in. Then you can clean
Quite frankly, someone who stumbles on this and thinks the suggestions are
serious, acting upon them, deserves what he gets.
- Original Message -
From: Robert Ellis [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, December 13, 2001 2:27 PM
Subject: RE:
about lockup and
that
Exchange will fail to run. I guess what I don't understand is how this
would
happen? If there is no password lockout set, what is the problem? Right?
-Original Message-
From: Daniel Chenault [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Thursday, December 13, 2001 5:47 PM
I've seen this when the AVAPI thread loses its way. I'm not familiar
enough with NAV to be able to say whether it can be set to ignore the IMS
queues, but that's what I'd do, letting NAV scan the mail later instead of
holding up the conversion process.
- Original Message -
From: Friese,
I don't understand; that's exactly what Monteleone-Haught gave you.
Exactly what are you looking for?
- Original Message -
From: Kim Kruse [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, December 12, 2001 5:06 PM
Subject: RE: Exchange 5.5 Directory
of files and locations - but I
haven't been able to find one for Exchange 5.5.
K
-Original Message-
From: Daniel Chenault [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Wednesday, December 12, 2001 3:32 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: Re: Exchange 5.5 Directory Structure Print Out Request
I
the same are slim.
-Original Message-
From: Daniel Chenault [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Wednesday, December 12, 2001 4:09 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: Re: Exchange 5.5 Directory Structure Print Out Request
Why not just install it? And I still don't see what the point
Er, no I wouldn't.
- Original Message -
From: Roger Seielstad [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, December 11, 2001 7:15 AM
Subject: RE: Antivirus causing move errors thingamajig
You would be mistaken.
The optimizer does a lot more than just
Atlanta, GA
http://www.peregrine.com
-Original Message-
From: Daniel Chenault [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Tuesday, December 11, 2001 8:55 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: Re: Antivirus causing move errors thingamajig
Er, no I wouldn't.
- Original Message
Peregrine Systems
Atlanta, GA
http://www.peregrine.com
-Original Message-
From: Daniel Chenault [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Tuesday, December 11, 2001 8:55 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: Re: Antivirus causing move errors thingamajig
Er, no I wouldn't
Have the VP remove the non-existent employee as his delegate.
- Original Message -
From: James Winzenz [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, December 11, 2001 11:52 AM
Subject: RE: NDR for Calender meeting
Actually, I have been having the same
Yeah, what about it? The AVAPI in Exchange 5.5 and the AV apps written to
use can cause timing deadlock errors. Both the ISVs and MS keep chasing it
down but it seems they have yet to actually fix the problem.
- Original Message -
From: Hansen, Eric [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange
Not sure to which post you are responding. If it was mine about doing a
batch file, I'd have to say you're wrong on all three counts.
- Original Message -
From: Michael Brandon [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, December 10, 2001 5:10 PM
Subject:
of new
mail, that is, the problem is intermittent. I have made another search of
the knowledge base pertaining to high ports and Exchange and find nothing
relating to delayed mail notification. Does anybody have any other leads
that I might follow?
-Original Message-
From: Daniel
After compaction, did the file show a significant drop in file size? How
soon after restarting the store does the size go back up? Does this server
host any foreign gateways (such as an IMS)? Perhaps there is a looping
message in the IMS (if present); this would certainly cause a ballooning
There is a KB article that gives a registry switch to restrict access to the
server. This could yield a batch file that roughly looks like:
stop all services
run regedit to import that .reg file for disabling
restart all services
And, of course, access could be given back just as easily by doing
According to RFC-2821, assuming Status: 5.2.2 means SMTP error 522, the
reason is 552 Requested mail action aborted: exceeded storage allocation
- Original Message -
From: Tener, Richard [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, December 07, 2001 10:21 AM
: Daniel Chenault [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Friday, December 07, 2001 1:21 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: Re: Error in imcdata\in
Rajeev: please refrain from making recommendations to others on deleting
files until you understand what those files do.
Bill: following
501 - 600 of 733 matches
Mail list logo
